Holly was known in the sport of womens boxing but widely unknown in MMA. She only had 2 fights in the UFC before she fought Ronda. Against very mediocre opponents, Pennington and Reneau. Ronda was undefeated and had defended the title 5 times finishing every fight. Holly went on to lose her next 3 consecutive fights. Miesha put her to sleep and Ronda had defeated her twice. Since they fought Holly has gone 2-4. She might be fighting Nunes for the title but she didn't earn it and doesn't deserve it.holly holm and buster douglas are not comparable ..... buster was a unknown nobody that came out of nowhere and beat the world's most devestating fighter at the time and then got KO'd by holyfield disappeared back into obscurity ballooning up to 400 lbs and almost dying in a diabetic coma
holm on the other hand was a former world boxing champ, so not unknown, and after deafeating ronda, she did not disappear into obscurity ....quite to opposite, she's fighting the world champ nunes for the belt in about a month
basically the OP is looking for someone that was unknown, came out of nowhere to KO a ufc champ winning the belt, and losing it in the next fight and then disappearing to the minor leagues to fight no one significant again
Maurice´s best win then was realistically Conan @ EF 3.There is an obvious answer to this question for me, and amazingly, no one in this topic has said it.
Maurice Smith.
Smith defeating Mark Coleman is by far the biggest upset in MMA history. Serra-GSP doesn't even come close.
Mark Coleman was seen as unbeatable. He was 6-0, had obliterated his only serious competition in Don Frye AND Dan Severn, and was this insanely powerful wrestler who would just bludgeon opponents with ground-and-pound, including his lethal headbutts. (Legal back then)
Meanwhile, Maurice Smith was a washed-up kickboxer with a LOSING record of 3-7, including a pathetic 1-6 in Pancrase. He had been dominated by much smaller, inferior grapplers than Coleman (Tamura, Ken Shamrock, Suzuki) and even a smaller, fellow striker in Bas Rutten. His best victory until then had been his last fight, a knockout of Kazunori Murakami, a mediocre grappler who would have been decimated by Coleman victims Frye and Severn, nevermind Coleman himself.
Keep in mind that a striker had NEVER beaten a half-decent grappler at this point in UFC history. And the idea that a guy as mediocre as Smith would defeat the unbeaten golden god Coleman?!
Utter insanity.
Sup buddy! I don't have as much free time as i used to, but it's all good.Good 'seeing' you my friend. Hope life is treating you well.
Holly. Kod an undefeated favorite, looked mediocre otherwise
YeahMatt Serra?
Yes, definitely.Matt Serra?
Sup buddy! I don't have as much free time as i used to, but it's all good.
I wish i could expend more time here, some great posters like you & a few others on the other sub-forum.
Have you enjoyed the recent fights? Spencer debut was so good! And Vivi Araujo's, omg. Been a lot of fun watching De La Rosa and Chiasson develop as prospects, Zhang and Ladd climbing the ranks, etc. Despite Rousey's and Joanna's downfall, WMMA is alive and well!
I think you could argue that Douglas was higher than Serra before facing Tyson though, had just beaten Berbick and Oliver McCall. It was more that the Tyson hype was so massive that people wrote him off.
It was a pretty unique situation really were Douglas exposed Tyson and then faded badly himself in the glare of attension(probably getting decent pay on his notoriety whilst fighting low level opponents) and the loss to Holyfrield.
MMA's "Buster Douglas moment" was I think clearly Weidman KOing Anderson, ultra hyped champ with unbeatable mystique gets exposed and is never the same. Weidman himself though was more successful before and afterwards than Douglas even if he did ultimately drop of early a few years latter.
Yeah maybe but I would argue Serra may have actually had better wins previously.
Berbick was well on his way out the door and McCall was yet to really do anything of note and had already lost a few. Sure he would go on to beat Seldon and shock the world (similar to Buster by winning the belt against Lewis) but at the time he wasn't really a win worthy of a title shot.
I don't think Buster "exposed" Mike either. Mike had surrounded himself with yes men by this point and didn't take Buster or his training the least bit seriously expecting another walk through.
If anything this is when Mike exposed himself as a remarkable talent with an unfortunate lack of discipline and the mental strength required to handle being thrust into the center of the universe at such a young age which was, IMO, ultimately his undoing and prevented him from becoming what his skill set and talent should have allowed him to become.
Weidman was like a 2/1 underdog and had the best odds to beat Anderson since Hendo IIRC. Many of us here and even pro fighters were picking Weidman
Terrible comparison TBH
Weidman
Matt Serra?