Dominant champs are strong evidence of a shallow talent pool.

[koquerelle]

Ah yes, the ole "lack of adequate competition" ruse. Michael Phelps, Usain Bolt, Serena Williams, Roy Jones Jr, Mike Tyson, Floyd Mayweather, GSP, Anderson Silva, Fedor, Tiger Woods, Messi, Ronaldo, Michael Jordan, Lebron James, Tom Brady, Roger Federer, Simone Blies...all just products of good timing, right?

And your "kicker" actually disproves your entire post. If these champs weren't dominant on their way up, then someone currently having ups and downs can become a future champ, which is indicative of sufficient competition.

QFT
Thread destroyed by the second answer

 

[pick999]

Poor argument for the reasons listed by other posters. Messi and Cristiano were the best by far in their positions for about 10 years. Federer owned tennis for about a decade (lol at tennis being shallow), Jordan, Kobe and Lebron all had their “eras”. Mayweather beat Pacquiao, Canelo and 48 other guys and never lost. None of those sports have shallow talent pools.

Most sports are designed to find out who the best competitor is, so when you find it and he’s an incredible exception, that shouldn’t be too surprising.

That doesn’t mean some divisions aren’t shallow, but the dominance of the champion by itself is not indicative of that.

Mayweather didnt win some of those fights

 

[dr. john lee]

QFT
Thread destroyed by the second answer

But he is completely right about WMMA though. The talent pool there is weak.

 

[GreatSaintGuillotine]

Khabib was not a dominant champ as he hadn’t cleaned his top 10 like Izzy or Usman have(practically beat everyone)
Khabib still hadn’t fought

1. Tony
2. Olivera
3. Chandler
4. Hooker
5. Islam
6. dariush

He still had fun fights left. It’s not a sign of a weak talent pool

Chandler wasn't ranked, hooker never earned a title shot, Oliveira was not yet in the top 5, same with Dariush, Islam is his training partner and was not in the top 10, and he tried to fight Tony many times

At the time he retired, Khabib beat half the top 10, 3 of the top 5, and 3 more former top 10.

 

[Iron Wolf]

Khabib was not a dominant champ as he hadn’t cleaned his top 10 like Izzy or Usman have(practically beat everyone)
Khabib still hadn’t fought

1. Tony
2. Olivera
3. Chandler
4. Hooker
5. Islam
6. dariush

He still had fun fights left. It’s not a sign of a weak talent pool

Agreed. The suggestion that 155 was shallow is positively absurd.

155 has been seriously deep water for years.

 

[You Will Vote For Dreyga]

Make sense Micheal Jordan was only great because the NBA was so shallow

 

[RustyShacleford]

So to find the sport with the best athletes, we need to find the one where the best guys win the least. Hockey maybe?

Really tho, obviously mma, a relatively new sport where you have to do a scary dangerous thing for not much money, does not have the same talent pool as sports that have been massively institutionalized for over a century. But if you've been watching, the talent has clearly improved huge amounts over the years and is continuing to do, so why do we always need these threads?

 

[Reign009]

Dominant champs are just evidence of...

The champ's dominance.

 

[Paolo Delutis]

This isn’t a troll thread, so I’m going to actually attempt to explain and justify what I’m saying and make it clear it’s not a “lul UFC sucks” thread.

Imagine competitive mile running. You would never see a case where the best mile runner in the world is 50 seconds better than the second best. It will always be close. Why? Because there is a physical limit to how fast you can run, and running is a sport that tons of people train for, and so many people will push that physical limit. Thus, you will have lots of people grouped closely together.

Now look at the UFC:

- Shev and Nunes rule their 3 divisions with iron fists. No one can even challenge either of them.

- Khabib ruled 155 totally. He dropped like 1 round ever and, by the end, finished everyone in dominant fashion.

- Usman dominates 170 totally. He had a bit of a war with Colby but other than that, his 5 title fights have all been dominant and he lost no rounds.

Izzy totally rules 185. His 4 title fights have all been easy wins (I suppose the toughest was the staring match with Yoel) and no one can really challenge him.

145 is a bit different since the champ and Max are both good. HW and BW have new champs (Yan , not Aljo I mean) that I suspect will be dominant but we do have to see first to be sure.

Here’s the kicker though. These champs weren’t all that dominant on their way up. Usman made his way to the top with boring decisions. Khabib grinder out decisions too and even had a seeming loss vs. Tibau. Izzy had struggles and went through a war with Gastelum on the way up.

