If Fedor loses his next fight....... |
| Posted By |
Message |
Sm0tP0ker
Learning to Sprawl
Career record: 69-50
Season: 0-0 (#-)
Location: Gatineau/Ottawa, Canada
|
the sun would start revolving around the earth
|
|
Post #16 3/15/10 9:39:54AM
|
|
|
Boo_Radley21
Heavyweight Champ
Career record: 502-350
Season: 6-4 (#3554)
Location: Ontario
|
People will still swing from his nuts and make excuse after excuse about why he lost...just like Shogun when he lost to Forrest.
|
|
Post #17 3/15/10 4:57:55PM
|
Advertisement |
|
Rush
Laying down the beats
Career record: 467-329
Season: 0-0 (#-)
Location: Canadian living in the SF Bay Area
|
I think he would, then Fedor would armbar the rankings and take #1 again.
|
|
Post #18 3/17/10 12:04:02AM
|
MODulation
Career record: 710-410
Season: 35-15 (#347)
Location: Portland via Iowa
|
He would still be the greatest fighter in the sport's young history.
There is no doubt that Fedor will lose some day... whether it is his next fight or 5 years from now. But regardless of what happens in the future for Fedor, his history has already solidified him as the greatest fighter so far and the King of the 2000-09's.
_______________________________________
Flame Not, Lest Ye Be Flamed Yourself.
#3 points UFC 95
#3 points WEC 43
#8 points Sengoku 5
#10 points Sengoku 12
#10 points EXC: Heat
#13 wagers WEC 51
#15 wagers WEC 47
#15 points Secondary League Season 7
#16 wagers Shark Fights
#18 wagers UFN: 20
#20 wagers 2nd League Season 8
|
|
Post #19 3/17/10 1:08:46AM
|
lohmann
A Black Belt in Jiu-Jitsu
Career record: 576-312
Season: 39-11 (#4)
Location: United States
|
Posted by Jackelope
More important than losing- who would earn the right to jump above him? Statistically you should say if Werdum beats him Werdum takes the number one spot. Do you think that would happen? Hell no. Ranking systems are B.S. and this is a perfect example why.
Werdum would deservedly jump ahead of him. I find it awkward to ever rank higher a fighter against somebody they lost to in their last fight, and the same would be for even Fedor Emelianenko. A good, relatively recent example of this occuring was when Paulo Thiago springboarded up the rankings after defeating a top-five Koscheck, who a fight later was put back ahead of Paulo Thiago by most rankers. Gonzaga got some giant rankings jumps after defeating a #2 or #3 CroCop. The best example was the moment in time that Serra sat atop the welterweight rankings but was soundly dethroned after GSP defeated Kos and Hughes. Generally top fighters, especially with the longevity of Fedor, aren't matched up against fighters that are outside the top seven or eight (and when they are, they do not lose), so it's hard to deal with the potential aftermath of a loss to a mid-tier fighter.
Because it would be Werdum, Fedor would probably drop more spots than if he had lost to Rogers, who was coming off a win over a fighter that, at the time, was floating around the top five heavyweights or if he one day loses to Brock Lesnar, who is a consensus top three.
Rankings are difficult to formulate, but I personally find it contrary in nature to have at #1 a fighter that recently lost.
I find it funny that this is the only division where the UFC can not decide who is the bona fide top fighter in the world. In every other case, when there's a dispute at the top, they can solve it by throwing together a fight. Not here, though.
(Fedor's going to beat Werdum ugly.)
|
|
Post #20 3/17/10 6:42:14AM
|
CwB
MMA Sensei
Career record: 221-151
Season: 0-0 (#-)
Location: Sin Sh*tty
|
Fedor is the son of God, and Chuck Norris would never let his son lose a fight.
|
|
Post #21 3/17/10 5:33:55PM
|
Rush
Laying down the beats
Career record: 467-329
Season: 0-0 (#-)
Location: Canadian living in the SF Bay Area
|
Posted by lohmann
Rankings are difficult to formulate, but I personally find it contrary in nature to have at #1 a fighter that recently lost.
But it is also hard to rank a fighter ahead of fighters that they recently lost to as well. i.e. Dos Santos beat Werdum "recently" so would it be right to rank Werdum ahead of him?
Unfortunately, rankings need to be formulated using a complex formula of MMAth and even then it can never satisfy every factor.
If I still did top tens, I would rank according to these rules
1) Is a fighter undefeated and if so, have they defeated people that were in the top ten at the time of the fight?
2) If a fighter has lost, has he avenged that loss? i.e. I really do not count GSPs loss to Serra or Hughes because he avenged those convincingly.
3) If a fighter has beat a top 10 fighter is it a one time thing? i.e. if they only beat that one fighter, I don't consider it a free trip to a spot above the defeated fighter. MMA is too volatile to judge a fighter from one fight. Fighters certainly gain or lose credibility with wins or losses, but I look at fight histories and not judge a fighter on their most recent fight only.
The tough part is how to handle top tens when fighters become inactive. Some people will erase a fighter or add a fighter on a whim. I like to knock them up or down notches over time.
wow, I can't believe I typed that because I didn't mean to go into that detail. 
|
|
Post #22 3/17/10 11:43:31PM
|
|
