Media Fedor named most padded record by MMA on Point!

[AnotherOldGuy]

Physical prime is typically starting at 27-28, bro. Of course, you'll get conflicting information from different sources, but early 30's is not when most people start to decline. Mid to late 30's is. The top endurance athletes are actually mostly in their 40's, and I would absolutely consider MMA an endurance sport. Not strictly, of course, and muscle strength + reflexes are definitely needed. Let's take a look at current UFC champions, though, just for shits and giggles:

• Heavyweight Champion: Stipe Miocic (19-3) - 38 years old
• Light-heavyweight Champion: Jan Blachowicz (27-8-0) - 37 years old - Jon Jones - 33 years old
• Middleweight Champion: Israel Adesanya (20-0) - 31 years old
• Welterweight Champion: Kamaru Usman (16-1) - 33 years old
• Lightweight Champion: Khabib Nurmagomedov (28-0) - 32 years old
• Featherweight Champion: Alexander Volkanovski (21-1) - 32 years old
• Bantamweight Champion: Petr Yan (15-1-0) - 27 years old Henry Cejudo - 32 years old
• Flyweight Champion: Deiveson Figueiredo (20-1-0) - 32 years old
• Women’s Featherweight/Bantamweight Champion: Amanda Nunes (19-4) - 32 years old
• Women’s Flyweight Champion Valentina Shevchenko (20-3) - 32 years old
• Women’s Strawweight Champion: Zhang Weili (21-1) - 31 years old

I mean, that pretty much says it all, brother. There's literally ONE champion under 31 years of age, and he is essentially champion by default since Cejudo (early 30's) gave up his belts.

31-33 is PRIME fighting age. This is not coincidental.

None of those fighters have been top five for ten years -- as I said, the ten year rule seems to be the overriding principle involved. Anderson, Fedor, Penn, Hughes, Aldo, GSP (well, actually he retired before ten years at the top, then came back, but was already looking worse in his last fights against Condit and Hendricks before, and was losing against Bisping until he landed that hook) all started losing regularly after ten years.

In the case of MMA, I'd argue most are physically declining after 28, but because they started MMA later on (in their 20's in most cases and some in their mid-20's) they're still gaining skills at age 31-33 which can compensate for decreasing physical ability. Compare that to say basketball, where everyone starts much younger (early teens if not sooner), and so already have top level skills by the time they hit prime age -- which is why its been a long time since someone over the age of 30 won the NBA MVP -- even Lebron was able to win 4 MVP's in his 20's, but none since turning 30 (he's 35 now).

Fighters who started MMA younger (Fedor, GSP, Aldo) drop out of their peak earlier (ie after ten years in the top three). I'm trying to think of a single fighter who was rated top three for over ten years -- Shogun comes the closest of the ones I can think of, but even he doesn't make it (GSP's retirement ranking doesn't really count -- though he was rated as a top WW for the four years he was retired, I think that was silly).

Fedor lasted about ten years as a top three HW. That fits into the ten year rule very well. It also fits into the same best before age 30 rule that applies to 90% of Olympic medalists, 90% of NBA MVP's, to HW boxers like Muhammad Ali, Joe Frazier and Mike Tyson (each of which was a better natural athlete than Fedor but still had fallen off alot by their early 30's).

Beyond that, even one of the articles you linked said that athletic longevity was tied to genetics -- unless every fighter has the same genetics, it'd be very strange if they all had the same longevity. The average life expectancy for a man is about 80 years (varying a bit between countries), and most are still healthy at age 50. Does that mean that every man is going to be healthy at age 50? Obviously not, because some clearly age more quickly than that (even dying of natural causes before 50). Expecting every athlete to have aged the same way to age 30 is making the same error as expecting each of them to age the same way to age 50, or 80, or 100.

You could argue that not aging well is a mark against an athlete (I've seen it used as an argument against Bobby Orr in hockey and Sandy Koufax in baseball -- ie a shortened career due to injury reduced their greatness), though in Fedor's case ten years as a top 3 HW is as long a time in the top e as anyone else.

You do raise an interesting point about age for different sports. I noticed that the average age of equestrian riders and golfer's is considerably older than the 26 for most high level athletes, and of course, for women's gymnastics the average age is about 15. However, my guess is that the ten year rules (ie max of ten years as a top three in the world competitor) holds pretty well in those as well.

