This is not to bash Askren!

JKS said:
Its hard to rank guys like Ben and Chandler, cause majority if not all the best fighters are in the UFC. They are really ranking the minor leagues here.
Click to expand...

Yeah. The only rankings that matter are the UFC-only rankings. Everyone knows who the best guys outside the UFC in each division are, there's no need to try to estimate where they stand relative to their UFC counterparts.
 
Gun'n'Run said:
Yeah. The only rankings that matter are the UFC-only rankings. Everyone knows who the best guys outside the UFC in each division are, there's no need to try to estimate where they stand relative to their UFC counterparts.
Click to expand...

None of the rankings matter including the UFC-only one, but if you're going to do rankings you should do complete ones.
 
FlyingSpladle said:
Based on his ability (albeit against some lower tier guys) certain websites think he's in the top 10 of WW. Say what you want about his style and how it entertains you, he's dominated everyone he's faced save the Hieron fight I think which he still won. He could definitely beat a lot of UFC 170 lber's, there are videos of him grappling with jake shields in practice and it's pretty competitive and this was years ago, he's getting better every fight
Click to expand...

Thanx for the rational case for him!
 
Cygnus-X said:
That sentence does not make any sense. Grammar check, please.
Click to expand...

Was looking at my kid while typing! Ment to say yes a body of work counts. But it has been against lower teir fighters . Not to say he can't beat the top 10 guys .
 
devilfisted said:
Was looking at my kid while typing! Ment to say yes a body of work counts. But it has been against lower teir fighters . Not to say he can't beat the top 10 guys .
Click to expand...

Many of those guys are better then they're being given credit for. I think the main reason Askren is ranked high is because I can't really motivate why the guys below him should be ranked higher.
 
Cygnus-X said:
Many of those guys are better then they're being given credit for. I think the main reason Askren is ranked high is because I can't really motivate why the guys below him should be ranked higher.
Click to expand...

Ok!
 
Fight Matrix has Askren at 8. I'm not saying their rankings are always perfect but they do use an objective system where opinion is left out.
 
There is definitely estimation involved. Ben Askren has beaten some solid guys like Hieron (considered a top ten guy at the time), Dan Hornbuckle (who was on a significant win streak at the time), Lyman Good, Nick Thompson, Douglas Lima, Karl Amoussou etc. And outside of Hieron he dominated all of them and it's widely believed that he's improved since Hieron. He also is an Olympic wrestler who uses his dominant skill as his primary strategy, so when it comes to what he does, few in the world are better. It's one of those things where you estimate a fighter's talent level and performances along with their wins and level of competition etc. Plus being a champion of a respected organization does carry some weight in itself. Rankings are just an estimation though, and if a guy doesn't deserve a ranking, we usually find out one way or another soon enough. So I see your point, but I think he deserves a top ten ranking based on his dominant in ring performances against solid competition, Bellator World Championship, talent and potential.
 
Meh i had more of a problem with gil being ranked number one for a while despite the fucking shark tank that was the ufc lw division at the time.
 
devilfisted said:
I just don't see how he can be top 10 without beating a top 10 fighter! I am not saying he can't he just hasn't. Shields just beat #4 and is not ranked in the top 10, Askren who's best win is prob Herron is ranked #6! We can't just rank fighters on what we think the can we need to see them do it !
Click to expand...

That's how it used to be and it created a huge UFC bias. When Werdum knocked Fedor off the #1 spot, guess who took Fedor's place. BROCK LESNAR. Every time Fedor lost, he dropped in the rankings, but the people who beat him barely climbed. Werdum and Bigfoot should have been #1 and #2, but they weren't, and because they were outside of the UFC, there was no one they could fight to earn the spot despite having already beaten the GOAT.
 
a. asserting Hieron is Askren's best win shows how little you know about the fighters Askren is facing. Hieron was the third best guy in his tournament. The majority thought he should have lost to Hawn, who the majority thought should have lost to Good. Good was probably the best guy in Hieron's tournament. And a couple tourneys later Good went on to lose to Koreshkov, who then Askren wiped the floor with. Really, Askren's best win is Lima. He's beaten everyone in Bellator, convincingly, but Askren. More realistically, Hieron was Askren's 3rd best win.

b. you realize it's commonplace to rank fighters in the top 10, without them having beaten a top 10 fighter, right? They have to rank 10 guys in the top 10, and they can't go back to 2007 to find someone with a win over a top 10 at the time, to do it. Jim Miller got ranked top 5 with his best wins being decisions over Tibau and Lauzon. The same was the case with Bisping, only decisioning the likes of Stann, Belcher, etc. So what's the big deal about Askren being in the top 10? Realistically, beating Lima is more impressive than anything Miller or Bisping did to get in the top 5.
 
