Cormier "close to perfect"

Shahrukh Khan said:
IMO You're a perfect fighter when you win all your fight by finishing them.
Winning by decision makes you a perfect athlete, but not a perfect fighter..

The perfect fighter is the one that can beat the shit of anyone no matter what the rules are. Would Cormier be undefeated if there was no rounds or decisions and the fight were going until one is down or submitted? Maybe, but not sure..
Same goes for guys like GSP, would he have been the champ that long if the one to win was last man standing, I doubt it..

i think that is one of the biggest problem with wrestlers, most of them (or course not all of them), are scoring points, not fighting. They are athletes (you can even say great fighting athletes though) but not fighters !

Anyway I still see Cormier beating Jones by decision (even if he's first title in the ufc will be against Gus :p ), but he'll probably lose the 1st round as it usually go to the champ in the UFC ;)
Click to expand...
Beating someone up does not equate finishing, some people do not get finished except by freak injury .. ala Condit.

Your definition of perfect fighter has a huge flaw.
 
He hasn't fought anybody decent except Nelson and Barnett

BIGFOOT- no
MIR- maybe years back, but today, no
CUMMINGS- lol no
Monson-no

Not having a 100% round win rate really tells me how bad he is, not how good

Jones is going to really f*uck this guy up
 
Jipa said:
Out of curiosity, can't you do the math for me and tell me? I'm sure you are a lot more interested in this than I am.

I'm only interested in pointing out the absurdity of Cormier hype and listening to your paper thin arguments about his greatness.
Click to expand...

There is no math. What math is there for me to do for you? You made a claim, back it up or shut up, it's really that simple.

I also never said anything about him being great, the paper thin arguments and logical fallacies can stay in your corner my friend.
 
Jipa said:
You mean 1. never lost a round or 2. never has and never will lose a round?

1. Wrestlers fighting outmatched opponents.

2. No one.
Click to expand...

OK, so when GSP didn't lose a round in all those fights, he was only fighting outmatched opponents, right? Or maybe, just maybe, they were outmatched because he was INCREDIBLY TALENTED AND HARDWORKING. Cormier outmatches guys like BF and Barnett despite giving up a massive size advantage. Why? Because he is very, very talented. And now that he is working hard to fight at 205 and has proven he can make the weight, he should make some very serious waves at LHW.

Cormier is legit. Not sure if he can topple Jones, but even if he can't, his resume is superb.
 
UJustGotChaeld said:
There is no math. What math is there for me to do for you? You made a claim, back it up or shut up, it's really that simple.

I also never said anything about him being great, the paper thin arguments and logical fallacies can stay in your corner my friend.
Click to expand...

Dude, there is math!

Cormier is undefeated after beating a litany of talented HW (I think 4 top tens?) that he was dwarfed by. 1:1 win ratio, there's your math.
 
UJustGotChaeld said:
Beating someone up does not equate finishing, some people do not get finished except by freak injury .. ala Condit.

Your definition of perfect fighter has a huge flaw.
Click to expand...

For you the best fighter is the one scoring the most points, for me is the last one standing, i don't think my definition has any we just don't appreciate the same values...


If we take martial arts as a sport, you're 100% right, but if we stick to the real definition of martial arts, as it was supposed to be before it became a sport, I am the one being right.
If MMA originally Vale Tudo was about scoring points during rounds, guys like Helio Gracie would have never been famous and nobody would knew BJJ out of Brazil nowadays..
 
UJustGotChaeld said:
There is no math. What math is there for me to do for you? You made a claim, back it up or shut up, it's really that simple.

I also never said anything about him being great, the paper thin arguments and logical fallacies can stay in your corner my friend.
Click to expand...

I'm quite sure there are a lot of fighters out there who haven't lost a round with their wrestling style. A lot of guys I've never heard of. In general, there are a lot of undefeated fighters on this planet.

Do you disagree when I say that wrestling control in the ground and in the clinch with boxing is the ultimate "round winning" style of MMA?
 
