I don't get this, it's happened to me more than once when I compare common opponents and how each fighter did against them as well as how and why they did good or bad and gave a prediction on how I think a fight will go. Yet when i've done this, some people call it MMAth. From my understanding of the term it doesn't consider anything about the fighters just that if you beat someone then you would beat everyone they beat which is why it doesn't work. IMO comparing common opponents and how they have done against certain styles isn't MMAth it's called an analysis. The reason i'm posting this is cause someone said I was using MMAth when I said Overeem should beat Roy Nelson because Frank Mir was able to beat him in the clinch and with wrestling and he's kind of known not to be good at either of those things(he normally gets out wrestled and beaten up badly in the clinch) and Overeem is actually known to be very good in those areas. Werdum also had a lot of success in the clinch against Roy, it seems to be a weakness of his.