Current MMA Champions by age

[Arrrrgh]

So weird that I update it as champions age and belts change hands. Like, why would I even do that?

My intention isn't to be condescending so please don't read this with that tone, but yes, exactly. Why would you keep updating this thread when it isn't very interesting and people don't really care?

It's kinda bad forum etiquette. It's like a blend between necrobumping and bumping your own thread repeatedly.

EDIT***
that said, me replying like this is arguably shittier etiquette and this is a karate forum for bullshitting so perhaps I just don't get the culture here despite being around a couple decades. Anyway, food for thought. I digress.

 

[Shaddows]

I'm not worked up, I just swear a lot. There's always going to be exceptions, no doubt, but the 27-35 range is about as set in stone as it gets. You should also note that I almost always (intentionally) include "typically" or "usually" or "commonly" or something similar to notate that these are the most common occurrences. Which, of course, allows for the reality that there will always be an exception.

Then I think we agree with each other.

I would guess we just disagree on how many exceptions there are

 

[Sweater of AV]

Scientifically speaking, a man's physical prime is typically between the ages of 27-35. That's not me making a claim, that is when most men have the highest muscle density, muscle strength, speed, and reaction time. The average age of current champions being between 32 and 33 is just actual real-world demonstration.

That's false. You can look at the 100m sprint as an obvious counter-example. The typical age of when people set their best times is closer to 25. It's rare to be over 30 and still be setting your best times.

You can't just make blanket statements and add "scientifically speaking" to make it sound like you know what you're talking about. Each of those traits will peak at a different time and for the most part happen at an age less than 30 years old. Different sports will also have different prime years.

MMA having current champions being around 32 or 33 isn't a real world demonstration of your claim. It's a combination of the physical traits required as well as the mental aspect required. Additionally, one typically needs an immense amount of experience in order to do well in the sport and the starting age is higher than most sports.

 

[Fioretti]

My intention isn't to be condescending so please don't read this with that tone, but yes, exactly. Why would you keep updating this thread when it isn't very interesting and people don't really care?

It's kinda bad forum etiquette. It's like a blend between necrobumping and bumping your own thread repeatedly.

EDIT***
that said, me replying like this is arguably shittier etiquette and this is a karate forum for bullshitting so perhaps I just don't get the culture here despite being around a couple decades. Anyway, food for thought. I digress.

I didn't make these threads to get recognition or a bunch of replies. I did it to keep track and see how the numbers will change over time. The people that appreciate it are also appreciated, and the people that get offended or are being intentionally juvenile are expected. It would actually be preferred if there were less replies, that way I can update and notate the changes easier. All this bickering from these kids who are upset that their favorite fighter wasn't "out of prime" when they lost is normal. Sure dawg at its finest.

Then I think we agree with each other.

I would guess we just disagree on how many exceptions there are

That's a fair statement. I personally think the biggest difference, for us, is what qualifies as an exception. The guys who acquired their belts at a very young or very old age are the outliers. You mentioning Silva being an exception because he held his belt until he was 38 isn't really an exception or outlier due to age/prime in my opinion, it's the perfect example. The fact that he didn't actually lose a fight from age 30 to 38 is the exception, because it's so fucking rare, but acquiring the belt at 31 is normal.

That's false. You can look at the 100m sprint as an obvious counter-example. The typical age of when people set their best times is closer to 25. It's rare to be over 30 and still be setting your best times.

You can't just make blanket statements and add "scientifically speaking" to make it sound like you know what you're talking about. Each of those traits will peak at a different time and for the most part happen at an age less than 30 years old. Different sports will also have different prime years.

MMA having current champions being around 32 or 33 isn't a real world demonstration of your claim. It's a combination of the physical traits required as well as the mental aspect required. Additionally, one typically needs an immense amount of experience in order to do well in the sport.

27-35 being a man's physiological prime is not false.

Yes, different sports will have different ages for peak performance, but not for when a man enters/exits his physical prime.

