Revising Fighter Ratings

Jim_Kidd · 05-09-2005, 03:41 AM

I can't tell you how much time I spent going over fighter ratings when first purchasing the Title Fight game. For instance, certain people call Muhammad Ali an "overrated fighter." Other's unquestioningly... the Greatest and virtually invincible in his fighting prime which some believe was never really seen due to the Vietnam War and the draft evasion problems he faced.

I was pleasantly surprised to find 3 versions of him in the game!

Next was George Foreman. I wasn’t happy with the board version of him. Ali, who had one of the greatest chins and recuperative powers in the history of the division said that Foreman could have knocked him out at one point but didn’t realized how badly he’d hurt him.

What was a “could of” with Ali would have been a “would of” against many of the champions of the past.

Again, I was happy to see the game rating him with a hitting power rating of 14.

Mike McCallum finally (in this version) was rewarded with a knockdown rating of 1. Overall, I was pretty impressed.

It wasn’t so with every fighter, though. And that’s one of the great features of the game; the ability to change or alter the ratings. Certain fighters, however, needed to be changed immediately!

Thoughts like, “This is ridiculous, how could anyone in their right mind give ____ a rating of ____ in that area!” ran though mind.

My question is; which fighters in the game did you, as a player, have to immediately change, before even considering using them in your game universe. Who were they and how did you change them?

Jim

CONN CHRIS · 05-09-2005, 05:22 AM

Good post Jim.

I have seen people mention re-rating a number of the stock fighters, but personaly I have never found one that looked obviously wrong at first glance (besides the well documented case of Joe Grimm - and I still am not sure on him). When I have thought one that the Trunzos did was off base, generaly a little extra time with the rating and some play testing proved to me that I wasn't correct.

The only one that I have found a real quibble with is flyweight Venice Borkhorsor. He is an extreme case where he was a top notch, perhaps top 5 of his era at flyweight then stepped up to Bantamweight and was barely or below mediocre there. 34(26)-1-0 at fly; 15(10)-7-0 at bantam. (may be off on the wins by one or two) His rating in the stock data base is at fly and I have to believe that he was rated based on his whole career, including the not-so-great bantam stretch. I re-rated him in post #131 in the Asian thread. I'm sure there are others like this, but that's the one that stands out to me.

That said, I am guilty all the time of rating fighters in a given division based on their whole career which spanned a few weights, so I really can't complain much at all about the original ratings.

Christopher

hamed · 05-09-2005, 09:25 AM

Speaking of this, I've heard people say Juan Manual Marquez is a great counter-puncher. In the game, his PL is 40 & CP is 40 too. If he's a great counter puncher as some say, should that # be higher than his PL? Just wondering or do you think 40 is good enough in both instances?

Jim_Kidd · 05-09-2005, 03:44 PM

In his book, The 100 Greatest Boxers of All-Time, Bert Randolph Sugar lists Johnny Dundee at #18 (one position behind Roberto Duran and one position ahead of Rocky Marciano). That gives you some indication of Dundee's ability.

Dundee fought for 23 years and has the most recorded bouts of any Champion at 330 fights. He won the Featherweight and Jr. Lightweight titles. Most of his loses came at the tail-end of his career. He fought some of the heaviest hitters of his time and only hit the canvas 1 time. He also lost a close decision to Benny Leonard, which some thought he won.

In the game, at Jr. Lightweight, his chin was rated at:
Chin vs Knockdown 3
Chin vs Knockout 2
Recovery 1

At Featherweight
Chin vs Knockdown 2
Chin vs Knockout 1
Recovery 1

Basically, with only one stoppage loss in 330 fights (and the only knockdown having occured in that fight), you're looking at one of the hardest to stop fighters in history.

He also had one of the lowest knockout percentages, scoring only 22 knockouts. The game reflects this with a hitting power of 1.

He was one of those colorful characters you don't hear about too much these days. "Back in the Day," however... he was considered an all-time great.

Brooks TVB · 05-09-2005, 03:56 PM

Personally, I moved Lewis's knockdown and knockout up one. He was knocked out only twice and never knocked down other than those two. Any boxer can go down from the "punch he didn't see". Just my opinion.

meade95 · 05-09-2005, 04:23 PM

Good post -

Like you I found many fighters to be rating seemingly very accurately and others to be completely off -

Don't have time to go into each fighter I have tweaked individually (at the moment).....but I can tell you that from LW down there are "many" figthers that need adjusting / tweaks.