I suspect there are exceptions to the ten years as top 3 in world rule. I think there was a discuss thrower (Al Oerter) who won gold in 4 Olympics (ie top 3 for at least 16 years), and Karelin in wrestling won 3 gold and silver (ie top 3 for at least 16 years), but I don't know of any in MMA.

 

[Fioretti]

None of those fighters have been top five for ten years -- as I said, the ten year rule seems to be the overriding principle involved. Anderson, Fedor, Penn, Hughes, Aldo, GSP (well, actually he retired before ten years at the top, then came back, but was already looking worse in his last fights against Condit and Hendricks before, and was losing against Bisping until he landed that hook) all started losing regularly after ten years.

In the case of MMA, I'd argue most are physically declining after 28, but because they started MMA later on (in their 20's in most cases and some in their mid-20's) they're still gaining skills at age 31-33 which can compensate for decreasing physical ability. Compare that to say basketball, where everyone starts much younger (early teens if not sooner), and so already have top level skills by the time they hit prime age -- which is why its been a long time since someone over the age of 30 won the NBA MVP -- even Lebron was able to win 4 MVP's in his 20's, but none since turning 30 (he's 35 now).

Fighters who started MMA younger (Fedor, GSP, Aldo) drop out of their peak earlier (ie after ten years in the top three). I'm trying to think of a single fighter who was rated top three for over ten years -- Shogun comes the closest of the ones I can think of, but even he doesn't make it (GSP's retirement ranking doesn't really count -- though he was rated as a top WW for the four years he was retired, I think that was silly).

Fedor lasted about ten years as a top three HW. That fits into the ten year rule very well. It also fits into the same best before age 30 rule that applies to 90% of Olympic medalists, 90% of NBA MVP's, to HW boxers like Muhammad Ali, Joe Frazier and Mike Tyson (each of which was a better natural athlete than Fedor but still had fallen off alot by their early 30's).

Beyond that, even one of the articles you linked said that athletic longevity was tied to genetics -- unless every fighter has the same genetics, it'd be very strange if they all had the same longevity. The average life expectancy for a man is about 80 years (varying a bit between countries), and most are still healthy at age 50. Does that mean that every man is going to be healthy at age 50? Obviously not, because some clearly age more quickly than that (even dying of natural causes before 50). Expecting every athlete to have aged the same way to age 30 is making the same error as expecting each of them to age the same way to age 50, or 80, or 100.

You could argue that not aging well is a mark against an athlete (I've seen it used as an argument against Bobby Orr in hockey and Sandy Koufax in baseball -- ie a shortened career due to injury reduced their greatness), though in Fedor's case ten years as a top 3 HW is as long a time in the top e as anyone else.

You do raise an interesting point about age for different sports. I noticed that the average age of equestrian riders and golfer's is considerably older than the 26 for most high level athletes, and of course, for women's gymnastics the average age is about 15. However, my guess is that the ten year rules (ie max of ten years as a top three in the world competitor) holds pretty well in those as well.

I suspect there are exceptions to the ten years as top 3 in world rule. I think there was a discuss thrower (Al Oerter) who won gold in 4 Olympics (ie top 3 for at least 16 years), and Karelin in wrestling won 3 gold and silver (ie top 3 for at least 16 years), but I don't know of any in MMA.

To stay at the top 10 years in any sport is far fetched and extremely difficult. Especially in a combat sport where you can lose in half a second. It doesn't mean they are physically declining at an earlier age.

Bader has been fighting for almost 20 years. Same with Mousasi. Izzy has been fighting for over a decade if you include his kickboxing career. You don't magically decline at an earlier age if you're at the top. Fight years are fight years. Fedor had tons of easy matches, so his fight mileage is actually less impactful than most. Out of all those champions listed, I believe only one of them has been fighting for 5 years, with 2 others around 7 years. The rest have been fighting for over a decade, with the majority of them 13+ years.

MMA champion's age is much more relevant than any other sport. Historically, 31+ is prime age for MMA champs.

