"So-and-so is the GOAT Because of all the Rounds he Won!"

The more rounds you won the more fights you won, that's just false.

I can have two fights finished in the first round and still have less rounds that one fighter that fought only once but won a decision, some people don't think before posting.
 
GreatSaintGuillotine said:
Another expert dodge lol. Jones and GSP have very comparable career paths. They're arguably equal in most regards. GSP has been more dominant.
Click to expand...
and GSP lost several times and Jones never lost. why am i comparing rounds again?
 
Noraaq said:
Title defenses are not a good metric for determining GOAT.

Some fighters get title shots after 2-4 fighters whereas others have to win 10 in a row.
Click to expand...
I'm just going to come out and say half of Ferguson's 12 wins are against cans and over the hill fighters.
 
kuroro said:
yeah who cares about constantly fighting only the best fighters in your division and never losing. that's so lame.
<YeahOKJen>
Click to expand...
oh you think fighters that get title fights are the “best in the division” that’s precious
 
KAZSoliloquy said:
oh you think fighters that get title fights are the “best in the division” that’s precious
Click to expand...
okay who do you think is generally better, the few fighters who get title shots or all the ones that don't get title shots?
 
kuroro said:
and GSP lost several times and Jones never lost. why am i comparing rounds again?
Click to expand...
GSPs won belts in 2 weight classes and avenged his losses. Jon has had multiple favorable decisions and struggled much more across his career than GSP did.
 
GreatSaintGuillotine said:
GSPs won belts in 2 weight classes and avenged his losses. Jon has had multiple favorable decisions and struggled much more across his career than GSP did.
Click to expand...
he clearly didn't struggle much more because he never lost. and GSP hasn't gotten favorable decisions?
 
I rate strength of schedule, finishes, avenging losses, and over coming adversity higher than I do wins/losses.

Undefeated means little to me, unless you're like 16-0 in the UFC. Silva could have retired 16-0, but he loves fighting so much and doesn't have an ego and didn't feel the need to protect his record. So he took chances. His love of fighting superseded any fear of losing his perfect record.
 
kuroro said:
he clearly didn't struggle much more because he never lost. and GSP hasn't gotten favorable decisions?
Click to expand...
Lol you must go solely by wiki. Winning does not mean you didn't struggle. Jon has had more close fights than GSP. And he hasn't lost the graces of very generous judges and good ol steroids backing him up.

Gsp has had 1 favorable decision across his entire career where as Jon has had 3.
 
kuroro said:
okay who do you think is generally better, the few fighters who get title shots or all the ones that don't get title shots?
Click to expand...
i think we know who the best fighters are regardless of whether they have a belt or not. i have no sentimental attachment to the concept of someone “defending their title.” i just don’t think that part matters.

all that matters is who you beat, the form they were in, and as a bonus, how you beat them.
 
KAZSoliloquy said:
i think we know who the best fighters are regardless of whether they have a belt or not. i have no sentimental attachment to the concept of someone “defending their title.” i just don’t think that part matters.

all that matters is who you beat, the form they were in, and as a bonus, how you beat them.
Click to expand...

Your thinking skills are lacking, here is the proof we don't know who the best fighter is: The never ending p4p argument, if we had the capacity to judge the best figher on subjective terms there would be a consensus by now.
 
youguysneverfought said:
Your thinking skills are lacking, here is the proof we don't know who the best fighter is: The never ending p4p argument, if we had the capacity to judge the best figher on subjective terms there would be a consensus by now.
Click to expand...
you want to oversimplify judging a fighters greatness by attaching numbers to them so you can better understand it, and my thinking skills are the problem?

there are plenty of GOATs that never won gold on the big stage. there are plenty of champs who barely beat anyone worth a shit. title defenses mean jack.
 
Can you name those plenty GOATs that never won gold? I would love to know.

Also, can you prove to me your point is true, that we know how to judge fighters on subjective terms? To me not having a consensus on the p4p was a clear enough indication that we can't.
 
youguysneverfought said:
Can you name those plenty GOATs that never won gold? I would love to know.

Also, can you prove to me your point is true, that we know how to judge fighters on subjective terms? To me not having a consensus on the p4p was a clear enough indication that we can't.
Click to expand...
urijah faber never won gold during one of the most dominant periods of his career. still one of the greatest BWs of all time. joseph benavidez is one of the best fighters to ever fight below 145. a giant portion of frankie edgar’s greatness comes from his achievements at 145 where he never won gold.

do you think tim sylvia is a GOAT for defending his HW title against jeff monson? arlovski for defending against buentello and eilers?
 
So Urijah Faber is a GOAT now? LOL

Guess you couldn't name those GOATs and are just naming good fighters now, that's ridiculous and a clear sign you just talk shit.

Have i ever said that one tittle defence makes you a GOAT? Please don't invent dumb arguments so you can have a response to them.

Also, i'm waiting for you to prove your point about the comunity having the ability to know who the best fighter, why didn't you responded, you can't?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,280,141
Messages
58,261,402
Members
175,984
Latest member
Omar Ahmed Lotfy

Share this page

Back
Top