Do win-loss records matter in MMA?

I think its ridiculous that people judge a fighter based on their record alone.
 
It does matter. The record gives insight into the fighter.
 
Nope, just how much money they make and how much shit they can talk, obviously. Welcome to 2016.
 
Rittsy said:
Anyone with an L on their record is a can.
Click to expand...

This is correct.

Conor is a can.

Rousey is a can.

Holm is a can.

Sage and Paige are cans.

Cain Velazquez is a can.

Aldo is a can.

Yeah, this is pretty much what Sherdoggers think these days.
 
To me? No.
To the casuals? Fuck yes.
Just look at the publicity undefeated fighters have compared to others.
 
j18lee said:
This is correct.

Conor is a can.

Rousey is a can.

Holm is a can.

Sage and Paige are cans.

Cain Velazquez is a can.

Aldo is a can.

Yeah, this is pretty much what Sherdoggers think these days.
Click to expand...

Most sherdoggers are undefeated at 0-0.
 
The Witcher said:
boxing is what has fucked most peoples perception of what records mean and what they should mean. i give it another 20 years at least before the notion of a near clean record means your are a top fighter.
Click to expand...

I think you're right. You've got top boxers that are 50-0 or something, and it starts to set expectations unrealistically high for other combat sports.

Of course, sometimes you just have absolute beasts like Karelin, but he's far from the rule.
 
Gamer2k4 said:
I think you're right. You've got top boxers that are 50-0 or something, and it starts to set expectations unrealistically high for other combat sports.

Of course, sometimes you just have absolute beasts like Karelin, but he's far from the rule.
Click to expand...
yeah and boxing has been around so long and dominant in combat sports that the clean or near clean record is embedded in us as to what mma fighters should be. but lawler, rda, diaz, condit, hunt, overeem.. the list goes on.
 
It seems to me that, if fighters can learn from their losses, then, ultimately, the quality of experience gained can potentially make a fighter with a poor win/loss record a better fighter--in terms of what skills they now walk into the cage with--than a fighter with a perfect record but a lesser amount of quality experience.
 
to an extent it matters,not like it does in boxing most consider couture a legend and rightfully so his record is not the greatest but he fought only the best,bj is another example,then you have guys who are underrated because their record like carlos newton
 
There's fights they lose 4 rounds and win in the last second, there's fights they win all rounds and lose in the last seconds. For me those aren't losses or wins really. I judge how superior they were in each fight or how they deal with back and forth bouts. Also the losses affect them more mentally than physically, there's no way you're a worthless fighter because you lost in MMA, what matters is your comeback. I like when they lose and come back stronger.

I don't care much about the record, can you say Rory is a loser after the rematch with Robbie Lawler ? or that Anderson took a beating from Bisping ? nowadays their record probably speak a lot, a lot of casual fans judge that. but i don't care much, most my fav fighters have losing streaks in their records.
 
I could care less about W-L records. I am far more interest in volume and record within that.

An MMA fighter that competes once every other year I could give a flying F less about the record regardless if they are undefeated. Rulon Gardner will forever be an undefeated MMA fighter. WHATEVER!

I am unfortunately the extreme exception to the rule, and clearly understand the significance of fight frequency. At the UFC level, their ain't a man or woman on the planet that can fight 6 times a year and go undefeated! Plain and simple folks.

Look at Baseball, as a way to understand how MMA fans should better comprehend W-L records. A team that loses 40 times a year is right up their with the GOATS!

Kids cream on dips that fight a hand picked opponent once every three years and keeps their (L's) to a minimum. Hopefully the mentality of the MMA fan will grow, so the sport itself can grow. Until then I can't blame MMA fighters like Rulon! Can't blame them a bit.

Children deserve muppet shows, not Humans in MMA fights!
 
America like winners. So it's better to crush cans and build a impeccable record than fighting top tier competition I guess?

Ex - (I hate to beat a dead horse but this is too easy)

Conor - before the UFC crushed middle tier fighters building up his resume. 19-3. GOAT candidate.

Nate - never fought an easy fight in his life. 20-10. Contender at best.

The contender beating the the GOAT says it all.
 
There are so many variables involved in mma that it makes it incredibly difficult for any one guy to rack up win after win, or to stay undefeated for many years.

Makes what GSP, JBJ, Aldo, etc. have done all that much more impressive in my eyes.

Rousey doesn't count, given the infancy of WMMA.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,280,241
Messages
58,269,117
Members
175,989
Latest member
wagoat

Share this page

Back
Top