Billthebutcher2 said:
There is definitely estimation involved. Ben Askren has beaten some solid guys like Hieron (considered a top ten guy at the time), Dan Hornbuckle (who was on a significant win streak at the time), Lyman Good, Nick Thompson, Douglas Lima, Karl Amoussou etc. And outside of Hieron he dominated all of them and it's widely believed that he's improved since Hieron. He also is an Olympic wrestler who uses his dominant skill as his primary strategy, so when it comes to what he does, few in the world are better. It's one of those things where you estimate a fighter's talent level and performances along with their wins and level of competition etc. Plus being a champion of a respected organization does carry some weight in itself. Rankings are just an estimation though, and if a guy doesn't deserve a ranking, we usually find out one way or another soon enough. So I see your point, but I think he deserves a top ten ranking based on his dominant in ring performances against solid competition, Bellator World Championship, talent and potential.
Click to expand...
You make some good points! I guess it is just bothering me that he is ranked so high and people think he should get at shot at GSP!
 
JonSnitchPhones said:
a. asserting Hieron is Askren's best win shows how little you know about the fighters Askren is facing. Hieron was the third best guy in his tournament. The majority thought he should have lost to Hawn, who the majority thought should have lost to Good. Good was probably the best guy in Hieron's tournament. And a couple tourneys later Good went on to lose to Koreshkov, who then Askren wiped the floor with. Really, Askren's best win is Lima. He's beaten everyone in Bellator, convincingly, but Askren. More realistically, Hieron was Askren's 3rd best win.

b. you realize it's commonplace to rank fighters in the top 10, without them having beaten a top 10 fighter, right? They have to rank 10 guys in the top 10, and they can't go back to 2007 to find someone with a win over a top 10 at the time, to do it. Jim Miller got ranked top 5 with his best wins being decisions over Tibau and Lauzon. The same was the case with Bisping, only decisioning the likes of Stann, Belcher, etc. So what's the big deal about Askren being in the top 10? Realistically, beating Lima is more impressive than anything Miller or Bisping did to get in the top 5.
Click to expand...

I did no such thing! I said prob his best win not forsure his best win!
 
JonSnitchPhones said:
a. asserting Hieron is Askren's best win shows how little you know about the fighters Askren is facing. Hieron was the third best guy in his tournament. The majority thought he should have lost to Hawn, who the majority thought should have lost to Good. Good was probably the best guy in Hieron's tournament. And a couple tourneys later Good went on to lose to Koreshkov, who then Askren wiped the floor with. Really, Askren's best win is Lima. He's beaten everyone in Bellator, convincingly, but Askren. More realistically, Hieron was Askren's 3rd best win.

b. you realize it's commonplace to rank fighters in the top 10, without them having beaten a top 10 fighter, right? They have to rank 10 guys in the top 10, and they can't go back to 2007 to find someone with a win over a top 10 at the time, to do it. Jim Miller got ranked top 5 with his best wins being decisions over Tibau and Lauzon. The same was the case with Bisping, only decisioning the likes of Stann, Belcher, etc. So what's the big deal about Askren being in the top 10? Realistically, beating Lima is more impressive than anything Miller or Bisping did to get in the top 5.
Click to expand...

In b you straw man my argument! I went back to last weds to find a guy who should be ranked higher! Him being #6 and shields not being there at all is a big deal!
 
Top ten is an opinion, not an objective fact. We are not measuring the height of a building with a laser.
 
devilfisted said:
I did no such thing! I said prob his best win not forsure his best win!
Click to expand...

LOL, that's semantics. So you asserting Hieron is probably Askren's best win shows how little you know about the fighters Askren is facing.

devilfisted said:
In b you straw man my argument! I went back to last weds to find a guy who should be ranked higher! Him being #6 and shields not being there at all is a big deal!
Click to expand...

Um, that would be because they don't produce a new ranking overnight. It's like a monthly thing. Shields will be ranked in the top 10, possibly above Askren when the new rankings come out. Not that he necessarily should be. At best he eeked out wins against Maia, Woodley, and Akiyama, where Askren is winning in dominant fashion recently. At worst, Shields should have lost to all 3 fighters. I thought he did. And in a hypothetical head to head, I don't think Shields would beat Askren. Askren could dictate position with his wrestling so he'd probably be on top, or on the feet where both their striking sucks, but Askren hits harder from what I've seen.
 
ocfightfan said:
Top ten is an opinion, not an objective fact. We are not measuring the height of a building with a laser.
Click to expand...

Bur we do use it to measure where a fighter stands in the title picture! And the rankings have him close to GSP without a top 10 win thats fucked up.
 
JonSnitchPhones said:
LOL, that's semantics. So you asserting Hieron is probably Askren's best win shows how little you know about the fighters Askren is facing.



Um, that would be because they don't produce a new ranking overnight. It's like a monthly thing. Shields will be ranked in the top 10, possibly above Askren when the new rankings come out. Not that he necessarily should be. At best he eeked out wins against Maia, Woodley, and Akiyama, where Askren is winning in dominant fashion recently. At worst, Shields should have lost to all 3 fighters. I thought he did. And in a hypothetical head to head, I don't think Shields would beat Askren. Askren could dictate position with his wrestling so he'd probably be on top, or on the feet where both their striking sucks, but Askren hits harder from what I've seen.
Click to expand...

Shields wins are better And they way outweigh any of Askrens wins. In a sport is about winning so in a fight if Shields wins a close fight against maia it's better then being dominant over #25 or lower. Also i don't agree that hieron was 3rd best in that turny!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,236,578
Messages
55,428,148
Members
174,774
Latest member
Judoka_Noob

Share this page

Back
Top