 

[JKS]

I've been watching MMA since the early 90's, bro. I'm well aware of the changes and the differences in structure. It doesn't negate the fact that Fedor has a padded record and a padded 27 fight unbeaten streak. The fact that he was fighting these funky-ass fights and not defending his title is exactly what makes him have a padded record. Like, how in the dirty fuck can you not understand that? You're trying to make excuses or give reasons why it was this way, but the fact that it was that way is what makes it true. Ogawa is/was a Japanese Pro Wrestling can. He beat 0-0 MMA Stefan Leko, then 1-1 Giant fucking Silva to advance to the semi-finals to face Fedor. Are you kidding?

How do you feel about Travis Fulton's 24, 28, and 40 fight win streaks? What about Bas ending his career with a 22 fight unbeaten streak? I love me some Igor, but he has one of the most padded records in MMA history. It's ok to admit that, it doesn't take away from how awesome it was to watch him put people to sleep. There's no need to glorify it. It's pretty common knowledge and well accepted that guys are going to have a bunch of no-names and unranked guys on their resume in the beginning. The issue with Fedor is that he continued to rack up W's (padding his record) against these types of fighters while he was the #1 HW in the world and HW champion. It's ok to admit it, because it's true.

Jon Jones racked up 6 wins in the first 3 months of his career against no name, unranked fighters. This is normal shit. He did that to get to the UFC, got one "gimme" fight against a similarly experienced Gusmao (5-0 at the time) in the UFC, got a few unranked fights against some decent names, then has fought nothing but ranked fighters ever since. Since he's been champion, every single one of his opponents were top 10, with the exception of Chael, who was a replacement and ranked #2 at MW. He's been undefeated and fighting ranked fighters for almost 10 years now. That is NOT padding your record.

LOL, don't try and school me on understanding anything BRO. I think it's pretty clear you don't quite understand the differences in structures and how the sport has changed over the years. The fact that you're trying to relate Travis Fullton, Igor and Bas to Fedor shows how irrational you are in understanding this. Fulton and Igor fought in regional mma circuits vs nothing but regional competition. Fedor actually fought at the highest level of competition in 3 major major promotions during his winning streak. While he fought a handful of showcase fights vs cans and some lower competition, majority of his competition was top level HWs at the time. The main point is no one questioned Fedor as an elite fighter despite fighting guys like Choi and Zulu because he beat so many other top guys. If you can't comprehend that the differences between Fulton, Igor and Fedor than you got something wrong up there kiddo.

And going back to your point about being the # 1 HW and fighting these guys? Once again, Fedor had very different circumstances, he wasn't under contract to one promotion and that is why he picked those fights. Fedor had no obligation to fight anybody under his circumstances. If you fight 21 times and 5 guys are weak than you're not padding your record.

And I am defending Jones here, he shouldn't even be on that list.

 

[Fioretti]

LOL, don't try and school me on understanding anything BRO. I think it's pretty clear you don't quite understand the differences in structures and how the sport has changed over the years. The fact that you're trying to relate Travis Fullton, Igor and Bas to Fedor shows how irrational you are in understanding this. Fulton and Igor fought in regional mma circuits vs nothing but regional competition. Fedor actually fought at the highest level of competition in 3 major major promotions during his winning streak. While he fought a handful of showcase fights vs cans and some lower competition, majority of his competition was top level HWs at the time. The main point is no one questioned Fedor as an elite fighter despite fighting guys like Choi and Zulu because he beat so many other top guys. If you can't comprehend that the differences between Fulton, Igor and Fedor than you got something wrong up there kiddo.

And going back to your point about being the # 1 HW and fighting these guys? Once again, Fedor had very different circumstances, he wasn't under contract to one promotion and that is why he picked those fights. Fedor had no obligation to fight anybody under his circumstances. If you fight 21 times and 5 guys are weak than you're not padding your record.

And I am defending Jones here, he shouldn't even be on that list.

You just have a hard time with reality. He fought a handful of top 10s (some of them barely making the cut), and fought mostly unranked. 9 top 10s out of his 27 fight win streak. That's exactly 33%. That is the epitome of a padded record. BRO.

 

[JKS]

You just have a hard time with reality. He fought a handful of top 10s (some of them barely making the cut), and fought mostly unranked. 9 top 10s out of his 27 fight win streak. That's exactly 33%. That is the epitome of a padded record. BRO.

