All Time Rankings - with numbers and formulas

[SerrabyTKO]

Tell me how a fighter with 6 losses is ahead of a fighter with 2 losses, and almost an equal amount of wins?

I don't think any algorithm can explain this.

Other than that I find the rankings good. I like how Nogueira and Hughes are ahead of Jose and JJ, as it should be, but no way is Anderson ahead of GSP, statistically speaking. Yes, some may argue that he was a finisher with a killer instinct, but it's purely subjective, and as far as statistics go GSP is the #1 -- better opposition, less losses, most fights won in the UFC.

Perhaps because they totally don't have "almost an equal number of wins," because one of them has almost ten more?

 

[JarlSkuld]

ts boss "stop dicking around on sherdog and do what your paid to do."

Looks like his job might be statistician. If that`s the case...keep up the good work.

Jarl

 

[phatron]

Cain is ranked higher because he was on the top of the division much longer.
Cain has 14 quarter-ends as #1 in the division (rk1ctg=14), Weidman has 7 and MM has 11.
Similar for top 10 P4P (top10p4p), Cain=17, Weidman=7 , MM =9.

I don't think fighters should be accruing points when injured.

Those numbers make it seem like cain defended the title for over 4 years straight but he's only fought 5 times since 2011.

 

[Magnum1978]

Interesting....

The most difficult, yet the most important factor in this is the opponent level calculations - how does the strength of schedule work with 'Opponents' is it gone on "rank" at the time (i.e. media outlets, etc, a subjective measure) or other calculation of opponent strength - i.e. The record of the opponent and statistical cross-calculation of their record vs other opponents, etc ?

Also, does it some how factor in 'how' the fighter won their fight? Finish/dominant Decision/Close decision/etc or is that a simple W/L/D/NC kind of thing? Are 'bad' losses worse in the continuations than 'fighter was robbed' type losses?

Also is there any factor in strange or erroneous results like Fedor's 'loss' to TK or would that be considered a 'loss' to a lower level fighter? etc? i.e i there a type of calculation asterisk* for that kind of fight?

Either way, good stuff

 

[tenniswhiz]

So wins over fighters with good wins matter a lot.
Is there any deduction for losses?

 

[RJ43]

Where in god's name did you find all of the info for populating the database?

 

[zec1234]

Tell me how a fighter with 6 losses is ahead of a fighter with 2 losses, and almost an equal amount of wins?

I don't think any algorithm can explain this.

Other than that I find the rankings good. I like how Nogueira and Hughes are ahead of Jose and JJ, as it should be, but no way is Anderson ahead of GSP, statistically speaking. Yes, some may argue that he was a finisher with a killer instinct, but it's purely subjective, and as far as statistics go GSP is the #1 -- better opposition, less losses, most fights won in the UFC.

Perhaps because they totally don't have "almost an equal number of wins," because one of them has almost ten more?

There are number of reasons why Anderson is #1 despite GSP having better record.

Let's start with career diagrams.

First thing that you can see from those diagrams is that Anderson started his MMA Career in 1997 - 5 years before GSP.

Second important factor is how much time they spent at #1 P4P.

People are also forgetting that Anderson had big fights even outside of UFC.

He was fighting in Pride.
He was Shooto champion (Hayato Sakurai - 2001).
Multiple Cage Rage champion (2004 - 2006).

 

[zec1234]

Interesting....

The most difficult, yet the most important factor in this is the opponent level calculations - how does the strength of schedule work with 'Opponents' is it gone on "rank" at the time (i.e. media outlets, etc, a subjective measure) or other calculation of opponent strength - i.e. The record of the opponent and statistical cross-calculation of their record vs other opponents, etc ?

Didn't really understand this question.


Also, does it some how factor in 'how' the fighter won their fight? Finish/dominant Decision/Close decision/etc or is that a simple W/L/D/NC kind of thing? Are 'bad' losses worse in the continuations than 'fighter was robbed' type losses?

Yes, check the Fight Mark explanation on my website. We have flags for Dominant and Close (+/-) fights.

