Do finishes really matter for p4p or goat debate?

[McDego]

Let's consider there are 2 Silvas. Silva A has 20 fights that end in 50-40 UD. Silva B has 20 fights in which he takes 300 shots for 4 and a half rounds and then gets a sub. Which Silva is the better fighter? Which is the more dominant fighter?

The fighter with 20 submissions is more dominant. He ended 20 fights on his accord.

The clock ended 20 fights for the other one.

Finishes are absolute.

 

[honzo]

It does because it leaves less to chance, if Jones has of finished Gus imagine how differently we would talk about him...
Same with GSP and Hendricks .
As someone said before, Anderson knocked out Vitor fkn Belfort

 

[honzo]

The fighter with 20 submissions is more dominant. He ended 20 fights on his accord.

The clock ended 20 fights for the other one.

Finishes are absolute.

LOL, GSP v A.Silva post.

 

[grimballer]

Let's consider there are 2 Silvas. Silva A has 20 fights that end in 50-40 UD. Silva B has 20 fights in which he takes 300 shots for 4 and a half rounds and then gets a sub. Which Silva is the better fighter? Which is the more dominant fighter?

wasnt everybody on fedors dik cause he would "come back from the dead" n finish his opponents?

these hypothetical questions are kinda stupid.

cause i could ask you whats better

20 50-45 decisions or 20 1st round finishes?

im sure majority would agree that rounds won/lost should be taken into consideration, however regularly finishing opponents > regulary going into decisions

 

[cungfu]

Let's consider there are 2 Silvas. Silva A has 20 fights that end in 50-40 UD. Silva B has 20 fights in which he takes 300 shots for 4 and a half rounds and then gets a sub. Which Silva is the better fighter? Which is the more dominant fighter?

Trick question. Silva A is not a fighter. 0/20 finishes? Does he have sock'em boppers as fists?

 

[peppo]

If other aspects such as level of competition, number of wins etc remain kinda even, then it can be used as an argument, imo. GSP and Anderson are close, but I always thought Andersons finishes made him tip over. Jones has been finishing a lot of really good fighters though, and his resume is out of this world. For me, he is actually the GOAT now, I think. It's hard to think of him like that though, but based on what he has accomplished in the sport, I think it's fair.

 

[tenniswhiz]

True. But people are gonna say the better man didn't win, considering that Chael dominated him for 4 rounds. And you can't honestly call that win dominant.

And why does a win have to be dominant?
Since people always ask "What's the big deal about finishes?" may I ask what's the big deal about 'dominance'?

If a fighter's style is to take advantage of split second mistakes rather than win rounds, then you can't really fault them for that. It's a perfectly legit strategy if the fighter can make it work often.

It can go the other way too; why does a fighter have to show dominance by winning rounds? If they're so damn dominant why can't they finish?
(oh, it's so hard to finish, right? Hard for some, natural for others)

Honestly, I'm just playing devil's advocate. I don't mind either way, and I'm impressed as long as it's a clear victory. So that can be a finish or a 50-45.
49-46 is CONSIDERABLY less impressive, and 48-47 fights (IMO) are basically a tossup even if one guy CLEARLY won 3/5 rounds. If you win 3/5 rounds, then as far as I'm concerned, on another day, you could just as easily lose 3/5 rounds.

 

[Aggro]

No point arguing with WhiteKnights

If finishes weren't important they'd have "Dominant decision of the night" instead of "Sub of the night" or "KO of the night" bonuses

Fucking LOL

The better man didn't win? Can't call that dominant? Chael submitted to him. We went over the definition of submission earlier, remember? It's literally the epitome of dominance, man. By tapping, Chael yielded to Anderson's power/authority. This made every other second of that fight irrelevant.

The big difference here is winning vs beating.

A decision is a win. You didn't BEAT the guy, but you won.

A finish is beating your opponent. You win.... absolutely.

Champ A beats a guy in 2 minutes. Champ B's opponent hangs with him for 25 minutes. Champ B is less dominant. Every time.

Dominant: ruling, governing, or controlling; having or exerting authority or influence

You exert more control, authory, and influence by finishing as you immediately end the fight when you finish. Going to decision means the clock ends the fight, not you.

 

[JonSnitchPhones]

A finish isn't INHERENTLY better than a decision. Cain's pounding of JDS is more impressive than Andy's hail mary triangle against Sonnen.

That said, finishes are usually more impressive. They are seldom not a definitive measure of beating an opponent. Whereas with a decision often you're leaving it open to the interpretation of the small majority of 3 middle aged men sitting cageside, none of which are you. And if by almost pure chance you receive their favor, you're a better? If you don't, you're worse? That's not remotely realistic. You win a few flips of the coin as opposed to losing them, and it vastly changes your legacy unfortunately. Bendo won a few virtual coin flips so he has a bunch of names on his resume he just as easily couldn't. Edgar should be 1-1 w/ Bendo, making him higher in the all-time lw rankings all things considered, but instead he got robbed the 2nd time so some people have a tough time making an argument for him. The same people have a tough time making an argument of Penn over Edgar because Penn got robbed the first time making him 0-2 instead of 1-1 (the third fight was pretty irrelevant to any discussion). Some people have difficulty ranking Pettis over Bendo based on the # of names on Bendo's resume technically, even though to demonstrate he was better Pettis deservedly beat him twice, 2nd time dominated him, and went on to finish Melendez too, who Bendo just as easily could have lost to. Subjective decisions drastically skew perceptions of relative resumes to the point comparisons often make little sense. So you need to look deeper.

