Championship Fights of the New Blood

**Eff Pandas** · 12-25-2015, 11:45 AM

I've been boxing record nerding out myself. As a proponent of Boxrec being the only non-objective form of accessing talent I've incorporated it into my gauge.

One of the problems I'm always b$tching & moaning about is quality control in boxing. There are fights that are legit at all levels of the game & there are bs fights at all levels of the game. What I wanted to see is a "UFC-like" common denominator established. So like when you see a guy who's 8-3 in MMA, but 1-3 in the UFC vs a guy who's 5-3 in MMA, but 4-3 in the MMA its usually a safe assumption the 5-3 guy is the superior fighter cuz the UFC record means more. So I invented my own version of this.

Basically I've so far just taken the approach that any opponent who's gotten to 100 points via the Boxrec point system should be considered a "world class" or "world capable" opponent. Don't really have a name for it yet tbh, but just been playing around with those terms some may strongly disagree with (I know to some cats world class is like 1 guy in a division lol). The points need adjustments for smaller fighters, but I haven't effed around with that yet.

Best Records (I've found so far) vs 100pt+ opponents of active/ranked fighters

Mayweather, 33-0 (13)
GGG, 18-0 (17)
Brook, 14-0 (10)
Stevenson, 13-0 (11)
Ward, 11-0 (3)
Garcia, 10-0 (3)
Kovalev, 9-0 (8)
Fury, 9-0 (5)
Thurman, 8-0 (5)
Crawford, 8-0 (4)
DeGale, 8-0 (3)
Rigondeaux, 7-0 (3)

**soul_survivor** · 12-25-2015, 06:11 PM

Originally posted by Eff Pandas

I've been boxing record nerding out myself. As a proponent of Boxrec being the only non-objective form of accessing talent I've incorporated it into my gauge.

One of the problems I'm always b$tching & moaning about is quality control in boxing. There are fights that are legit at all levels of the game & there are bs fights at all levels of the game. What I wanted to see is a "UFC-like" common denominator established. So like when you see a guy who's 8-3 in MMA, but 1-3 in the UFC vs a guy who's 5-3 in MMA, but 4-3 in the MMA its usually a safe assumption the 5-3 guy is the superior fighter cuz the UFC record means more. So I invented my own version of this.

Basically I've so far just taken the approach that any opponent who's gotten to 100 points via the Boxrec point system should be considered a "world class" or "world capable" opponent. Don't really have a name for it yet tbh, but just been playing around with those terms some may strongly disagree with (I know to some cats world class is like 1 guy in a division lol). The points need adjustments for smaller fighters, but I haven't effed around with that yet.

Best Records (I've found so far) vs 100pt+ opponents of active/ranked fighters

Mayweather, 33-0 (13)
GGG, 18-0 (17)
Brook, 14-0 (10)
Stevenson, 13-0 (11)
Ward, 11-0 (3)
Garcia, 10-0 (3)
Kovalev, 9-0 (8)
Fury, 9-0 (5)
Thurman, 8-0 (5)
Crawford, 8-0 (4)
DeGale, 8-0 (3)
Rigondeaux, 7-0 (3)

See, this is exactly why I don't think stats are any good for ranking boxers, based on a points system from boxrec, because boxrec throws up more anomalies than sense more times than not.

How does Fury make it on there? When his only truly world class opponent is Wlad and at a stretch Chisora.

How is Brook on there above Bradley or Khan?

I've never liked the boxrec stuff.

**Eff Pandas** · 12-25-2015, 06:55 PM

Originally posted by soul_survivor

See, this is exactly why I don't think stats are any good for ranking boxers, based on a points system from boxrec, because boxrec throws up more anomalies than sense more times than not.

To me in a battle of which ranking system is better Boxrec or alphabet groups, Boxrec wins all day. You wanna see some **** that don't make sense...explain to me how Glazkov & Martin are considered the top two HW's by the IBF? And thats just a easy one thats current. Alphabet groups got a long history of giving titles to undeserving fighters. I don't see titles as meaningful or telling in a boxers resume as I used to.

How does Fury make it on there? When his only truly world class opponent is Wlad and at a stretch Chisora.

The first thing people always have hangups on are names. I call it world class or world capable cuz it fits with my definition. Like I said in my original post I know some people say there are like 1, 2 or 3 cats who are world class in some divisions which I think is ******ed. I got a wider definition of world class & a even wider division of world capable boxers than most cuz who are talking about the #8 guy in the world being a f#cking bum. And there is some issues with the points for heavier guys vs the points vs lighter guys that I'm still playing around with so HW's or WW's are more likely to have more guys who qualify than a LW or FlyW.

How is Brook on there above Bradley or Khan?

I just threw together the best undefeated records using that method, not the most wins or everyone in a division. Here's some 147 guys doe.

Floyd, 33-0 (13)
Manny, 28-5-2 (17)
Kell, 14-0 (10)
Tim, 14-1-1 (2)
Amir, 13-2 (4)
Keith, 8-0 (5)
Shawn, 6-1-1 (2)
Sadam, 2-0 (1)
Danny, 10-0 (3)
Errol, 3-0 (2)
Andre, 11-4 (7)
Shane, 24-9-1 (16)
Chris, 3-2
Marcos, 12-5 (9)
Sammy, 2-0 (1)
Brandon, 9-3 (6)
Paulie, 9-7 (1)

All it really does it take out a bunch of bs fights & concentrates on the more meaningful, competitive fights in boxers career. For young guys it says how tested they've been or haven't been. And it tells who's testing themselves too I guess. For me it gives a better gauge of what guys have or haven't accomplished than title fights.

Championship Fights of the New Blood