|
||||
|
07-31-2008, 11:52 AM | #1 |
Minors (Rookie Ball)
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Virginia, USA
Posts: 44
|
Rating Lists
Do any of you guys use lists like "The Ring's 100 greatest punchers" to come up with your own ratings?
If so, which lists do you use and how do you implement them into your own game? Ciao, John |
07-31-2008, 03:58 PM | #2 |
All Star Starter
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 1,566
|
John, I have used the Ring ratings such as, hardest punchers to tweak the punching power of certain fighters. One example I can give you is I changed the punching power of Jersey Joe Walcott to a 7, and dropped Ali to a 6, as Ali was more of a volume puncher, and Walcott had the capacity to take you out with a shot.
Greg
__________________
Keep on Punchin' There are three things that go on a fighter, first your reflexes go, then your chin goes, and then your friends go. Willie Pep Last edited by Mad Bomber; 07-31-2008 at 04:06 PM. |
07-31-2008, 04:04 PM | #3 | |
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 2,006
|
Quote:
Seriously, I've looked at them and they do have a value. But they come with a disclaimer, "it's entirely open to debate." The big question is what do they mean by a great puncher? Is it a guy who can take you out with one shot? Is it the fighter who is more accurate with a lesser degree of one-punch power?, etc. Since its not all that clear, I've looked at it when I rate my own but don't rely upon it exclusively. If you look at it from strictly a power point of view, the TBCB ratings don't parallel the Ring's rankings. I'll just confine it to the Ring's top ten "greatest punchers." George Foremen and Earnie Shavers are ranked 9 & 10 respectively. While Sam Langford is placed second only to Joe Louis. In TBCB, Foreman's hitting power is 14 and Shavers is rated at 12. Langford only gets a 6 in this category. One of my personal favorites, Battling Torres is ranked 94 on the list but has a HP of 9---three higher than Langford. I'm not going to say which is more accurate or why there's a difference. All I can say is that there's no list or set of lists that will serve as a magic source to quickly (and accurately rate fighters). Unfortuantely, it's just not that easy. If you get a chance, go to the "Ratings of the Day Council" thread in the forum. Not only will you get a clearer picture of the complexity of rating you'll see the intense differences of opinion over what methodology should be employed. Last edited by professordp; 07-31-2008 at 04:20 PM. Reason: correction |
|
08-01-2008, 03:00 AM | #4 |
Minors (Rookie Ball)
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Virginia, USA
Posts: 44
|
Yes, I've checked out the "Ratings of the Day Council" forum and understand how complex it can be. I was just wondering if anyone gave these lists a second thought and how you may have been influenced by them.
When dealing with "knockout power" I usually go with a combination of Control Factor, Punching, Counter-punching, and HP. A fighter with a good combo of high CF, Punching, and Counter-punching with only a modest HP rating would be in control of the fight more often and automatically have more chances of throwing a crippling punch than a fighter with lower numbers but with a higher HP rating. So I think a lot more comes into play than just a large number in HP. Just my two cents. Ciao, John
__________________
"Get up, you bum!" - Muhammad Ali Last edited by Dragon-Wolf; 08-01-2008 at 03:11 AM. |
08-01-2008, 08:51 AM | #5 | |
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 2,006
|
Quote:
To sum it up, overall I'm pretty satisfied with the TBCB ratings, and I'm not inclined to "reinvent the wheel" by tossing a rating out the window and starting from scratch. Still like my good friend, Mad Bomber, I will tweak here and there if I feel that one part of a rating isn't right. So much of this rating process boils down to personal evaluation. Many would disagree, but I think that the more opinions you look at the stronger and more realistic your ultimate rating will be. Of course, one source of opinion would be the various lists created by The Ring. |
|
08-02-2008, 02:28 AM | #6 |
Minors (Rookie Ball)
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Virginia, USA
Posts: 44
|
No need to apologize. Sometimes when opinions are being thrown back and forth it may seem like one or the other is "talking down" when, in reality, that's not the case at all.
Another important rating or ratings I would like to bring up are the 2-point and 3-point percentages. I've noticed quite a difference in some of the fighters punch-point ratings in the computer game and the board game. Sandy Saddler is a prime example. I only bring this up to point out that the difference in 2-point and 3-point punches, in a close fight, can be the difference in the total points scored and the judgement of a particular round and, ultimately, who wins the fight. So I think it a very important point or points in the overall rating of a fighter. I'm more inclined to follow the board game ratings as I thought they were pretty spot on. Not only reflecting technique but the stamina-sapping power of their punches. Thoughts and opinions? Ciao, John
__________________
"Get up, you bum!" - Muhammad Ali |
Bookmarks |
|
|