No, I think I see it pretty clearly. I just go by facts and rankings. I think it's you who's spinning reality by trying to change facts by saying certain fighters really weren't top 10. 13/27 is 48%. And once again, as I mentioned, Fedor didn't really start moving as a top fighter till he hit Pride which was 6 fights into his winning streak. Like you said with Jones, those first few fight are not relevant. So you're really looking at 21 of those 27 fights, while the whole streak counts, you can't fault Fedor for fighting lower level guys when he's just coming up in his first 10 fights.

He fought 13 top 10 ranked opponents during his streak. Which is nearly half his streak. Once again, let's not start re-writing history and saying so and so wasn't really top 10 cause we can go back and do that with every top fighter. Yes, there are certainly times when a top 10 opponent isn't high level despite being ranked. But that's just the sport, every fighter has some wins on his record where the ranking is better than his level. Anderson, GSP all had those guys. There is literally 5 opponents on his record that are bums.

I am curious why you won't respond to other guys like Big Nog, Cro Cop, Wanderlei all fighting opponents like that???

 

[Fioretti]

No, I think I see it pretty clearly. I just go by facts and rankings. I think it's you who's spinning reality by trying to change facts by saying certain fighters really weren't top 10. 13/27 is 48%. And once again, as I mentioned, Fedor didn't really start moving as a top fighter till he hit Pride which was 6 fights into his winning streak. Like you said with Jones, those first few fight are not relevant. So you're really looking at 21 of those 27 fights, while the whole streak counts, you can't fault Fedor for fighting lower level guys when he's just coming up in his first 10 fights.

He fought 13 top 10 ranked opponents during his streak. Which is nearly half his streak. Once again, let's not start re-writing history and saying so and so wasn't really top 10 cause we can go back and do that with every top fighter. Yes, there are certainly times when a top 10 opponent isn't high level despite being ranked. But that's just the sport, every fighter has some wins on his record where the ranking is better than his level. Anderson, GSP all had those guys. There is literally 5 opponents on his record that are bums.

I am curious why you won't respond to other guys like Big Nog, Cro Cop, Wanderlei all fighting opponents like that???

48% is pathetic for the #1 HW in the world, and again, is the epitome of a padded record. All those guys you mentioned have padded records, I stated it clearly before, citing Igor specifically. Mirko is my favorite fighter ever and I'm perfectly content in admitting his record has some hefty padding.

5-2 Hunt wasn't top 10, Goodridge wasn't top 10, Coleman wasn't top 10 in their 2nd fight. Randleman is iffy. By all rights it's 9 or 10 ranked fights out of 27. Even at 13, it's less than half. Padded as fuck, man. Sorry.

Only 5 bums? Weren't you the one saying Ogawa was legit?

 

[Deleted member 110072]

None of those fighters have been top five for ten years -- as I said, the ten year rule seems to be the overriding principle involved. Anderson, Fedor, Penn, Hughes, Aldo, GSP (well, actually he retired before ten years at the top, then came back, but was already looking worse in his last fights against Condit and Hendricks before, and was losing against Bisping until he landed that hook) all started losing regularly after ten years.

In the case of MMA, I'd argue most are physically declining after 28, but because they started MMA later on (in their 20's in most cases and some in their mid-20's) they're still gaining skills at age 31-33 which can compensate for decreasing physical ability. Compare that to say basketball, where everyone starts much younger (early teens if not sooner), and so already have top level skills by the time they hit prime age -- which is why its been a long time since someone over the age of 30 won the NBA MVP -- even Lebron was able to win 4 MVP's in his 20's, but none since turning 30 (he's 35 now).

Fighters who started MMA younger (Fedor, GSP, Aldo) drop out of their peak earlier (ie after ten years in the top three). I'm trying to think of a single fighter who was rated top three for over ten years -- Shogun comes the closest of the ones I can think of, but even he doesn't make it (GSP's retirement ranking doesn't really count -- though he was rated as a top WW for the four years he was retired, I think that was silly).

Fedor lasted about ten years as a top three HW. That fits into the ten year rule very well. It also fits into the same best before age 30 rule that applies to 90% of Olympic medalists, 90% of NBA MVP's, to HW boxers like Muhammad Ali, Joe Frazier and Mike Tyson (each of which was a better natural athlete than Fedor but still had fallen off alot by their early 30's).

