Does Holly Holm's loss bring back more Ronda's legitimacy?

[Ar145984]

First of all, I'm not a Ronda fan, so go ahead and post the high kick picture if you think it means something and you want the free likes.

Now, on topic, there is an obvious striking bias favoritism on these forums. People tend to prefer striking specialist over grappling specialist. It's true that Ronda is not an elite striker by any means, but as we saw recently, Tate was able to beat Holm.

So you have a few arguments you can make

You can argue

1) Holm actually was never a good fighter, and therefore there is no such thing as a good fighter in WBW because it seems all fall under Ronda or Holm.

2) Holm was a good fighter, and so was Ronda, but styles make fights and some fighters are not going to match up well against certain styles, that doesnt invalidate their skills.

3) Meisha is in her prime now and Holm or Ronda are not good as well as the entire division.

I think the 2nd seems most reasonable. Ronda is good, Holly is good. They have always been good regardless of the anti-ronda, and I think Holm losing showed that Meisha is a legitimate competitor, and for Ronda to defeat her twice brings more legitimacy to Ronda. Obviously not Cain Velasquez good, but good.

 

[Arm Barbarian]

Even though both Ronda and the UFC ridiculous hype-train give us plenty of fodder to shit on her, the gal DOES have skills.

Main problem is she tries to use skills that she DOESN'T have at times, and that's what cost her against Holm, and likely will again.

She has power in her punches due to hip rotation, but the technique itself is abysmal.

She should really just use her strikes to set up what she does best - judo / grappling / subs.

 

[Death By Samson]

I think #2 makes the most sense.

 

[QcChopper]

Not at all as far as I am concerned, if she was the one to beat Holly then I'd say yes but until she does, even if she wins back the belt against Miesha, the taint is still there.

 

[DontWaitUp]

Ronda is a bad match-up for Miesha.
Miesha is a bad match-up for Holly.
Holly is a bad match-up for Ronda.
The enigma of our time.

 

[KTMshredsall]

It makes Hollys win look like a fluke, which if you have half a brain you know isnt true

But Ronda fans are idiots

 

[Username Bob]

First of all, I'm not a Ronda fan, so go ahead and post the high kick picture if you think it means something and you want the free likes.

Now, on topic, there is an obvious striking bias favoritism on these forums. People tend to prefer striking specialist over grappling specialist. It's true that Ronda is not an elite striker by any means, but as we saw recently, Tate was able to beat Holm.

So you have a few arguments you can make

You can argue

1) Holm actually was never a good fighter, and therefore there is no such thing as a good fighter in WBW because it seems all fall under Ronda or Holm.

2) Holm was a good fighter, and so was Ronda, but styles make fights and some fighters are not going to match up well against certain styles, that doesnt invalidate their skills.

3) Meisha is in her prime now and Holm or Ronda are not good as well as the entire division.

I think the 2nd seems most reasonable. Ronda is good, Holly is good. They have always been good regardless of the anti-ronda, and I think Holm losing showed that Meisha is a legitimate competitor, and for Ronda to defeat her twice brings more legitimacy to Ronda. Obviously not Cain Velasquez good, but good.

Holm has only been a full time MMA fighter since 2013. So she lost to a far more experience Miesha, big deal. Miesha is good She was the Strikeforce champ. Jackson-Wink will work on the holes in her game, and she will come back better. Holly will hold UFC gold again, have no doubt. she will beat Miesha and Ronda in a rematch.

Holly is a great fighter. Great fighters come back.

 

[Cowboy Cerroliveira]

Miesha was incredibly patient and had immense respect for Holly's striking. Ronda had the exact opposite of this.

 

[HHJ]

It depends on how little you thought of Ronda in the first place. If you thought Ronda sucked,and was the absolute drizzling shits,you should probably rethink that a little. If you think Holly got a fluke win,thats wrong too. Truth is in the middle.

 

[muaythaibeast]

Surely Holm running through the division would make Ronda look much better than Holm losing one fight after demolishing her?
As it stands I think this makes Ronda look like a bit of a joke. She wanted absolutely nothing to do with fighting when Holm was champ, but as soon as she gets to face Miesha again she's back training?
For your main point, I think comparative to the division those 3 are the best its got, but I wouldn't agree with the rock/paper/scissors comparison. I don't doubt at all that Holm could beat Miesha

 

[I am Everywhere]

Even though both Ronda and the UFC ridiculous hype-train give us plenty of fodder to shit on her, the gal DOES have skills.

