Duane Bobick

[Claybor]

I always liked Bobick and thought he was rated a little too low in the game, but I figured that was just me wanting the guys I like to be better. After looking over his career he was certainly nothing to fear for the top fighters, but he beat more fighters rated higher then he is then he lost to fighters that were rated similar or lower by a large degree. I wonder what others think?

[IceTea]

Great amateur not a good professional. He had power, but little else. Does hold wins over Mike Weaver who was 6-5 at the time and Scott LaDooooo. I think he is rated about right. Due to his power, he will upset fighters now and then in the game.

MJ

[Claybor]

A 7-3 record vs. fighters in the DB rated higher then him. I think if one applies simple logic that says it all. This rating is off some and should be looked at.

100 fights vs. each rated fighter he beat. He's ahead of 4, but only 2 definitively, and he doesn't stand much of a chance against 2. Total record vs. these fighters;

Real 7-0
Game 318-271-12


Wins vs. DB

Billy Daniels(6) Daniels wins 75-22-3
Mike Weaver(5) Weaver wins 79-21
Harold Carter(5) Bobick wins 53-42-5
Larry Middleton(6) Bobick wins 76-23-1
Scott Ledoux x2(4) Bobick wins 54-44-1
Chuck Wepner(3) Bobick 92-6-2

All losses

Ken Norton(9)
Kaille Knoetze(4)
John Tate(5)
George Chaplin

[meade95]

Originally Posted by Claybor

A 7-3 record vs. fighters in the DB rated higher then him. I think if one applies simple logic that says it all. This rating is off some and should be looked at.

100 fights vs. each rated fighter he beat. He's ahead of 4, but only 2 definitively, and he doesn't stand much of a chance against 2. Total record vs. these fighters;

Real 7-0
Game 318-271-12


Wins vs. DB

Billy Daniels(6) Daniels wins 75-22-3
Mike Weaver(5) Weaver wins 79-21
Harold Carter(5) Bobick wins 53-42-5
Larry Middleton(6) Bobick wins 76-23-1
Scott Ledoux x2(4) Bobick wins 54-44-1
Chuck Wepner(3) Bobick 92-6-2

All losses

Ken Norton(9)
Kaille Knoetze(4)
John Tate(5)
George Chaplin

That's also "boxing" - On any given night a guy may just rise to the challenge - And Bobick may have just done that more than a time or two -

I would also say.....Not to get overly focused on the "overall" rating. Or setting your guidelines for tweaking him...unitl his at a certain overall rating... That isn' the best way to go about rating a fighter........(rate his attributes.....Not his overall #)

Guys with lower overall ratings....can find themselves losing to "lower overall rated" fighters if they simply match-up with them wrong....

Or if the lower-overall rated fighter simply uses his positive attributes effectively.....

I haven't seen enough of Bobick fights to suggest a ratings tweak....

[IceTea]

Originally Posted by Claybor

A 7-3 record vs. fighters in the DB rated higher then him. I think if one applies simple logic that says it all. This rating is off some and should be looked at.

100 fights vs. each rated fighter he beat. He's ahead of 4, but only 2 definitively, and he doesn't stand much of a chance against 2. Total record vs. these fighters;

Real 7-0
Game 318-271-12


Wins vs. DB

Billy Daniels(6) Daniels wins 75-22-3
Mike Weaver(5) Weaver wins 79-21
Harold Carter(5) Bobick wins 53-42-5
Larry Middleton(6) Bobick wins 76-23-1
Scott Ledoux x2(4) Bobick wins 54-44-1
Chuck Wepner(3) Bobick 92-6-2

All losses

Ken Norton(9)
Kaille Knoetze(4)
John Tate(5)
George Chaplin

* Weaver is a 5 in his prime but when Bobick defeated him, the was 6-5 and very early in his career. If you rated Weaver at that point, he would get a (1) or a (2). If Bobick is ahead of four of the six, that is pretty good. I think his chin ratings really drive down his overall rating.

[Claybor]

I just used Bobick in a quick setup uni with tomato cans only and fast simmed. Bobick could only come up with a 46-5-1 record against them, not quite his 48-4 against better competition. I am not saying he should be bumped to a 7 overall or anything, but I don't think his current ratings quite do him justice.

[IceTea]

Originally Posted by Claybor

I just used Bobick in a quick setup uni with tomato cans only and fast simmed. Bobick could only come up with a 46-5-1 record against them, not quite his 48-4 against better competition. I am not saying he should be bumped to a 7 overall or anything, but I don't think his current ratings quite do him justice.

I think the (2) is good. Look what happened to him against Tate and Norton. He had a lot of glass in his chin....IMOP. A 46-5-1 record against tomato cans is ok with that chin.

After inspecting Bobick's rating, he is most likely the most dangerous (2) rated fighter in the game. He also owns 8/8 CF rating. His 6/5 chin rating drops him from a (4), if his chin was ordinary, to a (2). Lets not forget that a (4) rated fighter is above average in my opinion.

[Claybor]

Taking Weaver out of the equation Bobick still only garners about a 60% winning percentage against fighters he was 100% against, not sure I would deem that close enough.

[IceTea]

Originally Posted by Claybor

Taking Weaver out of the equation Bobick still only garners about a 60% winning percentage against fighters he was 100% against, not sure I would deem that close enough.