Beyond that, even one of the articles you linked said that athletic longevity was tied to genetics -- unless every fighter has the same genetics, it'd be very strange if they all had the same longevity. The average life expectancy for a man is about 80 years (varying a bit between countries), and most are still healthy at age 50. Does that mean that every man is going to be healthy at age 50? Obviously not, because some clearly age more quickly than that (even dying of natural causes before 50). Expecting every athlete to have aged the same way to age 30 is making the same error as expecting each of them to age the same way to age 50, or 80, or 100.

You could argue that not aging well is a mark against an athlete (I've seen it used as an argument against Bobby Orr in hockey and Sandy Koufax in baseball -- ie a shortened career due to injury reduced their greatness), though in Fedor's case ten years as a top 3 HW is as long a time in the top e as anyone else.

You do raise an interesting point about age for different sports. I noticed that the average age of equestrian riders and golfer's is considerably older than the 26 for most high level athletes, and of course, for women's gymnastics the average age is about 15. However, my guess is that the ten year rules (ie max of ten years as a top three in the world competitor) holds pretty well in those as well.

I suspect there are exceptions to the ten years as top 3 in world rule. I think there was a discuss thrower (Al Oerter) who won gold in 4 Olympics (ie top 3 for at least 16 years), and Karelin in wrestling won 3 gold and silver (ie top 3 for at least 16 years), but I don't know of any in MMA.

One significant factor as well is that in the 00's the path to a high level MMA career could be much shorter. These days its pretty common fighters need to spend a few years in lower level orgs and then when they get into the UFC it can still take alot of time for them to get into higher level competition.

Guys like Fedor, Nog and Shogun(all #1 in their division around 3 years after debut) all got into high level MMA careers very quickly compared to modern fighters. Jon Jones is arguebly the exception of course but he's looked like he's on the decline in recent years as well needing questionable decisions to avoid defeats.

I mean the whole narrative that these fighters were "exposed by the superior evolved generation" seems rather questionable when they were losing to guys like Werdum and Mir who were fighters of their own generation with patchy records.

 

[IsNormal]

Some people fail to realize that you can be a goat AND have a padded record AT THE SAME TIME.

If you beat 20 good opponents and 300 cans: your record is padded as fuck but you still beat more good opponents than most other fighters.
You're not worse than someone who beat 19 good opponents and 0 cans.

FYI: this is just a random example, I'm not saying Fedor beat exactly 20 good opponents.

 

[MartinGibson86]

Some people fail to realize that you can be a goat AND have a padded record AT THE SAME TIME.

If you beat 20 good opponents and 300 cans: your record is padded as fuck but you still beat more good opponents than most other fighters.
You're not worse than someone who beat 19 good opponents and 0 cans.

FYI: this is just a random example, I'm not saying Fedor beat exactly 20 good opponents.

Fedor's best wins BY FAR are decisions over Nog and CC anx finishes of AA and Tim.


His maniacal fanbase jumps to "Fedor would run roughshod over Cain, JDS, Stipe, and DC"


Nobody he ever beat was competitive with those 4. And he was in fact embarrassed by guys who were soundly beaten by those 4. Coulda fought DC had Bigfoot not mauled him. he is 2 years older than DC. He is 12 years younger than Coleman, who debuted at ufc 8 and is literally a "style vs style" remnant.

Fedor Emelianenko is TWELVE years younger than one of his "signature" wins.

 

[HHJ]

Worst site of all time

 

[AnotherOldGuy]

To stay at the top 10 years in any sport is far fetched and extremely difficult. Especially in a combat sport where you can lose in half a second. It doesn't mean they are physically declining at an earlier age.

Bader has been fighting for almost 20 years. Same with Mousasi. Izzy has been fighting for over a decade if you include his kickboxing career. You don't magically decline at an earlier age if you're at the top. Fight years are fight years. Fedor had tons of easy matches, so his fight mileage is actually less impactful than most. Out of all those champions listed, I believe only one of them has been fighting for 5 years, with 2 others around 7 years. The rest have been fighting for over a decade, with the majority of them 13+ years.

MMA champion's age is much more relevant than any other sport. Historically, 31+ is prime age for MMA champs.

