Description which is on the site, brings very little clarity even if translated as correctly as possible. Therefore, I will try to describe in as much detail as possible all the nuances associated with boxtracking, and give practical examples for greater understanding.

NAVIGATION

The site is relatively simple, but I’ll still tell you about some details that make navigating the site easier.

First, click on the gear and make the basic settings.

What do all the values ​​in a boxer's profile mean?

1. Fight number
2. Have the battle parameters been checked by the moderator of the Boxrek site?
3. Date
4. Full event map.
5. Weight of a boxer whose profile is open
6. The rating that the boxer had before the fight
7. Rating after the fight
8. Rival
9. opponent's weight
10. Rating of the opponent before the fight
11. Rating of the opponent after the fight
12. Opponent's record
13. Last six fights (green - victory, red - defeat, blue - draw)
14. Venue.

1. Result (W-win L-loss D-draw)
2. Type (decision, knockout)
3. How many rounds did the fight last/how many rounds according to the regulations
4. Rating of the fight according to the boxrack system (see below for more details)
5. Expand boxers’ indicators
6. The same thing, but in more detail
7. Description of the battle in the Boxrek encyclopedia

Why are boxers of the past overrated?

There are several reasons:

1. Quantity weight categories and number of championship titles

How does this play a role? Let's say the number of boxers in different periods of time did not differ much. Roughly speaking, what is today 50 years ago, it was 20 thousands of registered boxers. But today 17 weight categories. respectively, in each approximately 1100 boxers. Somewhere more. somewhere less. Previously, there were fewer weight divisions, so there were no boxers in each weight category. 1000, and by 2000 thousands. Rating also plays a role. He was essentially alone, well, let there be two..... and the boxers moved along 1 or two currents. Now organizations 4 , this all disperses a large number of boxers. And given the complicated relationship with management, the number of demotions increases noticeably over the years, and many boxers retire without losing their points. and their total number decreases over time due to natural factors.

2. Frequency of fights

Previously, fights were held almost every month, or even several times, so in a year and a half of performances there are 10-20 battles, among which there are almost always at least a few rated guys, and the frequency of downgrades in the ratings is noticeably lower than now.

3. Balance and settlement of points

The boxrec rating was not immediately available, and accordingly, the starting numbers for the pioneers were taken from some subjective motives, perhaps even personal sympathies and preferences. And given that in that period of time such advances had to be given in huge numbers, the consequences of this imbalance are very noticeable in the early stages of scoring. But over time, the consequences, for natural reasons, were eliminated or minimized, and today we have a fairer picture

4. More frequent upsets

Previously, the selection of opponents was not carried out as in modern boxing, the bag period was not so scrupulous, and they often boxed with everyone. Accordingly, the favorites lost to the underdogs more often than now. How did this affect the overall growth in numbers? Let's say a boxer with a rating of 1000 defeats a ranked boxer 150 . They usually don’t give anything for such a victory, and the overall rating for two remains the same 1150 . And if the underdog upsets the favorite, then for such an act rating system Bonuses are provided that have accumulated significantly over a long period. When a rated boxer 150 won by knockout, for example, a boxer with a rating 1000 , then the score becomes approximately 750 on 500 , that is, in overall score no longer for two 1150 , A 1250. All these points are spinning in circulation, and over time there are more of them. This is all conditional, and the numbers may be different, but the essence is that the total number of points increased more often than now.

I think the combination of all four reasons is the answer to this question.

FORMULA

Scoring and how it is done

As many of us understand, the system is such that the winner takes part of the points from the loser. Our task is to understand what part of the points and under what circumstances he takes, whether there are exceptions, additional increases in points, and other features.

This is what this soulless scoring formula looks like for nuclear astrophysicists and mathematicians with a scientific degree:

But perhaps not everything is so sad. Let's look at these hieroglyphs:
earn_f - some coefficient, and this value is 33.3% Don’t ask why, I don’t know yet. just 33.3%...
v- this value is based on the number of rounds in the battle. If the battle ended ahead of schedule, then the value is 1. If the battle ended on points, then we rely on that. how many rounds were there? If there were 12 rounds, then 12:12 = 1, so there will also be 1. If there were 6 rounds, then 6:12=0,5 . So v=0.5 If there are 8 rounds, then 8:12= 0,6667 ., and so on
r_a- points of the first boxer (the one we count)
r_b- points of the second boxer (it’s easier to bet on the loser)
c_d- this value is the difference in points. If the fight was finished ahead of schedule, then this value is equal to 1. If there was a judges’ score, then you need to work hard :)
For example, the judges' score was 59:55, 59:55 and 58:56. Now let's take all the differences in points. We get 4, 4 and 2. We add these values, divide by 3 (the number of judges), and then divide by 3 again (since the score was unanimous): (4+4+2):3:3= 10:3:3= 3,33:3= 1,11., but the value cannot be higher than 1, so we leave it at 1. Let’s say the score was different: 58:56, 58:56, 58:56. We get ( 2+2+2):3:3= 6:3:3 = 2:3 = 0,667. in this case the value c_d will be equal to 0.667
Let's consider another option, let's say we have a controversial decision: 58:56, 58:56, 56:58 . Here the picture changes a little, since there are not three unanimous judges, but two, therefore the formula will look like (2+2-2):3 and divide by 2!!!= (2+2-2):3:2 = 2:3:2 = 0,667:2=0,333 . in this case the value c_d will be equal to 0,333

Approximate calculation by eye

In the event of a victory by knockout or devastatingly on points, a certain principle applies. If the result is a close decision by the judges, then the points are closer.