I have many of the lower weight guys on tape (via a trading partnership I have with a few in Asia) and I know for certain that many in the lower weights ratings are simply off.

At the same time I don't want to go over board because there are also plenty within the lower weights that are rated somewhat accurately as well and even some that seem dead on right.

Jim_Kidd · 05-09-2005, 08:03 PM

What were Lewis' original ratings? I think I've already adjusted them as you have. I wish he would have fought Riddick Bowe. I've always thought Bowe was overrated. I would have loved to have seen Lewis bounce him off the canvas a few times before stopping him. Of course, Bowe did have a good uppercut on the inside. I guess that's one matchup that will have to take place in Title Fight land.

hamed · 05-10-2005, 09:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jim_Kidd

What were Lewis' original ratings? I think I've already adjusted them as you have. I wish he would have fought Riddick Bowe. I've always thought Bowe was overrated. I would have loved to have seen Lewis bounce him off the canvas a few times before stopping him. Of course, Bowe did have a good uppercut on the inside. I guess that's one matchup that will have to take place in Title Fight land.

Well Jim, in my world they've fought twice. 1st time in a seesaw battle, Bowe stopped Lewis in the 8th or 9th round to take the WBC title from Lewis. Then, in the rematch about a year later, Lewis blew Bowe out in a 1st round TKO - both fights ended via TKO.

There may be a rubber match down the line.

meade95 · 05-11-2005, 12:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jim_Kidd

What were Lewis' original ratings? I think I've already adjusted them as you have. I wish he would have fought Riddick Bowe. I've always thought Bowe was overrated. I would have loved to have seen Lewis bounce him off the canvas a few times before stopping him. Of course, Bowe did have a good uppercut on the inside. I guess that's one matchup that will have to take place in Title Fight land.

Bowe was not overrated - When he was ontop of his game he was one of the best big men in HW history - He could box, punch and fight both inside and outside (probably the best big man at fighting inside that I have ever seen).

But I agree with you too bad Bowe and Lennox didn't meet in the pro's - I'd probably go with Bowe via TKO - (but Lennox is smart and might have eeked out a Dec).

Mr Big · 05-11-2005, 02:53 PM

He didn't look that great in his two fights with Andrew Golota.

05-09-2005, 05:22 AM	#2
CONN CHRIS Global Moderator Join Date: Oct 2004 Posts: 29,026	Good post Jim. I have seen people mention re-rating a number of the stock fighters, but personaly I have never found one that looked obviously wrong at first glance (besides the well documented case of Joe Grimm - and I still am not sure on him). When I have thought one that the Trunzos did was off base, generaly a little extra time with the rating and some play testing proved to me that I wasn't correct. The only one that I have found a real quibble with is flyweight Venice Borkhorsor. He is an extreme case where he was a top notch, perhaps top 5 of his era at flyweight then stepped up to Bantamweight and was barely or below mediocre there. 34(26)-1-0 at fly; 15(10)-7-0 at bantam. (may be off on the wins by one or two) His rating in the stock data base is at fly and I have to believe that he was rated based on his whole career, including the not-so-great bantam stretch. I re-rated him in post #131 in the Asian thread. I'm sure there are others like this, but that's the one that stands out to me. That said, I am guilty all the time of rating fighters in a given division based on their whole career which spanned a few weights, so I really can't complain much at all about the original ratings. Christopher __________________ Check Out My Cards!