But then these guys get the belt and they are untouchable and dominant. Why? Because the talent level is so low that a champ has resources (tons of personalized trainers/coaches and training partners) that allow them to elevate themselves so far from the field. A guy like Usman gets taught a jab and becomes a KO artist. A guy like Francis gets taught a basic sprawl and dominates the “GOAT”. Khabib develops rudimentary kickboxing defense and loses like 1 round in 5 years. When your #1 guys destroy your #2 guys so badly, it means your sport lacks top talent.

No...just no...


Martial arts is probably the only thing on this planet that how much money or resources at the end of the day doesnt mean shit...a roundhouse kick is a roundhouse kick whether your paid $80\hr to learn it or you bought a $20 book ..its the same...


These are best guys and girls in those divisions.. For this era...every division and era is different there is no parallels between them...a dominant HW champion doesnt mean the same as dominant LW champion and vice versa..

What a dominant champion shows is simply the Current Highest Level of the division in the current era...

So izzy represents the best current level of MWs...khabib was the best current level of LW..
And so on...


It is the level that the rest of division will rise to ( which happens look at figgy and moreno) and the level the current champion must maintain ...that is why champions are under so much pressure they must remain ahead of the rest to.remain champion that is no easy feat ...


So your O.P has it wrong IMO...dominant champions are showing the current peak of the division which then builds the rest up..

 

[dipstickjimmy]

Not if you're chasing someone.

If you are an average Sherdogger ie 6'4" and 240 lbs with 2% body fat and are chasing a little girl to kick her ass you would be a coward chasing someone.

 

[COBRA03]

I think you are insulting the fighters who have worked hard to be champs. This same argument has been made over and over again in boxing and MMA over the years. All you can do as a champ is fight the next guy up. If you keep winning, maybe the champ is just that good.

 

[13Seconds]

Maybe in sports where everyone competes weekly like races, ball sports etc.

But in fighting, each participant has 3-4 chances a year at the most to compete.
So yeah, you see the best of the best hang onto their spot for years at a time.

If shevchenko or khabib did MMA 52 Saturdays a year, they'd surely rack up some losses and you'd get much more parity.

Just a by product of the inherent differences between sports imo.

Which makes Liverpools PL run 19/20 all that more impressive.

 

[jons333]

not always. there are cases where DJ isn't defending against a division full of cab drivers or Usman isn't defending against the journeymen of the LW division.

 

[Mr.Maelstrom]

Which makes Liverpools PL run 19/20 all that more impressive.

Absolutely, odds wise it's nearly a statistical impossibility for a team to to go 19-1

 

[textwarrior]

Perception is the real trick in understanding this questions. People see things for what they think they are vs what they actually are. The only way to see it for what it is, is with the understanding of what you are looking at.

IMO, we have jack of all trades and not a master at any trade because of the MMA learning curve is not that high yet. So, the problem has to do with the trainers not training at a high enough level yet so when other parts of the world or certain gyms have higher levels of trainers it shows. The trainers are learning too.

 

[PlasticFishBowl]

I think you are insulting the fighters who have worked hard to be champs. This same argument has been made over and over again in boxing and MMA over the years. All you can do as a champ is fight the next guy up. If you keep winning, maybe the champ is just that good.

sure, and we would get some champs like that. But we get a ton of them. Khabib, Izzy, Shev, Nunes and Usman all right now. There shouldn’t be multiple “transcendent” talents in your sports at all time. Especially not 5 who are in the GOAT discussion in their class lol. That like half the champs.

 

[special_k]

It's a not insignificant loss and shame that such brain power as displayed by these exegeses is not put towards the considerable social problems of curing cancer, space travel, etc.

 

[Ryeboi]

@PlasticFishBowl when did you start watching mma?

 

[kflo]

This is a bad thread. No offense.

 

[DOMMA]

Maybe in sports where everyone competes weekly like races, ball sports etc.

But in fighting, each participant has 3-4 chances a year at the most to compete.
So yeah, you see the best of the best hang onto their spot for years at a time.

If shevchenko or khabib did MMA 52 Saturdays a year, they'd surely rack up some losses and you'd get much more parity.

Just a by product of the inherent differences between sports imo.

Wow, an articulate, well thought out reply on Sherdog....