If a boxer defeats an opponent with a lower rating than him

1 to 1 --- 33.3%
1 to 1.25 --- 30.6%
1 to 1.5 --- 28%
1 to 1.75 --- 25%
1 to 2 --- 22.1%
1 to 2.25 --- 19.4%
1 to 2.5 --- 16.7%
1 to 2.75 --- 14.05%
1 to 3 --- 11.4%
1 to 3.25 --- 8.6%
1 to 3.5 --- 5.75%
1 to 3.75 --- 2.85%
1 to 4 and above --- 0%

Let's move on to practical examples: Povetkin ( 633 ) defeated Perez ( 311 ). Let's calculate the difference: 633/311=2,035 . Let's move on to the table. At 1 to 2 = 22.1%. In our case it turns out a little lower, that is 22% . So we subtract from Perez’s points 22% in favor of Povetkin. 311-22%=242,58 . Round up = 243 . In the end, that’s what happened.
More examples: Povetkin ( 395 ) defeated Charr ( 293 ). Difference= 1,348 once. Let's return to the table: 1,25=30,5%. 1,5=28%. We get an average option since the indicator is average between these. It's about 29%. 293-28%=208 points. In fact it turned out 209 points, a little more, but considering that we calculated by eye, the error is very small.

If a boxer defeats an opponent with a higher rating than him

then the loser gives the winner part of his points as a percentage:
1 to 1 --- 33.3%
1 to 1.125 --- 34.5%
1 to 1.25 --- 35.6%
1 to 1,375 --- 36.4%
1 to 1.5 --- 37%
1 to 1.75 --- 38.2%
1 to 2 --- 39%
1 to 2.5 --- 40%
1 to 3 --- 40.8%

Let's move on to practical examples:

Jonathan Banks ( 232 ) defeated Mitchell ( 371 ). In the end it worked out for Banks 426 , at Mitchell's 232 . We count:
Let's calculate the difference. 371/232=1,6 once. Let's move on to taboisa. 1,5 times=37%., 1,75 times= 38,2% . How much do we have 1,6 once, then by eye it’s somewhere 37,5%. 37,5% from Mitchell's glasses ( 371)=139 points. Mitchell gives 139 points. check: 371-139=232 points. Just as much as Mitchell got. Banks took these 139 points, plus received 55 points for upset bonus. 232+139+55=436

Maximum upset bonus: (about 9% of the favorite who lost)

>>>The algorithm for calculating the upset bonus remains open for now.

Underdog wins by close decision

If the judges’ score was close, then another principle applies: I’ll show you right away with an example. Chris Algieri ( 163 points), defeated Ruslan Provodnikov ( 559 ). In such a case, the rating of the Losing Favorite will be the average of the original rating of both boxers. In our case, the average number between 163 And 559 . we think: ( 559 +163)/2=361 . Provodnikov got exactly the same amount of money. But since the score was extremely close, Algieri’s upset bonus was minimal. Minimum upset bonus ( 0,9% from the losing favorite). 3 points 361+3= 364.

The same principle works for any victory of the underdog, whose rating before the fight was more than 4 times lower than that of the favorite. Let's move on to an example: Vasily Lepikhin (16) knocked out Robert Berridge (246). Even though the win was not a close decision, the same principle applies due to the huge initial point difference. Let's check. (16+246)/2= 131. That's exactly how many points Berridge has left. But since the victory was a knockout, the maximum upset bonus applies ( 9% loser from the favorite), which in our case is 22 points. Lepikhin's total was 131+22= 153.

Draw

In a draw, everything is relatively simple, you just need to take into account one small nuance with the initial difference in points.

We look at the difference in points and multiply it by the coefficient 5.

