All Time Rankings - with numbers and formulas

[SerrabyTKO]

As I said, I think even his #5 at WW was anomolous.

Yeah I get that, I just disagree. You don't fluke your way into dominating Fitch for three full rounds like that. Or even the one against Rory.

Maia is a top 5 caliber fighter, wherever he may happen to rank from one minute to the next. IMO

Agreed, I don't rate GSP's win of Diaz that highly - but then again Anderson got Hendo after he had a loss (at LHW) too and almost 2 years from his last MW fight (which he also lost!). And Anderson also got Vitor who hadn't fought at MW for over 2 years (and first ever in the UFC) since beating Lindland.

Yet these guys were highly ranked and considered some of Anderson's best wins (if not the best)

Sure, but the quality of fighters that Hendo and Vitor are have been proven pretty solidly over many years and many fights. Flukes and setbacks and injuries happen to every fighter, but over a long enough timeline the cream rises to the top so to speak, and the quality is pretty clear for those two. Can the same really be said for guys like Diaz? Is his best win ever not a fat old LW? What about guys like Alves? Koscheck?

Hence why rankings are altogether a poor metric to use IMO and straight 'numbers' don't tell the whole story, or can even be used as a solid factor for basing calculations on. You need an algorithm to calculate the rankings (factoring in the intangibles which is nigh on impossible) and THEN calculate from those, the all time best. A very difficult task.

Anyway, I do agree with most of this in a fashion. Using straight numbers to calculate exactly who is the GOAT in an subjective universe can never really satisfy everyone. But I do feel this formula really does narrow it down and show pretty clearly what the tiers of GOAT are.

 

[tenniswhiz]

It looks like I need to explain dynamics of the ATT Score.
I will prepare some example to show you how different fighters were getting points in the past and give some predictions for future.
Do you guys have any preference? Any fighter that you would like to see, or how some recent fights impacted ATT scores?

I would like to see Frank Shamrock.

He had early career losses, late career losses, but his Golden Age was just outstanding.
Just wondering how your QB rating type system would address a guy like that.

 

[SuperLuigi]

We have an algorithm that calculates Current Score each week. Right now we are ranking about 10,000 fighters weekly.

For Historical Quarterly Rankings we use same algorithm and this is the process:
1. Go to the previous quarter-end, by setting the RankDate=QuarterEndDate and removing all data > RankDate
2. Run algorithm for Current Score
3. Store historical data and go back to #1

After repeating this 86 times, we have the whole history. There is no point in doing this for periods before 1993 Q3.

It takes us about 3 days to recalculate everything. History recalculation is done only when something in algorithm is changed (Current Score algorithm wasn't changed in the last 6 months), or when we have new/changed fight related historical data.

Point that I want to make is that same algorithm is used for all fighters, for all time periods, for all Weight Categories, and all genders.
That is the essence of objective ranking.

I see. I like that philosophy.

 

[Shambler]

Good lord I love this!

 

[Cubo de Sangre]

Very impressive thread.

 

[zec1234]

AllTimeTotal score is a number that describes fighters overall MMA achievements.

Fighters build their legacy through fighting top opponents, winning, reaching the top and staying there as long as possible.

ATT point increase is not linear and is not a set value.

Some up-and-coming fighters can gain more points than established fighters.
In our formulas we have parts that calculate maximums and averages.
When you are fighting better and better opponents, those maximums and averages are going up.
Once you reach the top, it is hard to increase those maximums. And averages might even go down.

- Dan Henderson already has so many top10 wins that another top10 win will mean that much for his legacy.
But for fighters like Brad Tavares, that top10 win would mean a lot.

- Being #1 in the division is nothing new for Jon Jones. But when T.J. Dillashaw reached #1, that was a big deal for him.

- Tito Ortiz already fought the best opponents and now in Bellator he cannot expect to collect much more ATT points.

- When you have 100 or even 50 fights, one more fight doesn't really have a great effect on your overall legacy.


Let's see how fighters are acquiring new ATT points.

High level formula has following 3 groups:
All Time Total = Opponents + Historical Quarterly Rankings + Other Fighter Stats

Opponents group indexes gets new points only when fighter has a new fight. It is mostly plus points, but it can also be a small amount of negative points.
Other Fighter Stats group also gets additional points with new fights. This can be + or - points.

