- Joined
- Jan 28, 2014
- Messages
- 965
- Reaction score
- 687
Between prime Usman and prime Hendrikc (pre USADA) which do you think was the tougher to beat and the one who had the best tools?
I think Hendricks had a better combination of striking + KO single punch. Usman has a little bit cleaner boxing
Usman was a better wreslter but no for a large margin. Nobody outwreslted Hendricks
I think Hendricks's resume was better: Condit, Lawler (for me 2x), Fitch, Kos, Ellenbergue and if you are going to account extra official victory (that he obviously had), GSP
Usman best victories: Burns, Masvidal (2x), Woodley, Maia, Covington (2x), Dos Anjos
Truly I'm not impressed by Usman resume, I think he would not have been so dominant in Lawler/Rory era (both were tough for wrestlers). And the only great striker that he has beaten (Masvidal) is inferior to Condit and Lawler.
I could put BJ in this discussion but I think he was too small to be as tough as these guys in that category.
I find Chimaev a tougher fighter than both but he didn't become a champion and his resume is not comparable to theirs
I think Hendricks had a better combination of striking + KO single punch. Usman has a little bit cleaner boxing
Usman was a better wreslter but no for a large margin. Nobody outwreslted Hendricks
I think Hendricks's resume was better: Condit, Lawler (for me 2x), Fitch, Kos, Ellenbergue and if you are going to account extra official victory (that he obviously had), GSP
Usman best victories: Burns, Masvidal (2x), Woodley, Maia, Covington (2x), Dos Anjos
Truly I'm not impressed by Usman resume, I think he would not have been so dominant in Lawler/Rory era (both were tough for wrestlers). And the only great striker that he has beaten (Masvidal) is inferior to Condit and Lawler.
I could put BJ in this discussion but I think he was too small to be as tough as these guys in that category.
I find Chimaev a tougher fighter than both but he didn't become a champion and his resume is not comparable to theirs
Last edited: