Tweet
Their rating system is really odd for some fighters, pretty good for others. No different than the ratings of most posters on here really.
-
-
Originally posted by Kezzer View Post
https://www.ringsideboxingnews.com/t...ned-in-detail/
Current Ratings
Points are redistributed by every bout. No points come in or get out of the system by this basic rating process
But points get out of the system by career end, by point reductions due to inactivity or missing opponent quality
So additional points must be fed into the system
– 0.01 points, when a boxer wins a bout
– 0.1 points, when a boxer defeats an opponent, who already won a bout within 18 months
– 1 point, when a boxer defeats an opponent, who already won a bout against a winning opponent within 18 months
– when defeating an opponent within the top 15 percent of all active boxers, who already defeated an opponent within the top 15 percent of all active boxers (top 15 percent limit 2019: men = 4.89 points, women = 1.87 points)
— 8 points at least
— as much points as the defeated opponent had before the bout
— 40 points at most
— with weight = 1, when the opponent had no loss after his top win, with weight = 1/2 after 1 loss, with weight = 1/4 after 2 losses etc
— with weight = 1 within 18 months after the opponents top bout, with weight = 1/2 thereafter and decreasing by a factor of 1/2 per another 18 months
– all with weight = cd * v; cd = clear decision factor and v = bout value
Every boxer gets a first rating of 0 before his first bout.
After every bout, the ratings of the two boxers involved are changed depending on the bout’s official result (KO, TKO, RTD, UD, PTS, NWS, MD, SD, DQ, TD, DRAW).
The value of a result varies between v=1 and v=0.
The clear decision factor varies between cd=1 and cd=0.
The winner cannot lose points for KO, TKO, RTD, DQ, TD and decisions on points with cd=1
KO, TKO, RTD are rewarded with full value v=1, cd=1.
NWS is rewarded with full value v=1 for 12 rounds boxed and more and a lower value related to the number of rounds boxed. Clear decision factor cd=1.
UD, PTS, DQ, TD are rewarded with full value v=1 for 12 rounds boxed and more and a lower value related to the number of rounds boxed, clear decision factor cd=1. If the score cards are available, it may be less.
MD, SD are rewarded with full value v=1 for 12 rounds boxed and more and a lower value related to the number of rounds boxed. Clear decision factor is limited to cd=0.5. If the score cards are available cd may be less.
DRAW is rewarded with full value v=1 for 12 rounds boxed and more and a lower value related to the number of rounds boxed. Clear decision factor cd=0.
If the score cards are available, the value rewarded is in direct proportion to the rounds boxed, with full value v=1 for 12 rounds boxed and more. The clear decision factor is in proportion to rounds boxed and the mean score difference per judge. cd=1 for a mean score difference per judge of 50% of the rounds boxed.
All bouts are regarded to have the same weight independent of titles.
The winner gets a certain part of the opponent’s points and a certain part of the rating difference to the opponent’s rating.
For a DRAW the rating of the higher rated boxer is reduced by some part of the point difference; the rating of the lower rated boxer is enhanced by the same amount of points.
The full relative point reward is 33%. It is in direct proportion to the pre-bout rating of the defeated opponent.
The rating of a boxer is reduced, if he didn’t box an opponent with a rating of at least 50% of his own rating points within 18 months.
The rating of a boxer is reduced by up to 50% in proportion to the difference of 2 times the rating points of his best opponent in this time period minus his own rating
The reduction is in proportion to the time the requirement was missed.
The rating of a boxer is reduced by 50% for every time period of inactivity of 18 months – and to even less in proportion to a longer time period of inactivity
The pre-bout rating of a successfully debuting boxer is set to 25% of his opponents pre-bout rating.
The rating points are in relation to a weight division. The rating points are converted with the cube of the upper weight limit ratio of the old and new weight division.
The winner is always rated higher than the loser. the minimum margin is: mean pre-bout ratings of both r_m = (r_a + r_b)/2; r_new_winner = r_m + earn_f*v*cd/4; r_new_loser= r_m – earn_f*v*cd/4
Formula
If a boxer with a rating of r_a before the fight defeats a boxer b with a rating of r_b before the fight with result of value v, clear decision factor cd, the new regular ratings r_a_new and r_b_new after a fight are:
earn = 1/3 * v * (r_b*cd + (r_b-r_a)/(1+2*cd));
r_a_new = r_a + earn_a
r_b_new = r_b – earn_b
The winner gets additional points.