Historical Quarterly Rankings is a group of indexes where additional points are added on a quarterly basis.
At the end of quarter, based on the fighter rankings, high ranked fighters get final points for that quarter.
New quarter starts with fresh points and those points can change by the end of the quarter (if fighters ranking changes).


Some scenarios.

1. When somebody is #1 P4P and is not fighting for 1 year.
This fighter will continue receiving his Quarterly ranking points, but will have no new fight/opponent related points.
He earned that #1 spot and it is OK to have that recognized in next couple of quarters. After that he will start slipping in rankings and that Quarterly addition will be lower and lower.

2. When somebody is fighting a lot.
That fighter might improve his Opponent score, but that is not linear and not unlimited.
Win portion of points depends on what were those wins.
Quarterly points will be same as for those that are not fighting in that quarter - depends on ranking.

3. What happens when somebody retires.
We don't automatically stop his points intake. He still gets ranking related quarterly points. He earned that with previous fights.
But, without fighting, he will drop down in rankings and eventually stop getting any new points.

 

[JRY82]

Awesome thread

 

[zec1234]

Nice work TS!

Holy shit, you put a lot of work into this. Haven't read through all your formula and stats yet. Just skimmed through.
Nonetheless, mad respects for the amount time and work you put into this.

I see. I like that philosophy.

Good lord I love this!

Very impressive thread.

Awesome thread

Thank you guys for your support.
I (and few other people) worked really hard on setting this up.
You guys, as always, helped with your comments and questions.
There are of course some sceptics, cynics and trolls, but that is part of Sherdog overall experience.
I have more material to add to this topic, so please keep coming back.

 

[milenss]

I appreciate the work TS, I really do. That said, people need to realize that these mathematically based systems are as essentially subjective as any fan's opinion. Every algorithm you use, every weighted variable, the stipulations of which equations to use and why, what you decide to include and leave out is all subjective. Creating a mathematical system doesn't mean the end result is objective.

Exactly this.

 

[zec1234]

I appreciate the work TS, I really do. That said, people need to realize that these mathematically based systems are as essentially subjective as any fan's opinion. Every algorithm you use, every weighted variable, the stipulations of which equations to use and why, what you decide to include and leave out is all subjective. Creating a mathematical system doesn't mean the end result is objective.

Exactly this.

So, in your opinion, what is the objective system?
One that is created by robots?

 

[barehanded]

No, because robots are created by subjective humans.

 

[zec1234]

No, because robots are created by subjective humans.

Then maybe system created by extraterrestrials.
They have nothing to do with dirty humans.

 

[zec1234]

Now we will take a look at some actual numbers to describe ATT dynamics.

Full formula that includes all 8 major indexes is:

AllTimeTotal = iOpponentWin + iOpponentAll +

​

iHistQtrSum + iHistQtrBest + iHistQtrDominance +

​

BasicCarScr + ChampPts + FightPctMark



Let's start with first quarter of 2015. This quarter just started and it will not be finalized until Apr 1st.

On January 1 new quarter was opened and some fighters received additional points based on their current ranking.
Those points are all in Historical Quarterly Rankings group.

Jon Jones is #1 P4P and he received 21 points = 15 [iHistQtrSum] + 0 [iHistQtrBest] + 6 [ iHistQtrDominance].
15 [iHistQtrSum] = 7 [isHFRkP4p] + 4 [isHFRkCtg] +4 [isHFCurScr]

Jose Aldo gets 18 points and Chris Weidman 16.
Anderson Silva is now ranked much lower, but still gets little less than 2 new points.


Then Jon Jones defended his title on Jan 3. This fight gives him following additional points:
53 = 25 [iOpponentWin] + 16 [iOpponentAll] + 6 [BasicCarScr] + 6 [ChampPts]

Daniel Cormier doesn't get any new points in iOpponentWin, but it gets a lot of new points in iOpponentAll (50).
Cormier gets a lot of new points in iOppBest (best opponents) and iaOppCSR (average). But, Jones is not improving his best or average opponent part.
BasicCarScr for Cormier goes down slightly (because he is no longer undefeated).

