Yes and....yes, yes it does. Especially since Tony has ducked a rematch with Johnson not too long ago. And Holloway went undefeated for a long time after losing to Conor as well as becoming Champ. Another fact for you, Holloway was Conors SECOND FIGHT in the UFC after Conor ko'd the Bamma Beast Marcus Brimmage.
Are 0 title defense and 4 ranked wins opinions? You are stating facts that don't really help your argument. Conor had 14 fights with championship experience in Cage Warriors. That's more impressive than whatever Holloway did before fighting Conor. It's amazing that Conor is the first fighter in history to clear out a division by just becoming the champ with 4 ranked wins.
You do realize Conor wasn't ranked number one when he first came to the UFC? Heck, everyone thought Brimmage was going to ko him because Conor hadn't faced any UFC competition.
that contest was glorious. It was hilarious watching all the Brimmage fans silenced.
Yeah I think a guy making his debut is ranked number one. You really think that little of me? Everyone thought Brimmage was going to win? You sure about that opinion of yours? Because Conor was the favorite going into that fight. And yes that was an amazing performance. This is getting off topic.
Lol. He had 3 top 10 wins at FW.
I don't think little of you. Just stating facts and joking around a little. But yes, most fighters and fans favored Brimmage. Marcus was on multiple pod casts and the narrative was that Conor had never fought any UFC competition so he would most likely lose.
McGregor is a reptilian.He was a great featherweight but that weight cut was legitimately frightening.
Looks like a different human being lol.
I don’t mind revisiting my thinking. I checked out stats, and they’re pretty even.
Bestfightodds, fightmetric, and mmadecisions are your friends for numbers/stats/facts. Conor was the odds on favorite despite whatever narrative you heard. Simply stating facts doesn't automatically make you right. It depends on how you use them to support your argument.
I appreciate you looking at stats and actually trying to give a tactical breakdown instead of just using mmamath like the guy who you responded to did. I point out the flaws of his statements with numbers already and he hasn't replied back.
Haha, he’s a good dude though. He’s usually pretty good about replying too. As for me, I don’t mind re-looking at my own points of view if I didn’t express something the best way, or trying to support my POV with data.
Ok?
Betting odds are reflective of public perception. You can see how the odds shift based on the money coming in. If a lot of people bet on Brimmage as the underdog then the odds should have shifted to him becoming the favorite or at least a smaller underdog. Conor started off as the favorite and ended up as the favorite so not much changed. Bro I gave you bestfightodds. Look at it yourself. It was close. Maybe 1.5:1 favorite for Conor.
Okay. Let’s go:
Look up
I'm glad you actually took the time to do some research after my response. But what you posted has nothing to do with how I responded to you. Read my previous post where I quoted you. I told you it's subjective and I'm not going to argue with you who is the better striker. I just pointed out the flaws in your post that I quoted. You should have done the research before posting but at least you corrected that mistake.
Why should his 170 record be 1-2? He clearly won 3 rounds against Diaz. The only question marks are whether round 3 was a 10-8 or not, so it’s either a McGregor victory or a draw, I’ve watched it several times as fan of both men and there’s no way Diaz won that fight.
I agree I wasn’t very accurate, because I was replying to in my mind very outlandish statement. I still think Donald won the first round by landing cleaner punches. Tony just ate them like a mad man. I’m a huge Tony fan and believe he could defeat Conor, but in no way he is a better striker than Conor. It’s basically common knowledge.
