Two Plus Two Publishing LLC Two Plus Two Publishing LLC
 

Go Back   Two Plus Two Poker Forums > >

Sporting Events Discussion centered around sporting events.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 09-26-2011, 03:20 PM   #5651
kingofcool
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
kingofcool's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Makhachkala
Posts: 10,844
Re: SE Boxing Thread (still waiting for PBF v. Pac)

To add some meat to the argument that past eras had more fighters, i found this.

(Mike Silver is a well respected historian whos written the book "the arc of boxing". While i haven't read the book and therefore cannot provide sources, I'm sure hes not flat out lying about the numbers)

""In 1927, there were 2,000 licensed professional boxers residing in the state of New York and over 900 boxing shows were promoted throughout the state. In 2006, the state licensed 50 pro boxers and staged just 38 shows.

During the 1920s and 1930s, approximately 8,000 – 10,000 professional boxers were licensed annually in the United States, while in 2006 that figure had dropped to 2,850.""


Also;

"In 1925, a fighter had an average of 84 fights and fought 644 rounds before winning a title. In 1955, a fighter had an average of 70 fights and fought 417 rounds before winning a title. By 2007, the number dropped to 27 fights and 143 rounds."
kingofcool is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-26-2011, 05:46 PM   #5652
RT
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
RT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 42,955
Re: SE Boxing Thread (still waiting for PBF v. Pac)

While we're pseudo on the subject, has SE ever had a Boxing draft where were take 5-6 boxers (1 HW, 1 LHW/CW, 1 MW, 1 WW, 1 FW or something) and then compared stables? Could have some pretty cool results if we kept the numbers low enough that we saw it through to the end.
RT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-26-2011, 06:13 PM   #5653
NoJacket
old hand
 
NoJacket's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 1,284
Re: SE Boxing Thread (still waiting for PBF v. Pac)

Would the idea be playing the role of the promoter? i.e. maximising talent and marketability? I think that would be fun, rather than just picking the best fighters.
NoJacket is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-26-2011, 06:15 PM   #5654
RT
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
RT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 42,955
Re: SE Boxing Thread (still waiting for PBF v. Pac)

Quote:
Originally Posted by NoJacket View Post
Would the idea be playing the role of the promoter? i.e. maximising talent and marketability? I think that would be fun, rather than just picking the best fighters.
No clue, just floating the idea.

Ideally we'd have around 8-16 stables of guys that would then match up in a tourney or something. Match up each weight class and debate the 5 fights. Odds are it never gets that far, but there's enough interest in this thread to have a shot at being pretty cool.
RT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-26-2011, 06:19 PM   #5655
kingofcool
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
kingofcool's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Makhachkala
Posts: 10,844
Re: SE Boxing Thread (still waiting for PBF v. Pac)

i liked the mma draft that was made in the edf forum. People got to pick matchups rather than single fighters, and put together a "dream card".

Obviously pac vs floyd would instawin so maybe just ban that option.
kingofcool is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-26-2011, 06:19 PM   #5656
GBP04
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
GBP04's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Sevilla
Posts: 7,944
Re: SE Boxing Thread (still waiting for PBF v. Pac)

if you had to guess the VIG free vegas line of PBF - Mayweather (you win $1,000,000 if you get it +/- 10!) what would you guess it comes out at?

my thought is PBF -110 / Manny +110?
GBP04 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-26-2011, 06:20 PM   #5657
kingofcool
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
kingofcool's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Makhachkala
Posts: 10,844
Re: SE Boxing Thread (still waiting for PBF v. Pac)

Quote:
Originally Posted by GBP04 View Post
if you had to guess the VIG free vegas line of PBF - Mayweather (you win $1,000,000 if you get it +/- 10!) what would you guess it comes out at?

my thought is PBF -110 / Manny +110?
floyd -150

Opening line will probably be closer than that.
I'd imagine the opening line will be very close to the last one, which was what? -135? Don't remember.
kingofcool is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-26-2011, 06:46 PM   #5658
Geddy Lee
Good Ol' Canadian Boy
 
Geddy Lee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Obi-Sean, you're our only hope
Posts: 25,361
Re: SE Boxing Thread (still waiting for PBF v. Pac)

I like the "pick your stable" option, then let the teams duke it out, so to speak.

If we do it, I'm in.
Geddy Lee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-26-2011, 06:55 PM   #5659
RT
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
RT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 42,955
Re: SE Boxing Thread (still waiting for PBF v. Pac)

If we get enough interest from ITT we can try it I suppose, no idea what the protocol is for starting draft threads though (can't recall if there's an approval or anything).

Which is better in everyone's opinion, more owners/smaller teams, or fewer owners, larger teams?
RT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-26-2011, 07:05 PM   #5660
Bitchface
banned
 
Bitchface's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: HANTZ
Posts: 6,917
Re: SE Boxing Thread (still waiting for PBF v. Pac)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Geddy Lee View Post
I like the "pick your stable" option, then let the teams duke it out, so to speak.

