A points ranking system to legitimise boxing rankings!!!!!!!

[A-Wolf]

The Ring bases it's ratings on the word of Chuck Giampa, right? Thought I heard that somewhere. The guy is a lowlife.

[A-Wolf]

The Ring bases it's ratings on the word of Chuck Giampa, right? Thought I heard that somewhere. The guy is a lowlife.

Yep. He's the "ratings chairman." AKA yes man front guy.

[yaltamaltadavid]

Yeah, not only does the Ring have an elitist panel who think their opinions should be taken as definitive, the have a grand ruler who oversees it all. Opinion-based rankings are all bull****.

I'll have the welterweight rankings ready for tomorrow...

[Light_Speed]

I agree that the Rios-Abril decision was an absolute travesty. Still don't think rankings should ignore the official result.

I think unofficial rankings made by fans should reflect that.

[yaltamaltadavid]

Initial top-30 rankings for heavyweight to light welterweight are now posted! This is really falling into place nicely, and I suspect by within a few months it will produce rankings more strictly based on accomplishments than any other rankings. The other divisions will be up in time for this to be ready for the fights in September. Check it out and let me know what you think...

www.worldboxingrankings.proboards.com

[yaltamaltadavid]

This is why your system is never going to work. I'm sorry my friend. You cannot objectify a subjective sport. Boxrec and the little known IBO already try this and show this system has major, major flaws. Even then, an objective system has to be subjective in some way in regards to giving out points. Someone has to decide how many points a fight is worth. Doing it purely objectively, Deontay Wilder would be the best HW right now (lol...). It just isn't going to work. What TBRB are doing now is what I think the best system going. Some people disagree with little minor points in their rankings, but they give a solid, solid foundation as to what most people will accept as the legitimate rankings.

You mentioned you think it's good that the TBRB 'corrects' bad decisions with their rankings. I think if their rankings are widely accepted, this practice will be counterproductive: it's saying that rankings 'fixing' bad decisions is good enough, and judges can get away with it, but allows the structural problems in commissions and promotional companies that cause bad decisions to persist. If rankings accept bad decisions, there is less chance of more fundamental change to the sport.

[yaltamaltadavid]

I prefer ONE league. No more bull****ing. The best fight the best.

I totally agree. Boxing doesn't need separate leagues, but it needs a central international governing organisation, like FIFA or the ATP. Many Americans argue for a 'national commission', but boxing's a global sport so needs a global solution. I think in the current fractured promotional environment objective rankings won't truly be viable... but if there's a single governing organisation it would be able to rank basically every active boxer in the world.

[techliam]

You mentioned you think it's good that the TBRB 'corrects' bad decisions with their rankings. I think if their rankings are widely accepted, this practice will be counterproductive: it's saying that rankings 'fixing' bad decisions is good enough, and judges can get away with it, but allows the structural problems in commissions and promotional companies that cause bad decisions to persist. If rankings accept bad decisions, there is less chance of more fundamental change to the sport.

No, this just your view. I could turn around and argue that since bogus decisions have little meaning (if they were simply ignored) then there'd be no need for robberies.

And no, i don't agree with your "all or nothing" approach to reform. You have to start somewhere. Lets face it, you aren't ever going to be rid of awful decisions.

[yaltamaltadavid]

I think unofficial rankings made by fans should reflect that.

It's moronic and pointless for every fan to make their own rankings. Anyone should make their own pound for pound lists and debate then, but divisional rankings are supposed to show who deserves a shot at the championship and should reflect consistent success in the division and shouldn't be up for debate. Fans don't get to decide the standings in a team sports league. This isn't the masturbatory exercise other random fan rankings are. Because fair objective rankings don't exist, me and a few other people are trying to show how it can be done.

[yaltamaltadavid]

No, this just your view. I could turn around and argue that since bogus decisions have little meaning (if they were simply ignored) then there'd be no need for robberies.

And no, i don't agree with your "all or nothing" approach to reform. You have to start somewhere. Lets face it, you aren't ever going to be rid of awful decisions.

If you pushed your view that decisions don't have ultimate meaning, you could also say it doesn't matter who wins at all, and boxing should just be appreciated as performance art. But if you do that championships of course would also be meaningless. As much as I appreciate the spirit and art of boxing, I still think it's a sport so has to have a definitive winner. No other sport would overrule a result in the standings or rankings because of a disputed call, and it would be outrageous if that happened.

Also.. I don't know how you can put your trust in a group of journalists who decide Beltran beating Burns fulfills a 'robbery clause', yet Adamek beating Cunningham does not. If the result of boxing matches are so subjective, then so is an overrule of their results, and it become an endless, pointless debate.

Well, there's a lot that isn't being done at all about decisions, like the Nevada commission just covering up for CJ Ross. Even writing to the commission would have more of an impact than rankings ignoring a decision.

I think merely trying to fix the result of a problem isn't sufficent. Band-aid reforms haven't done anything for boxing over the decades. I don't ignore the benefit more minor reforms can have, but as is my view for most political problems, reform isn't good enough... we need revolution!!