Ten Times MMA Math Was Proven Totally Wrong In The UFC

[kingghidrah]

For those who don't know what MMA Math is, it is simply a version of an actual mathematical property called the "transitive property"

If a > b and b > c, then a > c (see http://www.mathwords.com/t/transitive_property_inequalities.htm)

In math the above statement is always true. In sports the rule is useful for making rankings, and determining who should be favored head-to-head, but is of course no guarantee of outcome; competitor A often loses to competitor C, a "violation" of the rule.

In practice it applies better to team sports because in individual sports, a bad day or the styles of the individuals involved can cause greater variation than you generally have in teams. Even so, the "rule" is violated countless times in team sports as well.

 

[MPD-Psycho]

Some of these are shown more as upsets and they didn’t really demonstrate the “math”.

In general, MMA math tends to be circular in nature unless one guy is undefeated, but even then there’s a workaround.

 

[Rvd Slmr]

I dont understand the mma math between cormier vs miocic..from who did DC lost, and miocic win against??

That's because the guy who did the video doesn't understand what MMAths is. It doesn't work for Diaz and Lawler, Williams and Coleman, Couture Liddell 1, Cain Werdum (as Cain > JDS isn't true since they are 2-1), Bader Tito doesn't work either because Tito hadn't lost to lil Nog yet...

 

[Better Every Day]

For those who don't know what MMA Math is, it is simply a version of an actual mathematical property called the "transitive property"

If a > b and b > c, then a > c (see http://www.mathwords.com/t/transitive_property_inequalities.htm)

In math the above statement is always true. In sports the rule is useful for making rankings, and determining who should be favored head-to-head, but is of course no guarantee of outcome; competitor A often loses to competitor C, a "violation" of the rule.

In practice it applies better to team sports because in individual sports, a bad day or the styles of the individuals involved can cause greater variation than you generally have in teams. Even so, the "rule" is violated countless times in team sports as well.

Mathematics also has relations that are not transitive (which apply here).

Intransitivity
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intransitivity

 

[Better Every Day]

Where is Holm Vs Rousy?

He didn't list it as one of the ten, but it was discussed in the video, and the MMA Math non-transitivity was as follows:

Ronda beat Miesha twice.
Holly beat Ronda
then Holly loses to Miesha (who had always lost to Ronda).

According to the faulty MMA Math that insists upon transitivity, Holly should have beaten Miesha because Ronda did (twice).

 

[sss133]

Stann > Leben >Wand>Stann

JDS -Rothwell-Reem-JDS

Rousey-Tate-Holm-Rousey

Nunes-Rousey-Zingano-Nunes

To name a few

 

[sss133]

Condit-Diaz-Lawler-Condit

Woodley - Lawler-Rory-Woodley

 

[SirKratos]

Biggest example of MMA Math being proven wrong is Rory Macdonald and Tyron Woodley. Woodley lost to Rory, yet beat every single fighter Rory lost against

 

[liljuey]

My morning dump, that I'm taking currently, is more interesting than this thread.

 

[jeremyemilio]

Most have nothing to do with pure MMaths (Ortiz/Bader, Bisping/Rockhold, really? You needed MMaths to believe Bader and Rockhold were the favorite?) and it forgets the most important anti MMaths case : Hughes finished Trigg twice, who finished Hallman twice, who finished Hughes twice.

Edit: the video doesn't even always name the MMAths reasoning, WTF? Do they even know what it means?

Edit 2 : there wasn't even a MMaths link possible between Diaz and Lawler, as neither had beat anyone that beat the other. WTF is this shit?

Edit 3 : It doesn't work for Diaz and Lawler, Williams and Coleman, Couture Liddell 1, Cain Werdum (as Cain > JDS isn't true since they were 2-1), Bader Tito doesn't work either because Tito hadn't lost to lil Nog yet...

This ^^^. All of this ^^^.

If you're going to make a video about MMAths, you really should use the term as it is understood by everyone else who has ever used the term...