Rating reduction caused by missing opponent quality:
career_top_rating = highest career rating adapted to bout division days = days between bout with best opponent before and bout with best opponent after reduction
r_red-career_top_rating/10 = (r_old-career_top_rating/10) * (1 – 0.5*(1 – 2*best_opp/r_old))**(days/(365.24*1.5))
Examples
Boxer a UD 6 boxer b, scores 59:55 58:56 58:56, a has 10 points, b has 5 points, opponent with a prior win, but not within the top 15 percent of all active boxers
A 6 rounder is rewarded with value 6/12, v=0.5
UD is rewarded with cd=1 at maximum
mean score difference per judge is (4+2+2)/3 = 2.667, which is rewarded in direct proportion to half the rounds boxed with cd= 2.667/3 = 0.89 at maximum
so cd=0.89
earn= 1/3 * 0.5 * (5*0.89 + (5-10)/(1+2*0.89)) = 0.44
r_a_new = 10 + 0.44 = 10.44
r_b_new = 5 – 0.44 = 4.56
Winner additionally gets 0.01 points + 0.1 points for opponent with win and weight = cd*v = 0.89*0.5= 0.445
additional points = 0.11*0.445 = 0.05 points
r_a_new = 10.44 + 0.05 = 10.49
Boxer a SD 8 boxer b, scores 77:75 77:75 75:77, a has 100 points, b has 50 points, opponent within the top 15 percent of all active boxers and with an own win against such a top 15 percent boxer 23 months ago and 1 following loss
A 8 rounder is rewarded with 8/12, v=0.667
SD is rewarded with cd=0.5 at maximum
mean score difference per judge is (2+2-2)/3 = 0.667, which is rewarded in direct proportion to half the rounds boxed 0.667/4 at maximum
so cd=0.167
earn= 1/3 * 0.667 * (50*0.167 + (50-100)/(1+2*0.167)) = -6.48
r_a_new = 100 – 6.48 = 93.52
r_b_new = 50 + 6.48 = 56.48
Winner additionally gets 0.01 points + 0.1 points for opponent with win + 1 point for opponent with a win against a winner
+ 40 points for opponent with top 15 percent win with weight=1/2 for 1 following loss and weight=0.41 for top win before 23 months
and overall weight = cd*v = 0.5*0.67= 0.333
additional points = (1.11 + 40*0.5*0.41)*0.333 = 3.10 points
r_a_new = 93.52 + 3.10 = 96.62
They change it periodically - I think there's been about 4 major changes that I recall in the last 7 or 8 years, and I'm sure there's been a great deal of minor tinkering too.
They got a discussion thread on Boxrec thats been running since 2005ish which describes the various iterations over the years and the changes that have been made, objections, complaints, ideas whatever... I used to dip in every now and then but I ain't bothered for a while. They used to make their algorithm more readily available too... I'm sure it's on the site somewhere but I found it easier from an external site when I ran a search.
https://boxrec.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=28051
Discussion on the latest iteration of the scoring system begins later on in 2019 apparently, if you're interested enough to follow it up. If you're into some relatively hardcore maths theres a link to a paper describing the 'whole history rating' type system they switched to in their last update of the algorithm... if I got the idea right it basically means that changes to past scores will occur based on future performances of opponents... so if a formerly highly regarded opponent than you beat turns out subsequently to be a dud and loses therir next 3 or 4 fights, the points your got for 'em are retroactively reduced...
Anyways for those with more interest in the underlying principles of that kinda ranking system:
https://www.remi-coulom.fr/WHR/WHR.pdfLast edited by Citizen Koba; 12-17-2020, 04:48 AM.Comment
-
Wut in the fook.Originally posted by Citizen Koba View Post
I knew they flipped it around but never got too deep into the trenches of the details, but idk that it makes any sense for the scheduled rounds to come into play with the points you get or the wideness of the decision. I liked the old formula better. I don't think rounds came into play at all & the only time closeness mattered was if a lower ranked guy lost a majority or split decision or got a draw with a higher ranked guy.
