TS is new to mman. Rampage didnt beat an aging chuck. he also beat him twice
I've been watching MMA for years. Rampage doesn't receive the same accolades for beating an all time great like Weidman did.
TS is new to mman. Rampage didnt beat an aging chuck. he also beat him twice
There's many in a thread saying just that. At least give Weidman many more title defenses. Many think beating a GOAT makes them the GOAT unless it's a fighter they like.
Strawman threads are fun.I have never seen anyone suggest that Weidman has a greater career and legacy thus far than Silva.
Anderson Silva had an iron chin back in the day. It's CLEARLY diminished at this point. Weidman dropped Anderson in the clinch with a punch in the second, and obviously caught him with his hands down in the first and KO'd him.
I doubt those things happen to Anderson in his prime. Machida took his punches just fine. I think people just say he's better than any version of him just to make his wins seem more legitimate.
Rampage really was better than any version of Chuck. He fought him in his supposed prime and then again later in his career.
MMA fans say that Weidman is better than any version of Silva and beats him at any part of his career and has a better career than Silva with merely 2 defenses (one a fluke and one great fight).
Rampage Jackson somewhat did to Chuck Liddell what MMA fans say Weidman would do to any version of Silva.
Rampage beat Liddell in two of Liddell's primes. Rampage brutally started the Liddell era (in Pride) and brutally ended the Liddell era (in UFC), yet Shertards argue that Liddell was a better fighter and had a better career than Rampage.
So how is Silva's legacy and career is inferior to Weidman's then why isn't Liddell's legacy and career inferior to Rampage's?
TS, I can say with all honesty that you are quickly becoming one of the shittiest posters on this forum.
Bravo.
MMA fans say that Weidman is better than any version of Silva and beats him at any part of his career and has a better career than Silva with merely 2 defenses (one a fluke and one great fight).
Rampage Jackson somewhat did to Chuck Liddell what MMA fans say Weidman would do to any version of Silva.
Rampage beat Liddell in two of Liddell's primes. Rampage brutally started the Liddell era (in Pride) and brutally ended the Liddell era (in UFC), yet Shertards argue that Liddell was a better fighter and had a better career than Rampage.
So how is Silva's legacy and career is inferior to Weidman's then why isn't Liddell's legacy and career inferior to Rampage's?
Anderson Silva had an iron chin back in the day. It's CLEARLY diminished at this point. Weidman dropped Anderson in the clinch with a punch in the second, and obviously caught him with his hands down in the first and KO'd him.
I doubt those things happen to Anderson in his prime. Machida took his punches just fine. I think people just say he's better than any version of him just to make his wins seem more legitimate.
Rampage really was better than any version of Chuck. He fought him in his supposed prime and then again later in his career.
You seem to be confusing skill level and style for legacy. Liddell and Anderson have better legacies than Rampage and Weidman however Rampage should almost always beat Liddell and Weidman should almost always beat Anderson.
Younger Anderson just loses differently, he would get finished on the ground instead of standing. Anderson's TDD and ability to get back up got way better post Sonnen 1.