First of all,
i appreciate your detailed response, it's not often the case that someone takes the time to answer as much to each point of larger posts/a larger post.
- You entire argument in that post is based on something like "all else being equal, the guy who achieves the same with less reach and height advantages is more impressive".
It certainly is very important to me, i think that's for sure!
First of all, none of the fighters on your list are directly comparable like in your analogy. Different weight class, different size of the talent pool, different skills of opponents, different # of champions beaten, different risk of getting KTFO, different # of rounds won, different # of 10-8 rounds, different # of finishes, different # of title defenses, different undefeated streaks, different physical gifts, different upbringing, etc, etc. So your whole point about "all else being equal" goes out the window, because nothing is equal about any 2 fighters in the OP.
In all fairness, you are correct with every statement - but i wholeheartedly disagree that my point goes out of the window; i'm convinced its very possible to make pretty accurate judgements when comparing (for example two) fighters from this list with each other.
One thing though: i try to leave things like upbringing etc. out of the equation and try to only judge what fighters have done inside the cage (cheating obviously being considered, if we know it happened) and against whom they've done it, etc.
- Second, you assume reach and height are automatic advantages, but they're not. You say "Fighter A and B weigh the same and are built the same, but one is 2" taller and 4" longer reach". That's physically impossible, because those inches weigh something. Fighter B is probably skinnier. There's a limit to how beneficial it is to be skinny and long. Hooker performs better at 155 than 145. Oliveira the same. They had more reach and height at 145, but they were worse. There's countless examples of this. Fighter A would be more muscular, which is not "a disadvantage", it's just a different build. The reason Jones' reach is an advantage is because he knows how to use it (which requires skill). If not, Gustaffson, Struve, Bigfoot and Reyes would be champions for 10 years too.
Once again, fair and very true points.
I have a feeling we'll ultimately agree on a lot more than you might currently think of, but in order to do that, i still have to answer you plenty here, so let's go!
(I'll try to keep it short)
Statement: "Those inches weigh something, fighter B in your example is skinnier then."
Answer: Fully correct! It's also fully correct that there's a limit to the beneficialness of being tall and long, but i think the limit of it being beneficial is mostly then to be seen, when already long fighters try to fight at a weight where they're compromised and i think this has bbeen the case for both Oliveria and Hooker, but especially the latter, who's actually a big lightweight.
For this reason, it's always necessary to look at if a fighter is actually healthy inside the cage, since too drastic cuts can (and almost always will) negatively impact performance.
Fighter A being more muscular would give him a small advantage in terms of strength, but since in my example he'd be shorter in height and reach, he'd be at a bigger disadvantage there than he's at a disadvantage from being more muscular.
In terms of cardio, having more muscle mass does *i think* only really start to have negative impacts on cardio if that more muscle mass is not the result of a sturdier build, but a result of putting excessive amounts of muscle mass on your body.
Example:
Daniel Cormier and Sean O'Malley have the exact same height and reach, but if they both decided to become 200 pounds at 10% of body fat, O'Malley would look like a bodybuilder, whereas DC would "just" look like a very athletic guy with a sturdy build, but i'd bet that if they were to do some kind of high intensity training, that O'Malley would gas out faster, since his body is closer to is way further removed from the amount of tissue it carries.
Statement: "Height and reach are not automatic advantages."
Answer: Fully correct, but i think context is mega important here. If you have two fighters, which are (sorry, but these examples are needed imo, lol) fully equal and both train to the best of their abilities, but one has more height and reach, he'll have more/bigger advantages than disadvantages in that fight than his counterpart with less reach and height.
However (!) and this is very important to this discussion (and imo often left out): with tall and rangy guys, you'll (on average!) have the same the same thing that you've got with heavy guys compared to light guys in training. Tall and rangy guys don't have the same incentive to traing their striking as much as shorter guys, since they've already been gifted with an advantage.
This leads to many long guys not making the most of what they have, whereas those who despite already having an advantage nevertheless are mega critical of themselves and try to better themselves as much as possible, often end up being extremely effective from range.
An example of the first mentioned guys would be fighters like Stefan Struve.
Struve not being an elite fighter wasn't because height and reach don't matter, but despite the fact that they do matter.
Struve - if he was average-sized for his weightclass - might have come just as far as he did being the giant he is, but in order to do that, he'd have had to work way more on his striking than he did in reality.
Jon Jones on the other hand (who btw does not just have a reach advantage, but most likely the craziest reach advantage that there is in the upper echelons of MMA) didn't neglect his overall striking (i'm saying overall, because his boxing could be better) at all, just because he's insanely long. As a result, he does extremely well from range and i will totally give Jones credit for not resting on his gifts, but instead putting in the work to make these gifts work even better.
(I guess keeping it short didn't work thus far, lol)
So in general, being tall and rangy (relative to your opponents) is *in itself* pretty much always very advantageous (unless you become so thin that your durability suffers, but that's rare), but just as with other things people can be gifted with, people can (and often will) fall into a lazier mindset here too.
That being said, while being long can be an enormous advantage in striking (imo especially if the gloves get smaller - if you want me to, i can explain why i think that, btw!), MMA is of course not a pure striking sport and while being tall and long can help you in some instances of grappling as well, it's not as big of an advantage there as it is on the feet, i think. (I'm way more knowledgeable in striking than i am in grappling, so i might not be fully correct here, i just remember a few analyses where for example it was shown that Jones being the opposite of DC in terms of length has helped him dealing and even winning wrestling exchanges against the much more accomplished wrestler that DC is).
