Media Chuck Liddell's reach

[mkt]

Age is just a number. Shogun, Machida, and Rashad had been fighting for almost 10 years and had over 20 MMA fights each while Shogun had also had a bunch of injuries, Rampage had been fighting for 12 years and had over 40 MMA fights, and Vitor had been fighting for 15 years and had over 30 fights. His wins over those guys were very impressive, particularly the way that he buzzsawed through Shogun, but he didn't fight the best versions of any of them. The same goes for Stipe, BTW. It's not that his wins over Hunt, Arlovski, Werdum, Overeem, and JDS weren't impressive, it's that he didn't fight the best versions of any of them. Not their fault that they don't fight in Time Machine MMA, but it is what it is.



Bigger and stronger wrestlers like Jeff Monson and Kevin Randleman couldn't take Chuck down. Randy Couture fought him three times and only took him down a handful of times and only held him down for longer than a few seconds after he was gassed in their first fight. Tito Ortiz took him down once in two fights and kept him down for only a few seconds. "Standard" or not, Chuck's TDD against elite and powerful wrestlers is nothing to scoff at.

That was my point about wrestling, though. Jon took down everyone at will in his prime, including Bader, the Janitor (known for beating U.S. Olympians in practice in his early days), Rampage, Jake O'Brien (D1 wrestler who mostly fought at HW), Hamill (also a college wrestler). Jones didn't just take them down, either. He took them to ground like they were children within the first minute or so of the fight.

Monson couldn't do anything to Cormier, whom Jones outwrestled in their grappling exchanges. He's the only fighter to do that, at LHW or HW. Even a 255-pound Josh Barnett got slammed and ragdolled by Cormier. And like I said, Randy and Tito are very standard, somewhat predictable wrestlers, even if they're good at it--especially Randy. And Randy didn't threaten you with kicks, knees, spinning elbow, etc. Part of Jones' success was how unorthodox he was standing and wrestling.

As for the LHWs being "old," you could use that argument with tons of fighters. Rampage also had an excuse for every loss--overtrained, undertrained, was filming the A-Team, etc. He said himself that he was better prepared for Jones than he was for any other fight.

You could use the "10+ years of wear-n-tear" for Werdum who became HW champ in his mid-30s or Jacare who peaked around the same age, Belal, Glover in his early 40s, Poatan at 37 (not much MMA but many years of kickboxing). Being 29-33 with 10 years of experience is super common at MW and higher weight classes and many are still great fighters. Rashad had recently tooled Phil Davis before he fought Jones. He was in his best form, better than the Macida fight (which I hate to admit as a Machida fan). He did have a quick downfall not long afterwards, but that happens, too.

 

[HavokHarmon]

That was my point about wrestling, though. Jon took down everyone at will in his prime, including Bader, the Janitor (known for beating U.S. Olympians in practice in his early days), Rampage, Jake O'Brien (D1 wrestler who mostly fought at HW), Hamill (also a college wrestler). Jones didn't just take them down, either. He took them to ground like they were children within the first minute or so of the fight.

Monson couldn't do anything to Cormier, whom Jones outwrestled in their grappling exchanges. He's the only fighter to do that, at LHW or HW. Even a 255-pound Josh Barnett got slammed and ragdolled by Cormier. And like I said, Randy and Tito are very standard, somewhat predictable wrestlers, even if they're good at it--especially Randy. And Randy didn't threaten you with kicks, knees, spinning elbow, etc. Part of Jones' success was how unorthodox he was standing and wrestling.

As for the LHWs being "old," you could use that argument with tons of fighters. Rampage also had an excuse for every loss--overtrained, undertrained, was filming the A-Team, etc. He said himself that he was better prepared for Jones than he was for any other fight.

You could use the "10+ years of wear-n-tear" for Werdum who became HW champ in his mid-30s or Jacare who peaked around the same age, Belal, Glover in his early 40s, Poatan at 37 (not much MMA but many years of kickboxing). Being 29-33 with 10 years of experience is super common at MW and higher weight classes and many are still great fighters. Rashad had recently tooled Phil Davis before he fought Jones. He was in his best form, better than the Macida fight (which I hate to admit as a Machida fan). He did have a quick downfall not long afterwards, but that happens, too.

