MMA RANKINGS - CHAPTER 2...

I like dynamic rankings and not MMAth reliant rankings which miss the big picture and don't tell an accurate story of who really are the best fighters. Just me.

I don't think that's fair on the fighters. It should be based on results only.

The point of rankings in fight sports has always been so that future people would be able to look back and have a glimpse of what was going on in a given division at that point in time. It's not about who is the most skilled, but who has been beating the best competition. It's why every single ranking done by a major MMA website/magazine had Brock Lesnar at number 1 after beating Carwin, yet almost no MMA journalists picked Brock to beat Cain. If the rankings were about who was most skilled, Cain would never have had to beat Brock to become the top Heavyweight. Or BJ Penn would have still been the number 1 lightweight even after his loss to Frankie. Or Anderson would've been number one at light heavyweight when he was fighting there. Fortunately, that's not how it's done. It's simply about who'd you beat, and how'd you do it. This is how rankings have always been done, and it's how they should be done here.

Wolfgangsta wrote:

I like dynamic rankings and not MMAth reliant rankings which miss the big picture and don't tell an accurate story of who really are the best fighters. Just me.

Dynamic rankings are the ones that don't tell an accurate story of the big picture. They simply tell who the most skilled fighters are, and there is definitely a place for that, it's called P4P rankings. The point of divisional rankings is to show what has actually happened, not who's the better fighter.

Chorky just said it better than anybody could have.

freakzilla316ftw wrote:

Wolfgangsta wrote:

freakzilla316ftw wrote:

Rankings aren't based on who beats who, they are based on who did beat who.

No they aren't. They're based on a lot of things.

That's why people have retarded rankings. It should be based on victories only.

Machida beat Rashad.. Machida beat shogun.. Shogun beat Machida.. Rampage beat Machida.. Shogun beat Rampage.. Rashad beat Rampage.. Forrest beat Rampage.. Rashad beat Forrest.

Some say Rampage beat Forrest.. some say Shogun beat Machida twice.. some say Machida beat Rampage...

RANK THEM PLEASE!!!!!!!!!




I have Machida as the #2 Ranked LHW in the world.. with wins over Shogun, Rashad, and RAMPAGE.

Rampage did beat Forrest
Shogun did beat Machida twice
Machida didn't beat Rampage
Shogun beat Rampage more than 5 years ago so that has no influence on current rankings

In the Rashad, Rampage and Machida triangle I guess you can rank the 3 in any order you want but I go by the latest fights and I have Machida losing 3 fights in a row now.

freakzilla316ftw wrote:

Rampage did beat Forrest
Shogun did beat Machida twice
Machida didn't beat Rampage
Shogun beat Rampage more than 5 years ago so that has no influence on current rankings

In the Rashad, Rampage and Machida triangle I guess you can rank the 3 in any order you want but I go by the latest fights and I have Machida losing 3 fights in a row now.

well you are not going by just victories than.

because Machida did Win in Machida vs Shogun I .. regardless of how you scored it..

Nearly everyone besides the 3 judges scored it to Rua.

freakzilla316ftw wrote:

Nearly everyone besides the 3 judges scored it to Rua.

wrong.

You honestly had Machida winning it?

There were quite a few people who had Machida winning the first fight. I was not one of them personally but as close a fight as it was is it that hard to figure that more than just the judges would have?

Smells like contradictions in here.

Wolfgangsta wrote:

I like dynamic rankings and not MMAth reliant rankings which miss the big picture and don't tell an accurate story of who really are the best fighters. Just me.

Logic would say your right. That's why some disagree.

I rank on who is the best not just wins and losses. That's why I can rank Fedor ahead of Werdum, that's why I've never had Serra ranked above GSP, ever, that's why Cain was my #1 HW after Fedor lost that's why Brock isn't top ten. All the best fighters don't get to fight each other so how anyone can argue ranks are only about wins is beyond me and a extremely narrow view to carry into this endeavor.

How you can rank fighters and completely ignore wins and losses is beyond Me.

Who is completely ignoring wins and losses?

GDPofDRC wrote:

Wolfgangsta wrote:

I like dynamic rankings and not MMAth reliant rankings which miss the big picture and don't tell an accurate story of who really are the best fighters. Just me.

Logic would say your right. That's why some disagree.

I rank on who is the best not just wins and losses. That's why I can rank Fedor ahead of Werdum, that's why I've never had Serra ranked above GSP, ever, that's why Cain was my #1 HW after Fedor lost that's why Brock isn't top ten. All the best fighters don't get to fight each other so how anyone can argue ranks are only about wins is beyond me and a extremely narrow view to carry into this endeavor.

I'm with you 100%.

GDPofDRC wrote:

Who is completely ignoring wins and losses?

You are by having Carwin and Mir ahead of Brock. Lollllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll at Mir ahead of Brock.

OU wrote:

GDPofDRC wrote:

Wolfgangsta wrote:

I like dynamic rankings and not MMAth reliant rankings which miss the big picture and don't tell an accurate story of who really are the best fighters. Just me.

Logic would say your right. That's why some disagree.

I rank on who is the best not just wins and losses. That's why I can rank Fedor ahead of Werdum, that's why I've never had Serra ranked above GSP, ever, that's why Cain was my #1 HW after Fedor lost that's why Brock isn't top ten. All the best fighters don't get to fight each other so how anyone can argue ranks are only about wins is beyond me and a extremely narrow view to carry into this endeavor.

I'm with you 100%.

You agree with someone who has Frank Mir ahead of Brock? Do your rankings then or are you scared?

This whole debate is a painful reminder of why I have zero interest to post any rankings on this site. Not saying I agree with Frank over Brock. But GDP is 100% correct with his thought process toward voting. He is the voice of reason in this mind numbing thread.

freakzilla316ftw wrote:

GDPofDRC wrote:

Who is completely ignoring wins and losses?

You are by having Carwin and Mir ahead of Brock. Lollllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll at Mir ahead of Brock.

I'm capable of seeing more than wins and losses, you might get there one day Freak.

Rankings are for wins and losses. Fuck, I feel like i've taken crazy pills.