Actually not being able to stay in the top (for any length of time) definitely means declining relative to your peak ... its pretty much the definition of declining. For instance, Usain Bolt (who retired from track at age 30 because he couldn't run as fast as he did as a younger man) could only come in third in his last world championships at 100 meters (and at time much slower than his world record). How is that anything but physical decline -- unless you think the drop-off was mental?

 

[Deleted member 110072]

Actually not being able to stay in the top (for any length of time) definitely means declining relative to your peak ... its pretty much the definition of declining. For instance, Usain Bolt (who retired from track at age 30 because he couldn't run as fast as he did as a younger man) could only come in third in his last world championships at 100 meters (and at time much slower than his world record). How is that anything but physical decline -- unless you think the drop-off was mental?

Bolt was a can who was left behind when the sport evolved, probably on PEDS as well unlike Justin Gatlin who evolved with the sport to a higher level.

 

[Fioretti]

Actually not being able to stay in the top (for any length of time) definitely means declining relative to your peak ... its pretty much the definition of declining. For instance, Usain Bolt (who retired from track at age 30 because he couldn't run as fast as he did as a younger man) could only come in third in his last world championships at 100 meters (and at time much slower than his world record). How is that anything but physical decline -- unless you think the drop-off was mental?

Bolt is in an entirely different sport. My point was that current champions have been fighting for over a decade. That's over 10 years, and they're at the top of their sport. We already discussed how sprinting, specifically, has a historically lower shelf life, and the average age of champion sprinters is generally lower than the average age of MMA champions.

All but 2 of the current champions in MMA are over 30 years old from the top two organizations, and the two that aren't are in their late 20's (27-28). You claim 27-28 is prime fighting age, the peak, and I claim 27-28 is the start of physical prime. Evidence points to my claim being more accurate, as the overwhelming majority are 30+.

Shall we go historical and look at the age of all previous champions? How many would you guess were in their 20s and how many in their 30s?

Fedor didn't even make it to PRIDE until he was 25 years old. So by 33 he was just shot and had declined? I don't buy it. He's still fighting in his 40's. Shit just caught up with him in his early 30's and he wasn't fighting no named freakshows consistently for the first time in his career.

31-33 is prime fighting age, and not one single person has proven that to be incorrect. I'll go back and show all MMA champs when I get the time, but I think you're aware that the majority were over 30.

 

[JKS]

48% is pathetic for the #1 HW in the world, and again, is the epitome of a padded record. All those guys you mentioned have padded records, I stated it clearly before, citing Igor specifically. Mirko is my favorite fighter ever and I'm perfectly content in admitting his record has some hefty padding.

5-2 Hunt wasn't top 10, Goodridge wasn't top 10, Coleman wasn't top 10 in their 2nd fight. Randleman is iffy. By all rights it's 9 or 10 ranked fights out of 27. Even at 13, it's less than half. Padded as fuck, man. Sorry.

Only 5 bums? Weren't you the one saying Ogawa was legit?

Sorry man, different time and different circumstances for Fedor, there are reasons why he took certain fights. And I still don't think you understand what a padded record is. These guys at the time took the fights that were available for them. It's not like they were taking easier fights and avoid harder ones, the level of competition was just lower back then. And that is what you don't seem to understand.

You're shitting on Fedor for fighting Ogawa, as if it's his choice. It was GP tourney, you know how things work. And Ogawa was just fine as a HW, you're just shitting on him cause he did pro wrestling. He was still a respectable fighter for the time, not a top HW, but certainly not a bum.

And now you're going back to switching facts around. Mark Hunt was not a top 10 cause he was 5-2?? With wins over Cro Cop he was certainly top 10. Just cause a guy has a 5-2 record means nothing, Lesnar was the #1 HW being 3-1. All those guys were top 10, Randleman just knocked out Cro Cop lol.

It's ok, you don't see it my way and that's cool. You can have an interpretation you want. Leave it at that.

 

[AnotherOldGuy]

Bolt is in an entirely different sport. My point was that current champions have been fighting for over a decade. That's over 10 years, and they're at the top of their sport. We already discussed how sprinting, specifically, has a historically lower shelf life, and the average age of champion sprinters is generally lower than the average age of MMA champions.