MMA is an endurance sport. You're trying to compare peak performance in sprinting to an endurance combat sport. Olympic endurance athletes typically have peak performance in their early-to-mid 30's, and have even shown to improve their times in their early 40s. Muscle mass and muscle density is detrimental to sprinters, which is why you don't see many sprinters between 27-35, because this is when men have the most muscle mass and density, as they are in their physical prime.

MMA having current champions between 32-33, and most UFC champions being over the age of 27 IS an actual real-world demonstration (and documentation) of their age range. Yes, it's a combination of physical and mental traits. Your entire body (which includes your brain) is in top form, for most men, between the ages of 31 and 33. Cognitive ability can increase until early-to-mid 60's in most, and strength can hold until 45-50. Speed and reflexes typically start declining at 36-37, and becomes more noticeable into the 40s.

Talk about blanket statements trying to make it sound like you know what you're talking about. Wtf? How does the ages of all MMA champions in UFC history, and all current MMA champions from the top 2 orgs, aligning with the scientific classification of physiological prime (ages 27-35) tell you that MMA fighters are out of their prime past the age of 30? How?

 

[Sweater of AV]

27-35 being a man's physiological prime is not false.

Yes, different sports will have different ages for peak performance, but not for when a man enters/exits his physical prime.

MMA is an endurance sport. You're trying to compare peak performance in sprinting to an endurance combat sport. Olympic endurance athletes typically have peak performance in their early-to-mid 30's, and have even shown to improve their times in their early 40s. Muscle mass and muscle density is detrimental to sprinters, which is why you don't see many sprinters between 27-35, because this is when men have the most muscle mass and density, as they are in their physical prime.

MMA having current champions between 32-33, and most UFC champions being over the age of 27 IS an actual real-world demonstration (and documentation) of their age range. Yes, it's a combination of physical and mental traits. Your entire body (which includes your brain) is in top form, for most men, between the ages of 31 and 33. Cognitive ability can increase until early-to-mid 60's in most, and strength can hold until 45-50. Speed and reflexes typically start declining at 36-37, and becomes more noticeable into the 40s.

Talk about blanket statements trying to make it sound like you know what you're talking about. Wtf? How does the ages of all MMA champions in UFC history, and all current MMA champions from the top 2 orgs, aligning with the scientific classification of physiological prime (ages 27-35) tell you that MMA fighters are out of their prime past the age of 30? How?

It is completely false. Also, your statement was the following:

Scientifically speaking, a man's physical prime is typically between the ages of 27-35. That's not me making a claim, that is when most men have the highest muscle density, muscle strength, speed, and reaction time. The average age of current champions being between 32 and 33 is just actual real-world demonstration.

I have a simple task for you. Go find me the scientific study that reports your speed and reaction time are at their peak from 27-35.

Now you're putting focus on endurance because you actually started to do some research.

Also, you might want to look at when athletes put up their best numbers in different sports.

 

[Shaddows]

That's a fair statement. I personally think the biggest difference, for us, is what qualifies as an exception. The guys who acquired their belts at a very young or very old age are the outliers. You mentioning Silva being an exception because he held his belt until he was 38 isn't really an exception or outlier due to age/prime in my opinion, it's the perfect example. The fact that he didn't actually lose a fight from age 30 to 38 is the exception, because it's so fucking rare, but acquiring the belt at 31 is normal.

Well, you would have to check the average age people are champs.
I can bet you that not many remained champions until that age.
In that sense, (and the fact he just beat an old Boxing champ whom nonetheless is a decade younger than him) shows IMHO he is indeed an outlier.

 

[icemun]

UFC

HW: Francis Ngannou - 35
LHW: Glover Teixeira - 42
MW: Israel Adesanya - 32
WW: Kamaru Usman - 34
LW: Charles Oliveira - 32
FW: Alexander Volkanovski - 33
BW: Aljamain Sterling - 32
FLW: Brandon Moreno - 28
Women’s FW: Amanda Nunes - 33
Women's BW: Julianna Pena - 32
Women’s FLW: Valentina Shevchenko - 33
Women’s SW: Rose Namajunas - 29

Youngest - 28
Oldest - 42
Average age = 33

BELLATOR

HW: Bader - 38
LHW: Nemkov - 29
MW: Mousasi - 36
WW: Amosov - 28
LW: Freire - 35
FW: McKee - 26
BW: Pettis - 28
WFW: Cyborg - 36
FLW: Velasquez - 35

Youngest - 26
Oldest - 38
Average age = 32.33

Average age of all champions from both organizations combined = 32.71


UFC Champions by age - HW
UFC Champions by age - LHW
UFC Champions by age - MW
UFC Champions by age - WW
UFC Champions by age - LW
UFC Champions by age - FW
UFC Champions by age - BW
UFC Champions by age - FLW


The links above are all champions in UFC history.

