How big is Aljamain Sterling for his weightclass?

[SeattleFightFan]

such tought talk. your keyboard must be terrified...

What are you on about? I'm not mad; I'm defending my position using logical arguments and, more importantly, sources.

You have a born on date of 2008, surely you remember when this was the norm on forums. Then again, that was already post-TUF, so maybe not....

EDIT: ok, I just re-read that post, I see where you're coming from I did call people emotional bitches in a rant...but I also think I explained why pretty well. I elaborated on post #60 is you're curious. Cheers.

 

[Goldentrophy]

He will be small(even not cutting weight) next to Josh Emmet, Shane Burgos and Volk if he were to move up to 145.

 

[Jorge Luis Borges]

I am all for changing the weigh-in rules. I seriously dislike the current rules and fear that they will only change after someone dies (like OneFC, like high school wrestling).

But intelligent fans don't conflate systemic problems around weight cuts, and willy-nilly picking some fighters - primarily based on popularity or the "look test" - and saying "hey, that guy is big, he must be a weight bully!"

Respectfully, here are my supporting arguments:

1) The weight issue itself: What you speak of is what I would call a systemic problem, in which there are no rules about weight gain after weigh-in (except a few recent, partially binding suspensions in Cali). Everyone cuts over 5%. Average is 10%. Many cut 12-14%. California started suspending those over 14.7%. In your perfect world, you suggest that fighters who cut 10% (average) are OK but fighters who cut 14% should be considered "weight bullies", however....
2) Fans reactions to the weight issue: It's not your "perfect world" and how fans actually hand out the term is nonsensical:

a) as I pointed out in post #12, fans don't actually use data to come up with who is a 'weight bully' and who isn't. For example, no one has ever claimed Cruz is a weight bully, but he gained back 14% in his last fight.
b) as @jx820 pointed out in post #22, "weight bully" is more popularity contest than anything else. Which is why Conor and Jones are, but Holloway and Gus aren't.
c) or as @Phisher pointed out in post #50, "Pereira is visibly larger than a large LHW like Reyes, but nobody cares because they want Izzy to lose"​

CONCLUSION: since a) there isn't a rule the fighters are breaking, and 2) fans by and large hand out the term willy-nilly instead of in a rational way, the only conclusion we can draw is that "weight bully" is an idiotic term that any sherdogger with a modicum of intelligence should be embarrassed to use.

I am willing to concede that IF we knew everyone's weight gains (and not just a few hints from Cali) and IF sherdoggers actually applied the term properly to those who were proven to have gained the most weight, then there would be a time and place for the term. In that parallel universe, you and I agree. Cheers.

If I'm reading you rightly, it boils down to two arguments:
1. 'don't hate the player, hate the game', and
2. It's overly subjective.

The first one is an argument that people with a modicum of intelligence can easily dismiss. Both an easily abused system and those who abuse that system can be criticized; fans aren't forced to condone all behavior that doesn't explicitly break the rules. The second is similar. Of course criticism is often highly subjective, but that doesn't invalidate all criticisms along certain lines. It just means that sometimes guys who are called weight bullies aren't, not that there is no such thing as people who abuse the current system and gain a notable weight advantage thereby.

I feel like you have good, limited points, but by asserting that all intelligent fans must see it that way, which is not generally your style, you undercut your position.

 

[Alpha_T83]

This is one of the reasons why weight cuts need to be regulated by weight inside the Octagon.

The answer to curbing weight cutting is pre-fight weigh-ins as you're entering the Octagon. This weigh-in result wouldn't be announced until the fight is over, but if you're more than 10 pounds above your weightclass limit, you get fined 35% of your purse and would be ineligible for championships.

The result would be fighters can weigh between 135-145 (136-146 non-title) at bantamweight inside the Octagon. Yes, this would cause some issues at first, but fighters would adjust to it pretty quickly. Not only would this eliminate weight bullies, but it would make the whole weight cutting much safer.

 

[SeattleFightFan]

If I'm reading you rightly, it boils down to two arguments:
1. 'don't hate the player, hate the game', and
2. It's overly subjective.

The first one is an argument that people with a modicum of intelligence can easily dismiss. Both an easily abused system and those who abuse that system can be criticized; fans aren't forced to condone all behavior that doesn't explicitly break the rules. The second is similar. Of course criticism is often highly subjective, but that doesn't invalidate all criticisms along certain lines. It just means that sometimes guys who are called weight bullies aren't, not that there is no such thing as people who abuse the current system and gain a notable weight advantage thereby.

I feel like you have good, limited points, but by asserting that all intelligent fans must see it that way, which is not generally your style, you undercut your position.

Most fans point to fighters they don't like who are tall and say "OMG weight bully!" without any evidence of weight changes, while at the same time (and I've proven this demonstrably) don't accuse lesser known or more popular fighters of it when there is ample evidence of being guilty of it!!!

At some point, I would argue that when a term is used so poorly the best thing we can do is stop using it altogether.

You seem to like the idea of the term so much, that you don't care how practically it's being used. But that's reading between the lines; I don't want to put words in your mouth.

As I said before, in an alternate universe where there are facts supporting opinions around this topic, you and I would agree. Meanwhile, I suppose we'll just agree to disagree in this universe. Cheers.

 

[BJJ Lover]

I never really saw it, he looks like a regular bantamweight to me, I think it's Petr Yan actually who is quite small for the division.

his limbs are huge but he’s average height for the division.

It’s actually a perfect body type for his style.

being tall is a disadvantage for shooting but having long arms is an advantage for everything.

Jon Jones for example wasn't a relentless wrestler. When he forced wrestling he wasn’t good- all of his takedowns came from opportune moments and clinch initiations whereas non tall dudes can force shooting aggressively

 

[pankrat]

Yeah he is big and slender, but not bigger than many other in the weightclass with different build, as Sandhagen or Aldo, nor than others with similar build.
This is boxing 135lbs champ Davin Haney (5'8")

 

[10000yearsold]

Bigger than you, bro.