It’s important to be the best in your era. Chuck was the clear #1 in UFC, but you had those other guys across the pond that could beat him, so it gets weird. If we’re looking solely at UFC career, he’s #2 or #3 for me. DC has that same issue in that he was always #2 to Jones. I don’t really count DC’s “defense” where he got headkicked and retained his belt, so Chuck edges him out in terms of title defenses.
It all boils down to how you rate a title run with wins over Gus, Rumble, and Volkan to Horn, Randy, Sobral, and Ortiz. It’s hard to compare quality of competition from different eras, imo. Rumble was dangerous, but beatable if you could avoid one of his missiles and make it past the first round. Gus had the fight of his life vs. Jones but was hit or miss outside of that. I still think for their era, Randy and Tito were solid wins, and both were champions. I gotta lean Chuck here, but understand where someone would rate DC’s competition higher. It’s all highly subjective.
Having lived through both, I gotta say that Chuck’s was more exciting and just felt more remarkable. No denying he was a bigger star than DC.
Yea, I think I’m settled on #2.
