Pick'em Leagues: THE BIG SHOW CASUAL BEST OF THE REST Single Event PvP: FANTASY POOLS Betting Leagues: THE BIG SHOW BEST OF THE REST

Dana White: UFC 166 main event winner will be the best heavyweight in UFC history

Print  
  Page 3 of 4     1     2     3     4  
Posted By Message

jay98107

MMA Sensei

jay98107 Avatar
14
 
 
 
 


 
 
Posts:1,140
Career:5,103-3,094
Joined:Jan 2007
Camp: TKO
Chips:
303
Usually I respond to Fedor's arguments with smartassedness, but I do want to make a very general argument about comparing past and present fighters with these greatest of all-time discussions. In my opinion, these arguments should revolve more around accomplishments than actual skill level, only because I think that generally, athletes get better in any sport as time goes on, with a few freakish exceptions. If you take a sport like boxing, an all-time great like Joe Louis would likely get destroyed by Wladimir Klitschko these days. Does any boxing analyst place Wladimir above Joe all-time? No, they do not, because it was a totally different time. Admittedly, this example is much more extreme than a Cain/Fedor example, but when you're talking about a sport that's not even 30 years old, talking about fighters whose primes were roughly 7 years apart makes a big difference I think. So, while I admit that Cain would beat Fedor these days, I don't think that simply beating him necessarily means that he's greater. I still put Fedor atop that list, but not by much at all. A few more title defenses (maybe 2-3 depending on who it's against) and my opinion will likely change.

Ad: FanDuel: Daily Fantasy Sports

Post #31   10/20/13 1:56:12PM   

Pookie

Remember Paul Herrera

Pookie Avatar
12
 
 
 


 
 
Posts:9,611
Career:2,212-1,253
Joined:Apr 2007
Camp: The Ringers
Chips:
1,791
Dana white said best in UFC history, and its hard to argue.

In fact its a solid argument for all of history. The fact that Dana didnt choose to go that route when hes prone to hyperbole leads me to the conclusion that...

Dana white believes Fedor is the best HW of all time.

_______________________________________
BJ Penn beat Frankie Edgar more times than Benson Henderson beat Frankie Edgar.

Post #32   10/20/13 3:44:40PM   

lll-lll

Standup Guy

lll-lll Avatar
2

 
 
 


 
 
Posts:265
Career:885-523
Joined:Jul 2007
Camp: The UFC Nutriders
Chips:
65

Posted by bjj1605


Posted by lll-lll

Damn this is revisionist history at its finest. Dude this can be done with every fighter in history. Who did Anderson beat? Who did GSP beat? Fitch doesn't look so good now. WHat about Kos? Franklin anyone? Marquadt? This happens every generation in MMA. People begin discounting everyone previous fighters beat. Soon people will be discounting Shogun, Machida, and others that Jones has beaten. It is a retarded cycle. Fedor, like GSP, Anderson, Couture, Tito, and others beat most of the best guys at their time. Cro Cop was a beast back then, and Pride's HW division was stacked. Coleman and Randleman wwwere former UFC champions. Goodridge was a beast.


If you want to say JDS and Cain are better because of evolution of the sport (like I did in my previous post), then go ahead. Its a good point. But don't come with the revisionist crap. Fedor beat top guys. If we picked apart all the legend's records they would all look like bums.


Yup. Looking BACK at a guys record always makes things look less impressive.

If for one think Fedor would have beat either JDS or Cain in his prime and I don't think either would have been an especially close fight. Prime Cro Cop was a more dangerous striker than JDS, in my opinion. Prime Randleman, and DEFINITELY prime Coleman, could wrestle just as well as Cain.

As to what Dana White said? I agree. Best HW in UFC history. Best HW in MMA history? Not a chance.

Whoever wins this fight will have beaten his best challenger and honestly I don't see any other current heavyweights offering them a serious challenge right now.

They simply cannot surpass Fedor because they won't be facing the same quality of competition.




Comparing Coleman and Randleman to Cain is asinine and I think you know that. Neither had the sub defense that Cain had, the cardio or the striking. Both took Fedor down with ease (Randleman's slam still gives me chills) but neither could defend a sub from a guy like Fedor. This new generation isn't 1-D like the Hammer House. Fedor had a ton of power and was one of the smartest fighters out there, so I give him a decent shot vs Cain in his prime. I also believe Cain has a weak chin. However, in my opinion Fedor never showed the TDD to stop Coleman or Randleman's tds. So I think he would struggle with Cain. Just can't see Fedor staying on his feet long enough to get the KO or subbing Cain from his back.