How should his rating be changed?

[Claybor]

I am not knowledgeable enough about how the game ratings work to rate fighters. I do know statistics though, and his don't seem to be as close as I would like to see them. Boxing is obviously a tough sport to accurately rate athletes in as there are no definitive stats. Perhaps he is just a tough one to get close in comparison to others in the game.

[meade95]

Originally Posted by Claybor

I am not knowledgeable enough about how the game ratings work to rate fighters. I do know statistics though, and his don't seem to be as close as I would like to see them. Boxing is obviously a tough sport to accurately rate athletes in as there are no definitive stats. Perhaps he is just a tough one to get close in comparison to others in the game.

Fair enough - Well if you believe his individual ratings (rated per category) look ok.....I'd suggest tweaking his CF Vs Boxer and Slugger up +1 -

See if that works for you - (or perhaps tweak his TKO rating -1, if he is being TKO'd more often than you think is accurate). Try small tweaks, in specific categories first......Don't do wholesale changes...

[CONN CHRIS]

Originally Posted by Claybor

I am not knowledgeable enough about how the game ratings work to rate fighters. I do know statistics though, and his don't seem to be as close as I would like to see them. Boxing is obviously a tough sport to accurately rate athletes in as there are no definitive stats. Perhaps he is just a tough one to get close in comparison to others in the game.

It's a tough thing to get the ratings 'right'. And even then...

One thing is for sure; you will never be able to get a fighter rated such that he can repeat his real life record perfectly. You should be able to get close and have him perform as he did in real life a preponderance of the time in the replay though. Sometimes, to get him to perform as he did against certain fighters you create a situation where he performs incorrectly against others. So, you have to split differences and give here, take there. You just have to play test and use the best judgment that you have.

It can actually lead to bad ratings to focus too much on how a guy performs against one particular opponent, you sort of need to imagine how that matchup might have gone if the two men were allowed to fight a half a dozen times. You do make a good argument though that Bobick doesn't feel right on balance.

I am not sure where Bobick's rating falls but I will add him to the re-rate consideration list that we are building. We are not necessarily re-rating all the fighters that we put on that list, but will discuss all of them in the rating group at the very least. Once the list gets going (we are still in the just starting phase) I will post and update it periodically in the DB editing thread. Anyone that has a pet peeve rating should feel free to drop a post in that thread as well. We will try our best to at least consider all of them before moving on to the task of expanding the DB.

Christopher

[Jim_Kidd]

I thought Bobick's rating was about right. His hp and decent CF will enable him to beat or even upset a decent amount of fighters.

It would be interesting to see what the top 10 fighters in a given month during the decade of the 50's, 60's, 70's and 80's would rate at. In other words, the champion(s) aside, was the average contender a 7 rated fighter. Were they higher? Or were they lower.

If you look at a fighter's complete career record, you'll see that many/most of the opponents, maybe 50% or more, were tomato cans and journeymen. Not that it takes away from the greatness of the fighter. When a fighter has career defining victories, nothing should erase that. It just shows the process that the good and great fighters go through on their way to the title.

Take Larry Holmes for instance. Holmes was a great boxer, with possibly the best overall jab (speed, power, etc.) in the division's history. Plus, he had loads of heart and came close to breaking Rocky Marciano's 49-0 record AND Joe Louis' record of 25 title defenses. Although he fell short of either record, it just shows you how good he was.

If you look at his record, until he fought Earnie Shavers (the fight before his title winning fight against Norton) he built his career fighting guys who would probably be rating 2 - 4 in our game.

When you're used to playing TBCB, though, you're used to using guys who are 7 and higher. In actuality, though, most fighters probably face a lot lower competition for the bulk of their careers. And most top 10 fighters probably face a lot lower level of competition than you realize until you really take a close look at the names and the records at the time they fought.

[bdennis2]

Claybor this is just for you i have a rating i did of D.Bobick back when tbcb1 came out i have play tested it over and over it works for me if you look counting the fighters other people rated ther is about 32 fighters that he fought i have a 32 fight sch set up for him 100 times for a total 3200 fights and this rating works will for me so this is the one i use all by the way i set up each fight in what ever creer stage they were in or there cond like Weaver Beginning and lack of focus.I look for historal replays done all replays in HWs from 1940 to 1988 had to rerate a few to get that likeness but to me that is all i care about Chuvalo and Cobb i couldn't get them right so i left them out you would have to rate chuvalo chin at about a -3 if game would let you do it Cobb at a -1 there is about 20 guys in the game that Chuvalo fought even with a 0 he gets knocked down way to much 100 times each fighter 2000 fights 288 times down that is and ave of 2.8 times per 20 fights he went his whole creer with out ever being down Frazier and Foreman came the closes to doing it Foreman when Chuvalo was past prime this is the first and last thing i have to say on this subject.By the way i only replayed the top 10 or 15 for each decade from 1940-88.

[Claybor]

Interesting, thanks, I will check it out. I was hoping to sway the creators to my opinion, and I got him on the list to be looked at. :] Can't ask for more. I know these guys can be real tough to rate, in a lot of cases as I have monkeyed around with some guys in what I thought was a logical way and totally messed up the 'reality' on a few occasions.