- Joined
- Feb 13, 2007
- Messages
- 34,969
- Reaction score
- 18,262
I don't really care about Holm one way or the other, but objectively speaking she is probably top 5 of WMMA of all time easily. But that's not saying much.
That never gets old
Cyborg, Tate, Shevchenko and GDR beat her. Of the ones who beat her Cyborg, Tate and arguably Shevchenko also have better resumes while Joanna and Nunes never fought her but have way better resumes, you can also make a case for Ronda even though she lost to Holm due to a way better resume. Top 10 sure but not top 5 "easily."I don't really care about Holm one way or the other, but objectively speaking she is probably top 5 of WMMA of all time easily. But that's not saying much.
Cyborg, Tate, Shevchenko and GDR beat her. Of the ones who beat her Cyborg, Tate and arguably Shevchenko also have better resumes while Joanna and Nunes never fought her but have way better resumes, you can also make a case for Ronda even though she lost to Holm due to a way better resume. Top 10 sure but not top 5 "easily."
Well Tate beat her and has more high ranked wins, the only thing Holm has over her are fewer losses (but also fewer wins/fights) and that she beat Ronda... but Tate beat Holm.I love Tate but I don't know if I put her above Holm.
Also I dunno why but I've always been partial to Marloes Coenen too but I don't know if she fits anywhere in top 10 WMMA all time list.
I love Tate but I don't know if I put her above Holm.
Also I dunno why but I've always been partial to Marloes Coenen too but I don't know if she fits anywhere in top 10 WMMA all time list.
Well, Tate has more wins and obviously beat Holm, so there's that.
But looking at their careers as a whole, who will have a bigger lasting impact and who will end up contributing to the sport more? That's important to consider in these types of discussions, and not just applying MMAth (not saying you are, just making a generic statement).
When Holm retires, and you compare both their careers, I think Holm will have meant more to the sport overall. And like I said, I don't even really care for Holm and don't find her interesting at all. But looking at the broader picture I see her being pretty high up the "all times" list.
The thread is not "who meant more to the sport" but who is the better fighter.
It doesn't but Tate also has more high ranked wins and was a 2-time champion in the top orgs for WMMA at the time, the main thing that makes people respect Holly more is that her style is more respected (ugh).And one person beating another doesn't immediately put them higher when discussing "of all time".
If that's all it takes then Stefan Struve must be higher all time than Stipe since he beat Stipe, and Stipe has never avenged that loss.
It doesn't but Tate also has more high ranked wins and was a 2-time champion in the top orgs for WMMA at the time, the main thing that makes people respect Holly more is that her style is more respected (ugh).
And one person beating another doesn't immediately put them higher when discussing "of all time".
If that's all it takes then Stefan Struve must be higher all time than Stipe since he beat Stipe, and Stipe has never avenged that loss.
she's much better than her recent record suggests. she was well ahead against miesha until the sub, was robbed by a cheating germaine, and brought cyborg to a decision.
Alot of you dont seem to understand that even if you totally ignore her entire MMA career she is still one of the 2 or 3 best female boxers ever. That alone makes Schaubs claim pretty accurate.
The MMA stuff was just icing on the cake.
she's much better than her recent record suggests. she was well ahead against miesha until the sub, was robbed by a cheating germaine, and brought cyborg to a decision.