Division depth according to boxrec

[mick1303]

I had a little bit of time on my hands, and being a database person, did a following exercsise: I've collected top 100 in each division down to Flyweight (sorry, I'm not very interested to go further down in weight). Then I calculated an average ranking of top 100. This shall give a numerical representation of "depth" in each division. I understand that not a lot of posters here respect boxrec rankings. But the good thing about them is that they are devoid of subjective element. My main goal is actually to trace the changes for a while and try to reverse-engineer their exact formula...

Here is the average ranking of top 100 by each division:

Division________________Avg-Ranking
Welterweight____________205.02
Heavyweight_____________181.17
Middleweight____________171.01
Junior_middleweight_____162.6
Junior_welterweight_____155.04
Lightweight_____________153.2
Light_heavyweight_______149.34
Cruiserweight___________135.54
Featherweight___________135.11
Super_middleweight______133.25
Super_featherweight_____131.84
Super_bantamweight______117.67
Bantamweight_____________90.92
Super_flyweight__________88.15
Flyweight________________80.94

[SilverMiles]

I had a little bit of time on my hands, and being a database person, did a following exercsise: I've collected top 100 in each division down to Flyweight (sorry, I'm not very interested to go further down in weight). Then I calculated an average ranking of top 100. This shall give a numerical representation of "depth" in each division. I understand that not a lot of posters here respect boxrec rankings. But the good thing about them is that they are devoid of subjective element. My main goal is actually to trace the changes for a while and try to reverse-engineer their exact formula...

Here is the average ranking of top 100 by each division:

Division________________Avg-Ranking
Welterweight____________205.02
Heavyweight_____________181.17
Middleweight____________171.01
Junior_middleweight_____162.6
Junior_welterweight_____155.04
Lightweight_____________153.2
Light_heavyweight_______149.34
Cruiserweight___________135.54
Featherweight___________135.11
Super_middleweight______133.25
Super_featherweight_____131.84
Super_bantamweight______117.67
Bantamweight_____________90.92
Super_flyweight__________88.15
Flyweight________________80.94

Cool idea. I wonder how the welterweight average will look once Manny retires.

[nivek535]

good stuff.
i wish theyd make the database public so we can run SQL on that **** haha.
we'll be able to put up some interesting statistics

[mick1303]

good stuff.
i wish theyd make the database public so we can run SQL on that **** haha.
we'll be able to put up some interesting statistics

It took me 3 hours or so to copy-paste pages. But now I have it as MS Access. Of course only top 100 in each division. But I can run whatever SQL I like on these data ))

[mick1303]

Cool idea. I wonder how the welterweight average will look once Manny retires.

Without Manny the average ranking of top 99 remaining welters is 197.85

[B-Bomber]

Nice exercise, not sure I agree with these stats though.

HW has some interesting up and coming, but apart from Wlad they are all pretty untested. I do not think it's amongst the "deepest" divisions.

MW , I assume, is so high because of Cotto and Canelo, both coming from lower weights.Neither of them has done much at MW.

While i find SuperBantam quite low. Rigo , Quigg and Frampton make it a pretty decent weightclass, i find.

[Scipio2009]

I had a little bit of time on my hands, and being a database person, did a following exercsise: I've collected top 100 in each division down to Flyweight (sorry, I'm not very interested to go further down in weight). Then I calculated an average ranking of top 100. This shall give a numerical representation of "depth" in each division. I understand that not a lot of posters here respect boxrec rankings. But the good thing about them is that they are devoid of subjective element. My main goal is actually to trace the changes for a while and try to reverse-engineer their exact formula...

Here is the average ranking of top 100 by each division:

Division________________Avg-Ranking
Welterweight____________205.02
Heavyweight_____________181.17
Middleweight____________171.01
Junior_middleweight_____162.6
Junior_welterweight_____155.04
Lightweight_____________153.2
Light_heavyweight_______149.34
Cruiserweight___________135.54
Featherweight___________135.11
Super_middleweight______133.25
Super_featherweight_____131.84
Super_bantamweight______117.67
Bantamweight_____________90.92
Super_flyweight__________88.15
Flyweight________________80.94

Average against what, exactly?

BoxRec rates near 1800 fighters at 147, yet rates under 300 fighters at minimum weight. Every weight class bantamweight on down has fewer than 800 fighters rated by BoxRec.

Beyond that, there are also "zombie fighters" rated (Michael Grant, Kevin Johnson, and Jonathan Banks are all in the heavyweight top 100, for example).

Honestly not sure what you're seeking to measure.

[-Hyperion-]

You didn't miss anything by not doing it below flyweight.....hell 100 is half the minimum division ....

And as expected the bottom 4 are the lightest weights in order.....

hipsters of boxing will not even see value to these, because "eye test doe".....

[-Hyperion-]

Average against what, exactly?

BoxRec rates near 1800 fighters at 147, yet rates under 300 fighters at minimum weight. Every weight class bantamweight on down has fewer than 800 fighters rated by BoxRec.

Beyond that, there are also "zombie fighters" rated (Michael Grant, Kevin Johnson, and Jonathan Banks are all in the heavyweight top 100, for example).

Honestly not sure what you're seeking to measure.

# of fighters in a division is also a sign of depth......and please, boxrec has records of minimum weight fighters with records like 1-10 in filipinas, japan, corea...not being in boxrec probably means your boxing comission is non-existent.
"zombie fighters"? kevin johnson fought in may....he is an active fighter......that's what it takes for boxrec to rate.......

[mick1303]

Average against what, exactly?

BoxRec rates near 1800 fighters at 147, yet rates under 300 fighters at minimum weight. Every weight class bantamweight on down has fewer than 800 fighters rated by BoxRec.

Beyond that, there are also "zombie fighters" rated (Michael Grant, Kevin Johnson, and Jonathan Banks are all in the heavyweight top 100, for example).

Honestly not sure what you're seeking to measure.

Average is not calculated "against" anything ))) It is just an average. IDK what "smaller words" shall I use... In each division only top 100 was used, therefore the number of fighters below 100 did not matter. While I agree that total number of ranked fighters in the division is also a sign of depth, it is a different matter all together.