The Boxrec calculation is crap. They have only an approximate idea how to rate boxers. My system is far better. Just the fact alone that they have Ali at #1 shows you that it's bad.
I have a completely different system than BoxRec for a very good reason. In fact: I suspect that they twist and spin it just to keep Ali at #1. As a side effect they have Max Baer above George Foreman and Schmeling above Holmes, which is equally ridiculous.
1) 90s > Ali's era for sure.
2) During Lennox' times experts were b*tching about the poor talent pool, too. Experts and fans b*tch about the "dire state of the heavyweights" since 18xx.
1) 200x2 is not a nonsense rule but the official definition of heavyweight. And by the way: 200x2 bootlicks Ali. 200x2 is not unfair to Ali but unfair to modern HWs, because no HW championships takes place at such a low weight nowadays.
2) Triads ("A vs B vs C vs A") are the answer to the nonsense that "In previous eras fighters use to fight each other more. Now they duck each other". The opposite is true.
I have a completely different system than BoxRec for a very good reason. In fact: I suspect that they twist and spin it just to keep Ali at #1. As a side effect they have Max Baer above George Foreman and Schmeling above Holmes, which is equally ridiculous.
1) 90s > Ali's era for sure.
2) During Lennox' times experts were b*tching about the poor talent pool, too. Experts and fans b*tch about the "dire state of the heavyweights" since 18xx.
1) 200x2 is not a nonsense rule but the official definition of heavyweight. And by the way: 200x2 bootlicks Ali. 200x2 is not unfair to Ali but unfair to modern HWs, because no HW championships takes place at such a low weight nowadays.
2) Triads ("A vs B vs C vs A") are the answer to the nonsense that "In previous eras fighters use to fight each other more. Now they duck each other". The opposite is true.
Comment