FAQ



1. Why would you want to make an independent ranking?

Short answer- I'm nuts.
Longer answer- I enjoy numbers and kickboxing. These two things just came together.


2. The K-1 is a tournament sport. They don't need a ranking. They choose a champ with the Grand Prix.

First, K-1 is not a sport but a company. I treat all promotional companies equally. The K-1 event results play a major factor in the ranking because they are the biggest, not because this is a K-1 ranking.

3. Why are they so bad? I mean did you really think Bob Sapp was the best kickboxer in the world?

The truth is I bet against him every time he steps in the ring. In five fights, I have been right only twice. The man can't kick and can't box yet he was the number one kickboxer.

4. So, why was he #1 in the world if you hold him in such low regard?

For the same reason Leon Spinks, Buster Douglas and Hasim Rahman could become boxing champions. He beat the #1 fighter at the time, Ernesto Hoost.

5. But he only had 2 fights!

Yes, and he took the #1 rank with his third fight. Strange, huh?

6. Why don't you do something about it?

Like what? If a promoter wants to match Bob Sapp and Ernesto Hoost, what can I do? Tonya Harding's husband is still in jail, isn't he?

7. You know what I mean; find some way of keeping him out of the top ten.

Some way? You mean tamper with the results by imposing my opinion that the underdog got lucky and didn't earn a place on the list that any other fighter would get? Sounds like corruption to me.


8. But your list had a chump not a champ. Everyone from #2 to #20 would pound him. That makes no sense.

Well, just using the word "would" is counterfactual. Hoost would have pounded him but he didn't. The fact is that Sapp won against the #1 fighter and as a result became the #1 fighter just like every underdog champion.


9. But that doesn't make him better than LeBanner.

No, but it did make him higher ranked than LeBanner. Ironically, Jerome LeBanner had a choice at the draw for the 2002 Grand Prix, Sapp or Musashi. If he had chosen Sapp, he would probably have won and taken the #1 rank. Instead he fought the lower ranked fighter.


10. Well, what do you expect people to think when they see Sapp, Goodridge and Parris so high on your list?

Now, I expect them to freak out and call me names. In time, I expect them to recognize that the list is kept by me but decided by the fighters themselves.


11. What do you mean by "decided by the fighters"?

I mean that the two fighters step into the ring, one defending his rank against the other. They decide when to throw kicks. They decide when to throw punches. They decide when to keep their hands up. The end result is their own doing.

12. End result? Are you saying this is based solely on who wins?

Yes. If the higher ranked fighter wins, he defends his rank. If the lower ranked fighter wins, he takes the higher rank as he would a title and the fighter who failed to defend his rank then falls 5 ranks.


13. You mean a first round KO and a five round decision are worth the same?

Yes.


14. How on Earth do you justify that?

Some fighters like kicking. Others don't throw a single kick. Some are power punchers. Others will try to hit you 100 times a round. Some want to block everything. Others depend on luck or the toughness of their chins. There are lots of strategies and they are all based on matching the strengths of one fighter to the weaknesses of his opponent and the rules of the game.

15. So?

So. If you can win by decision or stoppage, neither is worth more. They are just two different paths to the same objective, winning.

16. Are you crazy?

You would think so, wouldn't you? Most fans think when you out-point your opponent, you get a win, but when you knock out your opponent, you get a super win. Sports don't work that way. In hockey a 10-0 win is worth the same as a 2-1 win, two points in the standings.


17. In hockey, the last place team can't jump to the #1 spot by beating the leading team.

There are more differences between team sports and fighting sports that should be considered before making a general statement like that.
-The NHL has a season with a defined beginning and end.
-All NHL teams all play the same number of games.
These conditions don't exist in fighting sports. That is why we use a title system.


18. In boxing the title is only for the champion. Everyone else is evaluated. What do you think of that?

I think it is confusing. In most cases, it is easier to become champion of the world than #1 contender in boxing. In a few cases, unproven fighters get in the top ten without an explanation. We can only assume large sums of cash have changed hands.