Its wild that people accuse Jones of beating old champs/legends.

They were all 29-32. Under the average age of champions

 

[Sweater of AV]

Its wild that people accuse Jones of beating old champs/legends.

They were all 29-32. Under the average age of champions

It's also "wild" that Jones in the middle of his supposed "27-35 prime" arguably lost to Reyes and Santos.

I'd say it's also "wild" that Jon has failed more drug tests than anyone in history.

 

[Fioretti]

It is completely false. Also, your statement was the following:



I have a simple task for you. Go find me the scientific study that reports your speed and reaction time are at their peak from 27-35.

Now you're putting focus on endurance because you actually started to do some research.

Also, you might want to look at when athletes put up their best numbers in different sports.

Claiming something is "false" doesn't make it false. It's the combination of muscle strength, muscle density, speed, and reaction time that will never naturally be higher. You might throw punches a little faster at age 24 than you do at 32, but that's likely because you're carrying less muscle mass that is less dense. Do you think I meant speed as in sprinting ability? Here's a quote from me months ago explaining the same thing:

Whether or not a fighter falls off before he reaches his physical prime doesn't mean he's "out of his prime" at an earlier age. Injuries, PED testing, weight cuts, better competition, and 500 other things can attribute to their decrease in performance. It doesn't mean their body is physiologically different or inferior. A man's physical prime is typically between the ages of 27-35. They'll never naturally have as high a combination of strength, speed, and reflexes before or after that time period.

You think I'm just now starting to "put focus" on endurance because I've only "just started" to do some research? Buddy, here's another quote from me, in this very thread, from months ago:

MMA is also an endurance sport. People tend to forget this. Endurance athletes typically peak in their early to mid 30s, and some can even show improvement into their early to mid 40s.

You want me to find you a scientific study that reports speed and reaction time only? How about you show me something that refutes what I've been saying? Show me something that says a man's physical prime is 25-30 and that after 30 they decline physically? You really can't, because it's not true. The physical declines typically start in the late 30's. Some studies say that muscle strength peaks at 25 and can hold until your 50's. It plateaus. Add in the density that starts in your late 20's - early 30's, the cognitive abilities (such as reaction time), experience, and the ability to hold onto your muscle mass/density - you have your prime.

Here's an article that may help your understanding: Aging and Athletic Performance - training, exercise, strength, muscle - World of Sports Science (faqs.org)

Here's the most relative paragraph (oddly enough the first one) that shits on what you've been saying:

There are certain immutable truths concerning the performance of the human body as it ages, particularly as the athlete reaches age 40. The physical peak for most humans, in most sports, is between 25 and 35 years of age; during this peak period, the well-conditioned athlete can create a confluence of muscular strength, peak cardiovascular and oxygen transport, speed and reaction time, and mental capabilities (including the ability to deal with competitive pressures), all bound together by a desire to succeed.

There's also a nice section about endurance athletes that's almost identical to what I said:

Since 1950, the average age of world champion distance runners in the 3-mi (5,000 m) races through to the 26-mi marathons (42.2 km) ranges between 28 and 32 years of age. From this peak of ability, runners will continue to perform at levels close to their personal best into their late 30s and early 40s; performance then declines at a rate of approximately 2% per year through age 80

 

[Fioretti]

Well, you would have to check the average age people are champs.
I can bet you that not many remained champions until that age.
In that sense, (and the fact he just beat an old Boxing champ whom nonetheless is a decade younger than him) shows IMHO he is indeed an outlier.

