Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
blackhousemma

Greatest champion ever in each division? (ufc)

Recommended Posts

both GSP and Hughes had become champ twice however Hughes defended his title 7 times and finished 6 of them' date=' GSP has 6 title defenses (all on his 2nd reign) with only one stoppage (corner stoppage)

 

as champ Hughes>GSP[/quote']

 

hughes 5-2

 

GSP 7 on the bounce! if you count from the interim! plus far tougher competition!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
WW maybe' date=' that's where he fought Hughes.[/quote']

 

Catchweight (175 lb) bout: Matt Hughes vs. Royce Gracie

Hughes wins by TKO (punches) at 4:39 of round one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
hughes 5-2

 

GSP 7 on the bounce! if you count from the interim! plus far tougher competition!

 

Couldn't agree more! Hughes was a beast, but there is no way you can compare the callibre of competition the two faced. If you asked the questions outside of the GSP discussion about how much the sport has evolved over the last five years or how much tougher the competition is today everyone would say it's like night and day. If you are trying to say greatest of all time you have to account for the evolution of the sport. There is far more competition today at every weight class.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bantamweight - soon to be Faber

Featherweight - soon to be Aldo

Lightweight - BJ Penn

Welterweight - Matt Hughes

Middleweight - Anderson Silva

Light Heavyweight - Liddell

Heavyweight - Couture

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I already acknowledged that he couldn't compare to the fighters of today. Who was better than Royce back then? It could be that fighters of today couldn't compare to the fighters of the future. Should they receive no credit for being at least the best of their time?

 

Rickson, Sakuraba, and Bas Rutten just to name 3. Are we just going based off the first 4 or so UFCs? You do realize that those weren't the best fighters in the world right? It was a glorified commercial for Gracie JJ. Not saying it wasn't effective, but it definitely doesn't qualify him as GOAT.

 

Anyways, my list:

 

LW: Penn - Duh.

WW: GSP - He has fought better competition than Hughes did and still been dominant...and I believe prime vs prime that GSP would win 9/10 times.

MW: Silva - Again, duh.

LHW: Chuck - Cases can be made for others, but Chuck had a better run than anybody except Tito and Tito's competition was pretty crappy.

HW - Randy - Wins by default in a division with crappy history. I expect this name to change soon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Rickson' date=' Sakuraba, and Bas Rutten just to name 3. Are we just going based off the first 4 or so UFCs? You do realize that those weren't the best fighters in the world right? It was a glorified commercial for Gracie JJ. Not saying it wasn't effective, but it definitely doesn't qualify him as GOAT.

 

Anyways, my list:

 

LW: Penn - Duh.

WW: GSP - He has fought better competition than Hughes did and still been dominant...and I believe prime vs prime that GSP would win 9/10 times.

MW: Silva - Again, duh.

LHW: Chuck - Cases can be made for others, but Chuck had a better run than anybody except Tito and Tito's competition was pretty crappy.

HW - Randy - Wins by default in a division with crappy history. I expect this name to change soon.[/quote']

 

I am talking about early 90's. The guys you mentioned dominated in the late 90's and early 2000's. At this period the sport had already gotten away from Royce. Furthermore, the level of competition argument is very subjective and don't think it should be a criteria in this discussion. It just leads to stupid arguments. Good post!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I am talking about early 90's. The guys you mentioned dominated in the late 90's and early 2000's. At this period the sport had already gotten away from Royce. Furthermore' date=' the level of competition argument is very subjective and don't think it should be a criteria in this discussion. It just leads to stupid arguments. Good post![/quote']

 

Bas had his first Pancrase fight before the UFC started, but his lack of ground experience at the time might have given Royce the victory, Idk for sure. Pretty much the entire Gracie family and multiple other sources admit that Rickson was better at the time of the first UFC tournament. Sakuraba started a few years later, so ok I won't put him there. As for the level of competition, the topic asked for who we thought were the greatest fighters. I'm not sure how you can judge that without looking at levels of competition. How can you not consider it a criteria? A guy that goes 3-2 in the UFC is gonna rank higher than a guy 5-0 in Bellator every time for me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

