BoxRec moves Tyson Fury up to #2, Anthony Joshua still at #1, Wilder drops to #5

I'm sure there was writers that said Lewis-Holyfield 1 wasn't a robbery too. :lol1: The Associated Press scored Lewis-Holyfield I for Lewis, 117-111. The Associated Press is historically the most important "unofficial" score as it was considered the official score of boxing before judges existed. The AP scored Wilder-Fury I a draw, 113-113. The Washington Post, the most respected newspaper in the country, had the fight a draw. Kevin Iole of Yahoo Sports, one of the most respected boxing writers in history had the fight a draw, 113-113. Dan Rafael and Lance Pugmire, two of the other most respected boxing writers in history had Wilder winning, 114-112. Of the official BoxingScene scores, BoxingScene's writers had either a draw 113-113 or Fury 114-112. Point being, it was a very close fight. Only UK fanboys think it was a robbery.

#1 Fury #2 Joshua #3 Wilder I was going to have Wilder as 2 but after that beating i can't. He's not #5, this is why rankings should be determined by human experts and not computer algorithms. I think your ranking make perfect sense.

The vast majority of experts had Fury winning too. First of all, that's not true. Second of all, if it was so clear that Fury won, six of the most famous and respected publications wouldn't have had a draw or Wilder winning. If you knew your boxing history, you'd know once upon a time we didn't even have judges and the AP decided who won the fight. The fight was only a robbery in the minds of UK fanboys. Among people who were actually at ringside, it was a very close fight, that easily could have gone Fury's way, but a draw was reasonable too.

Anthony Joshua was ranked #1 by BoxRec before the Ruiz fight. Then, after Ruiz stopped Joshua, Ruiz moved into the #1 spot. After Joshua regained his titles from Ruiz and Usyk moved up to Heavyweight and got a win, the rankings were as followed: 1.) Joshua 2.) Wilder 3.) Usyk 4.) Ruiz 5.) Fury The new rankings: https://comicvine1.cbsistatic.com/uploads/original/11119/111199253/7254536-screen%20shot%202020-02-23%20at%204.17.19%20am.png BoxRec's ranking system has been criticized for a long time, but I don't know what to criticize more: Fury being ranked behind Joshua, or Wilder being ranked behind Usyk & Ruiz. I think that’s fair. After fury has beaten wilder twice I think Usyk and Ruiz could well be favourites if they fought. Usyk is a great boxer, arguably Better than fury. Ruiz has really fast hands and would potentially open wilder up like fury in the second fight. You could debate it of course but I think it’s reasonable and partially reflects wilders lack of credible opponents

Boxrec ratings are and have always been a joke.

Think Boxrec have it spot on regarding the top two. Wilder should be third, Ruiz fourth and Whyte fifth.

I think that's fair. Even if Fury is the clear favorite over Joshua, Boxrec is about what you've done, not what you can do. Fury sat out nearly 3 years and has fought several low rated bums during his return. Joshua has consistently faced top 15 guys, other than Wilder, I don't know if Fury has even fought a top 50 guy since returning. Yeah, that's a fair way to look at it. The problem comes when people point to BoxRec as some sort of authority on who the best fighters are, that's not what it measures at all... AJ is certainly number one in terms of consistently high-profile fights, he has a relatively good activity rate. But no way is he the top dog in terms of ability

Fury is no1. He is favourite against Josh so is no1. Didn't Floyd come back, not really did much and was made no1 soon after? The top 3 were fury, Wilder and josh. And fury is the only one with 2 wins out of the 3 of the trio.

I say robbery because that's what 99% of people saw. Average scorecard of 1700 fans. The opinions of biased fans are irrelevant. The opinions of people watching on television are irrelevant. The actual top experts, who were sitting ringside, working for the most respected publications, many of them scored a draw or had Wilder winning. I was actually ringside for the fight. A lot of the close rounds the UK fanboys automatically gave to Fury, people ringside gave to Wilder for being the aggressor and landing the more damaging blows. The Associated Press, ESPN, Yahoo Sports, the LA Times, Sporting News, the Washington Post, etc all had a draw or Wilder winning. So you can't act like the official decision being a draw is some outrageous outcome. Doesn't matter what 1700 fans on the internet think.

I'm a Joshua fan and know it's not fair. Fury should have more points because he beat Wilder twice but boxrec only counts the first fight as a draw. Which is why boxrec is flawed, fighters benefit from corruption. Pretty cowardly to block me from your threads, but to still respond to me with that kind of nonsense. In the first fight, the Associated Press, ESPN, Yahoo Sports, the LA Times, Sporting News, the Washington Post, etc all had a draw or Wilder winning. When that many top level publications don't have Fury winning, you can't cry robbery when the official decision is a draw. You cry robbery because you're a fanboy. Plain and simple.

#1 Fury #2 Joshua #3 Wilder I was going to have Wilder as 2 but after that beating i can't. He's not #5, this is why rankings should be determined by human experts and not computer algorithms.

I think that's fair. Even if Fury is the clear favorite over Joshua, Boxrec is about what you've done, not what you can do. Fury sat out nearly 3 years and has fought several low rated bums during his return. Joshua has consistently faced top 15 guys, other than Wilder, I don't know if Fury has even fought a top 50 guy since returning.