Frequently Asked Questions (#1- #3)

[Jim Trunzo]

Frequently Asked Questions: Part 1 - 3

The following FAQ list has been compiled from customer questions, suggestions and recommendations. The answers provided are considered “official” and come from both the designers and programmer of the game:


Why does “Fighter A” have a higher HP than “Fighter B” when it’s common knowledge that “Fighter B” is the harder hitter?

The ratings are NOT “pure” in the sense that they are strictly relative to one another. In other words all “10’s” are not created equal. This can’t be stress enough: all ratings are inter-related! A fighter with a 12-12 Control Factor and an 8 HP will get more knockdowns and knockouts than a fighter with a 7-7 Control Factor and an 11 HP, if both men fight 100 fights against an opponent with a 3 KD1 and 3 KO. Likewise, two fighters with identical CF’s and HP’s going against the same opponent can differ greatly, depending upon their respective Punches Landed/Counterpunch numbers. A fighter who is in control more often and lands more often is going to have his HP come into play more often than a fighter with lower CF/PL ratings, even if his HP is the same.

The exception would only occur when there are extremes. A fighter with a 10/10 CF and PL of 40/40 but a HP of 1 will not score more knockdowns/knockouts than a fighter with a 7/7 CF and PL of 38/38 but an HP of 12.

Those of you who attempt to analyze the ratings must view them in relationship to the other ratings if you hope to really understand what they mean and how they work.


Why is the Rankings System so erratic? How many times must it be “fixed” before it’s going to work correctly and consistently?
<O</O

This is a fair question that deserves an honest answer. We don’t know. The problem is simple: we are trying to simulate with numbers, what is actually done with popular and political and financial factors involved. To add to the difficulty, we are trying to use four different ranking systems so that different organizations have different contenders and different ranking orders from one another.

In real life, “Fighter A” might have lost 2 of his last 3 fights and end up, because of the influence of his promoter, his popular appeal and other nebulous factors as a mandatory for a title fight. In a simulation, trying to add those factors to a fighter’s record would make things even worse. Furthermore, in your fantasy world, not every fighter in a division has fought and those that have might differ greatly in how many fights are on their ledger.

Consider this: who should be ranked higher – Fighter A, whose record is 8 – 0 against no-name competition or Fighter B, whose record is 12-15 against mostly Top 15 fighters? In real life, I’d bet on the8 -0 fighter being ranked higher; in Title Bout it would most likely be the fighter who is 12-15. But if you had to put money on which fighter would win if they faced each other at this juncture in their respective careers, who would you expect to win, inexperienced fighter who hasn’t faced a “live” opponent yet, or the experienced veteran who has gone in against the best and held his own?

We continue to try to find a better balance each time we overhaul the Ranking System. We’ve gone from ridiculously complex formulas to striping it down to the simplest set of values possible. We’ll continue to tweak the system until we hit on something with which we can all live. Until then, feel free to manually adjust the ratings as you see fit. After all, that’s what the WBA, WBC and IBF do!


Why are some fighters there one year and disappear the next? How do you decide who to include, who to ignore and who to delete?

There are many types of players who purchase the game, including a goodly number of casual boxing fans, who barely know Peter Jackson the fighter from Peter Jackson the film-maker. There are also those die-hards who not only know the headliners but also the prelim fighters, their girlfriends and their blood-type! When selecting fighters for a particular database, we attempt to take into consideration both camps and everyone in between.

One rule of thumb is that we include only those fighters who have a body of work that is worth representing at the time. A good example of this would be boxing’s newest sensation, Amir Khan. This 18 year-old prodigy looks like he might be something special but he’s only had two pro fights. Could we rate him? Sure. Would his ratings be very good? No. He’s got way too much to prove yet and already there are questions about his chin, his stamina, etc. Rating him would accomplish little at this point, and could potentially prove confusing to the fan who has heard about this wonderful new fighter but isn’t sophisticated enough to understand why his ratings are so poor or why, at this point he always loses when matched against even fighters with an overall rating of 5 or 6.