LW:Bj

WW:Hughes(18-6 UFC record,nuff said)

MW:Spiderson

LHW:Liddell

HW:JDS comin for this spot,too hard to pick one now actually,overall MMA would be hell of a easy(Big Nog,Fedor,Cro Cop...) but just in UFC its too hard.... but if Bas Rutten could stay longer and defend his title few times,he would be there for sure

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bas had his first Pancrase fight before the UFC started' date=' but his lack of ground experience at the time might have given Royce the victory, Idk for sure. Pretty much the entire Gracie family and multiple other sources admit that Rickson was better at the time of the first UFC tournament. Sakuraba started a few years later, so ok I won't put him there. As for the level of competition, the topic asked for who we thought were the greatest fighters. I'm not sure how you can judge that without looking at levels of competition. How can you not consider it a criteria? A guy that goes 3-2 in the UFC is gonna rank higher than a guy 5-0 in Bellator every time for me.[/quote']

 

The reason why I say that the level of competition should not be considered is because it is completely subjective, while stats are not. Fighters have been using effectively the same techniques for nearly ten years, so how is the fighters so much better today? We can assume that the level of competition has improved because of the increase in exposure, but we really don't know. We can assume that a prime GSP could beat a prime Carlos Newton, but we just don't know. We could say that the WW division has the best fighters, but without cross fighting between divisions, we just don't know. I personally think that the WW division of today is a weak division, but unfortunately I can't prove that. It's just my opinion. I have logical reason behind my opinion, buts its just an opinion. I do agree that the UFC should be treated as a step up above the rest, but once again this is not absolute.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

HW - Randy Couture

LHW - Chuck Liddell

MW - Anderson Silva

WW - Matt Hughes

LW - BJ Penn

FW - Jose Aldo

BW - Dominick Cruz

 

:P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This is about their championship reign. So far Matt Hughes has defended his title more times. Obviously' date=' their will always be a reigning champion that hasn't lost the title yet. That has no clout in this discussion or only reigning champs would be the GOAT because everybody else would have lost their title. When I reffered to the Hughes fights, I am not referring to the opponent themselves, I am referring to the type of epic battle they had. Hughes had more entertainig fights. If only winning mattered, then Fitch would of had a rematch with GSP along time ago. However, his fights are largely considered boring, so he doesn't get a title shot. Furthermore, Hughes finished 6 out of 7 fights. I know GSP fanboys like to ignore that statistic because it doesn't serve GSP well, but its an important statistic. This is where GSP falls drastically short. Hughes also has the record for most wins in the UFC and he ties Anderson with the most title wins in the UFC.[/quote']

 

u try to down play my post by saying that we should only talk bout their title reign like thats not what i have been doing and then u go to prove ur point by saying a stat that matt has the record for total wins and that has little 2 do with his title reign it self...how does that work out

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

im not a gsp fanboi (silva would beat him) but i think gsp has done more as the ww champ...he beat better fighters as champ(matt beat some guy form japan who should not have got the title shot even worse then hardy)...and has help market the sport better...and took matts belt form him and is a 2time champ just like matt with out losing to belt 2times like matt...(gsp my move to mw making him have to give up the belt)...ur point of matt being older when he lost the belt does not carry much weight cuz would silva get the same excuse if gsp took his belt i think not and we all know this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This must UFC champs' date=' not mma. There's no other explanation of Chuck being chosen as the best LHW champ ever.[/quote']

 

re-read the thread title

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
LW - bj Penn

WW - Matt Hughes

MW - Anderson silva

LHW - chuck liddell

HW - randy couture (soon to be dos santos)

 

I agree with all of these except GSP belong in the WW section. The UFC hasn't had a HW reigning consistently over his division for a long time.