Many want to boil down the argument of who was the best to how many "names" you've accumulated with a green bar next to them on Fight Finder, for simplistic purposes or to fit an agenda. It's not actually a valid way of making a determination though. Who a fighter was when you beat them, and how you beat them, in reality tells a big part of the story.

 

[McDego]

A finish isn't INHERENTLY better than a decision. Cain's pounding of JDS is more impressive than Andy's hail mary triangle against Sonnen.

That said, finishes are usually more impressive. They are seldom not a definitive measure of beating an opponent. Whereas with a decision often you're leaving it open to the interpretation of the small majority of 3 middle aged men sitting cageside, none of which are you. And if by almost pure chance you receive their favor, you're a better? If you don't, you're worse? That's not remotely realistic. You win a few flips of the coin as opposed to losing them, and it vastly changes your legacy unfortunately. Bendo won a few virtual coin flips so he has a bunch of names on his resume he just as easily couldn't. Edgar should be 1-1 w/ Bendo, making him higher in the all-time lw rankings all things considered, but instead he got robbed the 2nd time so some people have a tough time making an argument for him. The same people have a tough time making an argument of Penn over Edgar because Penn got robbed the first time making him 0-2 instead of 1-1 (the third fight was pretty irrelevant to any discussion). Some people have difficulty ranking Pettis over Bendo based on the # of names on Bendo's resume technically, even though to demonstrate he was better Pettis deservedly beat him twice, 2nd time dominated him, and went on to finish Melendez too, who Bendo just as easily could have lost to. Subjective decisions drastically skew perceptions of relative resumes to the point comparisons often make little sense. So you need to look deeper.

Many want to boil down the argument of who was the best to how many "names" you've accumulated with a green bar next to them on Fight Finder, for simplistic purposes or to fit an agenda. It's not actually a valid way of making a determination though. Who a fighter was when you beat them, and how you beat them, in reality tells a big part of the story.

Well said.

I still think decisions should be draws. If neither fighter can beat the other in the allotted time, nobody wins.

 

[TriangleMonkey]

Dominant performances and HL reel finishes are what is Excellence and should weigh in when comparing the very best

 

[dmwalking]

I think method says a lot. There's a reason why many consider Ali the GOAT. His record wasn't spotless. But it was HOW he would win. It was HOW he would come back from adversity.

That's why Fedor and Silva are good candidates for GOAT. That's why Jones is too. With a good enough defense streak, Pettis could as well. GSP is a GOAT contender because of his defense streak and crazy good skills. But he'll always rank under Fedor and Silva.

 

[The Accuser]

Finishes can be a sign of dominance or of luck. Anyway, they are not the only sign of dominance. Only for the more WWEish fans of MMA are they relevant in GOAT debates.

 

[LIL_GUY]

For sure they matter- finishes better illustrate fighter's abilities as steps above his opponents, if he shows these finishing abilities on top flight opponents on semi-regular basis.

If a fighter is so dominant the next step of that dominance is to finish. Otherwise whats the point of dominating when you could just be clearly winning, or probably winning. you'd still be winning, right?! Of course fighters want to finish their opponents!

People feared Anderson because they didnt want to get knocked out in some embarrassing fashion. I don't think they experienced the same fear when imagining loosing a decision.

And decision wins don't make great highlight reel footage like KOs/subs.

 

[DrewGZA]

How many points is a KO or submission worth? It transcends # points. Even a 50-44 just means they tried really hard but couldn't accomplish what they set out to do.

Regardless of how useful the word "dominant" is (the term has nothing to do with quality of opposition, you could beat a bunch of low level fighters and you're as dominant as heck), I'd much rather be able to put people away quickly. If 3 people attack you and you aren't taking all day to beat 1 of them, you're better.

Everyone wants to go out there and KO/submit their opponent in seconds. You can only do this if you're that much better than your opponent. You can make the excuse that the quality of opposition was too high, but look at what Pettis did to Bendo. If he won a decision everyone would say of course he didn't finish, the opposition was high quality. But Pettis didn't stop at that, he kicked ass. Anderson didn't outpoint Leben who had a ridiculous chin, he went in and KO'd him.

And GSP's "quality of opposition" is as overrated as heck. Anderson moved up a weight class and beat a former champion easily. GSP stayed in his weight class. P4P goes to Fedor and Anderson. Weightclass (WW) recognition can go to guys like GSP.

That stuff said it's more dominant if someone like Machida doesn't take any clean shots and wins a decision having wobbled their opponent at some point in the fight, than somebody like Jones getting their arm in that armbar or somebody eating a lot of shots that hurt them and later manage to KO their opponent you could argue.

 

[Magnum1978]

wasnt everybody on fedors dik cause he would "come back from the dead" n finish his opponents?

err... no?

In what Fedor fight has he ever been down or damaged so badly he's had to figuratively 'come back from the dead' for the win ?

There are none. Surviving randleman's slam demonstrated Fedor's crazy toughness, but was like a minute into the fight and was pretty much instantly reversed to be on the bottom. The only one that might have classified is if Fedor had have made it to round 3 against Bigfoot and went on to finish him.

 

[INoHespectChael]

What's more dominant? Cain's UD over JDS or Cain's TKO over JDS?

Why are you comparing 1 fluke ko to 2 easy wins? What if they both fought mur 3x and cain won three 50-45s while JDS KOed him in the first 3x?

Nobody tries to win by decision unless they want to make less money.

 

[riitzni]

They don't but we'll argue about it to the end of fucking time.

 

[Tuaminator]

If anderon and jones were equal and then you looked at there vitor fights. Silva will get the bump

 

[DarthChen731]

"Hasn't finished his last 4 opponents disregarding Chael and Vitor"


And this is where I stopped reading