7 out of 21 current MMA champions (33.33%) are over the age of 35

When I did the divisional age threads, I should've included how long they held their title, or what age they lost it at. I may just do that one of these days if I have time, but the way I did it actually helps the argument of those who think that this is a sport for 20 year-olds. The numbers would be much higher if I included all that.

Anderson is an outlier in general, no doubt about that, but he's not an outlier in terms of increasing these numbers at all. That's what I mean. He counts as 31 in the MW division thread.

 

[Sweater of AV]

Claiming something is "false" doesn't make it false. It's the combination of muscle strength, muscle density, speed, and reaction time that will never naturally be higher. You might throw punches a little faster at age 24 than you do at 32, but that's likely because you're carrying less muscle mass that is less dense. Do you think I meant speed as in sprinting ability? Here's a quote from me months ago explaining the same thing:



You think I'm just now starting to "put focus" on endurance because I've only "just started" to do some research? Buddy, here's another quote from me, in this very thread, from months ago:



You want me to find you a scientific study that reports speed and reaction time only? How about you show me something that refutes what I've been saying? Show me something that says a man's physical prime is 25-30 and that after 30 they decline physically? You really can't, because it's not true. The physical declines typically start in the late 30's. Some studies say that muscle strength peaks at 25 and can hold until your 50's. It plateaus. Add in the density that starts in your late 20's - early 30's, the cognitive abilities (such as reaction time), experience, and the ability to hold onto your muscle mass/density - you have your prime.

Here's an article that may help your understanding: Aging and Athletic Performance - training, exercise, strength, muscle - World of Sports Science (faqs.org)

Here's the most relative paragraph (oddly enough the first one) that shits on what you've been saying:

There are certain immutable truths concerning the performance of the human body as it ages, particularly as the athlete reaches age 40. The physical peak for most humans, in most sports, is between 25 and 35 years of age; during this peak period, the well-conditioned athlete can create a confluence of muscular strength, peak cardiovascular and oxygen transport, speed and reaction time, and mental capabilities (including the ability to deal with competitive pressures), all bound together by a desire to succeed.

There's also a nice section about endurance athletes that's almost identical to what I said:

Since 1950, the average age of world champion distance runners in the 3-mi (5,000 m) races through to the 26-mi marathons (42.2 km) ranges between 28 and 32 years of age. From this peak of ability, runners will continue to perform at levels close to their personal best into their late 30s and early 40s; performance then declines at a rate of approximately 2% per year through age 80

Once again, this was your statement:

Scientifically speaking, a man's physical prime is typically between the ages of 27-35. That's not me making a claim, that is when most men have the highest muscle density, muscle strength, speed, and reaction time. The average age of current champions being between 32 and 33 is just actual real-world demonstration.

Just show me the scientific study that led you to this conclusion. I don't want to see random sources.

Since you're all about "science" though:

https://www.wired.com/2011/07/athletes-peak-age/

Athletic performance obviously decreases as people get older and their bodies wear down physically, but new data compiled by French researchers sheds new light on exactly when these declines might start showing up, at least in some sporting disciplines.

The careers of more than 1,150 swimmers and track-and-field athletes, as well as the accomplishments of nearly a hundred chess grandmasters, were scrutinized based on the event they were participating in, as well as their age and how old they were when they established any world records. In all, more than 11,200 performances among these athletes made it into the data set, and the results confirm that there reaches an age – a physiological tipping point, if you will – when athletes start to experience an irreversible downturn in their abilities.

Generally speaking, athletes start to see physical declines at age 26, give or take. (This would seem in line with the long-standing notion in baseball that players tend to hit their peak anywhere from ages 27 to 30.) For swimmers, the news is more sobering, as the mean peak age is 21. For chess grandmasters, participating in an activity that relies more than mental acuity and sharpness rather than brute, acquired physicality, the peak age is closer to 31.4.

 

[KillerIsBack V2]

Fedor cucks, explain why Fedor was being emasculated in the states at 33 if everyone seems to be destroying competition at that age? Is it because he went 6-5 under fights sanctioned by a governing body? And that maybe, just maybe PRIDE kept his mystique alive, longer then his skills could?

