Do you think an MMA fighter can ever get a 50-0 record?

Do you think an MMA fighter can ever get a 50-0 record?


  • Total voters
    121
Not possible unless you go out of your way to avoid any sort of org with decent opponents, which includes feeder leagues like Fury FC, CFFC, LFA, CW, etc.

Closest you could get is some of the guys in the brazilian circuit, particularly from the Aspera team, but even they have moved on from padding records like that.

It just doesn't make any sense to do that since you already get a bunch of opportunities within your first 10 fights if you're undefeated and getting finishes, you'd have to forego any aspirations of fighting at a high level to accomplish the 50-0 goal, let alone anything beyond that.

You'd end up blacklisted from how many times you'd turn down orgs and how shitty your resume would be lol.
 
To summarize my point more clearly:

If someone can go from 0-0 to becoming a Travis Fulton level fighter while being undefeated, then they could go 50-0 by fighting cans (because Fulton literally did this already).

We already know this is the bare minimum "level" you need to beat 50 cans in a row. And many many many people who are undefeated today are better than Travis Fulton.
 
For sure its can happen. But it's harder to do in mma than boxing. Just because there are so many variables in which you can loose. And it's easier to get caught with smaller gloves and kicks involved.

Freak incidents, stuff like getting caught in the clinch and taking a knee to face or whatever this is why we see even the best fighters have losses. Like when GSP got caught by Serra. There much more to think about then just boxing so it can leave you more susceptible to getting caught.

In boxing you just have to defend your head and you body. No threat of leg kicks, no threat of takedown.
 
It's not a moot point. Beating 50 people in a row is very relevant to going 50-0. It shows that it is literally possible.

Early losses are an actual moot point, because it's already a given that if someone lost during their formative years they can't be 50-0.

We can agree that fighters can go 10-0, 15-0, 20-0. You can be a seasoned fighter and have an undefeated record. So if you just scaled back your competition or never increased your competition in the first place, you would have the experience of someone like Fulton during his run.

In other words, if you managed to go 27-0, you're not a rookie. So if you're still fighting guys who are 1-5 when you're 27-0, it's pretty obvious the latter is going to win the fight.


It's definitely possible to go 50-0 fighting people who have no intentions of being professional mixed martial arts. This scenario isn't that realistic, but if enough people tried it, it would happen. I dont really get how it wouldnt.

No, going a 100 and 0 after losing a few times is not what I'm talking about. You could go a 1000-0 record and it doesn't matter. If you lost a few fights in the start. It's easier to do a streak after you gained experience than doing a streak of 40-0 right off the bat. That's just my opinion. We'll obviously can agree to disagree. Which is fine with me.

But to have a 40-0 record or 50-0 record from start to finish won't happen imo. Just because the chances of losing is so high and the unpredictabilities in a fight make it more so. Especially early in your career where you are inexperienced.

Anyways, I understand where you are coming from. But I don't agree sorry.
 
For sure its can happen. But it's harder to do in mma than boxing. Just because there are so many variables in which you can loose. And it's easier to get caught with smaller gloves and kicks involved.

Freak incidents, stuff like getting caught in the clinch and taking a knee to face or whatever this is why we see even the best fighters have losses. Like when GSP got caught by Serra. There much more to think about then just boxing so it can leave you more susceptible to getting caught.

In boxing you just have to defend your head and you body. No threat of leg kicks, no threat of takedown.
Yes, there are more variables, but to put things in perspective, Matt Serra is still a very high level fighter. Matt Serra also didn't get lucky against GSP, he actually was just better.

Literally every person Matt Serra ever fought had at least one hard fight against him and he's fought Penn, Hughes, Karo, GSP etc. He's not a literal can.
 
Yes - Khabib could have gotten close had he kept fighting for another 5-7 years. Someone as dominant will eventually come along again
 
I mean Khabib is the closest to that, I wonder if he kept on fighting how long it would have took him to lose finally.

He would pretty much have to beat a top 5 guy till he reached 50-0.

I don't think it could ever happen, not like in boxing.

It's just too many variables and uncertainties for it to manifest.

