The Greatest Of: Champions (Kiwi's version)

[Kiwi Peewee]

The Greatest Of: Champions (Kiwi's Edition)

This article is basically the same as RULE's The Greatest Of: Champions, except it's more comprehensive. The point is to provide a quantifiable way of ranking successful battlers across all formats on the site. The top 60 are included here.

The Scoring System:

Each battler is ranked on the number of points they have earned over their career across any number of accounts on LetsBeef. Points are awarded for the following achievements, every time someone accomplishes that achievement (so for instance the 2x HOFers get 20 points overall from that category):

Audio/Text/Track Hall Of Fame Inductee – 10 points
Audio/Text/Video Grand Champion – 5 points
Audio/Text/Video GC Finalist – 5 points
Audio/Text/Video Secondary Champion – 3 points
Audio/Text/Video Secondary Finalist – 3 points
Tag Team or Rookie Champion – 2 points
Tag Team or Rookie Finalist – 2 points
LBA/LBT/LBTT/THC Title Match Victory* – 1 point
LBA/LBT/LBTT/THC Title Match Appearance** – 1 point
Cypher Competition Winner – 2 points
Cypher Competition Placing – 1 point
Major Track Competition 1st place – 5 points
Major Track Competition 2nd place – 3 points
Major Track Competition 3rd place – 2 points
Minor Track/Music Video Competition 1st place – 3 points
Minor Track/Music Video Competition 2nd place – 2 points
Minor Track/Music Video Competition 3rd place – 1 point
Battle/Cypher/Track-related LB Award – 1 point

* Victories via no-show are not counted

** Unsuccessful challenges that are part of an unrelated tournament are not counted

So, with that out of the way, let's get onto the rankings!

The Rankings:

1. Lockhart – 168

2. Bleu – 141

3. RULE – 86

4. UNKNOWN ARTIST – 75

5. Seul – 68

6. Dono – 62

7. Erupt – 60

8. Phil Banks – 54

9. stricc – 51

10. M-Rock – 49

11. Rai – 48

12. ILLoKWENT – 47

13. Jason – 44

14. Punk – 43

15. Askari – 39

16. Celsius – 38

17. Row – 37

18. Ticket – 36

19. Esso – 31

20. THA DUKE AND ALL-BORO – 30

=22. Manhattan, GRizzEAT AND reEFer – 28

=25. Real Talk AND Edgeworth – 27

27. SIXX-SHOTT – 26

=26. Rant, Shodan AND Skitt_Blazin – 24

=29. Mayneak AND Dissizit – 23

31. YC – 22

=32. DaDDiO, Kiwi Peewee AND Wonder Gurl – 21

=35. Brutally Honest, Illimit, LEFT FIELD AND Meta4 – 20

39. Aggo – 19

40. Obey – 17

=41. Danger Rich, FiNAL WoRD, Mikey DeNiro, Stotty Pimpin AND 2FUEL – 16

=46. DJ WENJAY, LunaticK, SBT The Messiah, Krhyme Killz, TalkSick, Wonderbred – 15

=52. BizzyOne, Fiji Osa, RhetoriK, Strat AND TRE – 13

=57. Ferno, Fidel Z AND GOOD GRIEF – 12

=60. DeNiro B Milk AND OLDE ENGLISH – 11

[Kiwi Peewee]

The Greatest Of: Champions (Kiwi's Edition)

This article is basically the same as RULE's The Greatest Of: Champions, except it's more comprehensive. The point is to provide a quantifiable way of ranking successful battlers across all formats on the site. The top 60 are included here.