05-11-2005, 02:53 PM	#10
Mr Big All Star Starter Join Date: Nov 2003 Posts: 1,238	He didn't look that great in his two fights with Andrew Golota. __________________ The M.O.B. Isaiah 54:17

05-09-2005, 03:41 AM	#1
Jim_Kidd All Star Reserve Join Date: Aug 2004 Location: Florida, West Coast Posts: 578	Revising Fighter Ratings I can't tell you how much time I spent going over fighter ratings when first purchasing the Title Fight game. For instance, certain people call Muhammad Ali an "overrated fighter." Other's unquestioningly... the Greatest and virtually invincible in his fighting prime which some believe was never really seen due to the Vietnam War and the draft evasion problems he faced. I was pleasantly surprised to find 3 versions of him in the game! Next was George Foreman. I wasn’t happy with the board version of him. Ali, who had one of the greatest chins and recuperative powers in the history of the division said that Foreman could have knocked him out at one point but didn’t realized how badly he’d hurt him. What was a “could of” with Ali would have been a “would of” against many of the champions of the past. Again, I was happy to see the game rating him with a hitting power rating of 14. Mike McCallum finally (in this version) was rewarded with a knockdown rating of 1. Overall, I was pretty impressed. It wasn’t so with every fighter, though. And that’s one of the great features of the game; the ability to change or alter the ratings. Certain fighters, however, needed to be changed immediately! Thoughts like, “This is ridiculous, how could anyone in their right mind give ____ a rating of ____ in that area!” ran though mind. My question is; which fighters in the game did you, as a player, have to immediately change, before even considering using them in your game universe. Who were they and how did you change them? Jim Last edited by Jim_Kidd; 05-09-2005 at 03:44 AM.

05-09-2005, 09:25 AM	#3
hamed Registered User Join Date: Sep 2003 Posts: 2,073	Speaking of this, I've heard people say Juan Manual Marquez is a great counter-puncher. In the game, his PL is 40 & CP is 40 too. If he's a great counter puncher as some say, should that # be higher than his PL? Just wondering or do you think 40 is good enough in both instances?

05-09-2005, 03:44 PM	#4
Jim_Kidd All Star Reserve Join Date: Aug 2004 Location: Florida, West Coast Posts: 578	In his book, The 100 Greatest Boxers of All-Time, Bert Randolph Sugar lists Johnny Dundee at #18 (one position behind Roberto Duran and one position ahead of Rocky Marciano). That gives you some indication of Dundee's ability. Dundee fought for 23 years and has the most recorded bouts of any Champion at 330 fights. He won the Featherweight and Jr. Lightweight titles. Most of his loses came at the tail-end of his career. He fought some of the heaviest hitters of his time and only hit the canvas 1 time. He also lost a close decision to Benny Leonard, which some thought he won. In the game, at Jr. Lightweight, his chin was rated at: Chin vs Knockdown 3 Chin vs Knockout 2 Recovery 1 At Featherweight Chin vs Knockdown 2 Chin vs Knockout 1 Recovery 1 Basically, with only one stoppage loss in 330 fights (and the only knockdown having occured in that fight), you're looking at one of the hardest to stop fighters in history. He also had one of the lowest knockout percentages, scoring only 22 knockouts. The game reflects this with a hitting power of 1. He was one of those colorful characters you don't hear about too much these days. "Back in the Day," however... he was considered an all-time great.

05-09-2005, 03:56 PM	#5
Brooks TVB All Star Starter Join Date: May 2004 Location: Loudon, TN. Posts: 1,439	Personally, I moved Lewis's knockdown and knockout up one. He was knocked out only twice and never knocked down other than those two. Any boxer can go down from the "punch he didn't see". Just my opinion.

05-09-2005, 04:23 PM	#6
meade95 Hall Of Famer Join Date: Jul 2003 Posts: 2,095	Good post - Like you I found many fighters to be rating seemingly very accurately and others to be completely off - Don't have time to go into each fighter I have tweaked individually (at the moment).....but I can tell you that from LW down there are "many" figthers that need adjusting / tweaks. I have many of the lower weight guys on tape (via a trading partnership I have with a few in Asia) and I know for certain that many in the lower weights ratings are simply off. At the same time I don't want to go over board because there are also plenty within the lower weights that are rated somewhat accurately as well and even some that seem dead on right.

05-09-2005, 08:03 PM	#7
Jim_Kidd All Star Reserve Join Date: Aug 2004 Location: Florida, West Coast Posts: 578	What were Lewis' original ratings? I think I've already adjusted them as you have. I wish he would have fought Riddick Bowe. I've always thought Bowe was overrated. I would have loved to have seen Lewis bounce him off the canvas a few times before stopping him. Of course, Bowe did have a good uppercut on the inside. I guess that's one matchup that will have to take place in Title Fight land.