 

Oh and Liddell was the best in MMA, not just in the UFC.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The reason why I say that the level of competition should not be considered is because it is completely subjective' date=' while stats are not. Fighters have been using effectively the same techniques for nearly ten years, so how is the fighters so much better today? We can assume that the level of competition has improved because of the increase in exposure, but we really don't know. We can assume that a prime GSP could beat a prime Carlos Newton, but we just don't know. We could say that the WW division has the best fighters, but without cross fighting between divisions, we just don't know. I personally think that the WW division of today is a weak division, but unfortunately I can't prove that. It's just my opinion. I have logical reason behind my opinion, buts its just an opinion. I do agree that the UFC should be treated as a step up above the rest, but once again this is not absolute.[/quote']

 

Yes, it is a subjective criteria, but the entire topic of GOAT is subjective, so I'm not going to ignore a criteria which I feel is one of the most important to look at just because it is subjective.

 

I agree with all of these except GSP belong in the WW section. The UFC hasn't had a HW reigning consistently over his division for a long time.

Oh and Liddell was the best in MMA' date=' not just in the UFC.[/quote']

 

It amazes me how someone could even begin to make this claim when you got guys like Wandy and Shogun in pride dominating and beating people like Rampage...the same Rampage that tko'd Chuck in his prime and beat him for the UFC title a few years later.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
u try to down play my post by saying that we should only talk bout their title reign like thats not what i have been doing and then u go to prove ur point by saying a stat that matt has the record for total wins and that has little 2 do with his title reign it self...how does that work out

 

I will concede to that point but my other points are on the mark.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
im not a gsp fanboi (silva would beat him) but i think gsp has done more as the ww champ...he beat better fighters as champ(matt beat some guy form japan who should not have got the title shot even worse then hardy)...and has help market the sport better...and took matts belt form him and is a 2time champ just like matt with out losing to belt 2times like matt...(gsp my move to mw making him have to give up the belt)...ur point of matt being older when he lost the belt does not carry much weight cuz would silva get the same excuse if gsp took his belt i think not and we all know this

 

1. he beat better fighters as champ(matt beat some guy form japan who should not have got the title shot even worse then hardy = This point is completely subjective and impossible to prove.

2. has help market the sport better...= This is also subjective. I think that his last fight actually hurt the sport. His marketability doesn't make him a better champion.

3. took matts belt form him and is a 2time champ just like matt with out losing to belt 2times like matt... = Hughes defeated GSP in order to begin his second reign. Furthermore, the fact that he still has the belt has no bearing. If it did only reigning champions would be the greatest of all time.

4.ur point of matt being older when he lost the belt does not carry much weight cuz would silva get the same excuse if gsp took his belt i think not and we all know this. I will concede to this point. If Silva was to lose the belt now, to be fair I do think people should acknowledge that he is in the twilight of his career.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why do you keep pointing out subjective things in a topic that is built to be subjective? This entire discussion is subjective and impossible to prove and its based on opinions so there is nothing wrong with using criteria that are based on opinions as long as they are reasonable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yep' date=' jump-to-conclusion fail.[/quote']

 

haha ..

 

 

we all know the correct answer is TITO :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Why do you keep pointing out subjective things in a topic that is built to be subjective? This entire discussion is subjective and impossible to prove and its based on opinions so there is nothing wrong with using criteria that are based on opinions as long as they are reasonable.