The Scoring System:

Each battler is ranked on the number of points they have earned over their career across any number of accounts on LetsBeef. Points are awarded for the following achievements, every time someone accomplishes that achievement (so for instance the 2x HOFers get 20 points overall from that category):

Audio/Text/Track Hall Of Fame Inductee – 10 points
Audio/Text/Video Grand Champion – 5 points
Audio/Text/Video GC Finalist – 5 points
Audio/Text/Video Secondary Champion – 3 points
Audio/Text/Video Secondary Finalist – 3 points
Tag Team or Rookie Champion – 2 points
Tag Team or Rookie Finalist – 2 points
LBA/LBT/LBTT/THC Title Match Victory* – 1 point
LBA/LBT/LBTT/THC Title Match Appearance** – 1 point
Cypher Competition Winner – 2 points
Cypher Competition Placing – 1 point
Major Track Competition 1st place – 5 points
Major Track Competition 2nd place – 3 points
Major Track Competition 3rd place – 2 points
Minor Track/Music Video Competition 1st place – 3 points
Minor Track/Music Video Competition 2nd place – 2 points
Minor Track/Music Video Competition 3rd place – 1 point
Battle/Cypher/Track-related LB Award – 1 point

* Victories via no-show are not counted

** Unsuccessful challenges that are part of an unrelated tournament are not counted

So, with that out of the way, let's get onto the rankings!

The Rankings:

1. Lockhart – 168

2. Bleu – 141

3. RULE – 86

4. UNKNOWN ARTIST – 75

5. Seul – 68

6. Dono – 62

7. Erupt – 60

8. Phil Banks – 54

9. stricc – 51

10. M-Rock – 49

11. Rai – 48

12. ILLoKWENT – 47

13. Jason – 44

14. Punk – 43

15. Askari – 39

16. Celsius – 38

17. Row – 37

18. Ticket – 36

19. Esso – 31

20. THA DUKE AND ALL-BORO – 30

=22. Manhattan, GRizzEAT AND reEFer – 28

=25. Real Talk AND Edgeworth – 27

27. SIXX-SHOTT – 26

=26. Rant, Shodan AND Skitt_Blazin – 24

=29. Mayneak AND Dissizit – 23

31. YC – 22

=32. DaDDiO, Kiwi Peewee AND Wonder Gurl – 21

=35. Brutally Honest, Illimit, LEFT FIELD AND Meta4 – 20

39. Aggo – 19

40. Obey – 17

=41. Danger Rich, FiNAL WoRD, Mikey DeNiro, Stotty Pimpin AND 2FUEL – 16

=46. DJ WENJAY, LunaticK, SBT The Messiah, Krhyme Killz, TalkSick, Wonderbred – 15

=52. BizzyOne, Fiji Osa, RhetoriK, Strat AND TRE – 13

=57. Ferno, Fidel Z AND GOOD GRIEF – 12

=60. DeNiro B Milk AND OLDE ENGLISH – 11

[Edgeworth]

Interesting system, appreciate taking the time!

[Edgeworth]

Interesting system, appreciate taking the time!

[ALL-BORO]

Appreciate the recognition and i am humbled to even be considered for the list. Great job sir RESPECT.

[ALL-BORO]

Appreciate the recognition and i am humbled to even be considered for the list. Great job sir RESPECT.

[NOBLE]

I wouldn't include LBA/LBT wins because that automatically gives the newer guys a leg up over the older guys who were around when LBT/LBA didn't exist yet.

[NOBLE]

I wouldn't include LBA/LBT wins because that automatically gives the newer guys a leg up over the older guys who were around when LBT/LBA didn't exist yet.

Originally Posted by NOBLE

I wouldn't include LBA/LBT wins because that automatically gives the newer guys a leg up over the older guys who were around when LBT/LBA didn't exist yet.

I would because it’s supposed to hold some sort of prestige. Seeing that there’s only 2 major site titles on the site, they should be considered very important. It’s about growth as a platform. And no ones stopping the older guys from coming back and winning a major title. Skitt and Boro for example are 2 old heads battling for LBA.

Dope list Talent.

Originally Posted by NOBLE

I wouldn't include LBA/LBT wins because that automatically gives the newer guys a leg up over the older guys who were around when LBT/LBA didn't exist yet.

I would because it’s supposed to hold some sort of prestige. Seeing that there’s only 2 major site titles on the site, they should be considered very important. It’s about growth as a platform. And no ones stopping the older guys from coming back and winning a major title. Skitt and Boro for example are 2 old heads battling for LBA.