If we do it, I'm in.
This sounds awesome.
Bitchface is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-26-2011, 07:08 PM   #5661
kingofcool
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
kingofcool's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Makhachkala
Posts: 10,844
Re: SE Boxing Thread (still waiting for PBF v. Pac)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Geddy Lee View Post
I like the "pick your stable" option, then let the teams duke it out, so to speak.

If we do it, I'm in.
So given this scenario we would do our own team vs another drafters? Not inhouse fights?

And the goal is to beat others in teamgames?

Either way I'm in. I'll jump at any chance to discuss boxing.
kingofcool is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-26-2011, 07:09 PM   #5662
Geddy Lee
Good Ol' Canadian Boy
 
Geddy Lee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Obi-Sean, you're our only hope
Posts: 25,361
Re: SE Boxing Thread (still waiting for PBF v. Pac)

Quote:
Originally Posted by kingofcool View Post
So given this scenario we would do our own team vs another drafters? Not inhouse fights?

And the goal is to beat others in teamgames?

Either way I'm in. I'll jump at any chance to discuss boxing.
Yep, that's what I was getting at.

I think it could work and I think it'd be fun.
Geddy Lee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-26-2011, 07:11 PM   #5663
kingofcool
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
kingofcool's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Makhachkala
Posts: 10,844
Re: SE Boxing Thread (still waiting for PBF v. Pac)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard Tanner View Post
Which is better in everyone's opinion, more owners/smaller teams, or fewer owners, larger teams?
No opinion on this. But I'd hate for this to get stalled and forgotten after a while because of inactive people etc.

So the drafters imo need to be able to stay somewhat active.


Another Question. Should we do currently active fighters only, or is it cool to pick any fighter in history?
I think the latter would make it more interesting since otherwise It's easy to just pick the dominant forces in every division.

No one will argue that Donaire will beat Agbeko, but Monzon vs Hagler?
kingofcool is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-26-2011, 07:14 PM   #5664
RT
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
RT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 42,955
Re: SE Boxing Thread (still waiting for PBF v. Pac)

To give anyone interested a better idea, I'm thinking something like this:

1 HW (200 lbs.+)
1 LHW/Crusier (175-199lbs.)
1 MW/SuperMW (160-168lbs.)
1 LWW/WW/LMW (140-154lbs)
1 BW-LW (118lbs-135lbs)

Those groupings seem close enough that we can compare fighters across their respective divisions when the need arises.

16 teams, 5 guys OR 8 teams, 10 guys (2 from each class)

Picks go ABBABAABBAABBA (1st overall pick is last in rounds 2 and 3, then regular snake)

At the end of the picks, we make a random bracket and match up each stable, we can all vote, best of 5 moves on.

Seem like a decent starting point?
RT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-26-2011, 07:16 PM   #5665
RT
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
RT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 42,955
Re: SE Boxing Thread (still waiting for PBF v. Pac)

Quote:
Originally Posted by kingofcool View Post
No opinion on this. But I'd hate for this to get stalled and forgotten after a while because of inactive people etc.
I tend to agree. 8 teams picking 10 fighters>>16 teams picking 5, but it's close imo since there aren't going to be a ton of rounds.

Quote:
So the drafters imo need to be able to stay somewhat active.
yup

Quote:
Another Question. Should we do currently active fighters only, or is it cool to pick any fighter in history?
I think the latter would make it more interesting since otherwise It's easy to just pick the dominant forces in every division.
All time LDO

Quote:
No one will argue that [undrafted] will beat [undrafted], but [undrafted] vs [undrafted]?
fyp
RT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-26-2011, 07:19 PM   #5666
kingofcool
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
kingofcool's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Makhachkala
Posts: 10,844
Re: SE Boxing Thread (still waiting for PBF v. Pac)

may i suggest we pick the 8 original weightclasses?

That way we cover pretty much every fighter in history. Obviously you would be able to draft anyone who could realistically make the weight. (most guys at 168 would be drafted into LHW etc)
kingofcool is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-26-2011, 07:20 PM   #5667
Bitchface
banned
 
Bitchface's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: HANTZ
Posts: 6,917
Re: SE Boxing Thread (still waiting for PBF v. Pac)

How do you want to weigh prime/peak vs. career longevity?
Bitchface is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-26-2011, 07:22 PM   #5668
RT
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
RT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 42,955
Re: SE Boxing Thread (still waiting for PBF v. Pac)

Quote:
Originally Posted by kingofcool View Post
may i suggest we pick the 8 original weightclasses?

That way we cover pretty much every fighter in history. Obviously you would be able to draft anyone who could realistically make the weight. (most guys at 168 would be drafted into LHW etc)
I don't have any problem with this. I just went with the 5 sets I mentioned above to keep picks down and avoid making people pick 110 lbs fighters they've never heard of.
RT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-26-2011, 07:22 PM   #5669
kingofcool
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
kingofcool's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Makhachkala
Posts: 10,844
Re: SE Boxing Thread (still waiting for PBF v. Pac)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bitchface View Post
How do you want to weigh prime/peak vs. career longevity?
As i understand this will not be about legacy or "greatness". Rather head 2 head matchups. And that way it all comes down to skill, ability and how you can exploit the strengths and weaknesses of the other fighter (basically stylistical matchup)
kingofcool is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-26-2011, 07:25 PM   #5670
RT
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
RT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 42,955
Re: SE Boxing Thread (still waiting for PBF v. Pac)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bitchface View Post
How do you want to weigh prime/peak vs. career longevity?
It seems like we could go either:

1) You pick the boxer at a given age and we attribute to him everything he'd done up to that point

or

2) You get his body of work accounting for age (i.e. the KOs a boxer that's hung around too long suffered at the end of his career don't weight as heavily as his "prime-work").

