GSP is GOAT, and it's not even close: A lazy Sunday morning coffee discussion

[MiroHa]

Rogers was never anything close to top 100, let alone top 10.

Hindsight is 20/20. When Rogers KO'd Arlovski he was a top 5 HW and had been on a tear before losing to Fedor in his previous fight.

 

[turbotime]

Hindsight is 20/20. When Rogers KO'd Arlovski he was a top 5 HW and had been on a tear before losing to Fedor in his previous fight.

Proves just how historically shallow the heavyweight division is. It is very top heavy, wasn't Arlovski like #3 when Fedor fought him LMAO

 

[ScarHead]

GSP lost two fights in his 20's.

Fedor lost three fights in his 30's and one in his 40's.

Pretty much a wash.

If anything, its worse to lose in your 20's than your 30's, but actually both are part of the normal curve for athletes. Take a look at Olympic gold medal winners - the peak age is 28. Very few win gold medals in their 30's (as in less than 10% of gold medal winners are over 30), very few win gold medals in their early 20's).

Choosing between the two is just a question of personal preferences. For what its worth, both Fedor and GSP have said they have huge respect for each other, way more than their fans have for the other.

And despite the problems Anderson and Jones have had with PED's, they won many fights before testing positive, so they're part of the GOAT discussion as well.

Basically as far as I can see there are the big four (in no particular order): GSP, Anderson, Jones, Fedor, and the differentiation between them is like kids arguing about what's the best color:

'red'
'no you're wrong, blue's the best color'

Very well said and argued.

But there is 1 other point to take into consideration.

GSP was fighting a much higher quality competition consistently in his 20s than Fedor was.

If GSP fought guys like CM Punk instead of the Matts maybe he wouldn't of had loses.

 

[AnotherOldGuy]

Fedor could've rematched his losses, why are you acting like he couldn't? Did he not keep fighting after Werdum tapped him?

Sure, just like Muhammad Ali could have rematched his losses to Holmes and Berbick. Because lets face it, a fighter in his 30's is just as good as in his 20's. Fighters never decline with age, they just get exposed.

 

[AnotherOldGuy]

Very well said and argued.

But there is 1 other point to take into consideration.

GSP was fighting a much higher quality competition consistently in his 20s than Fedor was.

If GSP fought guys like CM Punk instead of the Matts maybe he wouldn't of had loses.

True, GSP had a much more consistent level of competition, though I'd say Fedor's best wins relative to his time were better - no one GSP beat is as dominant as Big Nog was when Fedor first beat him, or Crocop for that matter.

 

[AnotherOldGuy]

Except you don't know enough about those fighters to say those things obviously. Joe Louis (who you mention here) is a perfect example of why your whole point isn't true- he did a thing very similar to GSP and Serra- he lost to a lesser fighter in his prime, then came back and destroyed that fighter (Max Schmeling). Early career slips don't do anything to erase overall greatness, especially when you prove it was a fluke by coming back and destroying your opponent. Fedor came within a hair of getting KO'd by Fujita when he got caught by a hard punch, and could just as well have a similar situation to GSP and Joe Louis.

Fedor was 33 when he went downhill badly, and most all of these guys you mention were still doing well at that age, still winning titles. If GSP was great in his prime, and great when he was older, he is better than someone who was great only until they were 33 (and fought lesser opponents overall, and in an org that doesn't test also). The later career matters my friend, especially at only 33.

But Joe Louis also lost to Rocky Marciano at the end of his career, yet was unable to revenge that loss. Which is exactly my point; when you're young you can avenge losses, because you're still at your prime (or even coming into it). When you're old, every year makes you worse. Young folks don't get this, at least until they get older themselves. At a certain point there's no chance of bettering your previous results, all you're trying to do is slow the decline.

And in high level sports that can happen fairly young. Usain Bolt lost to two guys in the 2017 world champions with what for him is a bad time, and at age 31. Old guys like me will nod and say he's losing a step. Young guys will say he should be as fast as 30 as he ever was, and losing just proves he was never as good as the two guys who beat him - ie that Usain Bolt was exposed, and there's no way he can be considered the greatest sprinter, since he'll never avenge those losses (he retired because, as he said, at 31 he couldn't run like he did at his prime). Age isn't just a number.

People age differently. Again, every older person knows this. I'm retired. Some of my retired friends, who were better athletes than I was when we were all young, are now much worse athletes. (Sadly some are even dead - its hard when friends start dying). Does that show that they were never better than me, or just that I aged better? As much as I'd like to say my being able to outrun them now (some of them can barely walk) means I was always faster than them, aging simply doesn't work that way.

 

[Guile]

Jones would beat GSP, Fedor and Anderson. Jones is the GOAT

That doesnt mean shit. I could name 40 terrible boxers that could beat sugar ray robinson but hes still goat.

 

[bref]

So we want to pretend that GSP didn’t run from Mike Perry to MW?

Mike Perry? Never heard of her.

 

[turbotime]

Sure, just like Muhammad Ali could have rematched his losses to Holmes and Berbick. Because lets face it, a fighter in his 30's is just as good as in his 20's. Fighters never decline with age, they just get exposed.