Let's move on to examples:
Guillermo Jones rated 251 drew the fight with Laurent Boudouani, who had a rating 1030. 1030/251=4,1.
4,1 - this is how many times the favorite’s rating is higher than the underdog’s rating. Now let's calculate the average rating. 1030+251=1281/2=640,5
now the resulting difference 4,1 multiply by the coefficient 5 we get 20,5. So Buduani's rating will be 640,5+20,5% and Jones' rating will be 640,5-20,5%
20,5% in our case they are equal 131 glasses That is, Buduani = 640,5+131=771,5 and Jones 509,5 . In reality, it turned out the same way with a slight rounding in favor of Jones, because the judges' score was 1 point more in Jones' direction.

let's check again:
Albert Sosnowski ( 319 ) tied the fight with Francesco Pianeta ( 164 ). Difference= 319/164=1,95 . Kaf means= 1,95*5=9,75%

Total points= 319+164=483 . Seridina = 483/2=241,5 . Difference = 9,75% from the middle ( 241,5 ). We count 241,5*0,0975=23,6 . So Sosnovsky 241,5+23,6=265,1
And at Pianeta, respectively 241,5-23,6=217,9. What actually happened? 216 And 268 . Here the error is also very small, but the fluctuations are in the other direction. Why? the score is slightly different, in the case of Jones and Budouani, Jones had an advantage in 1 the judge's score, therefore, the points leaned slightly in his direction, and in the case of Pianeta with Sosnovsky, Sosnovsky has more 2 points, respectively, points moved slightly towards Sosnovsky from the formula.

DOWNGRATION AND ELIMINATION FROM THE RATING

* After a one-year simple period, a boxer leaves the rating.
If a boxer returns within a year and a half, and his last opponent had a rating of at least 50% of the boxer’s own rating, then this boxer returns without penalty. After all, less than a year and a half has passed since the last top opponent.
Example: David Hay- after the fight with Klitschko his rating was 489 , then Haye retired and left the rankings. Even after returning before the fight with Chisora, the layoff was more than a year, and Haye was still not in the rankings. But he returned to the fight with Chisora ​​with the same 489 points, since less than one and a half years have passed, required for relegation.

If the boxer is very for a long time does not enter the ring, then his rating additionally falls by 33,3%

If a boxer does not fight for a year and a half with boxers whose rating is at least 50% of the boxer’s rating, then he is demoted in the rating.

DOWNLOAD FORMULA

If a boxer is idle and 18 does not box for months, and returns exactly 18 months later, then his rating is cut exactly by 50% . Being idle, every year its rating is cut by 33,3%

If during these 18 months the boxer fought with boxers whose rating in relation to his own is lower than 50% , then accordingly it looks exactly how much lower. and based on this, we take this percentage to reduce.

Example:

Take Andre Ward. In September 2012, Ward had an opponent with a rating of over 50% than Ward himself. Accordingly, the reduction took effect in March 2014. The demotion was effective against the highest-rated of all rivals over the past year and a half. Since there was only one opponent, we count only him. Edwin Rodriguez's rating was 448 (before the fight). We count in relation to Wardovsky 1340 (after battle)

We calculate the difference (Rodriguez before the fight, since the calculation is made in relation to this factor, and Ward after the fight, since it is necessary to reduce from final result): 448/1340=0,3343 ., subtract the resulting number from 0,5=0,1657=16,57%

Ward eventually demoted to 1118 points.

Let's check what came out according to the calculations: 1340-16,57%=1117,96=1118

ADDITIONAL INCREASE TO THE RATING

We often come across that, let’s say, two boxers had, for example, 500 points before the fight, and in the end it remained that way, and in some cases it became more. Why?
For example, it happened with Vasya 240 points, from Petya 260 . Vasya defeated Petya, he became 300 , at Petya's 200 . The balance has been preserved, but it also happens that Vasya has become 320 , and Petya 230 , and it is unclear why this happens.

This is where the history of downgrades plays a role. Let's turn to the same Shpilka and Jennings. Before the fight it was for two (241+210=451) After the battle it became (348+143=491) Where did you come from 40 glasses? This is connected precisely with this history of downgrades. We'll clarify the details a little later.
One of the clearest examples of the historical significance of relegations is the fight between Vitali Klitschko and Sam Peter. Before the fight with St. Petersburg, Vitali Klitschko's rating was 163 , he was greatly downgraded. since Klitschko has not boxed for 4 years. Peter's rating was 841. (163+841=1004) After the fight the rating became (1122+560=1682) Why is there such a huge difference? 678 glasses? What plays a role here is that if a boxer defeats a highly rated boxer after a break, then his rating increases not based on the current one, but on the basis of the old lowered one. But this only works if you defeat a boxer with a higher rating in relation to the lower one. That's basically how it happened. Klitschko's rating before the downgrade was 961 . But 961 - it is more than 841 from Samuel Peter, accordingly, the calculation cannot be taken from this figure, but will be taken from as close as possible to 841, which will also happen 841. We check: 841+841=1682 . We got just 1682 points that eventually came out. But if Peter had won, the calculation taking into account the increase would have been carried out only for him. The rating for Klitschko would not have changed.

Let's look at practical examples when a rated boxer defeats a simple boxer who had a high rating:
Arthur Shpilka with rating 178 . defeats ranked plain Mike Mollo 33 , and all of a sudden his rating becomes 215 , despite the fact that Mollo's rating does not change at all. What kind of chaos? let's figure it out. Before the downtime, Mollo's rating was 99 . that is, for the Hairpin, the formula is based on the Mollo rating 99 . So it turns out that a boxer with a rating 178 defeating a ranked boxer 99 , gets quite expected 37 points. From 99 Mollo points left 62 points. But since Mollo didn't win, he can't go higher than simple points, since simple points are only returned if he wins. Accordingly, his rating simply does not change.

