Stipe is clearly the hw mma goat “if” he beat Cormier.

Yeah guess I was kind of taking the piss on that comment.

My main gripe is that most people claiming Stipe is in HW GOAT contention couldn't even name 5 other guys in the conversation.

That's a strawman and you know it.
 
Stipe doesn't challenge people below his weight class. Because that would be bullying.
 
That's a strawman and you know it.
How is it a strawman? The GOAT has to be considered not just in the modern UFC era but in the original UFC, Pride, Strikeforce etc. as well.
Stipe is a new jack on a good streak but he hasn't been around that long in the scheme of things.

DC doesn't have any better claim to HW GOAT than Stipe, considering the mostly middling caliber of opposition he faced there (Mir and Barnett notwithstanding) Stipe would probably beat their asses handily too but that's not saying much.
 
Regarding your methods; Jeff is actually 1:1 against Oleynik. He won the first fight by a split decision and lost the second one via submission. I don't see how you could consider him a legit opponent for the world class level. But this is not about MMAth, you simply just have to watch Monson fight a few times to realize that he's nowhere near the level of Top10 HW fighters, especially not in the year 2011. His ground game is legit, but his cardio is terrible and his standup is non existant.



Of course it doesn't mean nothing. Arona and Babalu are both beasts and veterans. But they are not HWs, which is why they would do really bad at HW. Size matters. I know that because people are making grimaces when I kick a pads they are holding with my 95kg. It hurts them now and it wasn't hurting them 10 years ago when I was like 15kg lighter (assuming my technique was ok back then). I put on muscle and I feel more powerful, but I'm not dumb enough to fight anybody that's just naturally bigger and broader than I am. A light sparring is all those guys can get out of me, because I know how it feels when stuff just doesn't work because the guy is too big. It's a really shit feeling when you worked on a technique for 2 years and then figure out it just doesn't apply because your opponent is a fucking monster that laughs at you like Superman laughs at incoming bullets. o_O

I'm obviously NOT a pro fighter and don't know shit about real pro training or what it means to be in the ring/octagon with many people watching every move. I'm really not trying to say any of the guys we mentioned are bad, but we are talking about the highest level there is in the strongest weightclass there is. The baddest man on the planet and such. If you want to be the baddest guy, you can't go "cut me some slack because I'm smaller". If you think you're smaller, change your weightclass, if you think you're not shut up and fight.
Good info. I'm definitely coming around to the LHW's not giving Fedor a "GOAT point." Maybe "honorable mention"... but you are correct that as you look at their careers, they weren't lighting up the HW division, so that makes it very hard to give Fedor a GOAT point for those fights.

I'm aware that Monson lost later on to Oley, but I consider that as much a testiment to his validity at the time he fought Fedor as I do to count it against him. I'll have to review 2011 Monson a bit deeper. As you suggested, I will watch tape of him back then. I'm also curious to see where he was ranked at the time... beyond the top 10 I'm sure, but where you know. Do you happen to know that? I did a little searching but didn't find anything.

Fedor didn't get a GOAT point in my original list for Monson... but someone just as passionate as yourself was on the other side of your the argument you're presenting here & they convinced me. Your argument is compelling as well. Again, it does mean "something"... but we do need to double check just how valid of an opponent he was in the grand scheme of things.

I can say that Stipe's opponents have been in deeper water than Monson, so that sayz a lot regarding a comparison between Stipe & Fedor.

Just watched Fedor vs. Monson (ie... RDA vs. Nate... lol) Damn them leg kicks. Fedor had his number on them & the more he got the more his strikes started landing. Refused to tie up or grapple which took Monson out of his game. Great strategy.

Monson vs. Oley - Close fight, but the takedowns & ability to hold Oley... along with Oley's lack of ability to get up or mount an offense from the bottom won Monson the night. Didn't light the world on fire... but again, he did it to Oley, so that's something.

will review more later & let this sync in. Monson gassed a bit but not much. Looked decent against Oley all in all.
 
So what you are saying is that they actually had an even playing field, unlike the current UFC?