As for the JDS comparison to Cro Cop.... JDS is a boxer, Cop a kick boxer. Cop was weak in boxing, evidenced in the Fedor fight as Fedor used boxing to negate Cop's kickboxing. Fedor stayed in close and kept away from Cop's big kick. Then Cop didn't have the hands go hang with Fedor's boxing. This is where JDS would differ. JDS could box with Fedor. Both have power. Both are smart. Both throw with force. I would say its a war til someone eats canvas. I think JDS is a little more crisp and straiaght with his punches and that may be the difference. Fedor would struggle to land those looping power shots on JDS. However, I wouldn't discount Fedor's abaility to adjust.

I'd make JDS and Cain favorites vs Fedor because they have great athleticism and skills. But we all know Fedor was way ahead of his time so I give him a good shot to hang in his prime.

Last edited 10/21/13 2:48PM server time by lll-lll
Edit note/reason: n/a

Post #33   10/21/13 2:45:53PM   

bjj1605

Heavyweight Champ

bjj1605 Avatar
14
 
 
 
 


 
 
Posts:3,566
Career:1,953-1,167
Joined:Oct 2007
Camp: Canadian Power Team
Chips:
772

Posted by lll-lll


Comparing Coleman and Randleman to Cain is asinine and I think you know that. Neither had the sub defense that Cain had, the cardio or the striking. Both took Fedor down with ease (Randleman's slam still gives me chills) but neither could defend a sub from a guy like Fedor. This new generation isn't 1-D like the Hammer House. Fedor had a ton of power and was one of the smartest fighters out there, so I give him a decent shot vs Cain in his prime. I also believe Cain has a weak chin. However, in my opinion Fedor never showed the TDD to stop Coleman or Randleman's tds. So I think he would struggle with Cain. Just can't see Fedor staying on his feet long enough to get the KO or subbing Cain from his back.

As for the JDS comparison to Cro Cop.... JDS is a boxer, Cop a kick boxer. Cop was weak in boxing, evidenced in the Fedor fight as Fedor used boxing to negate Cop's kickboxing. Fedor stayed in close and kept away from Cop's big kick. Then Cop didn't have the hands go hang with Fedor's boxing. This is where JDS would differ. JDS could box with Fedor. Both have power. Both are smart. Both throw with force. I would say its a war til someone eats canvas. I think JDS is a little more crisp and straiaght with his punches and that may be the difference. Fedor would struggle to land those looping power shots on JDS. However, I wouldn't discount Fedor's abaility to adjust.

I'd make JDS and Cain favorites vs Fedor because they have great athleticism and skills. But we all know Fedor was way ahead of his time so I give him a good shot to hang in his prime.



@Coleman/Randalman

Whew. Good thing I only said wrestling.

@CroCop

Prime Cro Cop would absolutely have embarrassed JDS in a pure striking match. He was not "just a kicker" or anything like that. He was a complete top-level K1 striker.

I think Fedor would have knocked out JDS inside of two rounds. I think Cain would give him trouble but Fedor would win through due to his much more diverse game. Cain is a good boxer with outstanding wrestling. Fedor is an outstanding Sambo striker with great striking and ADCC level grappling. He's simply dangerous from more places (in his prime.) Add that to Cain's weak chin and unproven submission game and I think Fedor is the clear hypothetical winner.

Post #34   10/23/13 1:30:22AM   

aussiemma

Soup is not a meal

aussiemma Avatar
11
 
 
 
 


 
 
Posts:4,023
Career:1,741-1,015
Joined:Jan 2012
Camp: Dark Horse
Chips:
619

Posted by jay98107

Usually I respond to Fedor's arguments with smartassedness, but I do want to make a very general argument about comparing past and present fighters with these greatest of all-time discussions. In my opinion, these arguments should revolve more around accomplishments than actual skill level, only because I think that generally, athletes get better in any sport as time goes on, with a few freakish exceptions. If you take a sport like boxing, an all-time great like Joe Louis would likely get destroyed by Wladimir Klitschko these days. Does any boxing analyst place Wladimir above Joe all-time? No, they do not, because it was a totally different time. Admittedly, this example is much more extreme than a Cain/Fedor

example, but when you're talking about a sport that's not even 30 years old, talking about fighters whose primes were roughly 7 years apart makes a big difference I think. So, while I admit that Cain would beat Fedor these days, I don't think that simply beating him necessarily means that he's greater. I still put Fedor atop that list, but not by much at all. A few more title defenses (maybe 2-3 depending on who it's against) and my opinion will likely change.




