Is it time to slide Charles Oliveira over Tony Ferguson in All-Time Lightweights
- Thread starter bartleby929
- Start date
- Joined
- Mar 6, 2018
- Messages
- 12,155
- Reaction score
- 15,738
Nah. Prime El Cucuy beats Khabob with ease.
- Joined
- Feb 12, 2004
- Messages
- 169,664
- Reaction score
- 156,598
lol who cares? If Tony was your personal # whatever for a year or two,and isnt anymore what does it really matter? it doesnt hahahahah
You could argue who had the better career,I suppose.
You could argue who had the better career,I suppose.
- Joined
- Jan 23, 2017
- Messages
- 17,311
- Reaction score
- 35,501
Yeah, that wasn't the day though. Tony was 36 and coming off a very bad loss to snap a huge win streak. At the point Oliveira beat Ferguson, Ferguson had still accomplished more and beaten better fighters over his career it was just a story of one guy who had very clearly fallen out of his prime vs another guy who had risen into his. I'd say the moment Charles knocked out Chandler for the vacant belt probably and after his first defense certainly. Beating a fighter doesn't make your career better than theirs or you better than they ever were though.
- Joined
- Oct 6, 2009
- Messages
- 9,342
- Reaction score
- 9,174
ftfy.
You said it Yourself. Tony was one competitive loss removed from a double digit win streak. It's 20/20 hindsight, and completely results oriented saying Tony was "clearly" past his prime for that fight. Ferg was the betting favorite as well as my pick. It wasn't 36 years old that beat his ass pillar to post, it was Charles Oliveira that did that. It wasn't because Tony had descended to Charles level, it was because Charles transcended Tony's level. It wasn't because Tony's cardio failed. It wasn't because he lost a step, his chin had been cracked, he was just showing up for checks, none of that. What version of Tony do you think would have beat Charles that night or since?
- Joined
- Jan 23, 2017
- Messages
- 17,311
- Reaction score
- 35,501
It's not about which version beats which to decide to who the greater fighter was relative to their careers. It's about their records, accomplishments, biggest wins etc. At the time Oliveira beat Tony, Tony had a better record, better rankings, more top 10 wins, more achievements, less losses etc. Tony was 36, that is relevant..saying it's not is foolish, when you're 36 and take a huge ass whooping by Gaethje, 36 is about 8 years detached from your athletic prime and Tony had had a history of injuries, he had been rocked and dropped by Pettis, Lando and Gaethje among others leading up to the Oliveira fight....I personally think the Tony that beat Thompson and RDA would have looked VERY different than the one who got smashed by Gaethje, Oliveira and Beneil.
Don't sit here and say it's not about getting old, this isn't my opinion or yours it's just evident through statistics and facts. 36...a history if injuries, prone to taking damage en route to winning, top 5 fighter for years...durable begins to visibly slow down, take more damage and be effected by it worse at 36? This is normal, it was catching up to Tony for years and Gaethje finally got him. That's not me arguing that Gaethje wasn't always better, we will never know and I don't really care but surely anyone sane knows 36 year old Tony wasn't his best version and especially not after the Gaethje loss for fucks sake.
- Joined
- Jun 22, 2022
- Messages
- 18,020
- Reaction score
- 13,710
I don't see prime bj and Frankie beating Charles in anything else but nostalgia and legend status. I would rank it according to show would win prime for prime. Bj Was a killer but phisically not dominant. Frankie would get dwarfed by Charles.
- Joined
- Oct 6, 2009
- Messages
- 9,342
- Reaction score
- 9,174
You're adding a lot of parameters not mentioned in the thread title or op. I just gave my opinion about the question in the thread title, and when that happened for me.
You seem hell bent on convincing me that Your opinion of when that happened is more accurate and holds more weight than my opinion and I'm sure it does....for You. What's your motive here Sherbro? Asking because I see the wheels the Goalposts are mounted on.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jan 23, 2017
- Messages
- 17,311
- Reaction score
- 35,501
Nothing, I just disagree with you and I wanted to discuss and present my opinion. It doesn't really matter at all. The idea that someone surpasses another in terms of all time greatness the moment they defeat that person is a silly opinion I see used too often is all. Beyond that people aggressively disregarding age or primes is again silly "it wasn't aging, injuries, cumulative damage through fighting that lead to Tony losing, it was simply his opponent being better" this is a ludicrous response, those things matter a ton. How many fighters currently in the top 10 at 170lbs and lower are 36 or older? Counting the champs that's 55 fighters, I'm going to guess it's about 5 total and there's never been a champ that old. Fighters losing at advanced ages to someone in their prime, doesn't make that person better in terms of all time greatness. I'm challenging you to give a better argument for your opinion for that being the time Oliveira surpassed Tony because by any logical metric he hadn't yet.
- Joined
- Dec 24, 2018
- Messages
- 963
- Reaction score
- 204
Frankie what? Dude is a bantamweight.
- Joined
- Sep 15, 2014
- Messages
- 20,972
- Reaction score
- 16,642
How come Frankie gets called a point fighter but not Benson?
- Joined
- Oct 6, 2009
- Messages
- 9,342
- Reaction score
- 9,174
I don't see the clear deterioration in TF that you see. I was still hopeful Tony could pull out the JG fight in to the 3rd. Charles and Dariush just executed a game plan that exploited a weakness of Tony's that was there his entire career, as shown by Danny Castillo a decade ago. A year and a half AFTER the CO fight, TF took a clear round off Chandler. He didn't look slow, weak, or out of shape in that fight, he got caught. Happens, simple as that. The diaz fight was wonky as shit and deserved more scrutiny than it received. Not that any of that is really relevant anyway. At the time of TF/CO, in that moment, I felt that Charles had become a better fighter than any version of TF. Charles work since has only solidified that position.
I can use whatever specific paramaters I need to frame CO as the "Greater" lw than Islam Makhachev. I have an admitted anti Dagestan bias. I even think it's pretty obvious that when looked at in context, that CO not only has better wins, he has better losses than IM also. Still, if You ask me in generic terms who is the greater LW, I can't put CO above IM currently. (But I hope that changes)
The obvious reason for that is the head to head result.