Dope list Talent.

[NOBLE]

Originally Posted by P u n k

I would because it’s supposed to hold some sort of prestige. Seeing that there’s only 2 major site titles on the site, they should be considered very important. It’s about growth as a platform. And no ones stopping the older guys from coming back and winning a major title. Skitt and Boro for example are 2 old heads battling for LBA.

Dope list Talent.

Some of those guys are never coming back. That's just a reality. If the whole point is to make an accurate comparison and then rank guys based on that comparison, you can't use factors that didn't exist when some guys were around. That's like ranking NBA greats and using the Slam Dunk contest as part of the rubric. There's no telling how Jerry West, for example, would've done in the Slam Dunk contest because it wasn't around when he was active. So it's a bit unfair to rate newer guys above him or give them more points because they won such contests and he didn't. You'd have to use (as much as possible) factors that have always been around to even the playing field when comparing guys from different eras.

[NOBLE]

Originally Posted by P u n k

I would because it’s supposed to hold some sort of prestige. Seeing that there’s only 2 major site titles on the site, they should be considered very important. It’s about growth as a platform. And no ones stopping the older guys from coming back and winning a major title. Skitt and Boro for example are 2 old heads battling for LBA.

Dope list Talent.

Some of those guys are never coming back. That's just a reality. If the whole point is to make an accurate comparison and then rank guys based on that comparison, you can't use factors that didn't exist when some guys were around. That's like ranking NBA greats and using the Slam Dunk contest as part of the rubric. There's no telling how Jerry West, for example, would've done in the Slam Dunk contest because it wasn't around when he was active. So it's a bit unfair to rate newer guys above him or give them more points because they won such contests and he didn't. You'd have to use (as much as possible) factors that have always been around to even the playing field when comparing guys from different eras.

[Svengali]

These threads are always fun but of course that's all they will ever be because ranking people from different generations is difficult to do especially when the associated achievements change.

Here's an interesting thing that doesn't get accounted for in the formula though. When I was looking through the Hall of Fame UNKNOWN ARTIST's record struck me as the most impressive 282 wins, 5 losses. Not only that but he avenged four of those losses. Tournaments aren't the only measure of someone's achievement after all.

[Svengali]

These threads are always fun but of course that's all they will ever be because ranking people from different generations is difficult to do especially when the associated achievements change.

Here's an interesting thing that doesn't get accounted for in the formula though. When I was looking through the Hall of Fame UNKNOWN ARTIST's record struck me as the most impressive 282 wins, 5 losses. Not only that but he avenged four of those losses. Tournaments aren't the only measure of someone's achievement after all.

[Shodan]

Originally Posted by P u n k

I would because it’s supposed to hold some sort of prestige. Seeing that there’s only 2 major site titles on the site, they should be considered very important. It’s about growth as a platform. And no ones stopping the older guys from coming back and winning a major title. Skitt and Boro for example are 2 old heads battling for LBA.

Dope list Talent.

Aren't you supposed to be permabanned?

Also, huge props for taking the time to do this @Lil Talent. What I'd also like to see is the "raw data" of who won what and when. The records haven't necessarily been cleanly kept as far as I know, and it looks like you've already done the footwork to collect the pieces.

[Shodan]

Originally Posted by P u n k

I would because it’s supposed to hold some sort of prestige. Seeing that there’s only 2 major site titles on the site, they should be considered very important. It’s about growth as a platform. And no ones stopping the older guys from coming back and winning a major title. Skitt and Boro for example are 2 old heads battling for LBA.

Dope list Talent.

Aren't you supposed to be permabanned?

Also, huge props for taking the time to do this @Lil Talent. What I'd also like to see is the "raw data" of who won what and when. The records haven't necessarily been cleanly kept as far as I know, and it looks like you've already done the footwork to collect the pieces.

[NOBLE]

Originally Posted by Svengali

These threads are always fun but of course that's all they will ever be because ranking people from different generations is difficult to do especially when the associated achievements change.

