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 (https://www.letsbeef.com/forums/showthread.php?t=128666), 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!

[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.

[Punk]

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]

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.

[Shodan]

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]

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.

[Punk]

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 ----------

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.

[NOBLE]

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 ----------



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

ILLoKWENT did more than win LBT. Lol. He won the Concept and another orange tourney, I believe. Anyways, I am not in any way shape or form saying any new ideas or features to be cancelled. I'm simply arguing for a more nuanced way of comparing guys from different eras. If you love this list and are satisfied with the results, then that's good. More power to you and props to Lil Talent for taking the time to share his perspective.

[Punk]

ILLoKWENT did more than win LBT. Lol. He won the Concept and another orange tourney, I believe. Anyways, I am not in any way shape or form saying any new ideas or features to be cancelled. I'm simply arguing for a more nuanced way of comparing guys from different eras. If you love this list and are satisfied with the results, then that's good. More power to you and props to Lil Talent for taking the time to share his perspective.

It’s all about preferences so no ones wrong here tbh. Good to see your view on it.

[joan of arc]

blu deleted, so he lost all his accolades. row deleted and cheated, so he lsot all his accolades. just confirming that if you delete you are no longer entitled to previous accolades earned.

awesome list. i disagree with all of it, but i love this project, and loved seeing this.

great work LT

[Punk]

blu deleted, so he lost all his accolades. row deleted and cheated, so he lsot all his accolades. just confirming that if you delete you are no longer entitled to previous accolades earned.

awesome list. i disagree with all of it, but i love this project, and loved seeing this.

great work LT

Yet they’re still respected for all the work they’ve put in. So your opinion here don’t count.

[joan of arc]

Yet they’re still respected for all the work they’ve put in. So your opinion here don’t count.

i was letting lt know that the site does not consider the accolades of deleted accounts

[Kiwi Peewee]

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.

I toyed with the idea of factoring battle record into it, but decided against it for two reasons. Firstly, too many of the people in question have at least one major account deletion, so it isn’t possible to get their battle records accurately (Bleu, Lockhart, PaiNN, Row, Rant, Rai, Ticket). Secondly, because then Bnas would be GOAT :D

Finding a way to factor defeating other people on the list into the equation would be good though, although I have no idea how it would be done. But thanks for the suggestion!

---------- Post added at 08:12 AM ---------- Previous post was at 07:58 AM ----------

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.

There was consideration given to weighting tournament wins based on the number of accolades among the field that partook in the tourney? This would probably disadvantage those in the really early days when only a handful of accounts from that era got tourney wins but I guess it's the best idea I've seen for it so far.

As far as the LBT/LBA(/LBTT) belts being around only in the recent era, I think this is somewhat countered by the existence of the Letsbeef.com competitions, which mostly seemed to run in the older days and stopped several years ago. For instance, Punk only won one of them, despite being a Track HOFer, and this has substantially held back his score on the "Greatest Track Makers of All Time" sublist (speaking of which, I have sublists for Audio Battling, Text Battling & Cyphering, Video Battling and Track & Music Video Making which I may post if the interest warrants them). I'm sure there are way more LB.com competitions than are displayed in the forum page, but I have no idea where to find them, maybe uncovering these would even the playing field some more?

[NOBLE]

When did LB.com competitions start?

[Kiwi Peewee]

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.

A lot of the information had been collated by RULE, absolutely massive props to him for taking all that time, it made my job not just easier but possible. Most of the records haven't been updated since roughly the time I joined the site, which is just as well, because I did the results of everything from when the records end until now by memory. Below are all the sources I remember using:

Audio Tournaments: The History Of: LetsBeef Audio Champions (https://www.letsbeef.com/forums/showthread.php?t=103349)
Text Tournaments: The History Of: LetsBeef Text Champions (https://www.letsbeef.com/forums/showthread.php?t=99225)
Video Tournaments: The History Of: LetsBeef Video Champions (https://www.letsbeef.com/forums/showthread.php?t=126398) and Lets Beef (And LOCKHART) Proudly Present: The Bars For Bling Video Battle Tournament (https://www.letsbeef.com/forums/showthread.php?t=140762)
LBA: The History Of: The LBA Championship (https://www.letsbeef.com/forums/showthread.php?t=117357)
LBT: The History Of: The LBT Championship (https://www.letsbeef.com/forums/showthread.php?t=122438)
LBTT: The History Of: The LBTT Championship (https://www.letsbeef.com/forums/showthread.php?t=149450)
LB.com Contests Forum Section: LetsBeef.com Contests > WINNERS (https://www.letsbeef.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=500)
Audio HOF Inductees: Resolved Audio Nominations (https://www.letsbeef.com/forums/showthread.php?t=102987)
Text HOF Inductees: Resolved [Text] Nominations (https://www.letsbeef.com/forums/showthread.php?t=102986)
Track HOF Inductees: Resolved Track Nominations (https://www.letsbeef.com/forums/showthread.php?t=102989)
LB Awards: The History Of: The LetsBeef Awards (https://www.letsbeef.com/forums/showthread.php?t=125080)

The table with all the information that I used to make this is in a Microsoft Excel Spreadsheet, I can send it to you anyone that is really curious to tinker with if they want to.