Not at all and actually contrary

Everyone was not on the same doses and levels of peds. Some weren't even taken it or on low doses due to health concerns and you can see the physiques, that doesn't take a rocket scientist

Pride was also corrupted by the yakuza. Not even close to a even playing field

In the US, Fedor hasnt even looked half as strong as his old Pride self. You should be lucky people even consider Fedor the HW Goat over Stipe
 
Last edited:
This is good. I like when people question my data... as it only strengthens it. I've done this with all the GOATs, so I've had people mention things here & there that I've added in.

Coleman was done for both fights. Remember, I'm looking at their performances "after".... & the only significant win for Coleman after their first fight was a weird injury Shogun got during the fight. Not quite the stuff you want to give out a GOAT point for.

You are correct in your thought that 2017 JDS was JDS's last fight... but as this is an ongoing story, we can only do our best in regard to recent fights & where I think their competition is going. I don't doubt JDS was still valid, but to your point, it is disputable within my system here. We do however know exactly what happened to Tim Silvia after the Fedor fight. He went on to compete against lesser quality opponents. So just as we can't give Fedor a GOAT point for most of the people he's beaten lately... we also can't give him a GOAT point for beating someone who only fought cans for the rest of their career.

Again with Francis, we don't know what he will do moving forward... but one can imagine that he will continue to fight top competition & do well. Brett Rogers seems to have done the same thing as Tim Silvia. he's got a lot of wins over lesser competition.

So if you got an argument for The competition that Tim Silvia & Brett Rogers had "after" they fought Fedor... then I'll consider adjusting for a GOAT point, but as best I can see, they both fought low level fighters. They got wins for sure... but it's not that hard for a top level fighter in the twilight of his career to take on lesser competition. A GOAT who wants a GOAT point from me, will have to show that the person he beat actually went on & got wins against higher level competition than what I'm seeing with Tim Silvia & Brett Rogers.

Huh? You judge the opponents going into the fight, not based on what they did after. WTF is that shit

How about looking at fighter's ranks at the time. there have been posts in the past about that.
 
Huh? You judge the opponents going into the fight, not based on what they did after. WTF is that shit

How about looking at fighter's ranks at the time. there have been posts in the past about that.
Please calm down. No need for "WTF" & all that sarcasm... we're just talking about MMA. If you want to discuss it then simply present your point of view. No need for all this other stuff.

I don't like the idea that someone gets full credit when they were washed up from that fight on. Someone should perform before AND AFTER imo. There's so many examples of beyond their prime fighters finally losing their edge. There's also the modern day epidemic of people losing their mojo after July 2015 when USADA started. So it's not as simple as you're making it out to be where someone should get full credit for beating someone who did well in the past.

I don't believe that someone who was the first (or thereafter) in their inevitable decline should be given full credit for beating what is a shadow of their former glory.

On the flip side of that, I also feel that if someone that maybe wasn't fighting top level competition, but from that point on started being a world beater... that should weight heavily in the area of GOAT points. An example of this would be Borg. Right now I give Mouse no GOAT points for Borg's past.... but if Borg can turn into a world beater from here out, then I gotta regress & give that GOAT point to Mouse.
 
IF he beats Cormier he will be the GOAT. Imo Cormier is better than anyone Fedor faced.
 
The OP left things out of Fedor's resume. But the argument that any UFC champ has to match his ten year record is absurd. that's like saying Woodley has to match Askren's record. It's apples and oranges and strength of competition is what matters.

I'm not sure Stipe passes Fedor with a win over DC. Actually I'm pretty surethat he doesn't. I'd like to see Stipe get 6 straight successful defenses before comparing him to Fedor.
I can agree with all of that. I think a win against another top HW competitor (a proven one, not another Ngannou), plus DC, cements it. Loved the comparison between Askren and Woodley. Spot on.
 
Please calm down. No need for "WTF" & all that sarcasm... we're just talking about MMA. If you want to discuss it then simply present your point of view. No need for all this other stuff.

I don't like the idea that someone gets full credit when they were washed up from that fight on. Someone should perform before AND AFTER imo. There's so many examples of beyond their prime fighters finally losing their edge. There's also the modern day epidemic of people losing their mojo after July 2015 when USADA started. So it's not as simple as you're making it out to be where someone should get full credit for beating someone who did well in the past.

I don't believe that someone who was the first (or thereafter) in their inevitable decline should be given full credit for beating what is a shadow of their former glory.

