Khabib most overrated on roster - 2 significant names on entire 24-0 record

[HHJ]

just watch khabib fight,thats all you need to know this dude can be the champ

 

[fatlipjesus]

WTF, do you even logic bro? Sorry, but 90% of sherdog disagrees with you. It's universally agreed Nate Diaz is a horrible stylistic match up for Conor. He has superb boxing, height/reach on Conor. Durability/chin. And he's extremely slick on the ground. All those things are bad for Conor.

So .... Diaz having boxing and a chin is bad for Conor?

Isn't Conor a "world class striker"?

Or is he only a world class striker when he has the height/reach advantage and his opponent has no durability/chin?

I thought Conor's strength was striking and here you are saying Diaz is a bad match-up because of his striking abilities.

 

[Der Eisbär]

So .... Diaz having boxing and a chin is bad for Conor?

Isn't Conor a "world class striker"?

Or is he only a world class striker when he has the height/reach advantage and his opponent has no durability/chin?

I thought Conor's strength was striking and here you are saying Diaz is a bad match-up because of his striking abilities.

You act as if this is the first time you're hearing this. You're telling me you haven't seen it repeated on here 1000 times that Diaz is a bad match up for Conor? And Conor beat Diaz, are you forgetting that part?

 

[fatlipjesus]

You act as if this is the first time you're hearing this. You're telling me you haven't seen it repeated on her 1000 times that Diaz is a bad match up for Conor? And Conor beat Diaz, are you forgetting that part?

I hear Conor fans saying he's a bad match-up. I don't hear many others saying it.

If Conor is as good of a striker as everyone says he is, he shouldn't have any problem with beating Nate Diaz. Diaz has no kicking game, no footwork, no pressure, no power. He has volume punches and a chin.

Conor is supposed to beat top boxers but he can't handle Nate Diaz?

LOL


BTW, why do you keep ignoring my Buchinger question?

Still looking for a UFC fighter he's beat?

 

[Soul On Ice]

I thought Conor's strength was striking and here you are saying Diaz is a bad match-up because of his striking abilities.

Nate's BJJ, durability, cardio make it a tough match-up, he can take a beating early and make it into a war of attrition.

With a full tank of gas we've all seen that Conor is leagues above Nate.

 

[fatlipjesus]

Nate's BJJ, durability, cardio make it a tough match-up, he can take a beating early and make it into a war of attrition.

With a full tank of gas we've all seen that Conor is leagues above Nate.

Nate Diaz is 3-4 in his last 7 fights. He also has 11 losses.

Apparently most people don't have as much trouble beating him as Conor does.

 

[Frank Edgar]

You act as if this is the first time you're hearing this. You're telling me you haven't seen it repeated on here 1000 times that Diaz is a bad match up for Conor? And Conor beat Diaz, are you forgetting that part?

It's easy to say that in hindsight, after Diaz choked out Conor and then had a very close fight with him. But before their first fight nobody thought Nate had a chance. Diaz does have great BJJ but he only uses it when he gets taken down and Conor was obviously never gonna take Diaz down.

It is true that Khabib has a padded record but that doesn't mean he is not a great fighter. If he hadn't been out with injuries he would have already been champ by now.

 

[Der Eisbär]

I hear Conor fans saying he's a bad match-up. I don't hear many others saying it.

If Conor is as good of a striker as everyone says he is, he shouldn't have any problem with beating Nate Diaz. Diaz has no kicking game, no footwork, no pressure, no power. He has volume punches and a chin.

Conor is supposed to beat top boxers but he can't handle Nate Diaz?

LOL


BTW, why do you keep ignoring my Buchinger question?

Still looking for a UFC fighter he's beat?

Nate Diaz has no pressure? Lol.... wow. That's how I know you've gone full hater mode.

My internet at work is being potato tier right now and opening a bunch of pages to look at records is going extremely slowly.

 

[Der Eisbär]

It's easy to say that in hindsight, after Diaz choked out Conor and then had a very close fight with him. But before their first fight nobody thought Nate had a chance. Diaz does have great BJJ but he only uses it when he gets taken down and Conor was obviously never gonna take Diaz down.

It is true that Khabib has a padded record but that doesn't mean he is not a great fighter. If he hadn't been out with injuries he would have already been champ by now.

Again, I am not saying Khabib isn't a great fighter. I am saying he's overrated. His accomplishments do not align with what people say he can do.

 

[Der Eisbär]

I hear Conor fans saying he's a bad match-up. I don't hear many others saying it.

If Conor is as good of a striker as everyone says he is, he shouldn't have any problem with beating Nate Diaz. Diaz has no kicking game, no footwork, no pressure, no power. He has volume punches and a chin.

Conor is supposed to beat top boxers but he can't handle Nate Diaz?

LOL


BTW, why do you keep ignoring my Buchinger question?

Still looking for a UFC fighter he's beat?

You should have known wtf you were talking about before going on a crusade to have the Buchinger question answered.

Buchinger choked out Steven Ray who's now 4-1 in the UFC with a win over Ross Pearson.

 

[fatlipjesus]

Nate Diaz has no pressure? Lol.... wow. That's how I know you've gone full hater mode.

My internet at work is being potato tier right now and opening a bunch of pages to look at records is going extremely slowly.

Are you trying to tell me Nate Diaz is a pressure fighter? lol
With that footwork?


Let me save you the trouble on Buchinger. He's fought three people that have fought in the UFC. He lost to McGregor and Akira Corrassani (who was knocked out 3x in a row and retired) and beat Steven Ray.