A second rule of thumb is to eliminate any fighter who hasn’t fought for over a year and added nothing of note to the fight game. A fighter who goes 8 – 15 and calls it a career doesn’t get carried over to the “retired” database. He is deleted. On the other hand, a fighter who goes 34-57 might well be added because of his long-time standing as a trial-horse.


Do you consider a fighter’s amateur record when rating him as a professional?

No. First of all, any benefits that a fighter’s amateur career might five him become inherent in his professional outings and are therefore indirectly included. Second, the professional boxing game differs so greatly from the amateurs that in many cases, factoring in a fighter’s amateur record would produce tremendous inaccuracies. Howard Davis, for example, was a brilliant amateur but only a decent professional because his weaknesses (primarily his chin) were not exposed as an amateur in the manner that they were as a professional.


Why are some fighters included in more than one division upon their retirement and others not?

Again the truth is that this is an area that we need to look at more carefully. It’s easy to break Sugar Ray Robinson into both a welterweight and middleweight because his record can be dissected and there’s a body of evidence to support ratings in both cases.

However, some fighters spend such a short amount of time in a particular division that it’s redundant to have two ratings for him. Just move him up or down and, depending upon your viewpoint, either use the computer’s automatic adjustment for division changes or don’t.

Take a fighter who has 50 career fights: he starts out as a teenager, matures rapidly and puts on weight in a natural fashion, then adds the accumulating weight that comes with age. If he fights 10 fights as a junior welterweight, 35 fights as a welterweight and then 5 fights as a middleweight, we’re only going to rate him as a welterweight.

An exception would be if in those 10 fights as a junior welterweight or 5 fights as a middleweight, the fighter won a title or achieved some type of notoriety in the division (like Sugar Ray Leonard); then he might receive a special rating.

Admittedly, we have not been consistent enough with our policy and will be giving the retired database an overhaul. For example, Vinnie Pazienza is rating in two divisions but Greg Haugan isn’t (and should be).

</O
What is the most overlooked but crucial fighter rating?

This is an easy question to answer because as designers, we obviously have a better understanding of individual categories. The answer is “Endurance”. Endurance (or Stamina) plays such an important role in both real life boxing and the Title Bout simulation that its importance can’t be over-emphasized.

When a fighter tires almost every aspect of his game is adversely affected. He becomes much more susceptible to a knockdown (and one that does damage, not just a flash knockdown from which he quickly recovers); his punches lose their sting; his defense becomes less effective and he can’t control the fight as well.

It’s often a tricky thing to notice. If both fighters fatigue at nearly the same time, the flow of the fight may remain the same because ratings remain relative for both fighters. However, when there is a significant difference in the rate of fatigue, there’s little doubt about which fighter is tired and which isn’t!

Even a single digit difference can turn into a major factor for or against a fighter, depending upon the opposition. A fighter with an “8” Endurance Rating versus one with a “7” rating has an edge. An 8 versus a 6 has a huge edge!


Is a fighter’s “Overall Rating” the best guide to use when judging his ability?

Yes . . . and no! The fighter’s overall rating is the best guide to use for a quick ascertaining of the category of fighters in which he fits. However, all fighters with a rating of “10”, for example” are not created equally.

First of all, fighters have TWO control factors which, in many cases, differ by at least 1 and on rare occasions by 2. A fighter with a CF vs. a Slugger of 10 and a CF vs. a Boxer of 8, may over-perform when fighting an in-your-face brawler and under-perform against a shifty mover, at least in relationship to the fighter’s overall rating.

Just like in real boxing, styles make fights (one of the pugilism’s truest axioms!). Shane Mosley seemed to have had Oscar de la Hoya’s number but couldn’t beat Vernon Forrest who couldn’t beat Ricardo Mayorga.

