Here are the ten areas of analysis that he looks at:
http://coxscorner.tripod.com/boxchart1.html
(The part about footwork sheds some light on whether Mike Tyson was "fleetfooted" or not )
Here are the results:
http://coxscorner.tripod.com/heavyweightchart.html
While he looks at the science of what makes a fighter, giving in-depth analysis of every ingredient of a successful fighter, the rankings at the end are not down to a science. That said, I think his rankings based on the scores the fighters got looks pretty good, considering it is rating based... much better than boxrec anyway.
This guy definitely is a very knowledgeable fan of the sport... you can tell from the terminology he uses alone, and gives a pretty good account of his historical knowledge base.
He also posts questions/comments that were given to him in regards to this project on message boards and through email, along with his answers/defense of his decisions on what ratings to give to who.
I highly suggest you give this site a look. It's very interesting.
http://coxscorner.tripod.com/boxchart1.html
(The part about footwork sheds some light on whether Mike Tyson was "fleetfooted" or not )
Here are the results:
http://coxscorner.tripod.com/heavyweightchart.html
While he looks at the science of what makes a fighter, giving in-depth analysis of every ingredient of a successful fighter, the rankings at the end are not down to a science. That said, I think his rankings based on the scores the fighters got looks pretty good, considering it is rating based... much better than boxrec anyway.
This guy definitely is a very knowledgeable fan of the sport... you can tell from the terminology he uses alone, and gives a pretty good account of his historical knowledge base.
He also posts questions/comments that were given to him in regards to this project on message boards and through email, along with his answers/defense of his decisions on what ratings to give to who.
I highly suggest you give this site a look. It's very interesting.
Comment