How Does a Fighter Break in to the Top 10?

[Siver!]

Eh, did some research and turns out I'm wrong. Here is what the official UFC site says:
View attachment 1033162

I think it's silly tbh, I like my way better but ah well. I thought I knew how they were determined but apparently not lol, I wasn't intentionally misleading you when I wrote my original comment.

Agreed on the inconsistency of the panel though, there needs to be stricter definitions on how to rank someone. I think it should be results and form based, in that order.

I think they probably like the complete lack of rules, as it kinda just means you can vote anyone, anywhere, at any time.

I don't like the rules they use at all, but they definitely allow for hype trains to be overrated at will lol

 

[Hellowhosthat]

I didn't think the decision against Sterling was debatable, and I agree he probably should have won the O'Malley fight, but he got absolutely dominated against Merab. Maybe 9 was too harsh, but 4 is ridiculous. He has literally lost 4/5 of his last fights. I don't think having a few close decisions (and a DQ that was entirely his fault) should change the fact that he did lose those fights. Having a ranking of 4 means you should be 1 fight away from a title shot. I don't think Yan is 1 fight away from a title shot, however you spin it. Losing that many times means you should be at least 2 fights away from a TS. Put him at 7 and I think that's fair.

The ranking is supposed to be about who the best fighters in the division are. Given that most of his losses were close and that he beat #3 ranked Sandhagen it would seem silly to me to rank him lower. Song is #7 and Yan is currently the betting favourite over him.

 

[nostradumbass]

The ranking is supposed to be about who the best fighters in the division are. Given that most of his losses were close and that he beat #3 ranked Sandhagen it would seem silly to me to rank him lower. Song is #7 and Yan is currently the betting favourite over him.

Rankings should at least roughly resemble betting odds imo. There aren't more than 4 guys who would be betting favorites over Yan, and there certainly aren't more than 10 guys who would be betting favorites over Umar. Hell, I'm not sure Sandhagen will even end up the favorite against Umar, and Umar would probably be like 4-1 favorite against Rob Font, who's ranked ahead of him.

 

[Sean_wongster_wongmastter]

The 3 guys Umar passed are Martinez, Cruz, and Munhoz. I absolutely agree there's no justification for Umar passing Martinez, who looked great in his last fight and dominated Yanez (then ranked #14). But Cruz is effectively retired and hasn't won a fight in more than 2 years (won 2 fights in the last 7 years). And Munhoz has won 1 out of his last 5 fights.

So I guess you could argue that Umar should be #11. But Henry has no business in the top 10 right now--he hasn't won a fight in 3 1/2 years. So #10 makes sense for Umar, after all.

Performances absolutely matter, if an unranked guy fights the champ and beats him in few rounds, that unranked guy will emerge in the top 5.

 

[Sean_wongster_wongmastter]

The "no one wants to fight him" narrative is one of the fakest things in MMA.

No champion wants to fight Belal.

Belal wouldn’t even want to fight Belal.

 

[Local Plata]

Have some sort of marketing angle for Dana.

 

[Local Plata]

Performances absolutely matter, if an unranked guy fights the champ and beats him in few rounds, that unranked guy will emerge in the top 5.

Lmao. No. That's not how rankings work.

I mean now that the UFC is a circus and appealing to the pro wrestling dorks, that's pretty much what they do, but that's not what's supposed to happen. You don't gain ranks any other way than winning fights, unless guys above you fall off. Period.

 

[Chael_Sonnen]

I think they probably like the complete lack of rules, as it kinda just means you can vote anyone, anywhere, at any time.

I don't like the rules they use at all, but they definitely allow for hype trains to be overrated at will lol

Yeah true, it suits them for the rules to be ambiguous.

The ranking is supposed to be about who the best fighters in the division are. Given that most of his losses were close and that he beat #3 ranked Sandhagen it would seem silly to me to rank him lower. Song is #7 and Yan is currently the betting favourite over him.

Hmm, I think rankings should be results - form - and skill based, probably in that order. Agree to disagree. I mean, I think Yan is a fantastic fighter, and his recent results don't tell the full picture of where he is skill-wise, but I don't think rankings should be based on skill alone, and definitely shouldn't be based on betting odds. Anyway just my opinion, it's completely fine to disagree.

 

[Siver!]

Yeah true, it suits them for the rules to be ambiguous.

Hmm, I think rankings should be results - form - and skill based, probably in that order. Agree to disagree. I mean, I think Yan is a fantastic fighter, and his recent results don't tell the full picture of where he is skill-wise, but I don't think rankings should be based on skill alone, and definitely shouldn't be based on betting odds. Anyway just my opinion, it's completely fine to disagree.

I honestly don't even want skill set to be factored into rankings, but I suppose it could be the 'octagon control' of the scoring system (ie, virtually completely ignored, if not actually completely).

Judging someone's skill set is purely subjective. UFC Stats are far from perfect and are controversial at times, but that's more metric-based, and maybe a better third choice assessment?

 

[Siver!]

Rankings should at least roughly resemble betting odds imo. There aren't more than 4 guys who would be betting favorites over Yan, and there certainly aren't more than 10 guys who would be betting favorites over Umar. Hell, I'm not sure Sandhagen will even end up the favorite against Umar, and Umar would probably be like 4-1 favorite against Rob Font, who's ranked ahead of him.

Interesting point re: odds, and what we're seeing is oddsmakers using AI to form at least part of their results and offerings, and that does indeed include factoring in likely biases of audiences.

