For further reading, and to prevent repeating the same points, here is another discussion that was made regarding Felix's ranking system.

Constructive Criticism, Felix's Rankings

I still think it's a flawed system.

A "title"-based system, where each spot is treated like a title, can only work if there is contender "subsystem" to make sure the proper people fight each other. A title-holder should only compete against the top contenders to the title.

An example of what I'm talking about is the "ladder" system, which is often used in online game competition. Each spot is treated like a title, but they are only allowed to compete against people within 2 spots of their position. Also, if you are challenged for your position by someone within 2 spots, then you cannot decline it or you lose your position.

If you don't require each fighter to fight only the contenders for their spot, then there are potential problems when doing a ranking list. This is the case with K-1, where anyone can beat anyone.

Given this situation, their placement should be based upon a combination of their recent results, not just the results of one fight.

In Felix's system, and because of the lack of Contender-matching of each rank, one fight can make a fighter jump 100 slots. It should require a number of wins to jump that many positions.

To put it simply, I basically just think the formula for determining the rankins needs to consider more variables. The system Felix uses is far too simplistic to give an overview of what each fighter has accomplished to date. That is what a ranking system is supposed to do.