Yes to this man !! Very good post.

Post #35   10/23/13 5:51:57AM   

40ouncetofreedom

In Full Mount

40ouncetofreedom Avatar
5




 
 
 


 
 
Posts:519
Career:2,189-1,302
Joined:Mar 2009
Camp: The Evil Empire
Chips:
174
Could Babe Ruth hit a Pedro Martinez Slider form a raised mound ???

There's no point in arguing hypothetical fights that we won't ever get an answer to, Although it makes for good debate.

Post #36   10/23/13 8:30:26AM   

jjeans

Emma Watson Picture Incoming

jjeans Avatar
9
 
 
 
 


 
 
Posts:5,373
Career:1,325-802
Joined:Sep 2009
Chips:
1,350
IMO the biggest fight in UFC HW history was Carwin/Lesnar.

You literally had it all, a MASSIVE PPV Draw which got everybody watching, something Cain or JDS really haven't been able to do. A guy who could not be stopped, I mean nobody had gotten out of the first round with him, 2 guys who used next to every pound of the limit which is what you expect from the division. It hit the 1m PPV mark, the undercard had nobody really that solid so it was all coming from the Main Event and the entire card delivered.
It didn't have Henderson/GSP, and international stars so that it would be a worldwide success it was all the main event. Carwin was a champion but so was Brock. It will take many years IMO to ever create that success and produce that much hype. That was the last card to bring in 1m PPV buys.

I don't think ever in my life will we see a HW fight that big.

Going back to the point

Since Cain beat JDS and due to the lack of Fedor ever being in the UFC Heavyweight division it is next to impossible to argue that Cain is not the best HW in UFC history.

Last edited 10/23/13 9:19AM server time by jjeans
Edit note/reason: n/a
2 total post edits

_______________________________________
Never pick against a Russian, currently 32-11 (74%) in the UFC since 2012. #DoItForWatson

Dirty Blue

Post #37   10/23/13 8:59:59AM   

bjj1605

Heavyweight Champ

bjj1605 Avatar
14
 
 
 
 


 
 
Posts:3,566
Career:1,953-1,167
Joined:Oct 2007
Camp: Canadian Power Team
Chips:
772
I don't buy for one minute the idea that the best fighters of today are better than the best fighters of the past. Overall, there's more of them, sure. But that's only true because this is a growing sport.

Quite simply, there are limits to the human body and what we can accomplish athletically. To think that sports will forever "progress" so that future athletes are always better than past athletes is ridiculous, in my opinion.

I'm actually taking a political psychology class right now and we just read a great article from a neuroscience journal about "hindsight bias" and how its a feature of the way the human brain incorporates new information (by overriding the old information.)

Turns out hindsight bias is common in every realm of human thinking but is almost always wrong.

Post #38   10/23/13 9:37:41AM   

40ouncetofreedom

In Full Mount

40ouncetofreedom Avatar
5




 
 
 


 
 
Posts:519
Career:2,189-1,302
Joined:Mar 2009
Camp: The Evil Empire
Chips:
174

Posted by bjj1605

I don't buy for one minute the idea that the best fighters of today are better than the best fighters of the past. Overall, there's more of them, sure. But that's only true because this is a growing sport.

Quite simply, there are limits to the human body and what we can accomplish athletically. To think that sports will forever "progress" so that future athletes are always better than past athletes is ridiculous, in my opinion.

I'm actually taking a political psychology class right now and we just read a great article from a neuroscience journal about "hindsight bias" and how its a feature of the way the human brain incorporates new information (by overriding the old information.)

Turns out hindsight bias is common in every realm of human thinking but is almost always wrong.



I'll take todays athletes over historic athletes, especially baseball, Because some of the all-time greats didn't play against Blacks, Hispanics and other minorities. So while my argument wasn't necessarily against athleticism between old timers and new school..Just more of a competition thing. A lot of the old school guys also smoked,drank and were physically not to appealing..So to answer my own question....NO babe ruth couldn't hit a Pedro Slider.