19. Why not have a point system like tennis or the IBO?

I've experimented with a few models and found none that work as well as the list I now have. They have always conflicted with my unconditional criteria.


20. Unconditional criteria? What are they?

a)If Fighter A beats Fighter B, he must be ranked higher.
b)If Fighter A only fights lower ranked opponents, he won't move up in rank.

21. What? Just because Fighter A beats Fighter B doesn't mean he is better!

Yes, it does. That's what the fight is for, to decide who is better. Now don't get me wrong. I know luck may come into play and may give an unexpected outcome. Having said that, the onus is on the higher ranked fighter to defend his rank or lose it. If he fails, he will suffer the full consequences.

22. So you'll rank some bum ahead of one or more fighters he can't beat?

We're back to that counterfactual language, "can't beat". This is the same as saying a fighter "will win" or "would win". No one knows for sure who will win or who won't win. A ranking that tries reflect that will reflect nothing more than fantasy. If hindsight is 20/20, why settle for foresight.

In short, if you feel a higher ranked fighter would lose to a lower ranked fighter, the answer to your question is "yes". However, the list itself is based on results, not expectations. If the results match fans expectations, it is merely coincidence.


23. Back to the K-1, wouldn't the Grand Prix champion get the #1 rank at the end of every year since he would either beat the reigning #1 or beat someone who eliminated him?

I only count the opening round of tournaments. Both fighters must be fresh.


24. What if A beats B, B beats C and C beats A?

This is actually impossible because it ignores the element of time. A real life possibility is A beats B, B then beats C and then C beats A. I would adjust the rankings after each fight as long as a fighter didn't fight twice in the same day.

25. What if the judges awarded the wrong guy the winner?

The decision stands and is reflected on the list. Judges judge fights, not ranking lists. If the quality of judging is substandard, it must be improved. The purpose of a ranking list is not to repair the damage caused by low quality promotions.

26. What if the fight ends in a disqualification?

This is special. The guilty party will drop 5 ranks regardless of whether or not he was ranked higher.


27. What about inactive fighters?

Throughout the year, I make a note of who has and who hasn't fought. On December 31st, I go through the list and drop the inactive fighters 5 ranks. Those who went two years without fighting drop 15. Those who went 3 years inactive fall to the bottom of the list. More than that is a bump from the list entirely.

28. How does your list compare to other lists?

I once calculated the correlation (Spearman's rho) of my list to another independent list. It came out relatively low, 45% or so. Besides the objective versus subjective approaches, he divided the weight division in two, heavy and superheavy. Under this combination of circumstances, I don't expect our lists to ever correlate at an acceptable level (85% or more) except under coincidental circumstances.


29. What about the official ranking lists such as the ISKA, IKF, WKA and WAKO?

These organizations are the reason I started my list. A fighter can win and still be ranked lower than his defeated opponent. Some fighters remain in the top ten despite horrible slumps. In short, the above organizations put no value on winning and losing. That is wrong.


30. What do fighters think of you list?

Initially, they react like most fans who are used to subjective evaluations. They are pretty quick to warm up to it though. They see that I drop my favorites when they lose and raise my least favorites when they win. They therefore conclude that I am completely unbiased in the way I manage the list. They also like the idea that a loss won't haunt them indefinitely. A fighter can have a bad day in the ring and bounce back very quickly. Two examples are Filho and Bernardo who lost to Ivanovich and Goodridge.

31. How can I help?

It is easy to follow the top 30. After that, collecting information is a little tricky. If you can post fight results on Axkickboxing or Sherdog, that would be a tremendous help.

Also, some fighters are on the list that shouldn't be. If anyone dies or loses a limb or simply retires, it would be appropriate if he were taken off the list.

Furthermore, some fighters get listed twice. This is because of Japanese katakana or various spellings using roman letters or the use of nicknames or whatever. If you can find the fighters from your part of the world and check the information, that would be appreciated.

That's about it, fight results and proofreading.