[Nicholas]

i was letting lt know that the site does not consider the accolades of deleted accounts

The site being three users? Let the show roll on LT.

NOTE: RULE already put this kind of system together years ago. Official thread is here: https://www.letsbeef.com/forums/showthread.php?t=128666

[Kiwi Peewee]

When did LB.com competitions start?

My mistake, the earliest records I can find date from 2011. I do think it's an issue that battlers from the 2006-2009 period are very difficult to accurately rank, although a lot of them are HOF despite not having any titles so I guess that somewhat evens things out, for instance WAR TANK/Warren Peece is =61st. I guess a rankings list based purely on talent and ability not results is the only way to give the 2000's battlers a shot at being top unfortunately.

[RULE]

Fantastic collection here LT.

Its a very difficult job to do, as the amount of tourneys & the creation of LBA & LBT after 2012(ish) makes it very hard to form an objective display on who's accolades are the more impressive.

At the end of the day things like "best, greatest etc ect" are subjective, but putting together a list like this always helps the conversation.

Great stuff my man!

1/

[Kiwi Peewee]

blu deleted, so he lost all his accolades. row deleted and cheated, so he lsot all his accolades. just confirming that if you delete you are no longer entitled to previous accolades earned.

awesome list. i disagree with all of it, but i love this project, and loved seeing this.

great work LT

Thanks guts, although my decision is basically that only when titles are actually switched over to people that lost finals to Row will I switch the points over. Or, for instance, if Bleu's HOF induction pages are deleted (which hopefully never happens), then I'll take away his points.

Thanks to everyone showing love for this, it took a lot of time and effort and struggling with Microsoft Office so its great to know people enjoyed it :)

[Shodan]

Now I want to battle Mayneak.

[Supsie]

Now I want to battle Mayneak.

Ud get wrecked..

[Phil Banks]

I think anyone active before 2012 should be given a curve coz back then it was harder to win with the amount of dope people.... alot of later guys myself included had GC's that were bascially one or two hard battles an the rest cake walks if that. Said the same shit in Rule's thread guys like UA, Ticket even Boro had a harder road to a win than later winners did.

[Locchart]

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.

Comparing battle rappers to NBA Legends isn't an accurate analogy. People obviously can't compete at a high level in the NBA for more than 10-15 years, so yeah it's fair to say you can't compare between different eras because the game changes (which is why the MJ/LeBron debate will never hold any weight because the game is drastically different now in comparison to what it was then).

However, battle rappers don't have that problem. Battle rappers and rappers in general have the ability to evolve with the culture changes. Whether they choose to or not is completely up to them. Look at ALL-BORO, for instance. He started on LB well before LBA/LBT ever existed and he's the current LBA Champion. That's an accomplishment taken away from him that he earned all because of the rest of the people from his era aren't active anymore when they choose not to be. Is that fair to BORO? Absolutely not. What makes the old heads anymore special to where LBA/LBT can't be counted against them when one of their own from that era won it and is dominating with it as we speak?

Idk, I'm just not in to the whole handicapping thing with LBA/LBT, as it's been an important aspect of the site since it was first revived by RULE (s/o to RULE for that, btw).

What's everyone else's thoughts on it?

[The Ghost of Freak]

Jimmy Hoffa I personally think battle rap is garbage for garbage people. The fact that I'm not still banned is a failure of the moderators. g u t s


LBA is dookie business and deserves no creedence in a point system. Grand Champs are also dookie. Battle rap is likeblood sport for hateful manchildren.

PBS Special: Self esteem issues and insecurities are real, check yo self first you wreck yoself.

---------- Post added at 02:20 PM ---------- Previous post was at 02:19 PM ----------

Also, did Edgeworth and Seul pull the trigger on the shotgun wedding yet?

---------- Post added at 02:21 PM ---------- Previous post was at 02:20 PM ----------

Bet y'all are happy I'm back, right? 🔥 🔥 🔥 🔥

---------- Post added at 02:22 PM ---------- Previous post was at 02:21 PM ----------

Permaban me plz.

[NOBLE]

Comparing battle rappers to NBA Legends isn't an accurate analogy. People obviously can't compete at a high level in the NBA for more than 10-15 years, so yeah it's fair to say you can't compare between different eras because the game changes (which is why the MJ/LeBron debate will never hold any weight because the game is drastically different now in comparison to what it was then).