One last thing for this part of our discussion: it *could* very well be the case, that the incentive of staying lazy in striking training (and wherever length helps in fighting) - should one have turned out to be gifted with enormous length - is so big, that one can make the statement "overcoming the mindset that often goes along with being gifted in a regard, is just as difficult, as it is to reach a certain level without these particular gifts."
Regardless of if you agree (no matter the extent) with that statement or not though, working hard on something where one has been born gifted, despite being aware of having an initial advantage is not something that i consider to be a part of my ranking system.
(I hope you could follow me here, this all might sound strange - but i also hope you don't think that i think of you as not being so bright - because i just wanna avoid misunderstandings)
- Another problem is that you reduce "physical advantages" to reach and height alone. Imagine if Max had Cody's chin. You recognize DJ is a freak athlete, which is as much of an advantage as reach or height. Speed, strength, intelligence, chin, power, height, reach, cardio, all have genetic components to different degrees, you seem to think that only height is a genetic advantage. Not to mention there's other advantages that aren't genetic, but are just as predetermined as genetics, like being born into a family of fighters, being rich, etc. I don't think any of them take away from anything, I guess we just have a difference in perspective.
I fully agree here.
What i will say though, is that the overall (meaning the sum of cardio, explosivity, strength, durability, reaction time) physical capabilities of someone average and of someone gifted (assuming these guys are of the same size, weightclass-wise!) do in my opinion not differ as much as the differences in technical and tactical skills fighters often do have.
(As for the chin comparison betwen Cody and Max: while Max has the better chin, i think what's overlooked like crazy is how big of a difference it makes if you see shots coming or not; Cody is often caught really off guard in the instances he gets hit, especially when he gets emotional, whereas it's rare that Max gets hit from shots that he doesn't really see.
What might play also a role here, is that Cody actually is small for 135, he barely cuts weight and while not cutting much in itself is good, having less body mass means you can't take a shot as well as if you were bigger, but i'm not sure how much of a role it plays here.
I do think though, that more KO's happening at heavyweight and light heavyweight compared to the lighter weights is mostly due to less defensive responsibility, as this difference between heavy and light divisions is to my knowledge not as crazy in striking sports which have better heavyweight divisions compared to MMA... i wanna make a thread on this soon; there are lots of instances where guys are separated from consciousness at the lower weights too when being hit flush.)
For example, a pro fighter outside of any premier MMA organization (if him being outside of the org is not just due to being a talent that is yet to make it) is most likely not nearly on the skill-level of the champion of that weightclass in a premier org, but it's unlikely that the guy outside the premier org is physically (again, all physical things considered) significantly worse than the premier org champion.
I'm also not sure if DJ is *that much* of a freak athlete, at least compared to his peers, which matters the most imo.
I'd say Cejudo has more power, but might cardio-wise be on a similar level to DJ (Note: the avg. fight time is a flyweight only stat, whereas the other stats are career stats - Funnily enough though, DJ's striking output per minute at 125 is higher than his career (125+135) stat, whereas it's the opposite for Cejudo!
(Totally forgot to use career stats from the beginning on, so the numbers might be a bit skewed... sorry :/)
Avg. fight time
Cejudo: 12:05
Johnson: 18:37
Sign. strikes thrown/minute (calculable with sign. strikes landed/min. and sign. strike accuracy)
Cejudo: 8.71
Johnson: 6.35
Takedowns attempted per 15 min (calculable with TD. avg./15 min and takedown accuracy)
Cejudo: 6.42
Johnson: 5.98
Sign. strikes thrown per fight:
Cejudo: 105(.2)
Johnson: 118(.2)
Takedowns attempted per fight:
Cejudo: 5.17
Johnson: 7.18
... so at 125, Cejudo has a higher output, but his fights don't last as long, on average. (But again, looking at their overall stats, in relation to their fight time, Cejudo has the upper hand in volume too!)
Fighters like Horiguchi, Dodson, Reis and Elliott are about similar in output with DJ, btw., judging by the stats i've just looked at.
One extra thing:
- The narrative of Mighty Mouse being undersized at 125 is really, really exaggerated. Always undersized? Not even close IMO, unless you consider 1" or 2" in height "undersized". Look at some of the guys he faced during his UFC reign:
Benavidez x2: 5'4"
Dodson x2: 5'3"
Cejudo x2: 5'4"
Ian McCall x2: 5'4"
Bagautinov: 5'4"
Cariaso: 5'3"
Horiguchi: 5'5"
Wilson Reis: 5'4"
Ray Borg: 5'4"
Not saying Mighty Mouse isn't great, he is, I have him at #5 or #6. Sure, he faced guys that were taller/bigger than him, but the majority of the time he fought guys close to his size. Not even close to what Fedor did (or even guys like Frankie and DC). When he faced significantly bigger guys that were skilled, he lost half the time.
You're right and i'm sorry if i implied or said that DJ was always undersized - he was undersized when facing 135ers though. In regards to a comparison between him, Fedor, Frankie and DC in that regard: you might just be correct; what i do know though - i did the math for the reply to pankrat - is that when DJ fought Pickett, the relative height discrepancy between those was that of a 6'0" man fighting a 6'3.5" man and the height discrepancy between Johnson and Cruz/Moraes was in relative terms the same as between a 6'0" guy and a 6'6" guy (!).
(And although it wasn't intended to be a part of my argument, 1-2 inches of difference in height between guys 5'3" and 5'5" is more than 1-2 inches of difference between guys being 6'0" and taller, this isn't some crazy revelation, necessarily - but it helps to put the difference in height between Cruz/Moraes and DJ into perspective, i think).
Sorry for the mega long response bro, take care.