ADDITIONAL INCREASE FOR A BEGINNER

For debutants

For beginners there are additional bonus points, the main one of which is present for the debutant: If the debutant defeats the boxer, then the calculation is made with the starting bonus for the debutant in the amount 25% from the points of his losing opponent. For example: Boxer Kolya makes his debut. and his rating is 0. In the first fight, Kolya won the boxer Sasha with a rating 80, accordingly, the calculation formula will be carried out as if Kolya already 20 points (25% of 80). So what happens? 20 And 80. Average score 50 . That is, if Kolya wins on points, then Sasha’s rating becomes about 50 , and Kolya gets an additional upset bonus (this is written in detail in the section: Approximate calculation by eye) Accordingly, Kolya will have somewhere 65-70 points.
A similar example can be seen where debutant Vasily Lomachenko ( 0 ) defeated Jose Ramirez ( 95 ). As a result, Lomachenko became 81 , at Ramres - 55 . Once again we consider why. Ras defeated Lomachenko, then his rating had already become 24 (25% of 95). Roughly speaking for two 120 (24+95) That is, the middle is 60 . But since there was a knockout in the first third, Ramirez’s rating drops a little more than halfway. that's why he became 55 . Reverse 5 points returned accordingly to Lomachenko from the middle. It turns out for Lomachenko 65 . Well 16 points given for upset bonus
Let's look at another example: Alexander Usyk (0) defeated Felipe Romero ( 66 ). As a result, Usik became 60 , at Romero's 38 . Let's see why again. Add Usika immediately 25%, (66*0,25)=16,5 . So Usik already has 17 points. We are looking for the middle. (66+17)/2=41,5 . Due to the knockout, Romero remains a couple of percent below the average. So Romero 38 , at Usik 45 +upset bonus= 60.

DECREASE AND INCREASE IN THE RANKING DEPENDING ON THE TRANSITION TO ANOTHER WEIGHT CATEGORY

Over 90,892 (200+) Heavyweight Heavyweight
-30,5% ********** +43,88% ↓
Up to 90,892 (200) First heavy weight Cruiserweight
-23,5% ********** +30,72% ↓
Up to 79,378 (175) Light Heavyweight Light heavyweight
-7,8% ********** +8,46% ↓
Up to 76,203 (168) Second average weight Super middleweight
-9,4% ********** +10,38% ↓
Up to 72,574 (160) Middleweight
-7,3% ********** +7,89% ↓
Up to 69.85 (154) First middleweight Super welterweight
-8,9% ********** +9,77% ↓
Up to 66,678 (147) Welterweight
-9,2% ********** +10,13% ↓
Up to 63,503 (140) Welterweight Super lightweight Super
-7% ********** +7,53% ↓
Up to 61,235 (135) A light weight Lightweight
-7,4% ********** +7,99% ↓
Up to 58,967 (130) Second featherweight Super featherweight
-6% ********** +6,38% ↓
Up to 57,153 (126) Featherweight
-6,4% ********** +6,84% ↓
Up to 55.225 (122) Second Bantamweight Super bantamweight
-6,5% ********** +6,95% ↓
Up to 53,525 (118) Bantamweight Bantamweight
-5,2% ********** +5,49% ↓
Under 52,163 (115) Second flyweight Super flyweight
-5,3% ********** +5,60% ↓
Under 50,802 (112) Flyweight
-5,4% ********** +5,71% ↓
Up to 48,988 (108) First flyweight Light flyweight
-5,5% ********** +5,82% ↓
Up to 47,627 (105) Minimumweight

RATING OF FIGHTS

Looking at the upcoming fight, we notice a certain number of stars in front of it. What do they mean? This is like the level of the fight, which depends on the rating of the boxers.

Maximum, 5 stars, given if the rating of both opponents is not lower 331 points. If the rating of one boxer 1000 , and the other 330 , then it will no longer be 5 stars, since the boxer with a lower rating has a lower rating 331 .

5 stars - both ratings are at least 331 points
4.5 stars - 250 points or more
4 stars - 188 points or more
3.5 stars - 130 points or more
3 stars - 83 points or more
2.5 stars - 50 points or more
2 stars - 24 points or more
1.5 stars - 10 points or more
1 star - 1 points or more
0 stars - 1 or both of the boxers have a rating of 0.

For girls the numbers are much lower, which is why fights of unknown ladies are often highly rated

5 stars - 42 and above
4 stars - 28 and above
3 stars - 14 and above
2 stars - 4 and above
1 star - 1 and above
0 stars - someone has 0 points.

BoxRec is the statistical mecca of professional boxing. It presents two main ratings. Most boxing fans saw only the rating posted on the portal tab of the same name. This rating reflects the contribution of boxers to the dominance of a particular division throughout the history of professional boxing. This rating has no practical significance, because the higher the nominee is, the weaker the division was during the period of his performances and the longer he competed. Therefore, many boxing fans who first came to this BoxRec page in the hope of seeing a “sane power ranking” were deeply disappointed.