 

I prefer facts over subjectivity. If you think this guy fought more competitive fighters and I don't, there is nothing else to talk about. Your statement was made without any basis in fact, so there was nothing else to discuss. If you presented some facts, we could of discussed your interpretation. In both case where I pointed out subjectivity issues, the comments were made without facts to support it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

BW: Dominick Cruz(by default)

FW: Jose Aldo(by default)

LW: BJ Penn(Frankie Edgar's on his way though)

WW: Georges St. Pierre

MW: Anderson Silva

LHW: Chuck Liddell

HW: Randy Couture

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I prefer facts over subjectivity. If you think this guy fought more competitive fighters and I don't' date=' there is nothing else to talk about. Your statement was made without any basis in fact, so there was nothing else to discuss. If you presented some facts, we could of discussed your interpretation. In both case where I pointed out subjectivity issues, the comments were made without facts to support it.[/quote']

 

Fine, GSP is 2-1 against Hughes. That is a fact. Oh, you don't think Hughes was in his prime? Well that's really a subjective argument, sorry.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How can you argue that GSP is better than Prime Hughes? I guess Dennis Hallman is better than Hughes just cause he's got 2 wins over him. If you actually believe GSP is better than Hughes you're mentally ill.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
How can you argue that GSP is better than Prime Hughes? I guess Dennis Hallman is better than Hughes just cause he's got 2 wins over him. If you actually believe GSP is better than Hughes you're mentally ill.

 

Sorry for thinking that the guy who has at one time or another looked better than Hughes in every single area, has fought and beaten better competition, and beat Hughes twice is better than Hughes. I'm tired of hearing this downhill stuff too. Nobody was saying Hughes was going downhill until George beat him. He was 33 and 34 when George beat him, that's not that old ffs. It's not like he had taken tons of damage to be in a Big Nog state by that time. There have been so many champions around this age. He didn't even looked slowed down against GSP in the 2nd fight, GSP just looked a hell of a lot better than he did in their first fight. I truly believe that Prime GSP beats Prime Hughes 9 out of 10 times.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
When Matt Hughes was a little past his prime he beat GSP for the title and he had memorable matches that people still talk about: Matt Hughes versus BJ Penn/ Frank Trigg 2/ Carlos Newton. No offense to GSP' date=' but non of his title fights I would go out of my way to see again. I guess the real question is what has GSP done to be considered to be the best?[/quote']

 

Yeah who wants to see the onesided beatdowns that GSP gives... Respect the mans skill. He is the first true mixed martial artist and will be inducted into the hall fame and remember as such. That will be his legacy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Fine' date=' GSP is 2-1 against Hughes. That is a fact. Oh, you don't think Hughes was in his prime? Well that's really a subjective argument, sorry.[/quote']

 

I like waikru, but this was a damn good comeback.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Randy

Liddell

Silva

Hughes

Penn

 

 

As for Hughes/GSP, I prefer GSP as a person but respected and enjoyed Hughes as a champion far more. You can't go on about the prime GSP without considering that he stopped 'fighting' his fights once he'd lost to Serra. His current reign is like a hen keeping her eggs warm, just doing what needs to be done as it seems he's scared to fight. Winning is important though I'm sure we can agree, it's just a shame the fighters instinct is totally removed from the game plan.

 

If we looked at a prime Hughes/GSP when GSP was a fighter then the odds would even out a little. As a 'do what I must to win the decision' GSP, then he'll take it more often. IMO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Fine' date=' GSP is 2-1 against Hughes. That is a fact. Oh, you don't think Hughes was in his prime? Well that's really a subjective argument, sorry.[/quote']

 

Just because he beat Matt Hughes doesn't make him a better champion. That would be like saying Rocky Marciano was a better champion than Joe Louis, just because Marciano beat him. Furthermore, the prime argument is actually a scientific one. The human body is at its prime at certain ages. Look at Hughes age and compare that to the prime of the average human and you will get your answer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yeah who wants to see the onesided beatdowns that GSP gives... Respect the mans skill. He is the first true mixed martial artist and will be inducted into the hall fame and remember as such. That will be his legacy.

 

I agree completely. No where in most post do I disrespect GSP's skill. I think he is very talented and think that he will be the greatest WW of all time. I just don't think he's there yet. I am analyzing the two guys careers impartially, instead of looking at it as a fan of a particular fighter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...