All but 2 of the current champions in MMA are over 30 years old from the top two organizations, and the two that aren't are in their late 20's (27-28). You claim 27-28 is prime fighting age, the peak, and I claim 27-28 is the start of physical prime. Evidence points to my claim being more accurate, as the overwhelming majority are 30+.

Shall we go historical and look at the age of all previous champions? How many would you guess were in their 20s and how many in their 30s?

Fedor didn't even make it to PRIDE until he was 25 years old. So by 33 he was just shot and had declined? I don't buy it. He's still fighting in his 40's. Shit just caught up with him in his early 30's and he wasn't fighting no named freakshows consistently for the first time in his career.

31-33 is prime fighting age, and not one single person has proven that to be incorrect. I'll go back and show all MMA champs when I get the time, but I think you're aware that the majority were over 30.

The ten year rule doesn't refer to how many years you compete in a sport (in most sports most of the athletes hit ten years by the time they're 20), it refers to how many years you are at your best. For championship level athletes, that means how many years they're a champ (or at least a top contender). An athlete that was a champ or top contender, and then is no longer even a top contender, is normally (everywhere but Sherdog) said to be past their prime.

In terms of general sport, there is a large amount of data showing that 26-27 is the prime age -- everything from average ages in major sports leagues and Olympics (ie the center of the bell or normal or Gaussian curve -- you didn't comment on that so I may have used a name you're not familiar with), to the ages of medal winners and MVP's. After 26-27 it falls off, and actually quite dramatically, so that by age 30 there are far fewer top competitors in most leagues (even the NFL link you posted called over 30 NFL players the exception, and most of their over 30 guys were 31 or 32).

In terms of MMA, the age tends to be older, because people start later than in other sports -- and I suspect especially for the heavier weight divisions, because good big athletes have a lot of other options, so you get guys like Brock and Schaub and even Crocop and Hunt who do other things first. Fedor's first MMA fight in a major organization (Rings, which was a major organization in 2000) was at 23, which is early for MMA though very late for most sports. His first loss came at age 24 (yes it was a technical loss, but in sport technical losses are still losses), and then his second loss came at age 33, after being in top level organizations for 10 years and about 30 fights. That's a lot of training camps, especially for the idiotic ways MMA training camps go, with full out sparring every day for a couple of months.

In terms of prime fighting age, thinking there's one number that applies to everyone makes as much sense as saying there is one number that describes how long everyone will live before dying of natural causes. You make a lot of interesting and good points, but I don't understand why you keep coming back to that single number. We know how much genetics and lifestyle affect aging (to the point where some people die of natural causes in childhood and others live to 110+), so how does it make any sense at all to think everyone is going to have the same prime fighting age? Do you also expect every 70 year old to be at the same stage of their physical health/ability to walk etc?

 

[Superman Elbow]

So this thread got moved because "Troll Thread, misrepresented the video to fighter bash fedor" Mods I literally said EXACTLY what the video said AND the video starts the fedor section by pretty much calling him the GOAT, apparently the mods are just as unstable as all the other fedor fanboi's and didn't actually watch the video lol.

I'm very curious Mods, in the video was there anything that was factually inccorrect? Or how about a quote that is actually fighter bashing?

So now its trolling if someone posts a thread about a hot topic with facts if its about your favorite fighter?

 

[Superman Elbow]

Worst site of all time

Yes, Yes, let the hate flow...for all those who appose goat fedor

 

[Fioretti]

The ten year rule doesn't refer to how many years you compete in a sport (in most sports most of the athletes hit ten years by the time they're 20), it refers to how many years you are at your best. For championship level athletes, that means how many years they're a champ (or at least a top contender). An athlete that was a champ or top contender, and then is no longer even a top contender, is normally (everywhere but Sherdog) said to be past their prime.

In terms of general sport, there is a large amount of data showing that 26-27 is the prime age -- everything from average ages in major sports leagues and Olympics (ie the center of the bell or normal or Gaussian curve -- you didn't comment on that so I may have used a name you're not familiar with), to the ages of medal winners and MVP's. After 26-27 it falls off, and actually quite dramatically, so that by age 30 there are far fewer top competitors in most leagues (even the NFL link you posted called over 30 NFL players the exception, and most of their over 30 guys were 31 or 32).