BoxRec is the statistical mecca of professional boxing. It presents two main ratings.

However, BoxRec presents another rating that only a few people know about. The rating is located directly in the boxers' records, under the header with personal data, on the right side of the table. For hidden columns to appear, you need to change the position of the “ratings off” button to “on”. This rating, which for clarity we will call current, shows how the strength (level, class) of a given boxer changes from fight to fight. After a thorough multi-year and cross-study of the current rating using the example of hundreds of boxers, I can confidently say: there is nothing more perfect and accurate for measuring the strength of boxers. The current rating absolutely clearly shows when a given boxer had the peaks of his career, and when he had declines, when he reached his highest peak, and when he degenerated.

Looking ahead, I would like to draw your attention to the literal understanding of the word “current” in the conventional title of this rating. If you open the record of any boxer and randomly point your finger at the table, you will not receive information about the real strength (rating) of the boxer, but only rough information, which only in the unbroken chain of all other rating changes provides information to determine the true strength of the boxer. To avoid further confusion of terms, we will agree henceforth to call:

- current rating - BoxRec data for each individual fight;
- real rating - a rating that differs in magnitude from the current rating, which is assumed to be closer to the true value;
- confirmed rating - the value of the current rating, which does not decrease in a number of subsequent battles;
- true rating - the rating value that most accurately reflects the strength of a boxer at a given stage of his career.

Thus, only the current rating is visible to the naked eye in BoxRec. The true rating is given to the elite to see. To see the true rating, you first need to understand the mechanism for constructing the current rating.

1) a uniform formula for all boxers, which is published with detailed comments on it;
2) the boxer’s rating does not increase if the rating of the defeated opponent at the time of the fight was 4 or more times less;
3) a boxer’s rating is reduced by half every 1.5 years during which he did not fight a worthy opponent.

The text of the principles can be changed in detail, some numbers can be changed to others, but it is unlikely that it will be possible to replace them with other principles or give them a different essence.

To the zeroth approximation, the formula looks like this:

P = 4 * C * 16(D - 1),

D - share of victories.

This formula is very convenient for manual adjustments, although it has a large error.

To a first approximation, the formula is the product of the boxer’s initial rating and natural logarithms, etc.

It follows from the rules that the purpose of BoxRec is to try to rank boxers at levels whose representatives differ catastrophically from each other in the class. In simple words, a boxer with a current rating of 400 points is “theoretically” unable to defeat a boxer with a rating of 100 points or less. On the other hand, a boxer with a current rating of 400 points is unable to defeat a boxer with a rating of 1600 points or more.

If the difference is less than four times, then the boxer with a higher rating can lose, and in any way. The main thing here is not how to lose, for example KO 1, but how many times.

Let's look at examples. Let's take a boxer with a rating of 100 points. In order for his rating to increase to 400 or more points, he needs to win in a row, strictly speaking, an infinite number of opponents with a rating of 100 points (after the 50th victory he seems to hit the line), or 5 opponents with a rating of 200 points, or 2 opponents with a rating of 400 points, or 1 opponent with a rating of 701 or more points. Here and everywhere, for simplicity, by victory we mean victory on points 120-108. As you can see, the point is that the boxer, through his victories, proves that his real level is infinitely higher than the level of boxers with a rating of 100 points. Defeats bring down the ratings. So, if in our example a boxer has won 59 victories in a row over 100-point opposition, but in the 60th fight, having a rating of 399 points, loses to a 100-point opponent, then his rating collapses to 233 points, and the opponent’s rating, on the contrary, increases to 266 points. That is, just one defeat refutes the initial hypothesis that this boxer is infinitely above the 100-point level.

Summarizing the BoxRec practice for heavyweights in 1990 units, we can create approximately the following significant levels and sublevels (levels differ by 4 times, sublevels by 2 times):

- “zero”: true rating from 0 to 50 points;
- “bag”: rating from 50 to 100 points;
- johnirman: rating from 100 to 200 points;
- gatekeeper: rating from 200 to 400 points;
- top: rating from 400 to 600 points;
- champion: rating from 600 to 800 points;
- monster: rating from 800 to 1000 points;
- Dominator: rating from 1000 points.

For other divisions and other decades, the classification may differ, with the exception of 2-3 initial levels.

As good as principle No. 2 of BoxRec was, it gives rise to a practical incident. Namely: any boxer, with skillful leadership and selection of opponents, will be able to “gain” his rating 4 times, defeating monotonous, same-type boxers of the same level, for example, 100-pointers. And at the same time, he will be absolutely unable to defeat 200-point opponents, let alone 400-point ones. It is thanks to this incident that the so-called sack fighters rise high in the rankings - specialists in victories over opponents who are obviously inferior in level. I would like to especially emphasize that only fights with boxers of a similar class can definitively confirm the class of the boxer being studied.