No a fan of fedor, nor did i watch mma back then. But to be fair and logical. In fight sports, your milage matters more than your literal age. Fedor never stopped competing in every combat sambo tournament around through out his mma career(including the russian nationals and world championships in sambo). And was winning medals(mostly golds too) even when he was defending champions.

just my two cents. Makes sense?

 

[Carsormyr]

I didn't make these threads to get recognition or a bunch of replies. I did it to keep track and see how the numbers will change over time. The people that appreciate it are also appreciated, and the people that get offended or are being intentionally juvenile are expected. It would actually be preferred if there were less replies, that way I can update and notate the changes easier. All this bickering from these kids who are upset that their favorite fighter wasn't "out of prime" when they lost is normal. Sure dawg at its finest.

I appreciate your effort and the thread

 

[Fioretti]

Once again, this was your statement:

Scientifically speaking, a man's physical prime is typically between the ages of 27-35. That's not me making a claim, that is when most men have the highest muscle density, muscle strength, speed, and reaction time. The average age of current champions being between 32 and 33 is just actual real-world demonstration.

Just show me the scientific study that led you to this conclusion. I don't want to see random sources.

Since you're all about "science" though:

https://www.wired.com/2011/07/athletes-peak-age/

Athletic performance obviously decreases as people get older and their bodies wear down physically, but new data compiled by French researchers sheds new light on exactly when these declines might start showing up, at least in some sporting disciplines.

The careers of more than 1,150 swimmers and track-and-field athletes, as well as the accomplishments of nearly a hundred chess grandmasters, were scrutinized based on the event they were participating in, as well as their age and how old they were when they established any world records. In all, more than 11,200 performances among these athletes made it into the data set, and the results confirm that there reaches an age – a physiological tipping point, if you will – when athletes start to experience an irreversible downturn in their abilities.

Generally speaking, athletes start to see physical declines at age 26, give or take. (This would seem in line with the long-standing notion in baseball that players tend to hit their peak anywhere from ages 27 to 30.) For swimmers, the news is more sobering, as the mean peak age is 21. For chess grandmasters, participating in an activity that relies more than mental acuity and sharpness rather than brute, acquired physicality, the peak age is closer to 31.4.

You want to talk shit about "random sources" and dismiss the scientific information I provided to you from faqs.org - which cites the American College of Sports Medicine as its source - then proceed to link a fucking article from wired.com? You're underlining a portion that says athletes generally see declines at age 26, and then it immediately goes to say baseball players tend to peak between 27-30. So, your claim is that baseball players peak after their physical decline? The source credited in the article you linked is "French researchers". Where's the study? Where's the graphs? Which sports did they compare? Chess players, sprinters, and swimmers? Pretty weak rebuttal, bud.

 

[Fioretti]

@Sweater of AV

Here's some more studies:

A study done by Robert Kail and John Cavanaugh and featured in the book, Human Development: A Life-Span View, stated that men reach their physical peak between their late 20s and early 30s. These findings are further substantiated by a report found in the Encyclopedia of Sports Medicine and Science.

The Human Development: A Life-Span View study concluded that by the time a man reaches their late 30s their physical strength, flexibility, and muscle mass begins to decline and will continue declining. However, you can combat this by participating in regular sporting and fitness activities which will allow you to maintain your peak for at least 20 years longer if you don’t have any debilitating injuries.

 

[Sweater of AV]

You want to talk shit about "random sources" and dismiss the scientific information I provided to you from faqs.org - which cites the American College of Sports Medicine as its source - then proceed to link a fucking article from wired.com? You're underlining a portion that says athletes generally see declines at age 26, and then it immediately goes to say baseball players tend to peak between 27-30. So, your claim is that baseball players peak after their physical decline? The source credited in the article you linked is "French researchers". Where's the study? Where's the graphs? Which sports did they compare? Chess players, sprinters, and swimmers? Pretty weak rebuttal, bud.

You're a disaster. Post any scientific study to back up your statement. No random nonsense.

Also, the study was linked. I know clicking on links must be difficult. Here's another one for you though.