Main problem is she tries to use skills that she DOESN'T have at times, and that's what cost her against Holm, and likely will again.

She has power in her punches due to hip rotation, but the technique itself is abysmal.

She should really just use her strikes to set up what she does best - judo / grappling / subs.

Thats what she was trying to do. She did the same thing she does every fight - Strike to get in range, clinch for a judo maneuver. All neutralized.

 

[platypus44]

Holly was trained for 2+ years to beat Ronda. She trained for 2 months or so to beat Miesha. That's a big part of it. Also terrible game plan by Ronda which Miesha - after reviewing the tape of the Ronda/Holly fight - was easily able to improve on. But basically Holly had super training to the point of instinctive muscle memory in defense against clinch takedowns and armbars but very little training on defense against shoot takedowns and RNCs.

 

[HHJ]

. She wanted absolutely nothing to do with fighting when Holm was champ, but as soon as she gets to face Miesha again she's back training?

we dont know that she wouldnt have just fought the winner,like what was originally being touted. I think its unfair to assume that Rousey wouldnt fight holm at all.

 

[HHJ]

Remember when most of us thought Holm should have been brought along slow? well Rousey coming straight at her gave her all the shots she needed...but its still true...shes had only 2 fights in the ufc before Rousey...and she looked like she did in her pre rousey bouts against Tate. Tentative about the fight going to the ground. She is still up there...she came VERY close to winning the fight,but yeah...she def needs some seasoning on the ground. She's tough,thats without question....but she just needs the techniques and the mat time,and can hopefully take to it and embrace it.

 

[The lord of bones]

Holm has the best chance of disproving this out of the 3, I give her a better chance against Miesha than Miesha against Ronda or Ronda against Holly.

 

[nintey]

#2. Though I think Ronda had the talent to win the rematch if she had a better game plan, however the way she handled the loss, she got mentally destroyed and I have little faith she will ever fight again and if she does she will not perform well.

 

[sapporo ichiban]

Meisha was able to get the fight where she needed it to be twice over five rounds, the second time it paid off. Other than that she was losing that fight as slow as it was. The tempo of the fight could even rest with Meisha's strategy as the culprit.

I would say Ronda will beat Meisha again and Holly often beats both, Holly needs to work on her sub defence for sure, she gave up her back very easily.

I would say Holly is #1 Ronda#2 and Meisha or cat #3 right now most often.

 

[discrawg]

Holly losing to Meisha shouldn't mean anything in regards to her win over Ronda. Here's why:
Any true MMA fan knows if 1 beats 2, and 2 beats 3, it doesn't nessasarily mean that 1 will beat 3. MMA is not just a matter of who is a "better fighter" it is a matter of who is more suited to a specific style. Ronda is a far better grappler than Holly, & Holly is a far better striker than Ronda. So Ronda has to get Holly to the ground if she wants to win. However, Ronda is not a wrestler, she is a Judo fighter, so to get the Judo throw she needs to be close, to get close she needs to punch her way in, just as she did against every other opponent. Now, Holly didn't let Ronda punch her way in, Holly is a better striker than Ronda, and more specifically, Holly is a master at countering, so when Ronda charges straight forward like an enraged bull, Holly wins.
Meisha is a better grappler than Holly, & Holly is a better striker than Meisha, but Meisha can time a shot, & avoid punching her way in because she is specifically a wrestler, not a Judo player. Meisha can close the distance by timing her takedown, she is not reduced to punching her way in. Ronda is a better grappler than Meisha, & Meisha isn't good enough at striking to do what Holly did to Ronda, so, Ronda is an extremely tough match up for Meisha, irrespective of the fact Meisha choked out the girl that knocked Ronda out in the fight before.
Holly's loss means nothing in the regards to the fight with Ronda, does not raise, or diminish her stock in any way shape or form. In reality it's not a simple matter of one being better than another, it is a match up puzzle.

 

[VIPERdude]

Its fairly simple. Holly is a GREAT Striker. Ronda is NOT. Ronda says hey I am gonna out box this chick. The end

 

[HHJ]

Really it was a lazy jab that caused Holly to get taken down in the 5th. Lapse in concentration.