People have short memories.He surpassed GSP a while ago, so yeah
People have short memories.He surpassed GSP a while ago, so yeah
How the fuck he surpassed GSP exactly ?
Every generation is better than the last.Woodley has 4 consecutive defenses, Hughes had 5. But Woodley's competition has been 100x more stiff, which makes up for the one less title defense. Considering all of Woodley's beaten opponents would have murked Hughes in a round or so, I'd think Woodley would have an easy claim to 2nd WW GOAT
Well it isn't so clear cut. What about Shields?Matt Hughes beat cans and LWs and lost to a LW. lmao What are you talking about? Maybe third? Who the fuck are you going to put there? Pat Miletich? LMAO
Tyron is undoubtedly the second best WW on his way to first.
Comparing eras is actually very easy when you don't have nostalgic bias.
No it is not. It does not count as a defense. He didn’t win the fight.
since never? it doesn't even make senseHe beats Colby and he passes Hughes imo. Different era but the truth is Woodley has fought much stiffer competition.
23 fights in
Hughes is 22-1 with 1 UFC fight and no MMA accolades to his name
Woodley is 19-3-1 with 5 UFC title fights and 1 Strikeforce title fight.
Um..a draw is considered a defense. Always has been considered a defense.
So that's 4 defenses.
Yeah it does, check the biography part below, "4 title defenses";
http://www.ufc.com/fighter/Tyron-Woodley
Dumbass
He retained the title it is not a defense fuckhead. I don’t care what the UFC website says. Since when did They ever tell the truth about anything?
He retained the title it is not a defense fuckhead. I don’t care what the UFC website says. Since when did They ever tell the truth about anything?
Lol I bet that literally the only people making and buying this argument are ones that want to bolster Tyron's numbers. I was quite disappointed to see the UFC counting it as a defense the other night. It's a bad precedence and it is completely disingenuous. But it's the WME so I have come to expect them to make short sighted decisions for immediate results.Um, its their organization, so if UFC says its a title defense then you damn well make sure its a title defense
You were wrong, just let it go already. If you come inside the octagon as a champ and leave as a champ, you technically defended your belt. Retaining the title IS a title defense
Lol I bet that literally the only people making and buying this argument are ones that want to bolster Tyron's numbers. I was quite disappointed to see the UFC counting it as a defense the other night. It's a bad precedence and it is completely disingenuous. But it's the WME so I have come to expect them to make short sighted decisions for immediate results.
Having a draw is not a defense. You have to win to defend the belt. Defending means keeping whats yoThe UFC can say whatever they want be we as hardcore fans should all know better than that. That shit is a joke
Lmao give me a break dude. So you realize, you are right now literally saying that it is just as good to get a draw as it is to get a win, as long as you have the promotional tool on their waist.No, you don't have to win to defend the belt. And its not just UFC calling it a title defense. Check literally any other source on the internet about fighters title defences
A quick google search shows me this;
http://www.fightmatrix.com/ufc-records/title-defenses/
Check Edgar and Woodley's title defenses
Lmao give me a break dude. So you realize, you are right now literally saying that it is just as good to get a draw as it is to get a win, as long as you have the promotional tool on their waist.