Likewise, a single rating can swing a fight one way or the other, no matter how often you fight the two seemingly equal fighters. For example: Fighter A has a good defense, great ability to control a fight and excellent punching accuracy but little power and a so-so chin; Fighter B has a great chin and a huge punch and tons of endurance but isn’t very accurate and gets hit easily; Fighter C is basically the same as Fighter B but has a below average punch, less endurance but is more accurate than Fighter B, though not as accurate as Fighter A. All three fighters have an overall rating of “8”.

I would bet that Fighter A would lose the majority of times to Fighter B but win the majority of times against Fighter C. Why? Well, look at the strengths and weakness. Fighter A is not going to wear down Fighter B but he might well do so against Fighter C. Fighter A’s weak chin is going to be severely tested by Fighter B but much less so against Fighter C. Simply put, Fighter’s A’s strengths match up better against Fighter C than against Fighter B; and conversely Fighter’s A’s weaknesses play into the hands of Fighter B, and much less so against Fighter C.


Why isn’t Sugar Ray Robinson in the Welterweights (Or the Case of Lost Fighters)?

Is Sugar Ray Robinson really absent from the welterweight division? Are other outstanding fighters truly M.I.A.? Yes . . . and no! The confusion that has occurred within the database was brought about for good reason.

Previously, a fighter was given a separate “identity” in the database for each time he was entered; therefore, Sugar Ray Robinson, for example, was listed as both a middleweight and a welterweight; Roberto Duran was listed as a lightweight, welterweight and middleweight, etc. However, when the database was handled in that fashion, a fighter had separate records for each division and no cumulative record.

When working on the new version of the game, one of our goals was to honor the request of our gamers by finding a way to have all of a fighter’s fights recorded into one cumulative record; and we did so. This method solved one problem but created another: fighters could only be listed in one division at a time.

If you look at a fighter’s record, you’ll see all the divisions under which he can fight and/or any variation of a fighter that has been created. In the case of Sugar Ray Robinson, you’ll see that he can fight as either a middleweight or as a welterweight. Simply put a checkmark in the division in which you want him currently listed. It will set that division as the “default”. You can change that back and forth as often as you wish.

In the case of Muhammad Ali, you’ll find three “Ali’s”: prime, representing his overall career; pre-prime, representing the Ali prior to his ban from boxing; and post-prime, representing his return to the ring after the ban was lifted. Again, whichever box is checked will become the “default” ratings used when using Ali in a bout.

For now, we’ve opted in favor of one cumulative record for a fighter rather than fighters listed in more than one division at a time but having separate records.

That said, gamers can work around the above by doing the following: copy a fighter record (with all his rating records). Then, using Sugar Ray Robinson as an example, you can delete the MW rating record in the original Robinson fighter record, and delete the WW record in the new Robinson record. You’ll end up with two “Sugar Ray Robinson" fighters again, one in MW and one in WW at the same time.

When I go to a Fighter’s “Ratings”, what do the various column headings mean, in detail? Are they functional, informational or both?<O></O>

<O</O
This has been, especially for newcomers to Title Bout, a source of some confusion. Let’s attempt to clear this up once and for all. Here are the following headings and an explanation of each:

• Title: This is a unique key that tells the program where to do its bookkeeping.
• Source: This is informational and tells the gamer who did the ratings for the fighter.
• Career: This indicates for which stage of a fighter’s career the rating refer.
• Division: This indicates the division or divisions in which a fighter is rated
• Rt: This represents the fighter’s overall rating in a particular division
• Style: This indicates if the fighter is primarily a boxer or a slugger or can fight equally well either way.
• Def: This abbreviation does not stand for “defense”; it stands for “Default”
• CS Adj: This abbreviation stands for “Career Stage Adjustment”

Only the last two, Def and CS Adj, are functional from the RATING screen, among the group of columns at the top. Both are ‘toggle’ fields that are turned on and off by clicking in the box and either placing a checkmark in the box or removing the checkmark.

A checkmark in the “Def” box dictates in which division a fighter will be shown when selecting fighters for a given fight and which of his ratings will be used. For example, if Sugar Ray Robinson has a checkmark in his WW box, he’ll appear among the listed welterweights available for a fight and will use his welterweight ratings. If the checkmark is in his middleweight box, his middleweight ratings will be the “default” and Sugar Ray Robinson will appear among the middleweight listings when selecting fighters.

