Do you happen to know the difference between one evidence and something that def. proves something?
Not really. "One evidence" can only very rarely be used to prove anything. I always prefer to look at "one evidence" in the context of a whole career and taking the full circumstances into account. That is why I don't believe Leben is a better striker than Wanderlei, even though he knocked him out. And that is also why I don't believe Mir is a better BJJ practitioner than Nog, even though he subbed him.
Mir has always been a top BJJ, and the fact that he broke Nog's arm could be used as an evidence of him being better.
Why? Because it is convenient for you? You are clearly, clearly applying a double-standard here.
Chris Leben has always been known as a striker, first and foremost. Before he met Wanderlei, he had stopped a raft of good solid UFC guys such as Swick, Rivera, Sakara, Simpson, Santiago, Martin.
He then beat Wandy by striking.
It's the same situation, but you apply a double-standard because it is convenient for you to do so.
Leben over Wandy is also an evidence, but there is no context for saying Leben is a top striker. There are no other evidences.
However, there are tons of other evidences of Mir being a top BJJ guy in MMA.
Exactly. So now you are acknowledging that one fight (such as Mir-Nog II) does not prove everything. Now you are acknowledging that context plays a part, which you did not seem to be acknowledging before.
So, considering the context, Mir had 8 submission wins in his career before he met Nogueira. Three of them were against nobodies in 2001/2, two of them were against guys with very little concept of how to defend subs (Abbott, Lesnar), one of them was against a very mediocre fighter (Hardonk), one of them was against a fighter who was almost KO'd before the sub was applied (Kongo) - I'd argue the only sub win of real value was Tim Sylvia (and even then, he'd get subbed by Arlovski not long after).
By contrast, before meeting Mir, Nog has 20 submission wins. In addition to also subbing Mir's most valuable sub win, Tim Sylvia, he also subbed Heath Herring (the only time Herring EVER lost to a sub in 43 fights, other than once when he submitted due to exhaustion in his second pro fight), Enson Inoue (the only time Enson EVER tapped in 20 fights), Dan Henderson, and Mirko Crocop (the only time Crocop was EVER submitted in 41 fights other than a verbal submission due to injury against JDS).
You tell me whose "evidence" is greater?
If you aren't being totally biased and irrational, Nog is the only answer here.
I'm a nog fan and think he is maybe the HW #2 GOAT. But despite the fact he is a top grapler in MMA, Mir was the best in plain BJJ MMA. Nog had two chances to prove other wise. In the 1st he was still in good shape (had never been KOed before) and in the second he couldn't sub a worn down and zombie Mir.
Now you're just being stupid again. Nog was in the worst shape he ever was for the first Mir fight, and the fight was kept standing the whole time. In the second Mir may have been briefly buzzed by a punch, but he still held a big weight advantage over an old, physically depleted, decline Nogueira.
You are not being fair-minded at all with these comments.
Mir was the best in plain BJJ MMA.
I'm starting to wonder why I'm wasting time on someone who is talking such complete crap.
Fabricio Werdum is infinitely more decorated in BJJ than Mir, and Werdum is the only man to sub Fedor Emelianenko AND the only man to sub Alistair Overeem (other than one time Alistair tapped to punches).
Obviously he has proved to have better BJJ for MMA than Mir. As has Nog, as I proved earlier in this post. Mir ain't on the same level as guys like Maia and Werdum. You're delusional.