Yeah the narrative that Jones fought a bunch of old guys past their prime really never made much sense to me, especially coming from people who actually watched then. In 2010 LHW was considered one of the most stacked divisions the UFC had. Then suddenly by 2012 every single fighter considered top tier had become washed up? It just doesn’t make any sense.

 

[laleggenda27]

Chuck lost a fight to couture and was out struck by Keith Jardine …..can’t see how he match up well with Jones

1. When he lost to Jardine, Chuck was 37 and coming off being flatlined by Rampage. That wasn't prime Chuck. He was well on his way to being fully washed.
2. Yes, Chuck lost to Randy (another legend). But if you were around at the time, you remember Chuck clearly underestimated Randy and was taken by surprise in that fight. And he flatlined Randy in the 2 subsequent fights.

Notwithstanding your mmath, I think Chuck's combination of TDD, power, and ability to strike at range would have matched up well with Jones. Jones probably wins, but it's an interesting fight.

 

[TriangleMonkey]

No wonder Chuck had the ability to always reach out touch teh chin with ease

His is in the “ape index” for sure

My arm reach is 4” longer than my height as well, embrace the ape

 

[r-harper-1]

1. When he lost to Jardine, Chuck was 37 and coming off being flatlined by Rampage. That wasn't prime Chuck. He was well on his way to being fully washed.
2. Yes, Chuck lost to Randy (another legend). But if you were around at the time, you remember Chuck clearly underestimated Randy and was taken by surprise in that fight. And he flatlined Randy in the 2 subsequent fights.

Notwithstanding your mmath, I think Chuck's combination of TDD, power, and ability to strike at range would have matched up well with Jones. Jones probably wins, but it's an interesting fight.

Jones Ragdolls him worse then Rampage did

 

[Bullitt68]

That was my point about wrestling, though. Jon took down everyone at will in his prime, including Bader, the Janitor (known for beating U.S. Olympians in practice in his early days), Rampage, Jake O'Brien (D1 wrestler who mostly fought at HW), Hamill (also a college wrestler). Jones didn't just take them down, either. He took them to ground like they were children within the first minute or so of the fight.

This sounds a lot like stats with no context. Yes, he took Bader down...once, right at the opening bell, with a surprise double Bader thought was a punch. The rest of the fight, every time they went down to the ground it was Bader either trying for kimuras or pulling guard (he had no guard or BJJ, so I'm using that phrase loosely---he just pulled Jones down on top of him). Vladdy was 40 and years past his prime. Rampage was older and slower and nowhere near as explosive. I forgot O'Brien existed. And Hamill he hit a nice Greco trip on and that was that. Nothing that Jones did is comparable to the insanity of GSP picking up wrestling and then mauling Trigg, Sherk, Hughes, and Koscheck. Jones was slick and had nice TDs. Not arguing that. He might've even been able to put Chuck down once or twice. Not denying that possibility. But if he manages to get Chuck down, I can't imagine him being able to keep Chuck down. He'd have to wear him down and gas him out, but the time that it'd take for him to do that would be time for Chuck to land something, and with his power, that could be the fight.

Monson couldn't do anything to Cormier, whom Jones outwrestled in their grappling exchanges.

Again, Monson was 40 and had been fighting for 15 years.

Even a 255-pound Josh Barnett got slammed and ragdolled by Cormier.

Barnett wrestled in high school then started fighting immediately. He didn't have a wrestling pedigree and he was never known for his TDD. Besides, he didn't really care if the fight went to the ground since he was a submission guy. Not the same as Chuck's legendary sprawl-and-brawl.

And like I said, Randy and Tito are very standard, somewhat predictable wrestlers, even if they're good at it--especially Randy.

This has nothing to do with Chuck and is just about doing justice to Randy: He wasn't "standard" or "predictable." He had the Greco clinch work and trips from in close as well as the shots from the outside. He was actually a lot like Jones, which is why he could shoot power doubles and slam Rizzo into the fence while also surprising people like Ricco and Chuck with slick trips from the clinch.

And Randy didn't threaten you with kicks, knees, spinning elbow, etc. Part of Jones' success was how unorthodox he was standing and wrestling.

