Proof of MMA excellence can only be attained in the UFC

Degen Gambler

Silver Belt
@Silver
Joined
Jul 1, 2013
Messages
12,141
Reaction score
0
True or False?

Last night Bellator's MW Champion was destroyed by a washed up 39 year old, only won one fight in the last I don't know how long...Tito Ortiz. Michael Chandler, who just last year was considered by many to be a top 5 lightweight lost his second fight in a row, to a young up and comer who has never fought top comptetion.

When Dana says all the time you have to fight the best in the world (UFC) on a regular basis to be considered a top fighter I think he is right. Would you agree with Dana? Can fighters prove that they are top 5 or 10 in the world outside of the UFC?
 
Last edited:
Destroyed by a man with over 30 pounds advantage, :rolleyes:, sure that was a great "proof" of the greatnes of UFC
 
Will Brooks is a legitimate LW with a good chin, that doesn't make Chandler a bad one. It was a good scrap, and it should have been a draw. Tito outweighed his opponent by 30 lbs, what did you expect to happen?
 
Young prospects are coming out of nowhere all over the place, and could beat many top end MMA fighters if given the opportunity... They just aren't given the opportunity often.

Hell, that's how Chandler got his name to begin with.


And Tito/Shlemenko was a freakshow fight. Was straight up PRIDE matchmaking... Nothing wrong with that, just don't take anything away from it other then entertainment.
 
Most of your assumptions require complete lack of comprehension of the actual fights. Watch more fights and read less paper rankings.
 
Don't you think this is just MMA in general? A hyped fighter has a disappointing loss or two, and then all of sudden everyone says he is a bum. There is a lot of parity in MMA, more than people realize. Think of all the Strikeforce and WEC fighters who have shown that they were every bit the fighter that their UFC counterparts were/are.
 
UFC fighters are so good that some LW's from a minor league WEC came in and destroyed the top UFC lw's
 
Young prospects are coming out of nowhere all over the place, and could beat many top end MMA fighters if given the opportunity... They just aren't given the opportunity often.

Hell, that's how Chandler got his name to begin with.


And Tito/Shlemenko was a freakshow fight. Was straight up PRIDE matchmaking... Nothing wrong with that, just don't take anything away from it other then entertainment.

I am not talking about whether or not there are good fighters outside the UFC. I am talking about whether or not the have proved they are among the top 5 to 10 best in the world.
 
True or False?

Last night Bellator's MW Champion was destroyed by a washed up 39 year old, only won one fight in the last I don't know how long...Tito Ortiz. Michael Chandler, who just last year was considered by many to be a top 5 lightweight lost his second fight in a row, to a young up and comer who has never fought top comptetion.

When Dana says all the time you have to fight the best in the world (UFC) on a regular basis to be considered a top fighter I think he is right. Would you agree with Dana?

False. It was actually an event I liked. The UFC also does amateur fighting, it has a women's division.

In my opinion King Mo won the first and the third round (with a style I hate), he should've won that fight. Something I'd never expect. Tito killing a small opponent doesn't mean shit, it sort of shows why Anderson wanted to fight GSP and not Jones.

Chandler argument doesn't make sense either. If you don't understand why... shrugs. There is no helping you. :icon_twis
 
Well this thread was shut down pretty quick.
 
True or False?

Last night Bellator's MW Champion was destroyed by a washed up 39 year old, only won one fight in the last I don't know how long...Tito Ortiz. Michael Chandler, who just last year was considered by many to be a top 5 lightweight lost his second fight in a row, to a young up and comer who has never fought top comptetion.

When Dana says all the time you have to fight the best in the world (UFC) on a regular basis to be considered a top fighter I think he is right. Would you agree with Dana?

You bit hard eh?

Undeniably the UFC sports most of the best guys in the world, however you gloss over so many important facts to get to the point you want to make it makes your final verdict empty.

Tito is washed up, but he was fighting a man far smaller than himself, and wasn't winning a dominating fight until he got him down and got on top of him. You cant teach big, Shlemenko stepped up a weight class, a guy who could probably fight at WW relatively easily to fight a guy whos a LHW...so yea...*slow clap for Tito* important things to mention when slamming an entire organization.

And Chandler was beat by a new up and comer, someone who he had not been training to fight as he has spent 3 months getting ready for Alvarez, for a interm belt that he was not planning to fight for (as the fight he wanted was the fight for the belt not the invisible who cares interm belt).

So yes, if you dont think all that should be mentioned, maybe you dont really want people to think about what youre trying to prove all that much.
 
Don't you think this is just MMA in general? A hyped fighter has a disappointing loss or two, and then all of sudden everyone says he is a bum. There is a lot of parity in MMA, more than people realize. Think of all the Strikeforce and WEC fighters who have shown that they were every bit the fighter that their UFC counterparts were/are.

Great answer, almost any fighter can be beat "under the right circumstance", sure, there are low level fighters that have a low probability to be successful in UFC but any top 20 can get a good run at UFC
 
I'd argue all the belt holders in the UFC are the best in the world. They also have the most 'high ranking talent' under contract. You don't have to compete in the UFC to be considered among the best in the world, but you do definitely have to do something extraordinary ie. Fedor with a 10 year win-streak, dominating all other organisations in that time. You don't need to be in the UFC to achieve MMA excellence, but it's much easier to be seen as legit if you are.
 
Chandler argument doesn't make sense either. If you don't understand why... shrugs. There is no helping you. :icon_twis

So you believe Chandler has proved beyond a reasonable doubt he can hang with the best in the UFC? I'm not so sure.
 
Tito is washed up, but he was fighting a man far smaller than himself, and wasn't winning a dominating fight until he got him down and got on top of him. You cant teach big, Shlemenko stepped up a weight class, a guy who could probably fight at WW relatively easily to fight a guy whos a LHW...so yea...*slow clap for Tito* important things to mention when slamming an entire organization.

.

Do you believe Schlemenko is a top talent in the MW division? I don't at all. I think if he were in the UFC he would get destroyed by anyone in the top 15.
 
So you believe Chandler has proved beyond a reasonable doubt he can hang with the best in the UFC? I'm not so sure.

I can do the same question to you, So you believe UFC fighters have proved beyond a reasonable doubt he can hang with Chandler? I
 
I am not talking about whether or not there are good fighters outside the UFC. I am talking about whether or not the have proved they are among the top 5 to 10 best in the world.
During 2008, the UFC LW division had exactly 2 ranked fighters inside of it. BJ Penn and Sean Sherk. Every other ranked fighter at LW was in a different organization. Either DREAM, Sengoku, or Strikeforce. During that same time frame Eddie Alvarez became ranked via beating two ranked LWs in Hansen and Kawjiri, and Eddie stayed ranked since that time.

Michael Chandler became ranked via beating a long time ranked fighter. This is how rankings are supposed to work. You beat a ranked opponent you become ranked. When you lose, your ranking is then taken over by the dude who just beat you.


The more you know~
 
Back
Top