Ken or Frank Shamrock: Who had the better career?

[Glumberjack]

I guess owing to my going down memory lane with a thread about Pancrase, I got to thinking about the Shamrocks. There was a time when both were on the short list of best fighters in the world. Frank of course had the great run as Middleweight (Light Heavyweight) Champion in the UFC, but Ken was probably the best fighter in Pancrase for several years. Frank didn't suffer a bunch of late career embarrassing losses the way Ken did, but let's discard Ken's unfortunate recent career for the purposes of this thread. Who was the better fighter overall and who had the better career?

 

[EJRMAN513]

Frank but Ken will be remembered more though.

 

[Arm Barbarian]

Frank

 

[Fedor>Cain]

Intercontinental Championship gives Ken the edge.

 

[Huligani]

Is that even a question?

 

[SavageAngel]

Ken had a very nice run in the 90's. He was fighting in championship pancrase fights and in UFC superfights. He got a very nice run and was the biggest star at the time. Beat very good names at the time. After that he was a shadow of his former self. Frank had a more down to earth run, but didn't get the attention that Ken had.

 

[FenoxSky]

Frank was way better when it came to legitimate competition and evolving the sport and with it.

 

[Glumberjack]

Is that even a question?

It is if you have any awareness of early MMA. When Ken was in his prime he was absolutely one of the top fighters in the world.

 

[flex4life]

Frank being undersized beat Tito while Ken lost to him 3 times. Ken would have been remembered much better if he had not comeback after his WWF run.

 

[Huligani]

It is if you have any awareness of early MMA. When Ken was in his prime he was absolutely one of the top fighters in the world.

My awareness of MMA is as good as can be, and Frank clearly had the better career. Ken had the better Pancrase career, Frank had the much better career elsewhere which is far more meaningful especially when you consider the rules of Pancrase as well as the fixed fights.

 

[snugglecakes]

Frank didnt feed like ken did

 

[Big_Chief_Stove]

I guess owing to my going down memory lane with a thread about Pancrase, I got to thinking about the Shamrocks. There was a time when both were on the short list of best fighters in the world. Frank of course had the great run as Middleweight (Light Heavyweight) Champion in the UFC, but Ken was probably the best fighter in Pancrase for several years. Frank didn't suffer a bunch of late career embarrassing losses the way Ken did, but let's discard Ken's unfortunate recent career for the purposes of this thread. Who was the better fighter overall and who had the better career?

Frank 100%

 

[HI SCOTT NEWMAN]

Ken Shamrock.

 

[CTYankee]

Frank had a better career. Ken was more important to the sport.

 

[TheComebackKid]

It's a lot closer than many people want to admit.

Ken Shamrock

UFC Superfight Champion(1 defense)
King of Pancrase(1 defense)

Peak Record: 24-5-2

Wins: Bas Rutten 2x, Masakatsu Funaki, Dan Severn, Maurice Smith, Patrick Smith, Manabu Yamada, Kimo Leopoldo 2x

Plus Ken was the first guy not to lose to Royce Gracie. Ken would have actually won that fight if they had judges.

Frank Shamrock

UFC MW Champion(4 defenses)
Strikeforce MW Champion
WEC LHW Champion

Peak Record: 22-7-2

Wins: Bas Rutten, Masakatsu Funaki, Tito Ortiz, Kevin Jackson, Jeremy Horn, Minoru Suzuki 2x, Manabu Yamada, Enson Inoue

 

[Ceez]

Frank

 

[Warfist]

Frank competed in the dark days of the ufc. Its all about timing...which is why Ken will always be more famous.

Skillwise...Frank has him beat in every category and was light years ahead of the sport.

Frank Juarez Shamrock was a bad motherfucker

 

[CoffeeAndBeer]

Waat.

 

[McSpikes]

I'm sure Ken made more money so he had the better career.

 

[Red Triangle]

Frank but Ken will be remembered more though.

True.