Best way to rank a fighter?

[QueensburyRules]

--- people are naturally contentious over race, sports, and politics in the west, but some of us are more statistical in our approach.

I recently updated the heavy rankings and mention I published a demographic and ratings study on 103 notable baseball players.

I recently penned an article comparing Joshua to the greats. I'd give the link, but as I recall BS gets real upset over competing links.

I'll copy off a portion When I get to a real computer.

[The Old LefHook]

I got better and better at ranking fighters, until eventually I only needed to consider their sportsmanship to rank them accurately.

Certainly I can go about it differently. Believe me, I can get a dead ranking on a man by tossing him into a handful of mythical matchups and seeing how he does.

I may want to put a man in some cross-divisional matchups of course, to get the most accurate possible assessment of his talents and abilities. For instance, before I ranked Sandy Saddler I would want to see him in against both Marciano and Chico Corrales. It's only fair. And when I run the thought experiment of a mythical matchup, lads, I run her accurate. Results that can be counted on.

Miscellaneous information can also carry great weight in a ranking. Any man is a fool and a liar and in danger of hell fire who says his AT ranking of Duran did not go up when he learned Duran Kayoed a full growed bull with a single shot. My own ranking went up twice. Once when I still thought Duran had used a combination, and again when I learned it was a one punch KO. If new information came in tomorrow that Duran had indeed used a combination, I would have to readjust my ranking in light of the new miscellaneous information.

I can do strange things with a little information, don't ever doubt it. Give me a complete profile of a man's sportsmanship, and I can rank him for you accurately, but only his AT ranking. I can't tell you a thing about how he would do in the contemporary scene. But now you throw in his race on top of it, and I can suddenly not only tell you how he ranks in the current scene, I can tell you whether his last fight ended in a kayo or a decision. If you want to give me his fist size, I will rate him in other sports with dead reckoning.

Tip: A man with shorter legs than Marciano could win the heavyweight championship again soon. Don't let the size mongers destroy your faith in medium sized men, men.

[QueensburyRules]

--- Here tis my article in part:

Anthony Joshua: age 27, 18-0, 18 KO, 44 rounds, 3-0, 3 KO title record.*The Josh prime pro career has only just started, yet he is currently the best he's ever been, so how does that stack up with the best heavyweights ever in a fair comparison, F-A-I-R*being the keyword here?

Cross referencing the timelines involved using statistical variables yields the following:

Jack Dempsey*12-1-5, 11 KO 1916, age 19, no contender 5*years before title

Joe Louis 18-0, 14 KO 1935, age 21, no contender 2 years before title

Rocky Marciano 18-0, 17 KO 1949, age 25, no contender 3 year before title

Muhammad Ali 18-0, 14 KO 1963, age 22, one contender Doug Jones 1 year before title

Joe Frazier 18-0, 16 KO 1967, age 23, no contender 1 year before title

George Foreman 18-0, 15 KO 1970, age 21, no contender 3 years before title

Larry Holmes*18-0, 13 KO 1975, age 26, no contender 3 years before title

Mike Tyson 18-0, 18 KO 1986, age 19, no contender 9 months before title

Lennox Lewis 18-0, 16 KO 1991, age 26, no contender 2 years before title

Wladimir Klitschko 18-0, 17 KO 1998, age 21, no contender 2 years before title

My conclusion: Josh whoops all save the possibilities of still green *Joe Louis, Foreman, Tyson, or Wlad getting to him. Josh easily whoops all their comp at that stage with not many of Josh's comp being whooped by their comp as they build their records on the timeline. Josh represents the new continuation of supersized heavyweights that has taken over the division since the reigns of Lewis and the Klitschkos. His biggest advantage besides size/strength/boxing ability is being a fully mature age 27 in his athletic prime years with unparalleled success, scarcely losing a round. Most of the others were much younger at the same stage and less developed.

These I take to be the protagonists' best fight showing dominance without controversy or officiating help:*Joshua--undefeated Dillon Whyte pretitle

Jack Dempsey--KO champion Jess Willard in a epic*beatdown

Joe Louis-- KO rematch of 52-7-4 Max Schmeling in the biggest ever fight of the day*broadcast by radio internationally to an estimated 70 million radios with uncounted numbers of listeners in dozens of countries gathered wherever a radio could pick up the relayed broadcasts

Rocky Marciano-- KO 149-19-8 LH champ Archie Moore

Muhammad Ali-- UD 39-4 WBA champ Ernie Terrell

Joe Frazier-- UD Undefeated champ Ali in Fight of The Century/Fight of the Year

George Foreman-- KO undefeated champ Joe Frazier

Larry Holmes-- UD 20-2 contender Randall Cobb
.
Mike Tyson-- UD undefeated WBC champ Tony Tucker

Lennox Lewis-- UD once defeated 37-1 contender David Tua

Wlad Klitschko-- UD undefeated Alexander Povetkin in his homeland of Russia*while Russia was engaged in a low level war against Klitschko's native Ukraine, so political animosity and armament was off the shelf.

Could Joe Louis beat Max Schmeling with the rematch being held in **** Germany? We can't say other to note it was easier to beat Max in Yankee Stadium than to travel to hostile Berlin. Can Wlad beat Josh in front of 90,000 screaming meemies*in England's Wembley Stadium? In two weeks we'll have that*answer.

[HOUDINI563]

If you can't personally watch a fighter fight don't rank them.

In addition if you can watch them fight but don't know what great fighting is all about it's worthless anyway.

[HOUDINI563]

Josh is a completely unproven fighter. Mentioning him in the same breath as proven ATGs is a mistake if monumental proportions.

[QueensburyRules]

--- Guess the email never penetrated Houdini's grave.

I gave them all a fair comparison along the same time line of development.

Git thee a soothsayer with a crystal ball to assist you in understanding the time line of development.

[Joe Beamish]

#1 criterion: Who did you beat and how thoroughly?

[JAB5239]

--- Guess the email never penetrated Houdini's grave.

I gave them all a fair comparison along the same time line of development.

Git thee a soothsayer with a crystal ball to assist you in understanding the time line of development.

You left out the biggest factor of all though. Past fighters had to work their way to a title shot. And in most of the cases you posted about there were not multiple titles to pick from. Physical age is another thing you left out. Most heavyweights aren't fully developed physically until mid to late twenties. Combine that with having to work their way to a title and your entire post becomes a farce. Thanks for sharing though!!

[QueensburyRules]

--- I've indicated in many past posts over these many years the difficulty of making fights and obtaining title shots, but then you just want to put up a front of the Hue & Cry.

It's very difficult if youre the Ks, and damn near impossible to keep the mass of titles Wlad held.

Git thee over yerself, I compared upon multiple timelines of development for an objective, comprehensive comparison.

All you offer is "I think," probable code for "I drink."

By relevant numbers, by many measures Josh is ahead of the greats, only lacking the hardest mistress to please, Longevity...listen and learn...

[-CANE-]

I think I've stated before the criteria I use when ranking fighters in my heavyweight thread. I must say though having briefly read through this thread haven't seen anyone mention historical impact. I think that must count for something, not the first or most important criteria by any means but for me personally I do use it.

A good example is Mike Tyson, I have him in my top ten (quite low if I remember correctly it's been a few years since I posted regulary). But I think if it wasn't for the impact he had on the sport and still has then maybe he wouldn't be in there.