On the flip side of that, I also feel that if someone that maybe wasn't fighting top level competition, but from that point on started being a world beater... that should weight heavily in the area of GOAT points. An example of this would be Borg. Right now I give Mouse no GOAT points for Borg's past.... but if Borg can turn into a world beater from here out, then I gotta regress & give that GOAT point to Mouse.

That's not how this works. You can't give a fighter less credit for fighting a ranked opponent simply because you deem them to be worse than their rank years later.

The easiest way to judge it is to check how many top 10 and top 5 opponents each has faced. Fedor was at a disadvantage as they were spread between two organizations and he could only rematch so many times.

Regardless, Stipe needs a few more defenses to even be worth considering.
 
If you list stats like that you can make any of it sound good

Stipe’s UFC wins: 12
Fedor: 0

Stipe’s consecutive UFC title defenses: 3
Fedor: 0
 
That's not how this works. You can't give a fighter less credit for fighting a ranked opponent simply because you deem them to be worse than their rank years later.

The easiest way to judge it is to check how many top 10 and top 5 opponents each has faced. Fedor was at a disadvantage as they were spread between two organizations and he could only rematch so many times.

Regardless, Stipe needs a few more defenses to even be worth considering.

Strongly disagree. Coleman has a ton of top 5 opponents on his resume... won a UFC tournament & was the UFC Champ... etc.... However, when Fedor fought him, he was beyond his prime & no longer in top shape. Nobody who beat "old man Coleman" should be given the same credit as someone who beat "prime Coleman."

The USADA line in the sand is another similar situation. People who obviously declined after USADA make it hard to give the same credit you give to people who beat them Pre-USADA. Johnny Hendrix & MJ are 2 that come to mind atm... but there are a lot more of them.

Along with your logic would be giving Meathead full credit for beating Fedor. That's not realistic. The Fedor Meathead beat is just a shadow of his former self.

It works both ways.
 
Strongly disagree. Coleman has a ton of top 5 opponents on his resume... won a UFC tournament & was the UFC Champ... etc.... However, when Fedor fought him, he was beyond his prime & no longer in top shape. Nobody who beat "old man Coleman" should be given the same credit as someone who beat "prime Coleman."

The USADA line in the sand is another similar situation. People who obviously declined after USADA make it hard to give the same credit you give to people who beat them Pre-USADA. Johnny Hendrix & MJ are 2 that come to mind atm... but there are a lot more of them.

Along with your logic would be giving Meathead full credit for beating Fedor. That's not realistic. The Fedor Meathead beat is just a shadow of his former self.

It works both ways.

No, my logic is to use their rankings AT THE TIME OF THE FIGHT

Fedor wasn't ranked when meathead beat him so don't put words into my mouth
 
10 years in Pride...

where they didn't have any type of athletic commission and in a orgainization that encouraged fighters to use PED's

Not that I agree with OP but, if they didn’t test doesn’t that mean it was an even playing field and everyone could juice themselves to the gills?
 
what was Monson ranked when he fought Fedor?

I don't have that data anymore but all that matters is the rankings up to Rogers as he didnt beat anybody top 10 after that

- I'm simply calling out this retroactive analysis of fighters as unfair. So if the OP wants to make this argument they need to use complete data - which is rankings at the time. there were multiple rankings even back then so it's not simple.

Maybe someone will dig that old post up as it's far more analytical than this

EDIT:

Here's one incompelte source

 
Last edited:
10 years in Pride...

where they didn't have any type of athletic commission and in a orgainization that encouraged fighters to use PED's

If you're opponents are also on PEDs then there's no advantage....
 
Not that I agree with OP but, if they didn’t test doesn’t that mean it was an even playing field and everyone could juice themselves to the gills?

It appears easy to look at it that way but no athletic commission and testing means quite the opposite....

Because of how dangerous taking PEDs are, not every fighter was on them and many taking different levels of doses based on their pay and tolerance.

So you can have a guy on HGH and stacks of roids facing another guy just taking a testosterone booster...I mean, the mixtures are endless

You can blame the guy not on steroids for not taking them when he should and can be but the point of this is that, the playing field is most definitely not fair, unless perhaps both are on PEDs.

In the UFC (post-usada) both fighters don't have the option so the fights are closer to who's really better. Overall no playing field is truly even but testing most def would level the field over no testing at all
 
Back
Top