However, battle rappers don't have that problem. Battle rappers and rappers in general have the ability to evolve with the culture changes. Whether they choose to or not is completely up to them. Look at ALL-BORO, for instance. He started on LB well before LBA/LBT ever existed and he's the current LBA Champion. That's an accomplishment taken away from him that he earned all because of the rest of the people from his era aren't active anymore when they choose not to be. Is that fair to BORO? Absolutely not. What makes the old heads anymore special to where LBA/LBT can't be counted against them when one of their own from that era won it and is dominating with it as we speak?

Idk, I'm just not in to the whole handicapping thing with LBA/LBT, as it's been an important aspect of the site since it was first revived by RULE (s/o to RULE for that, btw).

What's everyone else's thoughts on it?

For me, its not so much about the LBA/LBT as it is about total number of tournaments/ways of earning points available to the battlers and how much of that they win. I get what you're saying in that there's nothing stopping the old heads from coming back and that if they did, the LBT/LBA and all the new tournaments would be just as available to them as it is to those currently active. What I'm saying is if someone only had 4 tournaments available to them during the calendar year and they win two of them, that's 50 percent, whereas someone who has 10 tournaments available and wins two is at 20 percent. Both racked two tournament wins each, but I would consider the one who won 50 percent to be more successful whereas with this list, they're counted equally and its not weighted.

[Kiwi Peewee]

NOBLE Phil Banks Jimmy Hoffa

Regarding adjusting scores based on time period: If it's available, the raw data on this would be so helpful. The problem is idk if it can be found, but if it can, here's what I would do: Take the top 10,000 most highly ranked accounts on the site in text and maybe the top 5,000 in audio. Sort them by years active, so you'd exclude people like ALL-BORO whose runs transcend across multiple eras to make it easier. Maybe just split them into people who were primarily active in 2006-2009, 2010-2015, 2016-2020. Then, you work out how many points under this system everyone in the rankings would have, and use that to format a half-bell-curve (90% or more would have 0 points obviously so it wouldn't be a full bell-curve). You could then work out how the score distributions differed by era, so for instance "the top 0.5% of battlers in the 2000s got >20 points, the top 5% got >5 points, the top 10% got >0 points; whereas from 2010-2015 the top 0.5% got >30 points, the top 5% got >15 points and the top 10% got >3 points" and then use some form of mathematical modelling or something to adjust each battler's scores based on their time period.

However, I think that this kind of system is more like a "pound for pound greatest boxer of all time" discussion. The thing about "pound for pound" type discussions is that its always going to be more effective to make a subjective call based on talent rather than trying to use statistics.

Also, no-ones mentioned it, but I think that whether achievements were in audio or text needs to be taken into account as well, relative to the time period in which they were earned. In 2006, the audio GC I think carried much more weight than the text, because the text side of the site was really underdeveloped. THA DUKE's accomplishment should probably be worth more than SpleNDiD. However, in 2019, I think a text win is probably more noteworthy than an audio win. For instance, in the latest audio GC, there were 15 people signed up, almost half of whom no-showed in the first round or something like that, and it reached the point where I actually signed up for it purely because I felt bad that such a prestigious tournament couldn't find 16 participants. Not to take anything away from Boro's phenomenal achievement, because the quality of the battlers that remained was impressive, but the competition for text titles is currently much more heated than audio imo. Just my thoughts though, I'd be interested to see what people have to say.

[Phracture]

26 not bad lol

[Obey]

Wow, awesome system here. Also great to see I made the list; glad I stopped by today.

[Kiwi Peewee]

Updated.

Big congrats to Rieper for overtaking Bleu as the most successful battler in LB history according to my system!

[EtH]

Updated.

Big congrats to Rieper for overtaking Bleu as the most successful battler in LB history according to my system!

Most winningest Champion on LB history.... So why couldn't the cunt get me to the tag final?

[Rai]

Most winningest Champion on LB history.... So why couldn't the cunt get me to the tag final?

Beacause half the verse was yours lol idk.

Got Shodan there last tag though.

[EtH]

Beacause half the verse was yours lol idk.

Got Shodan there last tag though.

If I could drag Punk to a final the least Lock could do is get me to a title.

[Seul]

Just seeing this now, thank's for putting this together. Also, suggesting that LBT/LBA shouldn't be included is kind of dumb, for starters, LBA/LBT isn't even that THAT new, people like stricc were holding on their titles too, suggesting that we would have to conform to a system that applies to people that were here from the stone age is kind of stupid, imo of course.

[Kiwi Peewee]

Updated with the latest round of GCs. Congrats to Lock and Bleu for separating themselves even further from the rest of the pack!

[Kiwi Peewee]

Updated again.