It would probably be helpful to consult AI about rankings, too, if they aren't already, but that would necessitate tightening the rules (it might be minimum 2 fights in the UFC, for example, but that wouldn't work for guys like Erceg who beat ranked opponents in their debut). AI would probably tell us Umar deserves to be where he is already, if not higher, but it would also account for the fact he hasn't beaten anyone meaningful in his career yet and - like Khamzat - shutting out mid-tier guys doesn't make you a future champion by any means.

The good thing about your proposed system is commentators like Cruz wouldn't be ranked right now. Hell, would it be that surprising if Bisping were still ranked, or any other number of retired fighters if they just hadn't said "I'm retired"? There are some hangers on who really shouldn't be there, and there are guys that aren't properly proven either, my concern would be if you reflected AI/oddsmakers too much, you'd favour the latter a little bit too much.

 

[blaseblase]

The ranking is supposed to be about who the best fighters in the division are. Given that most of his losses were close and that he beat #3 ranked Sandhagen it would seem silly to me to rank him lower. Song is #7 and Yan is currently the betting favourite over him.

Yan hasnt won a fight in 2 and a half years, the lack of winning and stacking up losses should penalize a fighter. Look at how long a shot Tony stuck around in the rankings because they kept feeding him to ranked opponents.

 

[nostradumbass]

Interesting point re: odds, and what we're seeing is oddsmakers using AI to form at least part of their results and offerings, and that does indeed include factoring in likely biases of audiences.

It would probably be helpful to consult AI about rankings, too, if they aren't already, but that would necessitate tightening the rules (it might be minimum 2 fights in the UFC, for example, but that wouldn't work for guys like Erceg who beat ranked opponents in their debut). AI would probably tell us Umar deserves to be where he is already, if not higher, but it would also account for the fact he hasn't beaten anyone meaningful in his career yet and - like Khamzat - shutting out mid-tier guys doesn't make you a future champion by any means.

The good thing about your proposed system is commentators like Cruz wouldn't be ranked right now. Hell, would it be that surprising if Bisping were still ranked, or any other number of retired fighters if they just hadn't said "I'm retired"? There are some hangers on who really shouldn't be there, and there are guys that aren't properly proven either, my concern would be if you reflected AI/oddsmakers too much, you'd favour the latter a little bit too much.

It would help with matchmaking, if anything, and make it more difficult to freeze guys out of moving up. It's a little weird when someone like Bo Nickal is unranked but is like -1400 for several fights in a row. Dude should be fighting someone where he's at least only a -500 favorite.

People were complaining when Islam moved up the rankings, but he was still a -600 favorite against #6 at the time Dan Hooker, and the fight was even easier than the odds suggested. Going on odds would probably benefit guys who aren't properly proven, but it would be very temporary, and would keep the rankings moving more often for different matchups instead of waiting for this guy or that guy to be available, and the hype for these guys is justified, it won't take years of mowing down bums just to get a ranked fight because there is now incentive for established guys to fight up and comers.

 

[Siver!]

It would help with matchmaking, if anything, and make it more difficult to freeze guys out of moving up. It's a little weird when someone like Bo Nickal is unranked but is like -1400 for several fights in a row. Dude should be fighting someone where he's at least only a -500 favorite.

People were complaining when Islam moved up the rankings, but he was still a -600 favorite against #6 at the time Dan Hooker, and the fight was even easier than the odds suggested.

Not sure I agree on Bo, though, the guy didn't look like he knew what an arm triangle was a couple of fights ago and people seem blinded by his non-MMA based credentials.

Guy's a beast, but they're struggling to find guys they're confident he'll beat well. I think chances are he'll keep being this enormous favourite until he loses, and I don't think that's far off. I have serious doubts if he'd beat anyone in the top 25 right now, so it's all down to how quickly he can evolve. It doesn't seem like his evolution has been massively high-paced.

 

[-Sideways-]

Beating someone in the top 10 usually helps.

 

[Goutfather]

people have long pointed out that rankings are basically just a reflection of how popular or known a fighter is. umar is from a famous family and is undefeated, so it makes sense. he’s probably good enough to be a legit top 10, but it’s kind of farcical they’ll just promote him. imo, fighters should have to earn their rankings, and they should regularly have to maintain their ranking against unranked opponents. fighting other ranked opponents is great, but if that’s all they fight, then nobody’s ranking ever really drops.

 

[mjfan23]

Sleep with Dana

 

[wwkirk]

Sleep with Dana

Maybe some girls would, but what are the guys supposed to do?

 

[Siver!]

Maybe some girls would, but what are the guys supposed to do?

Sleep with Dana.

 

[mister piscadinha]

having bubbles make the rankings bullshit

like, u can go on a 7 fight winning streak facing top15-30 fighters and that says very little about you being capable of being a top5

the same way losing three straight fights to other top5 fighters does not mean you should be out of the top ten

if the ufc played fast and loose with the rankings instead of trying to "build up" guys, we wouldn't have this problems

 

[Siver!]

having bubbles make the rankings bullshit

like, u can go on a 7 fight winning streak facing top15-30 fighters and that says very little about you being capable of being a top5

the same way losing three straight fights to other top5 fighters does not mean you should be out of the top ten

if the ufc played fast and loose with the rankings instead of trying to "build up" guys, we wouldn't have this problems

Mandatory "rankings spot defence following losses" clause in their contracts going forward?