Sian V. Allen & Will G. Hopkins. Age of Peak Competitive Performance of Elite Athletes: A Systematic Review. 19 June 2015. Sports Medicine. DOI: 10.1007/s40279-015-0354-3

It's summarized here:

https://www.realclearscience.com/jo...s_is_when_athletes_hit_their_peak_109280.html

For many of us, the hump comes too soon. We reach the apex of our physical abilities around age thirty, then it's downhill from there.

Elite athletes peak even earlier, according to a new systematic review published in the journal Sports Medicine.

Sian Allen and Will Hopkins, based out of the Sports Performance Research Institute in New Zealand, poured through the scientific literature to ascertain the age at which athletes competing in various sports hit peak competitive performance. Here's what they found:

- For sprints, jumps, and throws, men and women hit their peak around 25 years of age.

- For sprint swimming events, men peak around 24 years and women peak at roughly 22 years. Endurance swimmers peak about a year earlier for both sexes.

- Male and female marathoners are at their best at ages 30 and 29, respectively.

- Male and female triathletes peak at 27-years-old.

- Men and women competing in the Ironman triathlon, which consists of a 2.4-mile swim, a 112-mile bicycle ride, and a 26.2-mile run, are at their best at the ages of 32 and 34, respectively.

- Professional hockey players perform best between the ages of 27 and 28.

Generally, the authors noticed that athletes competing in "sprint" events requiring explosive power peak much sooner than athletes competing in endurance or game-oriented events, perhaps because older athletes are able to use experience and savvy to their advantage.


You're making this far too easy. Also note they suggest "experience and savvy" to help explain the success of older athletes in game-oriented events, as I said in the first post.

How about instead of making silly claims and trying to find random sources to fit your statements, you actually look at scientific studies and draw conclusions? That's what most intelligent people do.

 

[Fioretti]

You're a disaster. Post any scientific study to back up your statement. No random nonsense.

Also, the study was linked. I know clicking on links must be difficult. Here's another one for you though.

Sian V. Allen & Will G. Hopkins. Age of Peak Competitive Performance of Elite Athletes: A Systematic Review. 19 June 2015. Sports Medicine. DOI: 10.1007/s40279-015-0354-3

It's summarized here:

https://www.realclearscience.com/jo...s_is_when_athletes_hit_their_peak_109280.html

For many of us, the hump comes too soon. We reach the apex of our physical abilities around age thirty, then it's downhill from there.

Elite athletes peak even earlier, according to a new systematic review published in the journal Sports Medicine.

Sian Allen and Will Hopkins, based out of the Sports Performance Research Institute in New Zealand, poured through the scientific literature to ascertain the age at which athletes competing in various sports hit peak competitive performance. Here's what they found:

- For sprints, jumps, and throws, men and women hit their peak around 25 years of age.

- For sprint swimming events, men peak around 24 years and women peak at roughly 22 years. Endurance swimmers peak about a year earlier for both sexes.

- Male and female marathoners are at their best at ages 30 and 29, respectively.

- Male and female triathletes peak at 27-years-old.

- Men and women competing in the Ironman triathlon, which consists of a 2.4-mile swim, a 112-mile bicycle ride, and a 26.2-mile run, are at their best at the ages of 32 and 34, respectively.

- Professional hockey players perform best between the ages of 27 and 28.

Generally, the authors noticed that athletes competing in "sprint" events requiring explosive power peak much sooner than athletes competing in endurance or game-oriented events, perhaps because older athletes are able to use experience and savvy to their advantage.


You're making this far too easy. Also note they suggest "experience and savvy" to help explain the success of older athletes in game-oriented events, as I said in the first post.

How about instead of making silly claims and trying to find random sources to fit your statements, you actually look at scientific studies and draw conclusions? That's what most intelligent people do.

I guess you were too dense and emotionally fueled to click the link to sportsci.org? You know, the Encyclopedia of Sports Medicine and Science? You're also still hyper-focused on peak performance in certain events, as if that equates to "physical prime". It doesn't, and it is actually covered in the link too.