A checkmark in the CS Adj allows adjustments to be made by the computer to a fighter’s ratings. This is a very generic application that applies standard adjustments, based upon the career stages listed. Please note that if the "CS Adj." is checked, then whatever setting is listed in the career stage column will be used in all fights for that fighter until it is changed (see Create Fight screen).


How does “Career Stage Adjustment” actually work?

<O</O
Career Stage Adjustment is an advanced option that was designed to allow a more accurate replay of historical fights. It was never meant to be used as a role-playing tool; nor was it meant to be a completely accurate gauge for projecting a fighter’s future. That said, it certainly can be used those ways and in a number of others.

Used as originally intended, CS Adjustment would allow you to fight Muhammad Ali versus Larry Holmes or Larry Holmes versus Mike Tyson with much more “historical” accuracy. Holmes handled Ali easily in their “real life” fight, just as Tyson blew out Holmes. However, in those fights, a prime Larry Holmes was facing an Ali who was little more than a shell of his former self. The same circumstances applied when an aging Larry Holmes faced the real Mike Tyson and not the sad figure who is Mike Tyson today.

By using the CS Adjustment, gamers who wished to reply the historical fights could set Ali to the “END” of his career and leave Holmes set to his “PRIME”; then set Holmes to his “END” and leave Tyson at his “PRIME”. In both cases, 9 times out of 10, Homes will beat Ali and Tyson will destroy Holmes. This would not have been the case, of course, if Holmes had met Ali in Ali’s prime; or Tyson would have met Holmes at Holme’s best.

Here are some important points that you need to know when attempting to use the “Career Stage Adjustment” option:

• Unless you have the “CS ADJ” box checked under a fighter’s rating, no adjustments will be made when setting up a fight. As a matter of fact, the Career Stage drop-down box on the Create Fight screen will be “locked” at either his prime or whatever career stage he is rated, in the case of a current fighter.
• The changes to a fighter’s ratings will always revert back to his original ratings. If you wish, for some reason, to have a fighter permanently on hand at various career stages, you could copy his rating record, name it for example "08/2005" (field title), set his career stage field to for example "Post-Prime" (only informative) and have both his Prime ratings intact and a new set of Post-Prime ratings.
• Unlike fighters who have been rating individually for the utmost accuracy possible, using a “CS Adjustment” will apply generic changes to a fighter. While this will certainly make most fighters perform closer to their actual ability at a specific stage in their careers, it won’t work in all cases. Some fighters actually get better with age; other fighters retain their punch much longer than most; still others lose most of their skills except the ability to take a punch. This is just something to keep in mind when using the adjustment tool.
• It is highly recommended that if you use “CS Adjustment”, you do so only with retired fighters and not current fighters whose ratings are as up-to-date as possible and whose career stage is already determined.

What are Col1 and Col2 that appear under the “Menu” box, located at the side of the Fighter’s Screen?

This is, admittedly, very confusing because “Col1” is actually the “Select” column and “Col2” is actually the “Nationality” column. What “Col1” and “Col2” refer to are the LAST two columns on the screen, following the “Style (ST)” column.

These columns are actually very useful, once you locate them! Those two columns can show you any two ratings assigned to a fighter. For example, if you make “Col1” = KD1 (knockdown rating) and “Col2” = KO (knockout rating), you can see at a glance what kind of chin all the fighters in a division possess.

Furthermore, you can sort by either of those columns and instantly see all the best chins in the division or all the worst! Want to check for a combination of punching accuracy and defense? Set that up in “Col1” and “Col2” and you’re good to go.

[Cap]

Were the Col1 and Col2 meant to replace the "scouting reports" idea suggested on this forum some time back?

Just wondering.

[Bam Bam]

can't wait for the TBRP FAQ...

[lethal liberal]

Thanks Jim....your ratings are always right on! Fabulous job on the new version!

[bear]

bump

bear