_116148881_khabib_nurmagomedov_stats.png

Easily. Especially the heavies
 
Easily. Especially the heavies

We'll seeing is believing. I'd love to see it someday, he'd be the GOAT for sure if it manifests. But the chances are very low and I don't think it will ever happen.
 
Btw will bump this thread when it happens, whenever it happens if it ever does. lol
 
Yes - Khabib could have gotten close had he kept fighting for another 5-7 years. Someone as dominant will eventually come along again
Had Khabib continued to fight for 5 years, he would have had to fight 6 times a year to reach 50 wins. That's how ridiculous your thought is.
 
I think the most realistic Question is can a figher get to a 50-0 record with fights that will be respected, cos that matters. And Jon Jones would be the closest to that honestly, and he wont get there. So, I think i'd have to learn toward no.
 
I'm gonna assume you're talking about someone fighting in the main leagues.

So the answer is no. Fighters don't even get to 50 fights anymore. They fight once or twice a year at best.
They might fight 3-4 times in the beginning of their careers, but this undefeated fighter sure enough would be champion someday, so he'll drop down to fighting once a year.

So he would have to be fighting well into his late thirties and that's too old and too many fights to not get caught.
 
I think there are too many variables in an mma fight. People can go 50-0 in wrestling or boxing cuz you’re completely focused on one thing so you basically have to be the best at one thing, not that that’s easy but it’s easier to do than in MMA. MMA fights can go so many ways. They can be completely stand up boxing or kick boxing, or be dominated by clinching against the cage or a full on wrestling match or BJJ contest. Or all of those things can be utilized in a single fight. The every guy you fight has such different strengths and weaknesses. You have to be so elite at so many things and once you become champion depending on the strength of the weight class you’re in, you are most likely going up against a murderers row for multiple years in a row. Also think most combat sports outside of top mma orgs, you can face a long strings of sub par competition between top contenders.
 
Had Khabib continued to fight for 5 years, he would have had to fight 6 times a year to reach 50 wins. That's how ridiculous your thought is.
21 title defenses is obviously a very realistic thing to accomplish, especially in only 5 years.
 
I mean Khabib is the closest to that, I wonder if he kept on fighting how long it would have took him to lose finally.

He would pretty much have to beat a top 5 guy till he reached 50-0.

I don't think it could ever happen, not like in boxing.

It's just too many variables and uncertainties for it to manifest.

_116148881_khabib_nurmagomedov_stats.png


A champion in the UFC isn't incentivised to fight 4x a year over 6/7 year period...

I think its impossible with the risk of injury and the pay that champs receive meaning they can afford to fight once or twice a year.
 
As someone else said, if it was your primary goal to go 50-0, which means fighting random bums and drug addicts from the streets like Khabib did for the majority of his career, than yes it is possible.
Khabib fought “random bums and drug addicts from the street“ for the “majority of his career“?

Some people should go to some smaller events and see what it is like. Yes, those fighters are often less talented but they train hard, are often roided and there are some freaks. It is not as easy as fighting some bums and drug addicts from the street. The fighters in those events are often among the best of their gym.
 
I mean Khabib is the closest to that, I wonder if he kept on fighting how long it would have took him to lose finally.

He would pretty much have to beat a top 5 guy till he reached 50-0.

I don't think it could ever happen, not like in boxing.

It's just too many variables and uncertainties for it to manifest.

_116148881_khabib_nurmagomedov_stats.png
I don't think so.
This is why I defend Khabib when people talk about him being a can crusher. First of all, that's not true. Second, no matter who you're fighting, in MMA, anyone can lose at any time. There are too many ways to lose. And if you're fighting often enough to reach 50 fights, how can you be perfectly healthy and "on" each and every time out.
Even a bad night's sleep or a cold or any little thing can affect your performance.
It's why, aside from Khabib, even all of our MMA GOATs have taken an L here or there.
GSP is probably the best fighter of all-time and he lost twice. Even though he was most certainly better than Serra, he lost to him.
That is the nature of MMA and that is why Khabib is such a unicorn.
<goldie>
 
Back
Top