This link: AGING AND EXERCISE (sportsci.org) - here are some highlights for you:

• Young adulthood typically covers the period from 20-35 years of age, when both biological function and physical performance reach their peak. During young middle-age (35-45 years), physical activity usually wanes, with a 5-10 kg accumulation of body fat.
  
• Strength peaks around 25 years of age, plateaus through 35 or 40 years of age, and then shows an accelerating decline, with 25% loss of peak force by the age of 65 years.
  
• Muscle mass decreases, apparently with a selective loss in the cross-section if not the numbers of type II fibers. It is unclear whether there is a general hypotrophy of skeletal muscle, or a selective hypoplasia and degeneration of Type II fibers, associated with a loss of nerve terminal sprouting.
  
• There is a progressive decrease in the calcium content and a deterioration in the organic matrix of the bones with aging. However, the dividing line between normality and pathology is unclear, and it is also uncertain how far a decrease of habitual physical activity contributes to the age-related calcium loss.
  
• The calcium loss can begin as early as 30 years.
  
• Regular load-bearing exercise can halt and sometimes even reverse bone mineral loss through the eighth decade of life. Such a regimen is particularly effective when accompanied by a high calcium diet (1500 mg/day).
  
• The age of peak athletic performance depends upon the key functional element required of the successful competitor. In events where flexibility is paramount (for example, gymnastics and brief swimming events) the top competitors are commonly adolescents.
  
• Because of a longer plateauing of muscle strength, performance in anaerobic events declines less steeply, and in pursuits such as golf and equitation, where experience is paramount, the best competitors are aged 30-40 years.
  
• Caution is needed in drawing physiological inferences from athletic records, since the pool of potential competitors decreases with age.

This is a much more "scientific" approach, wouldn't you say? Again, you're focused on peak performance rather than physiological science. My threads showing the age of champions is actually more closely related to a peak performance study, as they are essentially showing the same thing in relation to MMA. Yet, you want to discard the "real-world demonstration" aspect of listing these ages? That's kind of weird, isn't it? Even more weird that peak performance by most MMA fighters/champions aligns pretty tightly with physiological prime. So weird now. What would you say are the key functional elements required of a successful MMA fighter? Did you know that the age of 35 is included in the classification of "young adulthood"? That's pretty weird too, isn't it?

 

[Shaddows]

7 out of 21 current MMA champions (33.33%) are over the age of 35

When I did the divisional age threads, I should've included how long they held their title, or what age they lost it at. I may just do that one of these days if I have time, but the way I did it actually helps the argument of those who think that this is a sport for 20 year-olds. The numbers would be much higher if I included all that.

Anderson is an outlier in general, no doubt about that, but he's not an outlier in terms of increasing these numbers at all. That's what I mean. He counts as 31 in the MW division thread.

that is some fucking interesting data.
It actually demystify him a bit, but I see your point!
If you have the time, please do and let me know! I love these data!

 

[Fioretti]

that is some fucking interesting data.
It actually demystify him a bit, but I see your point!
If you have the time, please do and let me know! I love these data!

It'll take so fucking long to do all of that. Then, how do I list it? Do I put the age they attained their title, the age they lost it, and average out how long each age group held their titles? Not sure what would be the most comprehensive way to list all this shit.

Hard to demystify the GOAT until somebody matches or beats what he's done. Usman is close to tying his UFC streak, but only a fraction of his fights were title fights and/or top 5-10. Spider bless.

 

[Shaddows]

It'll take so fucking long to do all of that. Then, how do I list it? Do I put the age they attained their title, the age they lost it, and average out how long each age group held their titles? Not sure what would be the most comprehensive way to list all this shit.

Hard to demystify the GOAT until somebody matches or beats what he's done. Usman is close to tying his UFC streak, but only a fraction of his fights were title fights and/or top 5-10. Spider bless.

hahaha
Think of it like that: many fighters will break some of his records. But only one of two very special could break as many records as he did while putting a show like he did.

I don't think averaging the age would do him favors, because he stayed for a long time at the top.
I would separate the age fighters got their title (meaning arrived at the top) and average that.
I would do the same with when fighters lost their belt and average that.
This way we get the average time fighters maintain their belts
and we could see how the spider sits in that.