Question that I'm too lazy to find out for myself (regarding Mayweather, Jones, BHop)

http://www.boxingscene.com/forums/showthread.php?t=193836 cool thread don't go back as far as i'd hoped though

In a way computerrized rankings is the only way to make unbiased rankings, since every human has his favorites. Still I haven't seen any algorithm that consequently produces great rankings, but I feel that the best today is the ones provided by IBO. Sad that I have to give credit to an alphabetboy.... :lol1::lol1: Where in the world do you find the IBO's?

Well boxing is based on people's opinions (ie. JUDGES? FANS?). Having looked at the boxrec rankings over the years it's obvious to me that using math for a sport as subjective as boxing as horse manure. Didn't they have Oscar as the #1 JMW up until last year? Boxrec is a wonderful site but they're rankings are hilarious. In a way computerrized rankings is the only way to make unbiased rankings, since every human has his favorites. Still I haven't seen any algorithm that consequently produces great rankings, but I feel that the best today is the ones provided by IBO. Sad that I have to give credit to an alphabetboy.... :lol1::lol1:

Well, i agree that boxing is largely based on peoples opinion, but the boxrec rankings flip the coin and use a different method which i find interesting. It doesn't mean i agree with them, but it interests me. Oh ok. Your previous post seemed to imply they were somehow better for using "math." Kinda ridiculous when you actually look at their rankings lol. But I see what you mean.

Well boxing is based on people's opinions (ie. JUDGES? FANS?). Having looked at the boxrec rankings over the years it's obvious to me that using math for a sport as subjective as boxing as horse manure. Didn't they have Oscar as the #1 JMW up until last year? Boxrec is a wonderful site but they're rankings are hilarious. Well, i agree that boxing is largely based on peoples opinion, but the boxrec rankings flip the coin and use a different method which i find interesting. It doesn't mean i agree with them, but it interests me.

I quite like the Boxrec rankings. They base their rankings on math, not 'peoples' opinions. Well boxing is based on people's opinions (ie. JUDGES? FANS?). Having looked at the boxrec rankings over the years it's obvious to me that using math for a sport as subjective as boxing as horse manure. Didn't they have Oscar as the #1 JMW up until last year? Boxrec is a wonderful site but they're rankings are hilarious.

i guess i just mean the ring ratings link? http://www.boxingscene.com/forums/showthread.php?t=193836

I quite like the Boxrec rankings. They base their rankings on math, not 'peoples' opinions. numbers can often be misleading in boxing though

I quite like the Boxrec rankings. They base their rankings on math, not 'peoples' opinions.

Good point on official p4p rankings. I opt for the Ring - they've been fairly consistent over the years. They are probably also best for historic reference but, as with all rankings, not without flaws.

I didn't know there was an 'official' p4p ranking. i guess i just mean the ring ratings Boxingscene has a p4p ranking that goes back a few years. I've made a thread in the c&s section containing all the historic rankings. link?

I didn't know there was an 'official' p4p ranking. Boxingscene has a p4p ranking that goes back a few years. I've made a thread in the c&s section containing all the historic rankings. Good point on official p4p rankings. I opt for the Ring - they've been fairly consistent over the years.

okay, so it's my understanding that Floyd Mayweather Jr., Roy Jones Jr., Bernard Hopkins and Pernell Whitaker are the only four boxers to have held a place in official top ten pound-for-pound rankings over a course of 10 years now the part that I'm too lazy to look up is: were they consecutive years? I know B-Hop's was interrupted and he fell from the rankings for one year ('05 I believe), but what about the others? I didn't know there was an 'official' p4p ranking. Boxingscene has a p4p ranking that goes back a few years. I've made a thread in the c&s section containing all the historic rankings.

All consecutive for the other three alright, i kind of suspected thanks mate

All consecutive for the other three