1) Lots of fight fans disagree on that point, there’s tons of threads on it. Saying they’re roughly equal is the middle ground I’m choosing to take between the two.
2) There are plenty of objective measures bear this out, although that’s not an argument I’ve made because if it was I would have cited their actual fight because I think that would matter in that context, or the fact that fightmatrix has Fitchs overall score at ww as about twice that of Okamis at mw. To be clear though that’s not the argument I’m making, because, although similar, what you’re confusing it with is in my next rebuttal.
3) I think that it’s fair to measure the time around a win in order to judge its value. It is on that basis that I believe Silva’s win over Franklin, for instance, is highly underrated. It isn’t the end all be all when it comes to judging the quality of a win, but when you see a guy win for a long time, then get beaten, then keep winning, it’s safe to say that the win over him is more valuable than if he had started a downward spiral. It means that person was likely at their peak, and they still lost.
4) It isn’t dishonest of me to state my subjective opinion. You just happen to disagree with my stated opinion. Ironically it’s actually somewhat dishonest of you to accuse me of bias based solely on the fact that we disagree even after I’ve told you that I’m a fan of Silva’s. And everything is debatable if you choose to debate it.
5) I wouldn’t call mw Swick a solid win based on that list. He was a journeyman a weight class down. That means less. I also wouldn’t call Tanner at that stage a solid win. He barely qualified as that when Franklin beat him. On top of that you’re leaving out the losses. There’s a reason Dan Henderson isn’t put in the same category as Silva and GSP by most people, and that’s because the run itself is meaningful. Going a significant period of time without losing, or in Fitchs case only losing to GSP makes up a big chunk of the value he held as a win.
.
1) It's ok.
I just stated the reasons why I think is "willfully ignorant" to overlook the value of a fighter willing to take risks in order to finish his opponent in a fight, and then the ability to execute a finishing technique.
The same you can value a neutralizing or contrlling technique, you can value, even more highly, applying a finishing technique.
GSP often admitted to try to finish his opponent in certain fight...and failed. There is a reason why he used the word "failed", although you dont want to reward who doesnt fail.
Anyways if you disagree, it's ok. There is no argument on it, you agree or not I guess.
2) Yes. As you say there are many objective measures to look at, so I'd not claim Okami was better than Fitch based on ranked wins or the many other stats that favour Okami in this convo like a fellow sherbro named Fioretti profusely dettailed.
Besides, the same way I think nª of ranked wins doesnt refflect how good Fitch was because he was denied opportunities vs better ranked opponents (Okami was also a victim of this becauseof his style and dull non-English speaking personality). It also means that your spot in the rankings (which is to a large extent the argument you stand by for Fitch) is not as consistently tested by top5ers.
We can agree on that, right? Let's be HONEST in BOTH ways.
Let's remind that Fitch's record vs ranked competition in UFC is 3-3-1
In another note, referencing their H2H matchup several years down the road, none of them ranked, and in the context involving PEDs and odds that I brought to you in that regard, the fact that you, again, pretend to ignore them while keep referencing it, it's what I appreciate at dishonesty in your part.
3) I get you. Fair enough.
In that sense, I remind you that Okami was coming off two ranked wins, and still collected another two afterwards, over Belcher - who was in an impressive streak - and Hector Lombard.
Let's remind that Fitch only got 3 ranked wins in his whole UFC stint. And I'd appreciate if you dont parrot again the "in a shallow division" argument, which is a biased generalization, especially in this case when Lombard moved down and climbed close to top5 WW rankings right after
4) It's ok. Respect.
5) Again the clear bias, mate: you try to justify arguments to discredit Swick and Tanner, without even doing it in the context of being in the comparison with Burkman or Gono, not with Khabib and Jon Jones.
For the record, Mike Swick was 9-1 in UFC, made runs to a tittle eliminator in both MW AND WW. He beat Loiseau, who was just coming off fighting for the MW tittle or finished Joe Riggs, who was highly regarded at the time.
You dont refflect any of this, which are unquestionably bigger accomplishments than Burkman or Gono or Erick Silva ever had in UFC, while sticking to the "journeyman" label. Yes mate, that's NOT being honest.
If you wish, move down Tanner at the bottom of the list (let's see if you gets so picky when assessing Fitch's list). I still didnt get an argument from you that justifies that one list is "clearly" better than the other. Not whatsoever.
