Realrhasta Posted June 29, 2010 Report Share Posted June 29, 2010 Some people say that you can only judge a fighter from his last fight. Some people say that you need to judge an entire career of a fighter. Fedor fought Werdum and lost, proving that Werdum was better then Fedor that night. Brock fought Frank Mir(ranked #4 at the date) 8 months ago, proving that Brock was better then Mir that night. Werdum beat Antonio Silva (~#10 at that date, 13-1 in records) 8 months ago aswell. This by my logic would make the following top 3 ranking in the HW div. 1. Werdum 2. Fedor 3. Brock You can allways ask your self who you think would win between Antonio vs Mir, but in my mind it doesn't matter since Werdum beat the #1 guy. When it comes to the classic p4p-ranking it's harder. First of all we have to agree on the paramters needed to determine what it is. For me, pound for pound would be the fighter that dominates his weightclass the best. You can allways say that "HW division is so bad" , why is that? Only one fighter have bin finnishing top guys in the same weight division in the first round, Fedor. Fedor have not only done it for a few years, he have bin doing it since 2002 (beat Semmy Schilt and heath herring) Anderson Silva was very dominant in his early UFC apperences with wins over leben and franklin. Those wins were 2006, in 2008 he starting to having trouble finishing fights against Patric Cote, Thales Leites and then Demian Maia. While Fedor finished Arlowski, Tim sylvia in the first round and Brett Rogers in the second round with clean stoppages. Gsp have had an amazing career and since his loss to Matt Serra (2007) he has won 7 fights with 3 stoppages (2* round 2 and 1*round 4). He is very dominating in his weight division but seems to have a problem with finishing fights. Bj Penn came back down to LW div in the UFC 2007 and fought Jens Pulver for the Tuf5 final. He got the belt from Sean Sherk 2008, lost to GSP 2009. Won against Florian and Sanchez later in 2009 and lost the belt to Frankie Edgar. What I can make out of this is that Fedor allways bin #1 p4p until Werdum beat him. Since both Bj Penn and Fedor lost, they are not #1. So it's either GSP or Anderson Silva. 7 Win streak since August 25, 2007 or 12 win streak since April 22, 2006. For me, Anderson Silva is the most dominant fighter in his weight class and showed that he also can move up in weight and beat fighters there (Irvin and Forrest) This is my opinion. Feel free to comment, keep it to the topic and have a nice day. Sorry for any spelling errors. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FatBoy Posted June 29, 2010 Report Share Posted June 29, 2010 For heavyweight rankings, the winner of Brock/Shane should definitely be #1, JDS #2 Werdum #3, Fedor #4, Loser of Brock/Shane #5. This seems fairly self-explanatory. Fedor just lost, so he can't be #1 anymore. Werdum, despite beating the #1 fighter in his last fight, just recently got KTFO by another fighter in the top 10. You can't be ranked above people you've lost to just because of 1 win. If Frank Mir went out tomorrow and subbed Fedor, he still wouldn't be #1 because he just lost to Brock & Shane. As far as the P4P debate, the criteria is much more relative and speculative, therefor more open for debate. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Realrhasta Posted June 29, 2010 Author Report Share Posted June 29, 2010 For heavyweight rankings, the winner of Brock/Shane should definitely be #1, JDS #2 Werdum #3, Fedor #4, Loser of Brock/Shane #5. This seems fairly self-explanatory. Fedor just lost, so he can't be #1 anymore. Werdum, despite beating the #1 fighter in his last fight, just recently got KTFO by another fighter in the top 10. You can't be ranked above people you've lost to just because of 1 win. If Frank Mir went out tomorrow and subbed Fedor, he still wouldn't be #1 because he just lost to Brock & Shane. As far as the P4P debate, the criteria is much more relative and speculative, therefor more open for debate. JDS knocked werdum out 1.5 years ago, and I already talked about the problem with a "present" ranking where you are only as good as your last fight. Same year, Brock got subbed by Mir and then faced 2 fighters outside top10. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jacky67 Posted June 29, 2010 Report Share Posted June 29, 2010 middleweight and welterweight are always struglling to finish fights because they have less power but more cardio . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FatBoy Posted June 29, 2010 Report Share Posted June 29, 2010 I'd say 2 years at least would be the cutoff for losses. Brock has avenged his loss, Werdum hasn't. Saying you're only as good as your last fight is essentially looking at the state of MMA in a vacuum. If Ray Mercer knocked out Fedor, would he magically become #1? Fedor only has 1 win over a fighter who has beaten a current top 10 heavyweight. Fedor is no doubt the greatest heavyweight of all time, but not the greatest heavyweight now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Realrhasta Posted June 29, 2010 Author Report Share Posted June 29, 2010 I'd say 2 years at least would be the cutoff for losses. Brock has avenged his loss, Werdum hasn't. Saying you're only as good as your last fight is essentially looking at the state of MMA in a vacuum. If Ray Mercer knocked out Fedor, would he magically become #1? Fedor only has 1 win over a fighter who has beaten a current top 10 heavyweight. Fedor is no doubt the greatest heavyweight of all time, but not the greatest heavyweight now. So if I understand you. Fedor beats werdum in a rematch and he is back to #1 in your opinion? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FatBoy Posted June 29, 2010 Report Share Posted June 29, 2010 I think the winner of Brock/Shane will be #1 until someone defeats one of them. If Fedor went out and totally smashed Werdum, I could see him being #2, maybe #1 if he beats Overeem & Werdum decisively. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 29, 2010 Report Share Posted June 29, 2010 Why do we have to rank them? It seems like it's more useful to just say "that guy is a good fighter, that guy is also a good fighter, let's watch them fight". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jiggy Posted June 29, 2010 Report Share Posted June 29, 2010 I think P4P it's pretty obvious Anderson Silva is #1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FatBoy Posted June 29, 2010 Report Share Posted June 29, 2010 Why do we have to rank them? It seems like it's more useful to just say "that guy is a good fighter, that guy is also a good fighter, let's watch them fight". I think a ranking system is good, it helps make wins more meaningful and puts fights into perspective. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 30, 2010 Report Share Posted June 30, 2010 You are never going to get serious rankings on a forum. Fact is there are to many Nutriders of one Org or another who change their logic or have screwed up logic. Like anyone who says Werdum is #1 because he beat #1. Thats just dumb. If Werdum isnt the best fighter he shouldnt be #1. People can get wins for many reason it dont automatically make them better than everyone else. If you rank this way how couldnt ANYONE in the UFC or another org ever be #1? They cant. The #1 ranking will be stuck in that org and passed around forever. Its flawed logic to allow people to nutride a promotion and hate on another by making a mockery of the rankings. Its one thing to have Werdum #1 if there is reason to do so. Based on 1 win and jumping him 10 spots is a joke. Fedor deserves to keep his #1 more than Werdum derserves to jump to #1. I dont have either at #1 but still have Fedor higher. A rankings should be a snap shot of the best fighters in a division. If someone asks me who the best HW is im sure as hell am not saying Werdum. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted July 1, 2010 Report Share Posted July 1, 2010 Weight rankings should be based on who you'd put money on to win a fight. In that case I'd still have Fedor over Werdum. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FatBoy Posted July 1, 2010 Report Share Posted July 1, 2010 Weight rankings should be based on who you'd put money on to win a fight. In that case I'd still have Fedor over Werdum. In order for rankings to be effective and not merely the basis of biases, they have the be based almost purely on a fighter's accomplishments. It's not about who a fighter can hypothetically beat, it's only about what they have actually done. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted July 1, 2010 Report Share Posted July 1, 2010 In order for rankings to be effective and not merely the basis of biases, they have the be based almost purely on a fighter's accomplishments. It's not about who a fighter can hypothetically beat, it's only about what they have actually done. What are odds based off of ? Wouldn't they be based off of a lot of the same things as rankings ? The beauty of odds is that you can take into account things like how the fight was won. Who would you put money on in a rematch and who would you have higher in the rankings ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted July 2, 2010 Report Share Posted July 2, 2010 Weight rankings should be based on who you'd put money on to win a fight. In that case I'd still have Fedor over Werdum. Thats crazy. Styles match fights. I wouldnt pick any one fighter to beat everyone so who i bet on depends on who they are fighting. I would bet on Fedor over Werdum. But i would take Santos to beat Brock and Fedor. But that dont mean Santos should be ranked higher than Brock right now. I would bet on Santos over Fedor even money before Fedor lost. Yet i still ranked Fedor #1. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted July 2, 2010 Report Share Posted July 2, 2010 What are odds based off of ? Wouldn't they be based off of a lot of the same things as rankings ? The beauty of odds is that you can take into account things like how the fight was won. Who would you put money on in a rematch and who would you have higher in the rankings ? Odds are based on where the majority of the betting money has went. It has nothing to do with skills but who people are betting on which lots of times is just a popularity contest. Lots of other factors. You cant use odds as a way to rank people. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted July 3, 2010 Report Share Posted July 3, 2010 Thats crazy. Styles match fights. I wouldnt pick any one fighter to beat everyone so who i bet on depends on who they are fighting. I would bet on Fedor over Werdum. But i would take Santos to beat Brock and Fedor. But that dont mean Santos should be ranked higher than Brock right now. I would bet on Santos over Fedor even money before Fedor lost. Yet i still ranked Fedor #1. I get what you're saying, but why would you rank Brock higher than Santos now if you think Brock would lose to Santos ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thegroovemonkey Posted July 3, 2010 Report Share Posted July 3, 2010 I think P4P it's pretty obvious Anderson Silva is #1 Except that Shogun would slap the taste out of his mouth. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
genghisjohn Posted July 3, 2010 Report Share Posted July 3, 2010 I disagree. While I give all the credit in the world to Werdum for his victory over Fedor, I do not consider him the better fighter. Fedor made a dumb mistake and fell into Werdum's guard and tried to ground n' pound his way out whether than remaining calm and trying to escape technically. In my opinion, top 5 heavyweight are: 1. Brock Lesnar - guy's a monster, his wrestling and physical abilities (especially his strength) make him the top fighter in the HW division in my book. 2. Fedor Emilianenko - I know he lost, but he's the most well-rounded fighter in the HW world (and quite possible in MMA) and I'm hoping this loss doesn't deter him from continuing to strive for excellence. 3. Shane Carwin - What he did to Frank Mir was incredible. He knocked him out with short punches from the clinch position. He's a monster, but I don't think he has what it takes to get past Lesnar. 4. Alistair Overeem - I know this one's out of left field, but he's on a 8 fight win streak and looked nothing short of spectacular in his win over Rogers. He's well-rounded, but his striking is what's most impressive. I hope to see him in the UFC eventually. 5. Junior Dos Santos - the guy's boxing is the most impressive aspect of his game, the angles, speed, and accuracy of his punches are almost incomparable in MMA. I think he'll get tested when they put him up against a top-notch wrestler though (Velasquez, Carwin, etc). In the mean time, his punches are tearing up his opponents in the UFC. Honorable Mention: Cain Velasquez, Fabricio Werdum, Frank Mir, Cheick Kongo, Bobby Lashley, Randy Couture Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.