You can tell it by looking through a retrospectoscope. Anything else is just guessing.
Prime is only established in hindsight for people like us to talk about on messageboards
Is the fighter winning?
Yes : Prime
No: Garbage , Can , never really was that good.
I disagree.Prime is only established in hindsight for people like us to talk about on messageboards
Prime is only established in hindsight for people like us to talk about on messageboards
Like you said, there are a lot of factors, so it's a complicated topic. Some people reduce it down to wins and losses, but often you can tell a guys lost a step even though he's still winning.
Fedor was noticeably slower and less technical by the time of the Arlovski fight. GSP was slower, less explosive, and had worse cardio after his acl injuries. Shogun still won some key fights but was noticeably worse, again, after acl injuries.
Cain and JDS murdered the shit out of each other in their trilogy, neither guy has looked the same since.
Bisping was fighting at 14?
Not MMA I'd have to assume, so amateur boxing?
sample size in MMA makes it difficult too. in boxing when a guy has 85 fights over 14 years, the patterns are easier to see. in basketball when a guy plays 1000 games over 12 years, the patterns are easier to see. and an NFL lineman plays some variation of the same 7 seconds about 14,000 times in his career - when he starts breaking down, it becomes obvious.
with the highest level fighters fighting every 6 or 10 months (and let's face it, we're not debating when a journeyman lost his prime - only top caliber fighters) the sample size becomes 5 fights in 3 years. probably against guys who specialize in very different skill sets.
nope. as a few guys on page 1 said, it's only through revisionist history that we choose to define prime.
Holy shit
Cliffs mofo
Did it move when you read itIt took me about 30 seconds to read the OP.
What grade are you in? And, why are you proud to be stupid? Don't be.
is 'colorful subjective history' a good happy medium?Actually, it’s just history. Not revisionist history.
History becomes most accurate when you have as much information as possible.
Of course there is plenty of room for personal opinion!
1. Columbus was a great, brave hero.
2. Columbus was a rapist and thief who enslaved and committed genocide.