I think I prefer 2 as it's just easier to conceptualize. Telling someone to rank Tyson only up to Spinks is harder than just saying "rank Tyson" (even though that in itself isn't all that easy).

Quote:
Originally Posted by kingofcool View Post
As i understand this will not be about legacy or "greatness". Rather head 2 head matchups. And that way it all comes down to skill, ability and how you can exploit the strengths and weaknesses of the other fighter (basically stylistical matchup)
Yeah, it's this basically, but BF's question is valid, see above.
RT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-26-2011, 07:27 PM   #5671
kingofcool
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
kingofcool's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Makhachkala
Posts: 10,844
Re: SE Boxing Thread (still waiting for PBF v. Pac)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard Tanner View Post
I don't have any problem with this. I just went with the 5 sets I mentioned above to keep picks down and avoid making people pick 110 lbs fighters they've never heard of.
Yeah, the lowest we would go would be flyweight (using the original classes).

If anyone is uncertain about a weight, well thats what youtube is for.
Just google "best flyweights of all time" and start going through the youtube archives to find your favorite fighter.

(youtube should be included as much as possible in my opinion. In part to let readers get a glimpse about, for them, undiscovered fighters but also to showcase attributes and certain skillsets. And basically, to make it more fun)
kingofcool is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-26-2011, 07:29 PM   #5672
kingofcool
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
kingofcool's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Makhachkala
Posts: 10,844
Re: SE Boxing Thread (still waiting for PBF v. Pac)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard Tanner View Post
It seems like we could go either:

1) You pick the boxer at a given age and we attribute to him everything he'd done up to that point

or

2) You get his body of work accounting for age (i.e. the KOs a boxer that's hung around too long suffered at the end of his career don't weight as heavily as his "prime-work").

I think I prefer 2 as it's just easier to conceptualize. Telling someone to rank Tyson only up to Spinks is harder than just saying "rank Tyson" (even though that in itself isn't all that easy).



Yeah, it's this basically, but BF's question is valid, see above.
The easiest would probably be to just assume the fighter is as prime as possible for when he fought at the weight. A floyd at featherweight is greatly different from a floyd at welterweight.

It will be hard to ignore the flaws we know tyson have, just by requesting us to forget everything past spinks.

We'll just have to try to be fair about this.
kingofcool is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-26-2011, 07:32 PM   #5673
RT
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
RT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 42,955
Re: SE Boxing Thread (still waiting for PBF v. Pac)

I assume you mean these right KoC?

Heavyweight [176 lbs plus; at least 75.3 kg; over 12 stone, 7 lbs]
Cruiserweight [175 lb maximum; 79.5 kg; or 12 stone, 7 pounds]
Middleweight [160 lbs maximum; 72.7 kg; or 11 stone, 4 pounds]
Welterweight [147 lbs maximum; 66.8 kg; or 10 stone, 7 pounds]
Lightweight [135lbs maximum; 61.4 kg; or 9 stone, 9 pounds]
Featherweight [126lbs maximum; 57.3 kg; or 9 stone]
Bantamweight [118lbs maximum; 53.6 kg; or 8 stone, 6 pounds]
Flyweight [112lbs maximum; 50.9 kg; or 8 stone]

The only issue that jumps out at me is the HW at 176+ seems to remove a lot of good fighters that would otherwise compete if it were 156-199. It's going to be hard to make a case for a great 180lb fighter against a traditional 235 lb HW.
RT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-26-2011, 07:33 PM   #5674
RT
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
RT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 42,955
Re: SE Boxing Thread (still waiting for PBF v. Pac)

Quote:
Originally Posted by kingofcool View Post
The easiest would probably be to just assume the fighter is as prime as possible for when he fought at the weight. A floyd at featherweight is greatly different from a floyd at welterweight.

It will be hard to ignore the flaws we know tyson have, just by requesting us to forget everything past spinks.

We'll just have to try to be fair about this.
Yeah, the fighters fight at "prime" for their weight imo, the only consideration is what to take into account. I'm thinking the entire body of work is the best bet.
RT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-26-2011, 07:37 PM   #5675
kingofcool
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
kingofcool's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Makhachkala
Posts: 10,844
Re: SE Boxing Thread (still waiting for PBF v. Pac)

Yep except for cruiserweight being changed into "light heavyweight" but thats semantics.

It's probably hard to imagine a guy like dempsey being able to handle the mammoth heavies of later eras, but i don't know where to draw the line?
An option could be to up it to the current 200lbs limit, but I'll leave that up to you guys to decide.
kingofcool is offline   Reply With Quote

Reply
      

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 12:53 AM.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2008-2020, Two Plus Two Interactive