Fight Matrix's Number 2!

MMAPlayground.com » MMA General » UFC Forum » Fight Matrix's Number 2!
jjeans
10/2/11 5:48:21AM
Fight Matrix's number 2 welterweight:

LINK is that justified? What are your feelings on that?
BeeR
10/2/11 8:03:09AM
Shields is a big win no doubt, but wins over Sean Pierson, Carlos Rocha,John Howard, and Mike Pyle with a loss to Condit is nowhere near #2. he shouldnt even rank higher then Condit, He will be a force to deal with no question,, but I dont think he's had the fights to crack the top 10 yet, and NOW he should be fighting the fights to do so. he's made a splash, now its time to make waves and rock the boat. I like they guy, I want too see some big fights now.
Poor_Franklin
10/3/11 1:29:29AM
i dont believe any WW list can be taken seriously if it does not start out like this:

1. GSP
2. Fitch
hashyandy4
10/3/11 1:39:36AM
It's kinda high for my liking, i have Ellenberger 7th in my current rankings

Pookie
10/3/11 10:14:08AM
I understand the algorithm behind it. Condit beat Ellenberger when Jake was ranked low, so it doesn't count for as much.
Ellenberger beat Shields when Shields was ranked 2 or 3, so he jumps up to that spot.

All in all, i think this is a pretty good example of why ranking off of objective accomplishments leaves you with a shitty rankings list.
Im all about the who i think has the most talent, or is the hardest match-up for his own division. Subjective Criteria>Objective Criteria.

Overall though, i like Fight matrix's algorithm, its about as unbiased as you can get when going off of just pure facts.

Also, i'd like to point out that Fitch's list of wins isnt all that impressive, and thus it makes sense to me that a win over Shields could propel Ellenberger above him. Since Fitch has been fighting and beating the Mike Pierce's, Ben Saunders's, and Akihiro Gono's of the division.
warglory
10/3/11 3:44:26PM

Posted by Pookie

I understand the algorithm behind it. Condit beat Ellenberger when Jake was ranked low, so it doesn't count for as much.
Ellenberger beat Shields when Shields was ranked 2 or 3, so he jumps up to that spot.

All in all, i think this is a pretty good example of why ranking off of objective accomplishments leaves you with a shitty rankings list.
Im all about the who i think has the most talent, or is the hardest match-up for his own division. Subjective Criteria>Objective Criteria.

Overall though, i like Fight matrix's algorithm, its about as unbiased as you can get when going off of just pure facts.

Also, i'd like to point out that Fitch's list of wins isnt all that impressive, and thus it makes sense to me that a win over Shields could propel Ellenberger above him. Since Fitch has been fighting and beating the Mike Pierce's, Ben Saunders's, and Akihiro Gono's of the division.



Why does that make sense? Fitch's resume is far greater than Ellenberger's. One win doesn't propel you to second place in this division. And in my opinion, there is nothing un-impressive about Fitch's resume, he has the second greatest record in UFC history.
gartface
10/3/11 3:49:47PM
Looks like a "what have you done for me lately" list.
Kpro
10/3/11 3:58:05PM
If I remember right his fight with Rocha made him look like he didn't even belong in the top 40. Shields was bound to be dropped eventually and Ellenberger deserves his due credit but I imagine most could name 10 WW's that deserve to be above him and don't have recent "off nights" against lower tier WW's like that.
Pookie
10/5/11 12:13:15AM

Posted by warglory


Posted by Pookie

I understand the algorithm behind it. Condit beat Ellenberger when Jake was ranked low, so it doesn't count for as much.
Ellenberger beat Shields when Shields was ranked 2 or 3, so he jumps up to that spot.

All in all, i think this is a pretty good example of why ranking off of objective accomplishments leaves you with a shitty rankings list.
Im all about the who i think has the most talent, or is the hardest match-up for his own division. Subjective Criteria>Objective Criteria.

Overall though, i like Fight matrix's algorithm, its about as unbiased as you can get when going off of just pure facts.

Also, i'd like to point out that Fitch's list of wins isnt all that impressive, and thus it makes sense to me that a win over Shields could propel Ellenberger above him. Since Fitch has been fighting and beating the Mike Pierce's, Ben Saunders's, and Akihiro Gono's of the division.



Why does that make sense? Fitch's resume is far greater than Ellenberger's. One win doesn't propel you to second place in this division. And in my opinion, there is nothing un-impressive about Fitch's resume, he has the second greatest record in UFC history.



Most people rank like that. It's why Rick Story and Charlie Brennaman made appearances on our top ten list. It's just their system, i state that i don't agree. But yeah, beating the person ranked #2 is worth more than beating a string of opponents that are ranked less, In THEIR algorithm.

Related Topics