All time top 50 list

[djtmal]

I had not seen this before, I don't agree with many of the slots but it was interesting in that it was based of a scoring system so at least its not just opinion it has a criteria.

All “greatest of all time” lists — whether they’re about Disney movies or TV series finales — cause a certain amount of controversy. The world would be a boring place if everyone had the same opinion, right? But a recent list of the greatest boxers of all time by record-keeping boxing website BoxRec got a lot of people seriously wound up.

A BoxRec representative explained their point-based system, which rewards each boxer’s annual division performance.

“A boxer can get up to 200 points per year for defeating No. 1 or No. 2 in the division,” Martin Reichert told Bad Left Hook. “Another criteria additionally rewards the boxer’s annual P4P performance. A boxer can get up to another 200 points per year for defeating No. 1 or No. 2 over all divisions.”

Furthermore, Reichert said, “Top wins per year are avenged by losses against lower-rated opponents in the referenced year, the year before and the year after. Top wins are rewarded much higher than medium-scale wins. The points per year are reduced to 1/2 for defeating No. 3, to 1/3 for defeating No. 4, 1/4 for defeating No. 5 etc. So defeating No. 11 earns only a 1/10 of defeating No. 1 or No. 2.”

https://www.thedelite.com/the-greate...ll-time-ranked

Let me guess. They had 49 dudes ahead of Floyd and your panties are in a bunch

[Willow The Wisp]

What else is there to do but challenge lists such as this? But this one happens to rank No. 1 on my all-time list of worst lists. Can't explain why, but when I was in the process of scrolling through and saw that James Toney had been selected for an all-time top 50 list, ranked 17 whole spots above Sam Langford and Floyd Patterson placed 24 spots above Willie Pep, I knew instantly that I wanted my 2 minutes back. Why on earth do non-historians attempt these things? We can all take solace in the facts that surgeons and airline pilots, at least; require certification.

[Roadblock]

Let me guess. They had 49 dudes ahead of Floyd and your panties are in a bunch

I thought it was quite funny I guess you still crying, and they had Floyd on top which I don't believe but is what it is.

[hugh grant]

Floyd is like a bad smell you can't shake off. He's a popular guy.

[Roadblock]

Floyd is like a bad smell you can't shake off. He's a popular guy.

Pelicans are always dirty on the Eagles

[PeepeePoopooMan]

seeing who made this thread I already knew who was gonna be number 1

[hectari]

Im surprised roadblock didn’t say manny pacquiao doesn’t belong on the list or belongs near the bottom lol

[VG_Addict]

Where would you rank Floyd all time if he beat Casamayor at 130, Tszyu and Hatton at 140, Pacquiao in 2011, Bradley in 2012, Canelo without a catchweight in 2013, and Thurman and Brook in 2014? Top 20 all time?

[Willy Wanker]

What else is there to do but challenge lists such as this? But this one happens to rank No. 1 on my all-time list of worst lists. Can't explain why, but when I was in the process of scrolling through and saw that James Toney had been selected for an all-time top 50 list, ranked 17 whole spots above Sam Langford and Floyd Patterson placed 24 spots above Willie Pep, I knew instantly that I wanted my 2 minutes back. Why on earth do non-historians attempt these things? We can all take solace in the facts that surgeons and airline pilots, at least; require certification.

I like these kind of lists, but strictly for entertainment.

That's the problem with a "number or point based" ranking system. With boxing, you can't just go off numbers and statistics alone, especially when you consider how different all the eras are from each other. You'll run into a lot of apples to oranges type of situations.

These lists are interesting at best, but I never take them seriously.