Also is there any factor in strange or erroneous results like Fedor's 'loss' to TK or would that be considered a 'loss' to a lower level fighter? etc? i.e i there a type of calculation asterisk* for that kind of fight?

Yes. We still keep official result, but we flag that fight with Wrong flag. That has big implication in the Score calculation.

Either way, good stuff

Answers in yellow.

 

[Magnum1978]

There are number of reasons why Anderson is #1 despite GSP having better record.

Let's start with career diagrams.

First thing that you can see from those diagrams is that Anderson started his MMA Career in 1997 - 5 years before GSP.

Second important factor is how much time they spent at #1 P4P.

People are also forgetting that Anderson had big fights even outside of UFC.

He was fighting in Pride.
He was Shooto champion (Hayato Sakurai - 2001).
Multiple Cage Rage champion (2004 - 2006).

How can this be used as a factor in a calculation when this piece of data is purely subjective and can only ever be opinion?

If instead had GSP been #1p4p during that time (an entirely possible thing, given promotional marketing often 'dictates' this), would that affect the calculations?

Sounds like a strange metric to base calculations on.

 

[zec1234]

How can this be used as a factor in a calculation when this piece of data is purely subjective and can only ever be opinion?

If instead had GSP been #1p4p during that time (an entirely possible thing, given promotional marketing often 'dictates' this), would that affect the calculations?

Sounds like a strange metric to base calculations on.

All Historical rankings are calculated with the same algorithm that we use every week.
So, it is not our subjective opinion, or public opinion, or promotional marketing.

 

[Pudgy**]

Look how close top 3 is. Then when you factor in that Fedor was a MW fighting at HW, he automatically becomes #1.

Then factor in the cans he stomped and then remove him from the list completely.

 

[ThePewp]

Aldo 7-0
Hendo 7-6

And you have Hendo above Aldo.

 

[Taric]

Fulton over Rickson.

antoniobanderas.gif

Fulton by armbar.

 

[BreadnButter]

Then factor in the cans he stomped and then remove him from the list completely.

Anderson lost to cans, that's worse.

 

[Ulti1]

Fedor fans are going to hate you

 

[RJ43]

Fedor fans are going to hate you

I think most Fedor fans are OK with GSP and Anderson being ahead of him from an objective criteria standpoint. It was just a different landscape back then and he simply did not have the back-to-back-to-back top 5 fights like GSP and to a lesser extent Anderson did.

When the UFC consolidated practically all of the top MMA talent they ensured their champions would be fighting all of the best in the world. Fedor never really had that kind of situation so he had weaker competition, some freak show fights, and had some of his peers under different promotions.

I think he is the exemplary fighter, but his strength of schedule will hold him back vs GSP, Anderson and the surging Jon Jones.

 

[Magnum1978]

All Historical rankings are calculated with the same algorithm that we use every week.
So, it is not our subjective opinion, or public opinion, or promotional marketing.

but ranking 'p4p' is used as part of the calculation?

how is 'p4p' determined?

 

[Jet40]

So wins over fighters with good wins matter a lot.
Is there any deduction for losses?

Thats what I want to know.

I also feel the length of time you are ranked should have no bearing. Different fighters fight at rates.(Cain)

I do like your approach though. I believe it just needs a little fine tuning.

 

[AJ Garcia]

So if gsp were to come back and win the belt again, would that put him over Anderson?

 

[Magnum1978]

I think most Fedor fans are OK with GSP and Anderson being ahead of him from an objective criteria standpoint. It was just a different landscape back then and he simply did not have the back-to-back-to-back top 5 fights like GSP and to a lesser extent Anderson did.

When the UFC consolidated practically all of the top MMA talent they ensured their champions would be fighting all of the best in the world. Fedor never really had that kind of situation so he had weaker competition, some freak show fights, and had some of his peers under different promotions.

I think he is the exemplary fighter, but his strength of schedule will hold him back vs GSP, Anderson and the surging Jon Jones.

Plus in the case of Silva you'd get guys like Cote, Leites, Maia, etc 'ranked' highly at the time as the division was weak but in reality they were not much in the term of comp. This skews the results if a Cote was top #3-5