In terms of MMA, the age tends to be older, because people start later than in other sports -- and I suspect especially for the heavier weight divisions, because good big athletes have a lot of other options, so you get guys like Brock and Schaub and even Crocop and Hunt who do other things first. Fedor's first MMA fight in a major organization (Rings, which was a major organization in 2000) was at 23, which is early for MMA though very late for most sports. His first loss came at age 24 (yes it was a technical loss, but in sport technical losses are still losses), and then his second loss came at age 33, after being in top level organizations for 10 years and about 30 fights. That's a lot of training camps, especially for the idiotic ways MMA training camps go, with full out sparring every day for a couple of months.

In terms of prime fighting age, thinking there's one number that applies to everyone makes as much sense as saying there is one number that describes how long everyone will live before dying of natural causes. You make a lot of interesting and good points, but I don't understand why you keep coming back to that single number. We know how much genetics and lifestyle affect aging (to the point where some people die of natural causes in childhood and others live to 110+), so how does it make any sense at all to think everyone is going to have the same prime fighting age? Do you also expect every 70 year old to be at the same stage of their physical health/ability to walk etc?

Do you think the "10 year rule" applies to every competitor in every sport, but is null and void if they're not at the top? Mousasi and Bader have both been fighting for almost 20 years and have been ranked for the majority of them. They're just not passed their primes, despite being 35 and 37, because they haven't been "at the top" for 10 years? Seems like a lack of logic and a massively generalized superstition. The age range of 31-33 has seen some of the best athletes' top performances over multiple sports, and is the most common age range for MMA champions specifically. I'll do a full list later, bro.

 

[Deleted member 110072]

The ten year rule doesn't refer to how many years you compete in a sport (in most sports most of the athletes hit ten years by the time they're 20), it refers to how many years you are at your best. For championship level athletes, that means how many years they're a champ (or at least a top contender). An athlete that was a champ or top contender, and then is no longer even a top contender, is normally (everywhere but Sherdog) said to be past their prime.

In terms of general sport, there is a large amount of data showing that 26-27 is the prime age -- everything from average ages in major sports leagues and Olympics (ie the center of the bell or normal or Gaussian curve -- you didn't comment on that so I may have used a name you're not familiar with), to the ages of medal winners and MVP's. After 26-27 it falls off, and actually quite dramatically, so that by age 30 there are far fewer top competitors in most leagues (even the NFL link you posted called over 30 NFL players the exception, and most of their over 30 guys were 31 or 32).

In terms of MMA, the age tends to be older, because people start later than in other sports -- and I suspect especially for the heavier weight divisions, because good big athletes have a lot of other options, so you get guys like Brock and Schaub and even Crocop and Hunt who do other things first. Fedor's first MMA fight in a major organization (Rings, which was a major organization in 2000) was at 23, which is early for MMA though very late for most sports. His first loss came at age 24 (yes it was a technical loss, but in sport technical losses are still losses), and then his second loss came at age 33, after being in top level organizations for 10 years and about 30 fights. That's a lot of training camps, especially for the idiotic ways MMA training camps go, with full out sparring every day for a couple of months.

In terms of prime fighting age, thinking there's one number that applies to everyone makes as much sense as saying there is one number that describes how long everyone will live before dying of natural causes. You make a lot of interesting and good points, but I don't understand why you keep coming back to that single number. We know how much genetics and lifestyle affect aging (to the point where some people die of natural causes in childhood and others live to 110+), so how does it make any sense at all to think everyone is going to have the same prime fighting age? Do you also expect every 70 year old to be at the same stage of their physical health/ability to walk etc?

You are of course dealing with alot of overlapping factors when it comes to what age fighters are at their best...

When they start their high level career.
How active they are in that career.
The style of fighter they are and how dependant on speed this makes them.
How fast they pickup MMA skills.

In Fedor's case he started young, was very active, has a style dependant on speed/agility and had already peaked skill wise by age 26-27.

I mean you see the same is even more true of Crocop and Nog, smaller HW's who depend on speed/agility, start high level fightpsort young and are very active and both decline even earlier than Fedor.

Look at boxing for example, Tyson as a small fast HW, RJJ also very dependant on speed, both declined young.

 

[HHJ]

Thank you mods for putting this garbage where it BELONGS