 

[jeremyemilio]

(edit: I address the faulty MMA Math of Ronda vs. Holly vs Miesha, as brought up in the video, later in the thread)

Holm vs. Rousey was mentioned in the video, but it wasn't surprising how Holm won... even Ronda predicted the method (head kick). The video author wants more than to make a video about upsets (underdogs winning), he wants the method of victory to be unexpected as well.

Yes... but that's not what MMAth is about. MMAth is about the idea that if fighter A and fighter B have faced common opponents, and fighter A has been clearly and notably more successful against these common opponents, then fighter A is simply the better fighter and will have success against fighter B.

Not only doesn't the maker of the video add a bunch of new, and unrelated criteria, but he virtually ignores the traditional, damned near universal, understanding of the concept.

 

[jeremyemilio]

What is incorrect about...

First, "nontransitive dice" and "MMAth" alike have nothing, whatsoever, to do with almost any of the examples in the video.

Secondly, if you are going to talk about "nontrasitive dice" you're probably thinking less in the direction of MMAth, which is faulty at least in part precisely because it doesn't take stylistic match-ups into account, and more in the direction of the classic "slugger/boxer/swarmer" dynamic that has been long noted in boxing.

Thirdly, your understanding of "nontransitive dice" is pretty superficial if you believe that the result of a single roll of the dice "proves" anything one way or another.

 

[Soul On Ice]

Video creator doesn't know what MMath is
LoL

 

[Luvhawky]

Seems like I've been lecturing Sherdoggers a lot about the perils of "MMA Math" lately. Hopefully, those Sherdoggers that need to watch a video like this one will educate themselves by doing so.



10. Chan Sung Jun "Korean Zombie" vs Mark Hominick
9. Michael Bisping vs Luke Rockhold 2
8. Tito Ortiz vs Ryan Bader
7. Pete Williams vs Mark Coleman
6. Nick Diaz vs Robbie Lawler
5. Daniel Cormier vs Stipe Miocic
4. Randy Couture vs Chuck Liddell 1
3. Cain Velasquez vs Fabricio Werdum
2. Rose Namajunas vs Joanna Jedrzejczyk 1
1. Kevin Randleman vs Mirko "Cro Cop" Filipovic 1

Was a favorite example of yours left out of the video?

Would you have ranked these ten differently (assuming the numbering used was also a ranking)?

Do you disagree with any?

Are rematches really mma math?

 

[youllneverwalkalone]

You cannot use it to support a reasoned argument, because it happens only SOMETIMES.

It's like support "MMABlack Supremacy" in an argument about Woodley-Colby fight: You give examples of Jones beating Bader, Rampage beating Maldonado, Mighty Mouse beating Cejudo, Bobby Lashley beating James Thompson.
How does it sound? Makes sense?

It doesn't but your whole analogy doesn't make any sense cause you are using fighters who are completely unrelated to each other. In MMA math you are using fighters who have opponents in common so you have at least a common denominator as a basis for inferences.

Again, that it works "sometimes" doesn't mean it "never" works.

 

[AimedWithV]

It doesn't but your whole analogy doesn't make any sense cause you are using fighters who are completely unrelated to each other. In MMA math you are using fighters who have opponents in common so you have at least a common denominator as a basis for inferences.

Again, that it works "sometimes" doesn't mean it "never" works.

This is not a "common denominator". The relation of fights' outcomes in MMAth is false. Just like a relation by religion.

And also, you lack an understanding of a common logic.
You can use a rule only if it ALWAYS works, and proven as working. You cannot use a rule if it works SOMETIMES, in any case. Because ANYTHING can work SOMETIMES.

 

[CroCopsLHK]

That video has very little to do with MMAmath, that guy has no idea what he's talking about

 

[tequilaboy]

So much ignorance in one video...

 

[LockardTheGOAT]

Conor/Alvarez, Holly/Meisha, and Ronda/Nunes are my favorite examples of MMA Math being a load of shit.

My favorite example of refuting this type of logic in boxing is Ali defeating George Foreman.

 

[SammyG420]

Cruz-Dillashaw-Garbrandt

Velasquez-dos Santos-Werdum