Chuck also spent very little time in the clinch. Especially at UFC 52 and then again at UFC 57, his footwork was incredible and he never allowed Randy to get near him, and if he did get near him he'd always get cracked and that's when Chuck either broke his nose or turned his lights out. For whatever reason(s) you think Chuck would be some walk in the park, you've got to realize that Chuck in his prime is not a 40-year-old Vladdy or Jake O'Brien.

As for the LHWs being "old," you could use that argument with tons of fighters.

I know. It's the truth. Tito beat an old and broken down Ken Shamrock. Machida beat and old and washed up Randy. JDS took out an older and slower Cro Cop. It happens. Fighters age. They're not always at their best. There's no sense denying reality.

Rampage also had an excuse for every loss--overtrained, undertrained, was filming the A-Team, etc. He said himself that he was better prepared for Jones than he was for any other fight.

So you don't believe Rampage except when he confirms what you want confirmed?

You could use the "10+ years of wear-n-tear" for Werdum who became HW champ in his mid-30s or Jacare who peaked around the same age, Belal, Glover in his early 40s, Poatan at 37 (not much MMA but many years of kickboxing). Being 29-33 with 10 years of experience is super common at MW and higher weight classes and many are still great fighters. Rashad had recently tooled Phil Davis before he fought Jones. He was in his best form, better than the Macida fight (which I hate to admit as a Machida fan). He did have a quick downfall not long afterwards, but that happens, too.

You're proving my point. Age is just a number. It's case-by-case. Masakatsu Funaki and Bas Rutten were broken down, injury-riddled, retired has-beens in their early 30s, while Randy Couture didn't have his first MMA fight until he was 33. Everybody's different, everybody's body reacts differently, everybody's body breaks down in different ways at different rates at different points in their lives/careers. It's not as simple as saying "They were only x age" or "This guy did x at y age."

 

[It Just Is]

Come Up Jones versus Come Down Liddell would've been a fucking massacre. If it's not prime versus prime, it's a lopsided Jones annihilation.

I said come up Jon because I don't think Prime Jon vs. Prime Chuck is even a match-up. While Prime Jon is less of a finisher and not as lethal, he is more skilled offensively and defensively everywhere in comparison to his previous incarnation. The Jon that beat Vitor, Glover, DC, Machida, Gus (barely, but Jon had high output in that first fight), and Cheal had all basis covered.

He'd definitely cause Chuck problems, but could he beat him in his prime? On the feet, you have to favor Chuck. I mean, Chuck fought plenty of strikers who caused him problems, including MT guys like Pele and Overeem and more Karate-style kickboxers like Mezger and Suloev, but Chuck would just eat every one of their shots and then hit them harder than they could hit him. Pele hit Chuck with full-on head kicks and he recovered immediately, Overeem was blasting him with knees, Mezger dropped him with a huge overhand right...and he beat them all if he didn't KO them in brutal fashion. He even outstruck prime Vitor from bell to bell and sat him on his ass in a punching exchange at the end of the fight.

Against prime Chuck Liddell, unless you had an iron jaw like Rampage did or planned on mixing in lots of TDs like Randy did, you'd be a fool to stand in front of him and trade shots. Nobody in the history of the LHW division had the power to hurt Chuck in his prime or the chin to take Chuck's shots save for Rampage, and Rampage couldn't even hurt Chuck with his sledgehammer punches, he just wore him down and took him out to the body.

I don't think Jon would stand with Chuck exclusively. I think he'd use a similar approach to the one he used against Rampage. Keep the distance with kicks, avoid boxing range, and shoot once Chuck is out of position off a lunging punch. Jon is is also deceptively strong in the clinch, better than anyone he's faced

 

[mkt]

This sounds a lot like stats with no context. Yes, he took Bader down...once, right at the opening bell, with a surprise double Bader thought was a punch. The rest of the fight, every time they went down to the ground it was Bader either trying for kimuras or pulling guard (he had no guard or BJJ, so I'm using that phrase loosely---he just pulled Jones down on top of him). Vladdy was 40 and years past his prime. Rampage was older and slower and nowhere near as explosive. I forgot O'Brien existed. And Hamill he hit a nice Greco trip on and that was that. Nothing that Jones did is comparable to the insanity of GSP picking up wrestling and then mauling Trigg, Sherk, Hughes, and Koscheck. Jones was slick and had nice TDs. Not arguing that. He might've even been able to put Chuck down once or twice. Not denying that possibility. But if he manages to get Chuck down, I can't imagine him being able to keep Chuck down. He'd have to wear him down and gas him out, but the time that it'd take for him to do that would be time for Chuck to land something, and with his power, that could be the fight.