In different decades, in different parts of the world, rating points had different values. This is obvious if we compare the values ​​of the confirmed maximum current ratings Joe Louis(5380 points), Rocky Marciano (4363),Ali-2 (3282), Fraser (2901), Formana-1 (1759), Tyson(1591) and Lewis(1071). For example, in previous times they had a higher rating than Lewis Joe Bugner and dozens of other heavyweights. Rating points are cheaper the more often there are fights in a division, the more often there are inter-divisional migrations, the fewer weight categories, the greater the gap between elite boxers and the rest, the weaker the division or region of performance. For example, regional bag fighter Lucien Rodriguez scored 735 points, while his true rating barely reached 200 points. As for the quantitative measure of the “bag”, it has not changed throughout the history of boxing.

BoxRec only takes into account official results, some of which contain a "German score". However, the statistics are most distorted not by fake victories, but by fights with a force majeure outcome.

BoxRec only takes into account official results, some of which contain a "German score". However, most of all the statistics are distorted not by “fake” victories, but by fights with a force majeure outcome. That is why, to competently study the dark forest called BoxRec, preliminary and repeated viewing of fights with the participation of all the main characters of the division throughout its history is required.

Fortunately, “wrong” fights and their judges’ scores make up a small percentage of all fights. And what is important is that most often the “German score” and sensational defeats occur in cases where the boxer being studied has acquired an obviously inflated rating. Manual recalculation of “wrong” battles can be done using the zero formula and the 1x2 calculator for BoxRec.

To be continued.

“Anyone in boxing who says they don’t use BoxRec is either retarded or lying.”- Promoter Lou DiBella

Introduction

So, BoxRec provides two main ratings of boxers: the rating of the fighters performing today (“active”) and the general rating (“all”). The overall rating includes active athletes (“active”), as well as boxers who have retired or have not competed for a year (“inactive”). An example of the latter case is Floyd Mayweather Jr., who did not announce his retirement, but did not compete for a year and was excluded from the BoxRec resource ratings of active athletes. Every boxer in the database is rated, even those with a 0-1 record.

The BoxRec rating does not depend on subjective views or opinions, it is entirely determined by boxer fights, information about which is stored in the BoxRec server database. The BoxRec computer recalculates the ratings of all boxers every day at approximately 09.35 GMT. When the computer updates the rating, a boxer can lose or gain points after each fight. Of course, provided that the editor added this fight to the database. A boxer can also gain or lose points if one of his opponents fights and his information is added to the database.

There are inaccuracies and anomalies in the ranking, especially in general (“all”), due to the incompleteness of the database. While a particular boxer's own record may be complete, his opponents' rankings may not be complete. This is especially true for boxers from before World War II when compared to modern boxers. This is due to the fact that many fights are hopelessly lost to history because they were not reported in the press or otherwise. But over time, BoxRec editors continue to study old sources and add “new” fights to the database, thus adjusting the ratings of boxers of old. So the rating gradually improves. BoxRec editors are currently adding about 2,000 new and old fights per week to the database.

All ratings take into account all fights in the database in chronological order. The higher ranked boxer should be expected to beat the lower ranked boxer, with the likelihood of this being greater the greater the difference in ratings.

1. Each boxer receives 0 as his first rating before his first fight.
2. After each fight, the ratings of both participants in the fight change depending on the officially announced result (, TKO, RTD, PTS, NWS, , , , DRAW)
3. The result value ranges from v=1 to v=0.
4. The clear decision multiplier ranges from cd=1 to cd=0.
5. The winner (KO, TKO, RTD, DQ, TD or decision) cannot lose points with cd=1.
6. KO, TKO, RTD are awarded the full value of v=1 and cd=1.
7. NWS is awarded v=1 for 12 or more rounds, v<1 пропорционально числу раундов. Множитель «clear decision» cd=1.
8. UD, PTS are awarded full value v=1 for 12 or more rounds, v<1 пропорционально числу раундов. Множитель «clear decision» cd=1. Этот способ работает, если карточки боковых судей недоступны.
9. DRAW are awarded full value v=1 for 12 or more rounds, v<1 пропорционально числу раундов. Множитель «clear decision» cd=0.
10. , , , are awarded the full value of v=1 for 12 or more rounds, v<1 пропорционально числу раундов. Множитель «clear decision» cd=0.5. Этот способ работает, если карточки боковых судей недоступны.
11. If judges cards are available, the value is determined based on the number of rounds boxed. Full value v=1 for 12 or more rounds.
12. “clear decision” multiplier for the number of rounds completed and the average difference in judges’ scores per judge. cd=1 for the average difference in judges' scores of 50% of the number of rounds played.
13. All fights have the same meaning, regardless of titles.
14. The winner receives a certain portion of the opponent's points and a certain portion of the difference between his own points and his opponent's points.
15. For a draw (DRAW), the higher-rated boxer's rating is reduced by some amount, while the lower-rated boxer's rating is increased by the same amount.
16. The total relative number of points awarded is 33%. This figure is directly dependent on the rating of the defeated boxer before the fight.
17. A boxer can receive up to 25 additional points for his opponent's launch state rank.
18. The maximum rating status is 15, so the maximum additional points for a rating status is 375.
19. The maximum number of additional points is reduced to the opponent's rating, but not less than 6*(launch state rank+1).
20. This value is multiplied by the maximum number of additional points minus your own rating and is directly proportional to the number of rounds played.
21. This value is multiplied by the following fraction: (maximum opponent’s rating +6*(launch state rank+1)/(maximum opponent’s rating+maximum own rating+6*(launch state rank+1)).