 

[SeattleFightFan]

i think what they naysayers are saying is what you already know and have freely discussed - that when you weighed historical (i think it was) * 75% numbers got screwy one way and when you weighted it *50% they got screwy the other way, so you landed on *60%. they will call that "subjective".

or, you have 8 variables; they could say that 7 of them make sense and 1 of them doesn't.

i think it's safe to say that these whiners are outliers, and you are attaining your goal of pleasing 95% of the people 95% of the time cheers

 

[zec1234]

Here is how some fighters increased their ATT points in the previous quarter (2014Q4).

Fighters that didn't previously have a lot of success, can add more points in one quarter than fighters at the top.

Robbie Lawler added the most points in 2014 Q4.
additional AllTimeTotal = iOpponentWin + iOpponentAll + iHistQtrSum + iHistQtrBest + iHistQtrDominance + BasicCarScr + ChampPts + FightPctMark
120 = 47 + 28 + 21 + 4 + 8 + 5 + 6 + 1

Anthony Pettis added 88 points and Aldo 80.
T.J. Dillashaw didn't have a fight in 2014 Q4, but still added 20 points.
Johny Hendricks with a loss added 13 points.

Tito Ortiz had a win over Stephan Bonnar, but that gave him just 3 additional points. His average Opponent points even decreased slightly.
Mauricio Rua and Miguel Torres both decreased their ATT by 2 points.


In the whole year 2014 (4 quarters) we have following fighters with the biggest increase:
T.J. Dillashaw (430)
Robbie Lawler (230)
Jose Aldo (180)
Chris Weidman (170)
Khabib Nurmagomedov (165)
Donald Cerrone (150)

Jon Jones had just one fight in 2014 and added 125 new points.

 

[zec1234]

I copied all my posts with theory to the first page of this thread.
You guys can let me know what else you would like to see

 

[zec1234]

What changed on All Time Ranking list after UFC FOX 14.

I will give detail changes for each major index.
AllTimeTotal = iOpponentAll + iOpponentWin + iHistQtrSum + iHistQtrBest + iHistQtrDominance + ChampPts + FightPctMark + BasicCarScr

Anthony Johnson added 83.4 points and moved up 30 spots to #114 on All Time list. He now has 964 ATT points.

• 83.4 = 16.3 + 34.5 + 1.5 + 12.6 + 9.6 + 0 + 3.2 + 5.7

Gegard Mousasi added 33 points and moved up 4 spots to #89 on All Time list. He now has 1046 ATT points.

• 33 = 5.2 + 17.4 + 1.3 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 2.1 + 7

Ryan Bader added 43.8 points and moved up 19 spots to #130. He now has 916 ATT points.

• 43.8 = 9.3 + 27 + 0.4 + 5.8 + 0 + 0 - 4.1 + 5.4

Dan Henderson lost 3.2 points and is still #6 on All Time list.

• -3.2 = 2.2 + 0 - 0.2 + 0 + 0 + 0 - 2.4 - 2.8

Gustafsson and Davis lost, but still were able to add couple of points:
Alexander Gustafsson added 5.8 points. He now has 967 ATT points.

• 5.8 = 18.8 + 0 - 1.6 + 0 + 0 + 0 - 7.4 - 4

Phil Davis added 4.2 points and moved down -1 spots to #144 on All Time list. He now has 887.6 ATT points.

• 4.2 = 11.8 + 0 - 0.3 + 0 + 0 + 0 - 1.6 - 5.7

 

[zec1234]

We also had some fights outside UFC and here is what changed for couple of familiar names. They both fought some unraked fighters and even win didn't help them collecting more ATT points. Some of their indexes even decreased.

Dean Lister added 2.2 points and moved up 2 spots to #359 on All Time list. He now has 623.8 ATT points.

• 2.2 = -1.4 - 1.4 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 3.1 + 1.9

Travis Wiuff added 1.2 points and moved up 1 spots to #237 on All Time list. He now has 730.2 ATT points.

• 1.2 = -0.1 - 0.2 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0.9 + 0.6

 

[SavageAngel]

Gotta say I absolutely agree with this 20 top fighters of all time list.

 

[Sano]

I have a question. Forgive me if I missed it.

What exactly does "other fighter stats" contain? I mean, other than rankings, do you quantify weight difference in fights or other "tale of the tape" disparities?

Do finishes count the same as decisions? Shouldn't a finish give a higher score for a given win? Also, should first round victories score more? Or should time be factored in at all? What about rounds lost/won?

I think these stats are worth taking into consideration, but I can definitely understand if they wont be.