[professordp]

I hope I can help tie this Data Boxing/TBCB discussion up with one final point that I neglected to mention, but works into the methodology employed to rate boxers.

Please correct me if I'm wrong (of course someone will, because I am usually wrong), as I recall Professor Compton bases a considerable portion of his ratings upon fight films he views and actually counts punches (type, power, etc.). I can't think of a system that would be more precise than his method of measurement.

Since TBCB involves a much larger universe, ratings are part quantification and part subjective impressionism (now ain't that a term!). The Compton approach wouldn't work for us. Christ, we can't find pictures for about 3/4 of all the fighters rated for the game---or articles, or web references of value---let alone fight films of them!

So djday45 hit the nail on the head---test it, test it, and test it. If it feels right---go with it. There's so much to a boxer (accuracy, power, defense, chin, etc.), and different people place empahasis upon different attributes.

If you've read the section on rating boxers (Appendix A) in the game manual, you'll recall the first line reads "There is probably nothing more difficult to rate in the world of sports simulations than a boxer....the best that one can do is to base a fighter's ratings on what we term 'intellegent speculation.'"

Speculate away, djday45---I'm running with you!