NoctisViril
2022-02-15 13:07:26
Ce qui ne va pas selon moi :
Sont vraiment trop bas : Marquez, Morales, Barrera, Pryor, Sanchez, Tyson, Gomez, Lewis, Duran, Monzon, Hagker, Leonard, Pacquiao.
Sont vraiment trop haut : Hamed, Patterson, Angott, Holyfield, Moore, Charles, Griffith, Canzoneri, Louis
Absents : Foreman, Cotto, Usyk, Fury
NoctisViril
2022-02-15 13:08:54
Le 15 février 2022 à 12:52:19 :
Jack Dempsey > tes merdes en dépit de
Antérieur à 1922.
Le 15 février 2022 à 12:49:52 :
En toute objectivité Mayweather mérite le top 5.
Le 15 février 2022 à 12:51:32 :
C'est quoi ce classement de desco ayaooohttps://image.noelshack.com/fichiers/2021/45/1/1636398893-risitassa-tison.png
Ils se basent sur quoi pour faire leur classement ?
Au niveau du ratio victoire défaite on a Mayweather et Fury qui n'ont jamais perdu un match, Fury n'est même pas dans le classement.
Au niveau de la technicité, les nouveaux boxeurs(ceux actuels) sont avantagés or ils sont minoritaires.
Popularité ? Mohamed Ali serait premier si c'était le cas, même les filles connaissent son nom.
Donc leur classement se base sur quoi?https://image.noelshack.com/fichiers/2021/45/1/1636398893-risitassa-tison.png
La méthodologie du classement :
Scoring Details:
Scoring for total points and peak points relied on a base 11-point scale (i.e. a champion and the top 10 contenders).
A win over the champion of one’s weight class, in a title or non-title fight, was worth 11 points, a No. 1 contender was worth 10, etc.
Losses worked in reverse. A loss to the champion was a one-point deduction sliding to 11 for a loss to the No. 10 contender.
Losses to unranked opponents drew a universal 12-point deduction. Draws against ranked opponents were worth half a win; draws against unranked opponents were a six-point deduction.
Fighters were then given a ranking in each scoring category: overall total, peak score (the highest point their points for wins and losses reached), and ranked wins.
Wins and losses to opponents in higher and lower divisions were included. A formula based on body weight percentage differences between divisions of ranked fighters, rather than scale weights of the fighters, was applied.
For instance, if a No. 2-ranked bantamweight defeated the No. 2-ranked featherweight, 126 was divided by 118 and then multiplied by standard win/loss points, making the win worth 9.61 points to the bantamweight and the loss a deduction of 3.2 points for the featherweight. If the featherweight won, 118 would be divided by 126 with the win worth 8.42 points for the featherweight and the loss meaning a deduction of 2.81 points for the bantamweight.
The exception was fighters moving up to face heavyweights. There is no specific heavyweight ceiling so the formula divides the weight limit of the smaller fighter’s division against the actual weight of the heavyweight.
Everyone who finished in the top 100 of preliminary research for those three categories was moved into a final pool of what came out to 150 fighters. Win total ties were broken based on peak score. Their rankings in each category were then averaged into a final score.
To best display the range of data, they were then divided into four groups to settle on the final 100.
Group one: anyone who finished in the top 100 of all three scoring categories or whose scoring average was higher than those who did. (1-64).
Group two was anyone else who finished in the top 100 for peak score and ranked wins but not overall points (65-69).
Group three was derived from fighters who scored in the top 75 of any of the three scoring categories or whose final scoring average was higher than what would otherwise be the bottom ten of the top 100 (70-100).
The final average score was used to order the fighters in each group for those who made the top 100.
The study tried to respect the varying standards The Ring has used to rank fighters over the last century. For instance, champions haven’t automatically secured the top spot in every era of Ring rankings. Mike McTigue was the light heavyweight champion for the inaugural rankings in 1925 and was rated fourth.
For the 1925 rankings, and the period when Ring didn’t recognize single champions from 1989 to 2001, only 10 fighters per weight class were ranked. The points scale shifted for those years. The No. 1-ranked fighter became the 11-point win, deduction for an unranked loss was eleven points, and unranked draws were a 5.5-point deduction.
The 1926 and subsequent annual rankings prior to the introduction of monthly rankings included more than 10 fighters so the first 11 were all factored in.
The study is primarily based on monthly rankings. However, for a lengthy period of time the February, and later March, issue of the magazine would only feature the annual ratings for the year. Those were treated as that month’s rankings and, if needed, were reordered as champion and top 10 to maintain consistency.
Rankings from 1925-1928 had no monthly movement. The solution was to include all results from 1924 in evaluating 1925 and then applying six-month increments with spare exception near mid-year dates until the debut of monthly rankings; i.e. results from January-June 1925 used the 1925 annual and the rest of the year used 1926’s.