Also it looks dumb so many guys got factions of points nowadays vs how it used to look with guys just having 0 points iirc.
Plus the the adjustment they made fooked up this whole criteria of quality opponents I had made up that gave me a good idea of what guys have done or haven't done at all levels. Back in the day beating a guy with 100pts or better meant you had beaten a world class, top 1% or better in your division guy. beating a guy with 50pts-99pts meant you beat someone solid. 25pts to 49pts was decent. And anything under 24pts were bs opponents.
I wish David McWater sold his rankings or better yet had a site for free for boxing fans. From the sounds of how he operates & his ideas I think his formula for ranking guys through a computer system like this is better.Comment
-
It's complicated.
https://www.remi-coulom.fr/WHR/WHR.pdf
https://boxrec.com/media/index.php?t...gs_Description
https://boxrec.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=28051
All the real info is in the first link. The other two kind of simplify it but there's a lot they leave out too.
As far as understanding it, I don't. Maybe after a while with the info I will but atm all I can tell you is vague nonsense.
One thing that's clear is this a sports algorithm used for predicting winners and losers in potential games being tooled to work as a boxing rating mechanism. I'm not sure how well it actually fits for what they use it for, but, **** they must understand it better than I do so the **** do i know.Comment
-
If I’m reading it right it weights anyone within top 15% active fighters the same. So I guess wilders 40x wins vs bums (bums being a bit excessive ... but in comparison) gets a better score than 15x wins vs top end opponents. Fury clearly benefits from this too with a number of his fights.
It’s similarly odd on other weights, I did think it looked pretty sensible last year - so does look like the latest iteration of changes has made the formal somewhat worse/less realisticComment
-
The point wasn’t about the individual fighters - but more the algorithm. If you look at Fights on paper etc it’s quite clear Joshua should be above wilder. Fury is more debatable because he’s unbeaten but the score gap between the two fighters doesn’t make sense given fury only has a couple credible wins.Originally posted by Boxing-1013 View Post
Posted on my last post but it appears the formula largely credits anyone within top 15% fighters with the same weighting now which means some of the weaker opponents fury (and wilder) they get given the same credit for it would seemComment
-
Top 15%? There's 1462 active HW's. So fighting anyone in the top 219 scores the same points.Originally posted by Kezzer View Post
Comment
-
Only go to Boxrec for their Fighter Profiles not their Sh^t Rankings!Comment
-
How is Schwarz ranked above Wallin.
The each only have one loss. It's to the same person: Tyson Fury. But Fury was just playing around with Schwarz and stopped him easily.Wallin on the other hand cut Fury, then gave him the toughest 12 round fight of his career.Comment
-
Yeah... I don't like it, myself. I see what they're gunning for, trying to make the system as accurate a predictor as possible (ie giving the highest likelihood that the guy they rank highest would win) but I think boxing just don't always work like that. Ain't like Chess say, where you basically got one set of invariable rules that are applied the same whereever you go irrespective of who t.f is promoting the match or A side nonsense.. there's always gonna be a big random element in boxing so it makes little sense to me to try to pin it down with that degree of precision.Originally posted by Eff Pandas View Post
Ha and FWIW I remember IDK maybe 5 or so years ago (would have been before the 2016 change which cut the scores drstically) you described your rough and ready ranking sytem and it stuck with me cos it was very close to mine... I went off a kinda power 2 based thing with 100 points as my starting point, so it was like 100+ for Gatekeeper type guys 200+ for Regional level guys and contenders, 400+ for true world level fighters and 800+ for the elite... (and 1600+ for the true Generational level guys though no-one actually hit that over the time I was using the system) anyway point was you knew where you stood with it and it gave you a loose idea of what to expect, but then each time they re-jig it it f#cks up your system.
I also don't like the fractions and I also don't like the precipitous drop off in scores from the top one or two in any division, makes it real difficult to scale when you're just going for an approximation, anyway... just griping, Boxrecs still an invaluable resource but I don't approve the direction they've gone with the scoring.Last edited by Citizen Koba; 12-17-2020, 05:50 AM.Comment
Comment