Again, Monson was 40 and had been fighting for 15 years.



Barnett wrestled in high school then started fighting immediately. He didn't have a wrestling pedigree and he was never known for his TDD. Besides, he didn't really care if the fight went to the ground since he was a submission guy. Not the same as Chuck's legendary sprawl-and-brawl.



This has nothing to do with Chuck and is just about doing justice to Randy: He wasn't "standard" or "predictable." He had the Greco clinch work and trips from in close as well as the shots from the outside. He was actually a lot like Jones, which is why he could shoot power doubles and slam Rizzo into the fence while also surprising people like Ricco and Chuck with slick trips from the clinch.



Chuck also spent very little time in the clinch. Especially at UFC 52 and then again at UFC 57, his footwork was incredible and he never allowed Randy to get near him, and if he did get near him he'd always get cracked and that's when Chuck either broke his nose or turned his lights out. For whatever reason(s) you think Chuck would be some walk in the park, you've got to realize that Chuck in his prime is not a 40-year-old Vladdy or Jake O'Brien.



I know. It's the truth. Tito beat an old and broken down Ken Shamrock. Machida beat and old and washed up Randy. JDS took out an older and slower Cro Cop. It happens. Fighters age. They're not always at their best. There's no sense denying reality.



So you don't believe Rampage except when he confirms what you want confirmed?



You're proving my point. Age is just a number. It's case-by-case. Masakatsu Funaki and Bas Rutten were broken down, injury-riddled, retired has-beens in their early 30s, while Randy Couture didn't have his first MMA fight until he was 33. Everybody's different, everybody's body reacts differently, everybody's body breaks down in different ways at different rates at different points in their lives/careers. It's not as simple as saying "They were only x age" or "This guy did x at y age."

I normally like engaging with you because this is disingenuous and a case study in accusing me of cherry-picking while you're much more guilty of it. Rampage was 33 when he fought Jones and 4-1 in his prior 5 fights. You talk about Monson being 40 but use Couture as an example of an elite wrestler whom Chuck faced. Do you know Couture was over 40 in all 3 of his fights with Liddell? Yes, fighters age differently, but none of us know exactly how. You can't just say "Fighter A beat up a bunch of old guys but Fighter B fought chronologically even older guys who were still in their primes...because it fits my narrative." A 40-year old Chuck isn't comparable to a 25-year old Jones in any way.

 

[mkt]

I don't think Jon would stand with Chuck exclusively. I think he'd use a similar approach to the one he used against Rampage. Keep the distance with kicks, avoid boxing range, and shoot once Chuck is out of position off a lunging punch. Jon is is also deceptively strong in the clinch, better than anyone he's faced

I agree. People are acting like Jones is a common grappler and Chuck would do well because he beat Tito, a 42-year old Couture, Babalu and Randleman (the latter two tried to straight up brawl with Chuck, something Jones would never do). Jones is nothing like Tito or Bader, whom he toyed with when both were young prospects.

 

[Bullitt68]

I said come up Jon because I don't think Prime Jon vs. Prime Chuck is even a match-up

In what sense? You mean because Jones was more aggressive when he was younger that he'd stand a better chance than when he'd matured and gotten much better technically? I don't know about that. Young and aggressive Jones might leave himself open to a KO punch early, while seasoned vet Jones with an all-around skill-set and lots of experience would probably have a better chance of defending against Chuck's strikes and working a grappling attack to tire him out and overwhelm him with GNP.

I don't think Jon would stand with Chuck exclusively. I think he'd use a similar approach to the one he used against Rampage. Keep the distance with kicks, avoid boxing range, and shoot once Chuck is out of position off a lunging punch.

