[JCWeb]

I think that the top performers, points-wise, in my Uni, both Attell and Langford, were closing in on 1700 before they lost their World titles.

One final thought on why there might be a difference between one Uni and another -- in addition to possible different starting off points, it could have something to do with how you schedule your matchups. I for one hardly ever use the autoscheduler function and hand-pick each and every bout I want to see even though I may wind up auto-simming or fast-forwarding the bouts. In general, that means I match up guys with similar ranking positions together. I think Chris in that lenghty thread where he described how he did his Uni indicated a somewhat similar approach, at least for the top 30 or so rated fighters. So, again, not being a ratings expert, perhaps how you schedule your match-ups may have something to do with the extent to which you see these rankings shoot up over time.

As an aside, I have always been fascinated by these statistical measures of performance ever since years ago I bought a book by Arpad Elo, the guy who set up the international chess federation's and US chess ratings system called the Rating of Chessplayers Past and Present where he compared guys like Fischer to the all-time greats like Morphy, Lasker, Capablanca and Alekhine...

Anyway, back to the mundane but enjoyable task of setting up the bouts for the initial month in the next year of my Uni, January 1916. So far it looks like both the Gibbons brothers will be in action defending their WBA title belts ...