Is it better to be an exciting fighter who loses, or a boring fighter who wins?

[Gigacardio]

Exciting fighter who loses (risks getting knocked out in every exchange due to flashy, aggressive style):
Jiri

Boring fighter who wins (maximize chance of winning a fight, even if boring techniques are used):
Khamzat


------------------


If you are an exciting fighter who loses too much, you risk getting cut from the UFC eventually.
If you are a boring fighter who keeps winning, people will skip your fights regardless.

What's better to be?

Khamazat is not that boring.
Friendly advice: go and watch kickboxing if you're all about the striking.

 

[Russie]

You can't go wrong stacking wins. You may not ever be a fan fav without that exciting style but you'll be around longer and seeing the paydays if can keep winning. It says something if you're able to turn back challengers with your style that they are unable conquer. Jon Fitch was like that. He had it rolling until GSP showed him how it's done. He never fully got it back on track with some wins and losses after that.

 

[TrueBias]

Khamzat is not a boring fighter you retard

He is now.

 

[Mammothman]

More like you want to be Justin Gaethje or John Fitch