Yet, you include him as a "good win" for McGregor because hes beaten one UFC fighter.... while only listing two of Khabib's UFC wins as "good wins", despite the other 6 all coming over better UFC fighters than Buchinger ever beat. That, my friend, is either called bias or not knowing what you're talking about. Take your pick.

BTW, Buchinger just got knocked out in the first round by a "Russian nobody" in M-1.

 

[Der Eisbär]

Are you trying to tell me Nate Diaz is a pressure fighter? lol
With that footwork?


Let me save you the trouble on Buchinger. He's fought three people that have fought in the UFC. He lost to McGregor and Akira Corrassani (who was knocked out 3x in a row and retired) and beat Steven Ray.

Yet, you include him as a "good win" for McGregor because hes beaten one UFC fighter.... while only listing two of Khabib's UFC wins as "good wins", despite the other 6 all coming over better UFC fighters than Buchinger ever beat. That, my friend, is either called bias or not knowing what you're talking about. Take your pick.

BTW, Buchinger just got knocked out in the first round by a "Russian nobody" in M-1.

Wow, way to nit pick the tiniest detail to prove your point in just one of the numerous variables surrounding how good of a fighter Khabib is. You really got me.

 

[fatlipjesus]

You should have known wtf you were talking about before going on a crusade to have the Buchinger question answered.

Buchinger choked out Steven Ray who's now 4-1 in the UFC with a win over Ross Pearson.

Yup, I know.

You said he's a good win because he has wins over "UFC fighters."

His record against UFC fighters is 2-2. He beat Ray and Tasumov (8 years ago), and lost to McGregor and Akira Corassani (lol).

Yet, you include Buchinger as a "good win" for McGregor because he's beaten two "UFC fighters".

Shalorus, Tibau, Tavares, Trujillo, Healey and Horcher are all UFC fighters. Why are they not included as good wins then?

 

[Frank Edgar]

Nate's BJJ, durability, cardio make it a tough match-up, he can take a beating early and make it into a war of attrition.

With a full tank of gas we've all seen that Conor is leagues above Nate.

"Leagues above"? Did we watch the same fight? In the rematch Conor lost like 2 rounds and the fight ended with McGregor on his back eating shots.

It was an awesome fight and props to McGregor for working on his cardio and winning but it was a very close fight. Compare that to what Rory Macdonald, Benson Henderson, or RDA did to Nate who did actually dominate him.

 

[Soul On Ice]

Nate Diaz is 3-4 in his last 7 fights. He also has 11 losses.

Apparently most people don't have as much trouble beating him as Conor does.

His record isn't relevant to how he matches up with Conor
As the old saying goes..."Styles make fights"

Conor doesn't have the thai boxing or wrestling style that gives Nate problem, Conor's biggest weapon are his hands and Nate just happens to be able to take a punch about as well as anyone while also being a good enough boxer himself to be dangerous.

On top of that his BJJ and submission skills are excellent

On top of that he never gets tired while fighting at a hectic pace.

 

[fatlipjesus]

Wow, way to nit pick the tiniest detail to prove your point in just one of the numerous variables surrounding how good of a fighter Khabib is. You really got me.

Nah, I just find it funny when people pick and choose their truths just to fit their own narrative.

"Khabib is only 24-0 cause he fought Russian nobodies."

Meanwhile, Conor McGregor got tapped out in the first round by a hand-picked Russian nobody.

You then say Buchinger is a "top win" because he beat two UFC fighters, but ignore the fact that Khabib is 8-0 while actually fighting in the UFC against UFC fighters, and you only name two of those as "top wins".

Also, Buchinger himself just got knocked out by a "Russian nobody."

Turns out its NOT that easy to go 16-0 against Russian nobodies.

 

[Der Eisbär]

Yup, I know.

You said he's a good win because he has wins over "UFC fighters."

His record against UFC fighters is 2-2. He beat Ray and Tasumov (8 years ago), and lost to McGregor and Akira Corassani (lol).

Yet, you include Buchinger as a "good win" for McGregor because he's beaten two "UFC fighters".

Shalorus, Tibau, Tavares, Trujillo, Healey and Horcher are all UFC fighters. Why are they not included as good wins then?

none of those fighters have a 31-5 record like Buchinger does.

 

[Soul On Ice]

"Leagues above"? Did we watch the same fight? In the rematch Conor lost like 2 rounds and the fight ended with McGregor on his back eating shots.

It was an awesome fight and props to McGregor for working on his cardio and winning but it was a very close fight. Compare that to what Rory Macdonald, Benson Henderson, or RDA did to Nate who did actually dominate him.

It was a very competitive fight.
I'm referring to the early parts of their fights tho, Conor was clearly the better fighter early on in both, no?

 

[fatlipjesus]

none of those fighters have a 31-5 record like Buchinger does.

Oh wait, so now Buchinger is impressive because he has a 31-5 record against nobodies?

How is his 31-5 record against nobodies impressive.... but Khabib's 16-0 record isnt?


I thought you were implying with this thread that having a great record with no substance proved nothing?

Yet here you're trying to prove your point by saying the opposite.

 

[Der Eisbär]

Oh wait, so now Buchinger is impressive because he has a 31-5 record against nobodies?

How is his 31-5 record against nobodies impressive.... but Khabib's 16-0 record isnt?


I thought you were implying with this thread that having a great record with no substance proved nothing?

Yet here you're trying to prove your point by saying the opposite.

Because 31 > 16. Does that really need to be explained? I also never said Khabib isn't an impressive or good fighter or even that his record isn't good. What I am saying is his accomplishments and record do not match how good his fans say he is.