Chuck wasn't a "lunging punch" kind of guy. At his best, Chuck was a disciplined counterpuncher. He'd use footwork and angles, he'd paw with the jab and switch it up to a nasty hook, all to get you to commit and leave yourself open to a bomb.

Jon is is also deceptively strong in the clinch, better than anyone he's faced

No way Jones's clinch is stronger than Randy's. Randy made his living in close, and even as an old man he was muscling Tim Sylvia to the ground and nearly lifted Brock off his feet at HW against guys cutting to make 265, not to mention Chuck's locking up with the Monster himself Kevin Randleman, the Ohio State HOF wrestler whose TDs were only ever stopped by Chuck and Rampage.

Rampage was 33 when he fought Jones and 4-1 in his prior 5 fights.

Again, I'm not saying that Jones' win over Rampage isn't impressive, I'm saying that he didn't beat the best version of Rampage. Rampage's best days were 2003-2008. Does that mean that he wasn't shit before 2003 or after 2008? Of course not. Rampage was still dangerous and he could still beat the Jardines and the Hamills of the division. But notice that he didn't finish anybody who was even remotely elite after 2008. A few years earlier and he would've pulverized Hamill, but older and slower and the best he's capable of is a lame decision. If you can't see that the Rampage of 2011 was nowhere near as explosive or devastating as the Rampage of 2005 or 2007, then there's no point having this conversation.

You talk about Monson being 40 but use Couture as an example of an elite wrestler whom Chuck faced. Do you know Couture was over 40 in all 3 of his fights with Liddell?

You're not understanding anything that I'm saying, are you?

Yes, fighters age differently, but none of us know exactly how. You can't just say "Fighter A beat up a bunch of old guys but Fighter B fought chronologically even older guys who were still in their primes...because it fits my narrative." A 40-year old Chuck isn't comparable to a 25-year old Jones in any way.

You're not understanding anything that you're saying either, are you? This might not be a fruitful conversation, but try rereading my posts and see if they make sense the second time.

I agree. People are acting like Jones is a common grappler and Chuck would do well because he beat Tito, a 42-year old Couture, Babalu and Randleman (the latter two tried to straight up brawl with Chuck, something Jones would never do).

You either haven't seen these fights or you don't remember them (or you don't know what "latter" means). None of those guys "tried to straight up brawl with Chuck." That's ridiculously off-base. Tito and Randy both obviously wanted (and constantly tried for, and sometimes landed) TDs. As for the latter two, both Babalu and Randleman also fought with the goal of getting Chuck to the ground. Babalu was a skilled MT striker who trained with Marco Ruas (and he fittingly won his first MMA fight with low kicks), but he spent that whole first fight with Chuck looking for a way in for TDs because he knew his only way to survive was to get the fight to the ground, but Chuck's sprawl-and-brawl was damn near impenetrable and so he never even came close to taking him down, forced instead to spend time on the feet, and that's Chuck's world. (He was then knocked out in their second fight literally trying for a TD.) And that's three-time Brazilian National Wrestling champion Babalu, who'd been wrestling since he was 9. As for Randleman, he literally didn't throw a single strike against Chuck. Randleman came out, took the center of the cage, and tried to counter a punch with a shot but Chuck defended, fought Randleman off in the clinch against the fence, and then knocked him out as soon as they broke. And that was former UFC HW champ and Ohio State HOF wrestler Kevin Randleman. None of these guys were "standard" old timey scrubs incapable of even fathoming the astronomical wrestling talents of Jon Jones.

 

[Daniel Henry]

Epic fight I predict ending in no contest due to both fighters eye poking the shit out of each till both blind

 

[bambambigelow]

Where did this idea that Jon Jones is not an elite striker come from? He's dominated everyone he's fought on both stand up and on the ground. No one has ever outstruck him.

 

[linvillegorge]

Chuck definitely looked like he had a helluva reach. He had obviously long arms and wide shoulders.

 

[linvillegorge]

Where did this idea that Jon Jones is not an elite striker come from? He's dominated everyone he's fought on both stand up and on the ground. No one has ever outstruck him.

Elite striker for MMA. The threat of the takedown changes everything and he's elite in the clinch too so you have to be cautious of of getting in too close. There's a lot of guys who would beat him in a kickboxing match but it's MMA so it's a moot point.