MMAaddictus said:
I hope somebody knocks this guy out. I don't understand the hype.
Click to expand...

not sure there is "hype" exactly, but people expect a lot out of the guy now that he has schooled bigfoot, barnett, mir, and roy nelson. none of those guys looked like they belonged in the ring with him. and now that jones has almost cleared out LHW, i guess there's interest in seeing him perhaps fight for the title.

he has good standup, awesome clinch, outstanding wrestling.
 
Who has he fought really? Barnett? Come on! LOL. Cummings? Trololol! Nelson? LOL!
 
Shahrukh Khan said:
IMO You're a perfect fighter when you win all your fight by finishing them.
Winning by decision makes you a perfect athlete, but not a perfect fighter..

The perfect fighter is the one that can beat the shit of anyone no matter what the rules are. Would Cormier be undefeated if there was no rounds or decisions and the fight were going until one is down or submitted? Maybe, but not sure..
Same goes for guys like GSP, would he have been the champ that long if the one to win was last man standing, I doubt it..

i think that is one of the biggest problem with wrestlers, most of them (or course not all of them), are scoring points, not fighting. They are athletes (you can even say great fighting athletes though) but not fighters !

Anyway I still see Cormier beating Jones by decision (even if he's first title in the ufc will be against Gus :p ), but he'll probably lose the 1st round as it usually go to the champ in the UFC ;)
Click to expand...

So in your opinion there have been no perfect fighters? Or a fighter that is 5-0 but all wins by finish is perfect, but a guy who is 30-0 with only 24 finishes is imperfect? Please explain this ludicrous system you use for judging perfection, because either it is insane (my suspicion) or your method for defining perfection is....well....perfect. So much so that I haven't encountered it yet.
 
MMAaddictus said:
Who has he fought really? Barnett? Come on! LOL. Cummings? Trololol! Nelson? LOL!
Click to expand...

Bigfoot, Mir, Paleilei...guys much larger than him, and whom he destroyed. Well, OK, not Mir, but he won that fight handily.

What is it going to take for people to admit that an undefeated HW with several big wins is legitimate when he cuts some flab and fights at 205?!? I'm not even a huge fan, but it is madness to pretend Cormier isn't a real threat at LHW.
 
All i know is that the UFC must be preying he stays perfect and avoids that H Bomb. If he does... big money Jones fight...
 
Codpiece said:
So in your opinion there have been no perfect fighters? Or a fighter that is 5-0 but all wins by finish is perfect, but a guy who is 30-0 with only 24 finishes is imperfect? Please explain this ludicrous system you use for judging perfection, because either it is insane (my suspicion) or your method for defining perfection is....well....perfect. So much so that I haven't encountered it yet.
Click to expand...

The "perfect" answer to that is simply that nobody is perfect no matter what subject we're talking about... ;)
If you can see someone as perfect in this world, it probably means that you have very low standards..

During Pride FC time, wrestlers were not that dominant due to the knees and kicks on the groung, in my eyes you cannot be considered a perfect fighter as long as it only depends on the rules !
 
Jesus. some of these are just troll posts or typed by dimwits. Cormier is the only guy who could take it too velasquez and the shertards don't see the hype. Shouldn't be typing this. probably can't be understood by these e level posters.
 
Shahrukh Khan said:
The "perfect" answer to that is simply that nobody is perfect no matter what subject we're talking about... ;)
If you can see someone as perfect in this world, it probably means that you have very low standards..

During Pride FC time, wrestlers were not that dominant due to the knees and kicks on the groung, in my eyes you cannot be considered a perfect fighter as long as it only depends on the rules !
Click to expand...

I can handle that as a solid response. I don't agree with your philosophy, though I guess that is because I view MMA (and the world at large) through a lens that is imperfect, and accepts various standards as 'close to perfect' or asymptotic to perfection.


Props to you on a good answer.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,236,568
Messages
55,427,907
Members
174,774
Latest member
Judoka_Noob

Share this page

Back
Top