Ike Ibeabuchi....estimate on ratings??

meade95 · 10-09-2004, 02:08 AM

Hey, what do others have Ike Ibeabuchi ratings set to?

HP?
Def?
Punches landed?
End?
Control boxer?
Control slugger?

Thanks

mh2365 · 10-09-2004, 10:57 AM

My game has him rated an 8. Do you not have him?

meade95 · 10-09-2004, 01:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mh2365

My game has him rated an 8. Do you not have him?

No, I have him in my game as well. And yes he is ranked as an 8 - But many fighters on here need to be tweaked a bit .....

Just curious if others have tweaked Ike's ratings and if so which ones (ratings). And what did you adjust them to?

I know many of the lower weight class fighters need to be adjusted. Some of their ratings are completely off - (Khaosai Galaxy and Sung Kil Moon both come to mind).

ACGord · 10-09-2004, 09:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by meade95

I know many of the lower weight class fighters need to be adjusted. Some of their ratings are completely off - (Khaosai Galaxy and Sung Kil Moon both come to mind).

I agree, although I don't feel qualified to rate Galaxy (I have only seen one fight), I always thought the lower weight classes were a little screwy.

I've always thought Lopez was overrated (both in life and in the game) but that could be just me. I think Chang is underrated in my opinion he beats Lopez 50% of the time.

Hell, I don’t even have Moon in my database is he user created?

Jim_Kidd · 10-09-2004, 09:39 PM

Ike's ratings are mostly based upon his great effort against David Tua. He fought at a great pace, sucked it up, showed a good chin, boxing ability, etc. That was before David Tua showed he had a control factor of about a 6 against boxers.

In a way, Jameel McCline showed the same kind of championship ingredients against a then undefeated Michael Grant.

We really don't know if Ike was the next great heavyweight or not.

With some fighters, it almost necessary (if you're the designer) to create two different versions of a single fighter. They did it with Ali. You have a pre-draft version, and a post draft version. Then, they made a compilation of the two (which I feel is too overrated).

You could do the same for Marciano. One for those who believe he was too small and overrated. And one for those believe he was one of the greatest ever and the issue of size would be compensated by his aggression and endurance. I guess, though, you'd have to do the same for other fighters like Corbett, Fitzsimmons, etc.

maxx · 10-10-2004, 01:41 AM

With Ike, it was not only the Tua fight but also his stoppage of Byrd. I mean, he's the only guy who has been able to destroy Byrd like that.

The problem is that, despite the clear potential he had, we just don't know what he could have become. Other than Tua and Byrd (both of whom are good but have significant limitations), Ike's level of competition was not great. He certainly looked like he would have done very well against the top echelon in the division, but he never actually got the chance to prove it conclusively in the ring. Maybe had he been tested more he would have been exposed as having Wlad's chin or -- given his psychological problems -- Oliver McCall's fragile psyche in big fights. How would he have done against a good big fighter instead of those short guys?

Given the unknowns and his opposition, I'd have a hard time rating him much above the game. Now, if I had to guess based on what I saw, my best GUESS is that he would have excelled and ended up much more highly ranked. But, if you're not basing your rating on wasted potential, I don't see any reason to adjust his numbers.

Jim_Kidd · 10-11-2004, 06:23 PM

You're right. I forgot about the Byrd fight. He showed it all in that fight. Speed, power, combination punching. Unfortunately, his head wasn't screwed on right. No fighters become great overnight. They develop. It makes you wonder what he and so many others like him (in any weight division) could have been had their out of the ring lives not destroyed their careers

10-09-2004, 02:08 AM	#1
meade95 Hall Of Famer Join Date: Jul 2003 Posts: 2,095	Ike Ibeabuchi....estimate on ratings?? Hey, what do others have Ike Ibeabuchi ratings set to? HP? Def? Punches landed? End? Control boxer? Control slugger? Thanks

10-09-2004, 09:39 PM	#5
Jim_Kidd All Star Reserve Join Date: Aug 2004 Location: Florida, West Coast Posts: 578	Ike's ratings Ike's ratings are mostly based upon his great effort against David Tua. He fought at a great pace, sucked it up, showed a good chin, boxing ability, etc. That was before David Tua showed he had a control factor of about a 6 against boxers. In a way, Jameel McCline showed the same kind of championship ingredients against a then undefeated Michael Grant. We really don't know if Ike was the next great heavyweight or not. With some fighters, it almost necessary (if you're the designer) to create two different versions of a single fighter. They did it with Ali. You have a pre-draft version, and a post draft version. Then, they made a compilation of the two (which I feel is too overrated). You could do the same for Marciano. One for those who believe he was too small and overrated. And one for those believe he was one of the greatest ever and the issue of size would be compensated by his aggression and endurance. I guess, though, you'd have to do the same for other fighters like Corbett, Fitzsimmons, etc.

10-09-2004, 10:57 AM	#2
mh2365 Banned Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: louisville Posts: 14,941 Infractions: 0/2 (101)	My game has him rated an 8. Do you not have him?

10-10-2004, 01:41 AM	#6
maxx All Star Reserve Join Date: Jul 2003 Posts: 716	With Ike, it was not only the Tua fight but also his stoppage of Byrd. I mean, he's the only guy who has been able to destroy Byrd like that. The problem is that, despite the clear potential he had, we just don't know what he could have become. Other than Tua and Byrd (both of whom are good but have significant limitations), Ike's level of competition was not great. He certainly looked like he would have done very well against the top echelon in the division, but he never actually got the chance to prove it conclusively in the ring. Maybe had he been tested more he would have been exposed as having Wlad's chin or -- given his psychological problems -- Oliver McCall's fragile psyche in big fights. How would he have done against a good big fighter instead of those short guys? Given the unknowns and his opposition, I'd have a hard time rating him much above the game. Now, if I had to guess based on what I saw, my best GUESS is that he would have excelled and ended up much more highly ranked. But, if you're not basing your rating on wasted potential, I don't see any reason to adjust his numbers.

10-11-2004, 06:23 PM	#7
Jim_Kidd All Star Reserve Join Date: Aug 2004 Location: Florida, West Coast Posts: 578	You're right. I forgot about the Byrd fight. He showed it all in that fight. Speed, power, combination punching. Unfortunately, his head wasn't screwed on right. No fighters become great overnight. They develop. It makes you wonder what he and so many others like him (in any weight division) could have been had their out of the ring lives not destroyed their careers