Post #39   10/23/13 1:03:35PM   

lll-lll

Standup Guy

lll-lll Avatar
2

 
 
 


 
 
Posts:265
Career:885-523
Joined:Jul 2007
Camp: The UFC Nutriders
Chips:
65
More like turns out you are learning nothing in your classes since you are using one correlation to assume a correlation somewhere else.

There is not a "hindsight bias" in MMA. I just told you that I give Fedor a chance. He was ahead of his game. If you can't see that the sport of MMA has evolved you are blind or dumb. Couture and Fedor were the dominate forces of their day because they were well rounded. They were intelligent and stayed ahead of the curve on the evolution of the sport.

I'll do a nice little MMA evolutionary chart for you to illustrate my point.

Evolution of wrestlers in MMA.....

1st big time wrestler in MMA was Severn. Stud wrestling skills, little to no sub defense and absolutely no striking.

Coleman and Randleman era-They brought in strength and athleticism. Awesome wrestling. Little to none sub defense and still weak striking. But still an improvement on Severn.

Tito Ortiz and Hughes era-Tito and Matt had all the stuff Coleman and Randleman had, but they added sub defense. They made Coleman's GnP more effective by adding grappling defense to it. Very athletic, but still weak striking.

Randy Couture era-Couture brings awesome wrestling. Some would say a better style in Greco for MMA. He then adds all kinds of stuff like striking, dirty boxing, and great positioning. While still having great grappling defense. Couture really stood out head and shoulders above his contemporaries. He was the first really well rounded wrestler.

Current era (Cain + Jones)- Now the top guys are all well rounded. Cain can use striking vs guys weak in striking or take a guy down and put a blanket of pain on them on the ground. Jones is totally versatile.



The sport has evolved. It is plain to see by anyone who isn't in denial. Guys today are better than guys in the past. That is without mentioning the athletic differences between eras. Look at Jones, no era has EVER had a Jon Jones athlete. Look at Cain, no era has ever had a HW with cardio like Cain. But see Cain will start something. People will see that to beat Cain you gotta be able to last at his pace at HW. So they will begin to train cardio and soon all HWs will have improved cardio in the next generation. That is the way it works. Couture and Fedor set the stage for current HWs. Cain and JDS saw you had to fight like Couture and Fedor to beat guys like them. So they trained in several skills to get to that level. Weidman is a perfect example. He says he watched Anderson for years, and says he trained to be able to beat Anderson. That is how evolution in the sport works.

Post #40   11/1/13 3:21:41PM   

Bubbles

Come at me bro

Bubbles Avatar
5




 
 
 


 
 
Posts:9,368
Career:1,153-681
Joined:Oct 2009
Chips:
1,463

Posted by iwannabesedated


Posted by bjj1605

I don't buy for one minute the idea that the best fighters of today are better than the best fighters of the past. Overall, there's more of them, sure. But that's only true because this is a growing sport.

Quite simply, there are limits to the human body and what we can accomplish athletically. To think that sports will forever "progress" so that future athletes are always better than past athletes is ridiculous, in my opinion.

I'm actually taking a political psychology class right now and we just read a great article from a neuroscience journal about "hindsight bias" and how its a feature of the way the human brain incorporates new information (by overriding the old information.)

Turns out hindsight bias is common in every realm of human thinking but is almost always wrong.



I'll take todays athletes over historic athletes, especially baseball, Because some of the all-time greats didn't play against Blacks, Hispanics and other minorities. So while my argument wasn't necessarily against athleticism between old timers and new school..Just more of a competition thing. A lot of the old school guys also smoked,drank and were physically not to appealing..So to answer my own question....NO babe ruth couldn't hit a Pedro Slider.


but a Babe Ruth or Sandy Kofax skillset in today's athlete would be just as dominant imo.

_______________________________________
The best cure for insomnia is a lot of sex. Even if it doesn't end up putting you to sleep, you don't mind so much

Men be careful, female sexual predators are using a date rape drug called a Blowjob to trap men into scams called relationships.

Ad: FanDuel: Daily Fantasy Sports

Post #41   11/1/13 6:43:42PM   

jay98107

MMA Sensei

jay98107 Avatar
14
 
 
 
 


 
 
Posts:1,140
Career:5,103-3,094
Joined:Jan 2007
Camp: TKO
Chips:
303

Posted by Bubbles


Posted by iwannabesedated


Posted by bjj1605

I don't buy for one minute the idea that the best fighters of today are better than the best fighters of the past. Overall, there's more of them, sure. But that's only true because this is a growing sport.