Werdum isn't exactly a spring chicken and neither is Hendo lol

not to mention Ali had Parkinson's well before these losses and had been boxing since he was what, 11?

 

[bref]

You didn't listen. Fitch is good, not great. Koscheck is good, not great. Diaz is good, not great. Condit is good, not great.

Matt Hughes is great. Henderson is great. Nogueira is great.

Alves? Good, not great.

You see where I'm going with this? Does this start to make sense to you? Is it this concept penetrating that thick head of yours?

The GOAT does not beat 1 great fighter in his whole resume. It has to be more.

Did you ever stop to realize that many of those guys are not 'great' because GSP was in their way?

 

[RichardHarrow]

That doesnt mean shit. I could name 40 terrible boxers that could beat sugar ray robinson but hes still goat.

Da fu

 

[KYS]

Mike Perry? Never heard of her.

Ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooof.

I can only advise you to delete your post as fast as possible. They are coming, they are here soon.

 

[turbotime]

That doesnt mean shit. I could name 40 terrible boxers that could beat sugar ray robinson but hes still goat.

No way, Robinson was way ahead of his time, the modern boxers would still have to be elite if they were going to handle Robinson.

 

[Fight Professor]

In the USADA era GSP is definitely the GOAT.

 

[Levi_]

But Joe Louis also lost to Rocky Marciano at the end of his career, yet was unable to revenge that loss. Which is exactly my point; when you're young you can avenge losses, because you're still at your prime (or even coming into it). When you're old, every year makes you worse. Young folks don't get this, at least until they get older themselves. At a certain point there's no chance of bettering your previous results, all you're trying to do is slow the decline.

And in high level sports that can happen fairly young. Usain Bolt lost to two guys in the 2017 world champions with what for him is a bad time, and at age 31. Old guys like me will nod and say he's losing a step. Young guys will say he should be as fast as 30 as he ever was, and losing just proves he was never as good as the two guys who beat him - ie that Usain Bolt was exposed, and there's no way he can be considered the greatest sprinter, since he'll never avenge those losses (he retired because, as he said, at 31 he couldn't run like he did at his prime). Age isn't just a number.

People age differently. Again, every older person knows this. I'm retired. Some of my retired friends, who were better athletes than I was when we were all young, are now much worse athletes. (Sadly some are even dead - its hard when friends start dying). Does that show that they were never better than me, or just that I aged better? As much as I'd like to say my being able to outrun them now (some of them can barely walk) means I was always faster than them, aging simply doesn't work that way.

Speed goes before other things though, and Usain Bolt is different than other top athletes like Tom Brady or Michael Jordan in that he has no other area to improve in to compensate for being slower; his sport is all about speed.

To an extent (within reason obviously, only for so long), you can get better as you get older, or stay the same, because you can improve your skills in other areas. Jordan put off going downhill for years by improving his jumpshot when he started to lose speed. Randy Couture got better much later in his MMA career by improving his overall skills.

In any case, the GOAT would cover accomplishments over a whole career, it is really stupid to even imply it only has to do with your prime. NBA stars and NFL QB's would never have elevated themselves to great heights without continuing to win championships into their 30's. Ali would never be the legend he is if he had quit before his legendary fights in his 30's. Examples are endless. Sports would look totally different if we only judged people by their physical prime, which is the early to mid 20's. Obviously the amount of time that you are able to maintain greatness matters; it's not like that is in question.

No one would be talking about Brady being the greatest ever if he had quit after his prime and not won all of these super bowls in his 30's. Hell, he is still the most likely QB to win a super bowl right now, and he's 40. No one is going to say, "Well, Sammy Baugh was better in his prime than Brady, so he is a better QB, Sammy is the GOAT." LOL, no. The whole career matters when it comes to legacy (and GOAT consideration).

 

[Guile]

No way, Robinson was way ahead of his time, the modern boxers would still have to be elite if they were going to handle Robinson.

Well someone stated that Jones, a Lhw, would beat GsP. So i could name many boxers that have 40lbs on sugar ray that could beat him. Same stupid logic.

 

[MiroHa]

Proves just how historically shallow the heavyweight division is. It is very top heavy, wasn't Arlovski like #3 when Fedor fought him LMAO

Proves there's a bigger X factor in the heavyweight regarding puncher's chance.

 

[KarateYeah]

Well, outside of anything else, just given that Fedor, GSP, Anderson and Jones all have equal numbers of people saying they're the GOAT shows that whatever else might be true, none of them is the undisputed GOAT.

You only have to look up the definition of "undisputed" to realize that.

Well, Fedor sure. But JJ and AS are out of my list after two failed USADAs.

 

[ThunderStruck]

These were 'good' fighters, not 'great'.

The only great fighters GSP beat were BJ Penn who was always undersized from a lower weightclass, and Matt Hughes.

Fedor as overrated as he is, beat Nog and Cro Cop.

Anderson smoked Hendo, Vitor and Sakurai.

Lets not even start with Jon Jones.

GSP is one of the GOATS but pointing to the names he beat is not gonna be a good argument for him.

Shields is a better win than CroCop and Nog imo. Those two are overrated.

 

[DWAYNEAMERICA]

I agree.

GSP is the GOAT.

Any debate against that fact is an idiotic exercise in futility.