Tyson Fury #1 HW on Boxrec, #2 p4p

[removed]

Rankings have been updated today.

1) Fury
2) Wilder
3) Joshua
4) Usyk

[Citizen Koba]

Rankings have been updated today.

1) Fury
2) Wilder
3) Joshua
4) Usyk

They're updated every day, man, what they've done is rejigged their algorithms... again - I think this is about the 4th time in as many years, which is becoming kinda frustrating.

I think the idea is they're trying to make it a more accurate predictor of future outcomes and - as best I understand it - are now retroactively changing the points value of wins dependent on the subsequent performances of the loser... say you'd initially got 100 points for breating a dude but then he goes on to get KOd in his next 3 fights then that hundred might have been downgraded to 30 by the time he loses his 3rd fight.

Honestly has me scratching my head a little, though i understand the logic, but since I tend to use 'em mainly for comparative puposes anyway - usually just to get a rough and ready idea of the level of guys outside the top 20 or 30 then I'm sure I'll learn to adapt to the new system.

Although they can get things loosely right sometimes, or at least in the general region of what most folk think is right, Boxrec has significant drawbacks as a ranking system, and is particularly poor for P4P for a variety of practical reasons, although it at least eliminates many of the cognitive biases that plague other systems.

[QueensburyRules]

Rankings have been updated today.

1) Fury
2) Wilder
3) Joshua
4) Usyk

- -AJ the record setting heavy of his era and only unified champ #1 on both boxrec and Ring for donkey years.

Boxrec experimenting with algorithms happens on a near daily basis. Tomorrow Fat Andy could be #1 on the basis of most tacos consumed.

[RJJ-94-02=GOAT]

- -AJ the record setting heavy of his era and only unified champ #1 on both boxrec and Ring for donkey years.

Boxrec experimenting with algorithms happens on a near daily basis. Tomorrow Fat Andy could be #1 on the basis of most tacos consumed.

Sorry but he’s factually #3 on Boxrec.

Unluckeeeeeee😂😂🤣

[UNBANNED]

They've rejigged their algorithms... again - I think this is about the 4th time in as many years, which is becoming kinda frustrating.

I think the idea is they're trying to make it a more accurate predictor of future outcomes and - as best I understand it - are now retroactively changing the points value of wins dependent on the subsequent performances of the loser... say you'd initially got 100 points for breating a dude but then he goes on to get KOd in his next 3 fights then that hundred might have been downgraded to 30 by the time he loses his 3rd fight.

Honestly has me scratching my head a little, but since I tend to use 'em mainly for comparative puposes anyway - usually just to get a rough and ready idea of the level of guys outside the top 20 or 30 then I'm sure I'll learn to adapt to the new system.

Although they can get things loosely right sometimes, or at least in the general region of what most folk think is right, Boxrec has significant drawbacks as a ranking system, and is particularly poor for P4P for a variety of practical reasons, although it at least eliminates many of the cognitive biases that plague other systems.

I'll take their list over opinions.

And lists should be fluid because life is fluid.

Carl Froch got A TON OF RESPECT for beating LUCIAN BUTE. That win is worth nothing now and rightfully so. The dude was a complete hypejob...so okay-decent win and Froch gets points for "ruining" Bute, but there wasnt much there ever in my opinion

[RJJ-94-02=GOAT]

Dave Allen 34 places above Otto Wallin who gave the #1 a tough fight.

Boxrec ratings are something else����

[removed]

They're updated every day, man, what they've done is rejigged their algorithms... again - I think this is about the 4th time in as many years, which is becoming kinda frustrating.

I think the idea is they're trying to make it a more accurate predictor of future outcomes and - as best I understand it - are now retroactively changing the points value of wins dependent on the subsequent performances of the loser... say you'd initially got 100 points for breating a dude but then he goes on to get KOd in his next 3 fights then that hundred might have been downgraded to 30 by the time he loses his 3rd fight.

Honestly has me scratching my head a little, though i understand the logic, but since I tend to use 'em mainly for comparative puposes anyway - usually just to get a rough and ready idea of the level of guys outside the top 20 or 30 then I'm sure I'll learn to adapt to the new system.

Although they can get things loosely right sometimes, or at least in the general region of what most folk think is right, Boxrec has significant drawbacks as a ranking system, and is particularly poor for P4P for a variety of practical reasons, although it at least eliminates many of the cognitive biases that plague other systems.

They have 3 HW's in their p4p list lol.

[VatoMulatto]

What Usyk done at HW to be rated 4??

[deathofaclown]

I remember their algorithm once had Eubank Jr ahead of Chocolatito when Chocolatito was coming off a loss

So yeah, their rankings can be skewed because there’s no rational thinking, it’s just an algorithm

That said, Fury is rightly the number 1 heavyweight by a mile and one of the best p4p.

I really wouldn’t use their rankings as anything more than a rough estimate of where fighters are in the division, give or take quite a few positions

[Citizen Koba]

I'll take their list over opinions.

And lists should be fluid because life is fluid.

Carl Froch got A TON OF RESPECT for beating LUCIAN BUTE. That win is worth nothing now and rightfully so. The dude was a complete hypejob...so okay-decent win and Froch gets points for "ruining" Bute, but there wasnt much there ever in my opinion

It's absolutely got it's place as a reference and gets more criticism that it should to be honest, but it's incapable of adapting to circumstances like blatantly bad scorecards which human - subjective based - systems can. Furthermore it's heavily skewed against the lighter divisions largely cos there's fewer fighters there and more mobility between divisions, but other other reasons too which I'll go into if you like.


Anyways, ain't gonna fault you if you like the Boxrec rankings or use 'em, there's no reason why you shouldn't and at least they ain't got the inherent biases of subjective systems, which generally massively skew in favour of those fighters who have been on US screens the most (a factor which I describe as 'exposure bias').

Myself I simply choose not to do P4P altogether, I understand it's a fun discussion to have but I just regard it is a bit of fantasy nonsense... for sure rank within divisions but his idea that somehow you can objectively compare guys of vastly different weights who can never fight each other or have common opponents makes no sense to me.