Here's an interesting thing that doesn't get accounted for in the formula though. When I was looking through the Hall of Fame UNKNOWN ARTIST's record struck me as the most impressive 282 wins, 5 losses. Not only that but he avenged four of those losses. Tournaments aren't the only measure of someone's achievement after all.

Another thing is the number of tournaments has increased over the years. So I would weigh tournament wins against the total number of tournaments available in that arena through the calendar year when it was won. Someone winning two tournaments when there were only 4 tournaments available is more impressive than someone winning two tournaments when there are 8 available.

[NOBLE]

Originally Posted by Svengali

These threads are always fun but of course that's all they will ever be because ranking people from different generations is difficult to do especially when the associated achievements change.

Here's an interesting thing that doesn't get accounted for in the formula though. When I was looking through the Hall of Fame UNKNOWN ARTIST's record struck me as the most impressive 282 wins, 5 losses. Not only that but he avenged four of those losses. Tournaments aren't the only measure of someone's achievement after all.

Another thing is the number of tournaments has increased over the years. So I would weigh tournament wins against the total number of tournaments available in that arena through the calendar year when it was won. Someone winning two tournaments when there were only 4 tournaments available is more impressive than someone winning two tournaments when there are 8 available.

Originally Posted by NOBLE

Some of those guys are never coming back. That's just a reality. If the whole point is to make an accurate comparison and then rank guys based on that comparison, you can't use factors that didn't exist when some guys were around. That's like ranking NBA greats and using the Slam Dunk contest as part of the rubric. There's no telling how Jerry West, for example, would've done in the Slam Dunk contest because it wasn't around when he was active. So it's a bit unfair to rate newer guys above him or give them more points because they won such contests and he didn't. You'd have to use (as much as possible) factors that have always been around to even the playing field when comparing guys from different eras.

So what do we do? Any new ideas or features, we just cancel out because it wasn’t there in the beginning? There’s no telling how Jerry West would’ve done, yeah exactly yet the NBA is now ranking All-Stars based on if a team captain picks them.

Regardless, the site’s improved its features and competitions. That’s like saying ILLOKWENT didn’t become one of the greats because he’s only LBT King.

---------- Post added at 01:57 PM ---------- Previous post was at 01:55 PM ----------

Originally Posted by Shodan

Aren't you supposed to be permabanned?

Also, huge props for taking the time to do this @Lil Talent. What I'd also like to see is the "raw data" of who won what and when. The records haven't necessarily been cleanly kept as far as I know, and it looks like you've already done the footwork to collect the pieces.

Do I look permabanned? What a stupid uncalled for question. Obviously I didn’t unban myself, pedo.

Originally Posted by NOBLE

Some of those guys are never coming back. That's just a reality. If the whole point is to make an accurate comparison and then rank guys based on that comparison, you can't use factors that didn't exist when some guys were around. That's like ranking NBA greats and using the Slam Dunk contest as part of the rubric. There's no telling how Jerry West, for example, would've done in the Slam Dunk contest because it wasn't around when he was active. So it's a bit unfair to rate newer guys above him or give them more points because they won such contests and he didn't. You'd have to use (as much as possible) factors that have always been around to even the playing field when comparing guys from different eras.

So what do we do? Any new ideas or features, we just cancel out because it wasn’t there in the beginning? There’s no telling how Jerry West would’ve done, yeah exactly yet the NBA is now ranking All-Stars based on if a team captain picks them.

Regardless, the site’s improved its features and competitions. That’s like saying ILLOKWENT didn’t become one of the greats because he’s only LBT King.

---------- Post added at 01:57 PM ---------- Previous post was at 01:55 PM ----------

Originally Posted by Shodan

Aren't you supposed to be permabanned?

Also, huge props for taking the time to do this @Lil Talent. What I'd also like to see is the "raw data" of who won what and when. The records haven't necessarily been cleanly kept as far as I know, and it looks like you've already done the footwork to collect the pieces.

Do I look permabanned? What a stupid uncalled for question. Obviously I didn’t unban myself, pedo.