Quite simply, there are limits to the human body and what we can accomplish athletically. To think that sports will forever "progress" so that future athletes are always better than past athletes is ridiculous, in my opinion.

I'm actually taking a political psychology class right now and we just read a great article from a neuroscience journal about "hindsight bias" and how its a feature of the way the human brain incorporates new information (by overriding the old information.)

Turns out hindsight bias is common in every realm of human thinking but is almost always wrong.



I'll take todays athletes over historic athletes, especially baseball, Because some of the all-time greats didn't play against Blacks, Hispanics and other minorities. So while my argument wasn't necessarily against athleticism between old timers and new school..Just more of a competition thing. A lot of the old school guys also smoked,drank and were physically not to appealing..So to answer my own question....NO babe ruth couldn't hit a Pedro Slider.


but a Babe Ruth or Sandy Kofax skillset in today's athlete would be just as dominant imo.



Maybe Koufax, but Ruth was hitting against guys that threw the ball about 20 MPH slower than they do today. That's a monstrous difference.

Post #42   11/2/13 6:32:51PM   

40ouncetofreedom

In Full Mount

40ouncetofreedom Avatar
5




 
 
 


 
 
Posts:519
Career:2,189-1,302
Joined:Mar 2009
Camp: The Evil Empire
Chips:
174

Posted by Bubbles


Posted by iwannabesedated


Posted by bjj1605

I don't buy for one minute the idea that the best fighters of today are better than the best fighters of the past. Overall, there's more of them, sure. But that's only true because this is a growing sport.

Quite simply, there are limits to the human body and what we can accomplish athletically. To think that sports will forever "progress" so that future athletes are always better than past athletes is ridiculous, in my opinion.

I'm actually taking a political psychology class right now and we just read a great article from a neuroscience journal about "hindsight bias" and how its a feature of the way the human brain incorporates new information (by overriding the old information.)

Turns out hindsight bias is common in every realm of human thinking but is almost always wrong.



I'll take todays athletes over historic athletes, especially baseball, Because some of the all-time greats didn't play against Blacks, Hispanics and other minorities. So while my argument wasn't necessarily against athleticism between old timers and new school..Just more of a competition thing. A lot of the old school guys also smoked,drank and were physically not to appealing..So to answer my own question....NO babe ruth couldn't hit a Pedro Slider.


but a Babe Ruth or Sandy Kofax skillset in today's athlete would be just as dominant imo.




Nope that's incorrect.

Post #43   11/3/13 9:40:47AM   

lll-lll

Standup Guy

lll-lll Avatar
2

 
 
 


 
 
Posts:265
Career:885-523
Joined:Jul 2007
Camp: The UFC Nutriders
Chips:
65
There is no proof of that. In a thread that has bjj1605 comparing Cain to Coleman and Randleman, you are making the most egregious statement here. Walter Johnson was known to be one of the hardest throwing pitchers ever. Bob Feller's speed was very high too.

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/393747-the-10-hardest-throwing-pitchers-in-mlb-history

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/mlb/news/20130308/power-week-baseball-pitchers/

Are there more guys throwing 100 today? Id say yes. Nolan Ryan no doubt produced a lot of wanna be fireball pitchers. But just because there are more at the top end doesn't mean guys back then were throwing in the 70's. That is one of the dumbest statements I have ever seen. I have been clocked at 70 and I never even pitched in Babe Ruth or below. To try and say that professional guys pitching when Ruth played were throwing that slow is nonsensical. Freshman year in my Babe Ruth league we had at least 7-8 guys pitching in the mid-high 80s. Several I've seen on scouts radar guns. One of my close friends hit 89 on a Pittsburgh Pirates scout's gun facing me (which was a waste of speed because I couldn't have hit that ball to save my life). He hit 86, 87, and 89 in my at bat. He was 15! So according to you, guys in Babe Ruth's era threw slower than several kids in my freashman Babe Ruth league?

Post #44   11/9/13 2:51:22AM   

lll-lll

Standup Guy

lll-lll Avatar
2

 
 
 


 
 
Posts:265
Career:885-523
Joined:Jul 2007
Camp: The UFC Nutriders
Chips:
65
Next post lol

Last edited 11/9/13 2:54AM server time by lll-lll
Edit note/reason: n/a

Post #45   11/9/13 2:53:05AM   
 
  Page 3 of 4     1     2     3     4