Quote:
Originally Posted by Thunder
I agree that there needs to be flexibility with regard to HP:3 pters.
In fact, I've used Holmes myself as an example to make the point. I wouldn't think Cooney is a guy whose typical damage would belie his HP and thus be an exception on the other side, but I haven't studied it enough to say with any real conviction.
But in general, if a guy hits hard, he hits hard. I would think a majority of fighters fall into the table guidelines . . how much of a majority? 51%? 75%? 91.32%? I'm not sure.
|
My advice is dont get caught up in formulas and calculations rating fighters in this game is much more than a science. It's what "feels" right that you feel in your bones thats what the fighter was like.
Now the more you research fighters and boxing in general you will find its a game of opinions, sometimes flatly contradictory ones lol.
My other golden rules is to test, test and test your ratings again and again.
But and here is the other killer it is very very easy to make many fighters very very average so to make it possible to account for very weird results in their careers, that is a mistake.
Take for example the Hart-Johnson result, now as I have rated them their is very little chance of their historical result being repeated as it should be, this does not mean that Hart is badly underated or Johnson the opposite, sometimes especially in boxings distant past results are just unexplainable apart from looking at more dubious answers.