1. The following launch states are distinguished:
2. 0=no recent wins;
3. 1=1 recent win, 2=2 recent wins, 3=3 recent wins;
4. 4=1 recent win over a status 3 opponent, 5=2 recent wins over a status 3 opponent, 6=3 recent wins over a status 3 opponent;
5. 7=recent win over a status 6 opponent, 8=2 recent wins over a status 6 opponent, 9=3 recent wins over a status 6 opponent;
6. 10=recent victory against a status 9 opponent, 11=2 recent victories against a status 9 opponent, 12=3 recent victories against a status 9 opponent;

1. When moving to heavier divisions, the rating decreases by the square of the inverse ratio of the maximum weights of the divisions; when moving to lower divisions, the rating increases by the same amount.
2. A boxer's rating is reduced by between 0% and 50% if he has not fought an opponent with at least 50% to 0% of his own rating for 18 months.
3. A boxer's rating is reduced by 50% for every 18 months of inactivity.
4. The rating of a boxer who successfully returns to the ring after a period of inactivity is determined by taking into account his rating before and after the inactivity, as well as the rating of his opponent before the fight.
5. For a boxer who makes a successful debut, the pre-fight rating is set at 25% of his opponent's pre-fight rating.

Earn= earn_f*v*(r_b*cd+(r_b-r_a)/(1+2* cd));

R_a_new= r_a+earn;

R_b_new= r_b-earn.

Additional points (no loss of additional points):

Examples

Boxer a KO boxer b, y a 1000 points, b 500 points, rating status 4, v=1, cd=1

Earn= 0.33 * 1 * (500*1 + (500-1000)/(1+2*1)) = 111

R_a_new = 1000 + 111 = 1111

R_b_new = 500 - 111 = 389

Boxer a UD 6 boxer b, score 59:55, 58:56, 58:56, y a 1000 points, b 500 points

A 6-round fight gets the value v=6/12=0.5

A unanimous decision of the UD judges is awarded the maximum value of cd=1

The score difference per judge is (4+2+2)/3 = 2.667, which is awarded in direct proportion to half the rounds boxed with cd =2.667/2=0.89 maximum

Thus, cd=0.89

Earn=0.33 * 0.5 * (500*0.89 + (500-1000)/(1+2*0.89)) = 44

R_a_new = 1000 + 44 = 1044

R_b_new = 500 - 44 = 456

Boxer a SD 4 boxers b, score 39:37, 39:37, 37:39, y a 1000 points, b 500 points

A 4-round fight gets the value v = 4/12 = 0.333

Split decision SD gives cd=0.5 maximum

The difference in score per judge is (2+2-2)/3 = 0.667, which is awarded in direct proportion to half of the boxed rounds 0.667/2 maximum

Thus, cd=0.333

earn= 0.33 * 0.33 * (500*0.33 + (500-1000)/(1+2*0.33)) = -15

r_a_new = 1000 - 15 = 985

r_b_new = 500 + 15 = 515

A more difficult case - boxer a KO 4 boxers b, y a 30 points, b 40 points, boxer b in rating state 3, v=1, cd=1

earn= 0.33 * 1 * (40*1 + (40-30)/(1+2*1)) = 14

r_a_new = 30 + 14 = 44

r_b_new = 40 - 19 = 21

extra points:

1 * 1 * (75 - 30) * min(max(40.4*6), 75) / 75 = 1 * 35 * 40 / 75 = 19

19 * max(30.4*6) / ((max(40.4*6)*max(30.4*6)) = 19 * 30 / (40+30) = 19 * 0.43 = 8

A given boxer's all-time boxer rating is the sum of 33% of his annual rating points, 33% of the sum of the annual rating points of his best defeated opponents, and 14% of his highest career rating:

1. The annual ranking is the ranking at the end of each year in which the boxer was active (fighting).
2. Annual rating points = 200/annual position in the weight category ranking.
3. The value of a top boxer's annual ranking decreases if the No. 10 ranked boxer in that weight class has a rating of less than 100 for men (the No. 5 boxer has a rating of less than 50 for women).

Stardom of the battle

All battles receive from 0 to 5 stars.

Formen:

5 stars = both opponents have at least 331 rating points~top 100 boxers

4 stars= both opponents have at least 188 rating points~top 300 boxers

3 stars = both opponents have at least 83 rating points ~ 900 best boxers

2 stars = both opponents have at least 24 rating points ~ 2700 best boxers

1 star = both opponents have at least 1 rating point = rated boxers

0 stars = one of the opponents does not have even one rating point = unrated boxers.

Forwomen:

5 stars = both opponents have at least 42 rating points ~ top 30 boxers

4 stars = both opponents have at least 28 rating points ~ 60 best boxers

3 stars = both opponents have at least 14 rating points ~ top 120 boxers

2 stars = both opponents have at least 4 rating points ~ 240 best boxers

1 star = both opponents have at least 1 rating point = rated boxers

0 stars = one of the opponents does not have a single rating point = unrated boxers.

P.S.: this article is my translation and adaptation of the rating description from the site http://boxrec.com/ (section “Encyclopedia”), so every person who understands printed English well can read this section themselves and (optionally) make adjustments to this translation. This is especially true for terms.

The service presented to your attention brings together into a single table the ratings of professional boxers for the five main boxing associations.

The service checks daily changes in ratings on the official websites of boxing associations and automatically makes changes to the unified rating table.

Rating of professional boxers according to The Ring, regardless of weight category

Rating of professional boxers P4P from The Ring magazine

Rating of professional boxers 2019 according to BoxRec, regardless of weight category

Boxing: ranking of boxers according to the five major boxing associations

World Boxing Association (WBA, WBA) founded in 1921. In accordance with the rules of the WBA (WBA), a boxer holding the title of champion according to the WBA (WBA) and one of the three other associations receives a special title:

"super champion" for fighters who have the right to defend their title in battles with challengers from other versions;

After this, the regular WBA title becomes vacant and is played among contenders.

The WBA also practices "spraying" its belts. In each weight category the WBA has:

"super champion"- who is obliged to defend his title every two years with challengers not necessarily from his own version, and who does not necessarily have to be a champion according to one of the other versions.
"regular champion"- a regular champion who is required to defend the title against a WBA mandatory challenger
"interim champion"- essentially the first number in the ranking, but not having the rights of a mandatory contender, but also having the “title” of champion.

World Boxing Council (WBC) was created in Mexico City, Mexico on February 14, 1963 as an international boxing organization. VBS has introduced new safety requirements in boxing. For example, it set a limit of 12 rounds instead of the previous 15 and expanded the range of weight categories.

International Boxing Federation (IBF) founded in September 1976 as the United States Boxing Association (USBA). In April 1983, an international division was created in the organization (BASH-M, USBA-I). In May 1984, the New Jersey-based BASSH-M was renamed MBF.

And 8 other localizations

Attendance Alexa Internet ▲ 9,977 (as of September 13, 2014) Server location Great Britain Great Britain Owner Great Britain Great Britain: John Sheppard Author John Sheppard Beginning of work 2000 Current status Active Alexa rating 9188

BoxRec or boxrec.com- a site dedicated to maintaining and updating records of professional boxers. The encyclopedia is based on the Boxrec Wiki engine and also supports MediaWiki.

The purpose of the site is to document the fights of every professional boxer. BoxRec publishes ratings for all active boxers, as well as ratings for all retired boxers. In 2005, BoxRec was officially recognized by the Association Boxing Commission (ABC).

Description

The site was founded by John Sheppard, an English analyst. Sheppard never attended a boxing match until 1995.

The site is updated with the help of volunteer editors from many countries around the world, following the example of adding articles to Wikipedia. Each editor is assigned to a country, or in some cases regions within countries, and maintains records for the boxers in that country or region. BoxRec also ranks each active wrestler by weight class based on a computerized point system.

Criticism of the site

BoxRec has been criticized for having incorrect records for boxers, especially the fighters' early history. Promoter J. Russell Peltz stated: “Very few things in life are one hundred percent. But I've encountered some glaring errors in BoxRec, mostly in the historical records." Dan Raphael noted that “a lot of people have access to corrections in BoxRec, and this does not always have a good effect on the accuracy of the record. Ricardo Mayorga's record has been wrong for years."

Promoter Lou DiBella, when asked how important BoxRec was to him, stated that "anyone in boxing who says they don't use BoxRec is either retarded or incompetent." Also, many promoters, managers and boxers rely on BoxRec ratings.

Rating of the best boxers regardless of weight category

Number	Boxer	Fights	Weight category	Title(s)
1	Saul Alvarez	49-1-2 (34 KO)	Average weight	WBA super champion, WBC, IBF, IBO middleweight champion.
2	Terence Crawford	34-0-0 (25 KO)	Welterweight	WBO welterweight champion, The Ring junior welterweight champion.
3	Gennady Golovkin	38-1-1 (34 KO)	Average weight
4	Anthony Joshua	22-0-0 (21 KO)	Heavy weight	WBA super champion, IBF, WBO, IBO heavyweight champion.
5	Errol Spence	25-0-0 (21 KO)	Welterweight	IBF welterweight champion.
6	Alexander Usik	16-0-0 (12 KO)	First heavy weight	WBO, WBC, WBA, IBF cruiserweight champion.
7