- Joined
- Jul 30, 2019
- Messages
- 15,498
- Reaction score
- 27,343
Nope. That comparison doesn't make sense either.Determining who's the best fighter @ 135 lbs is a bit like figuring out who's the smartest guy with down syndrome.
Nope. That comparison doesn't make sense either.Determining who's the best fighter @ 135 lbs is a bit like figuring out who's the smartest guy with down syndrome.
Nope. That comparison doesn't make sense either.
I disagree. Weightclasses are there to compare skill. It's known that a heavyweight would wreck a welterweight, so as long as they're roughly equal in ability.Sure it does.
I disagree. Weightclasses are there to compare skill. It's known that a heavyweight would wreck a welterweight, so as long as they're roughly equal in ability.
Flawed comparison. A math quiz is a question of skill (intelligence) alone, whereas a 170er losing to heavyweight is solely due to the reason that a heavyweight is physically more strong.Uh-huh. And a non down syndrome guy would wreck a down syndrome guy in a math quiz.
Flawed comparison. A math quiz is a question of skill (intelligence) alone, whereas a 170er losing to heavyweight is solely due to the reason that a heavyweight is physically more strong.
It has literally nothing to do with any type of skill.
It'll always be much more of an accomplishment to become the lightweight champ than becoming the heavyweight champ - people being in awe about big guys doesn't change that.
You misunderstood me, what i meant, was that a heavyweight beating a welterweight has nothing to do with skill.Lol. Math isn't a skill?
OK. So Usain Bolt would demolish the fastest special Olympics athlete.
Again, you're comparing something which is based on a single skill (sprint speed) alone to something as multi-faceted as MMA.OK. So Usain Bolt would demolish the fastest special Olympics athlete.
Again, you're comparing something which is based on a single skill (sprint speed) alone to something as multi-faceted as MMA.
It doesn't make sense.
As mentioned, i am aware of that.Take the best 135 lber ever and a one dimension guy like Roy Nelson and Nelson demolishes him.
Of course they won't be as powerful. Doesn't diminish their ability though.Power is part of fighting. The 135 lbs guys might be fast and skilled, but they will never have that power.
Difference is that that the best players in WNBA are not technically as skilled. There's more difference than just physicality.So watching them fight is like watching WNBA. You're watching people who just can't compete at the top level.
That's because the men are competing against A-level international athletes. Women's soccer teams routinely lose to boys' high school teams.
In mma on the other hand, the skill of the lower weightclasses surpasses the one of the heavier weightclasses by quite a big margin.
Yes and no.That's not true for all. They're just faster and lighter. That's just a physical trait, much like being bigger and more powerful.
But aside from that: lower weightclasses have a far bigger pool of talent. That's actually my main argument.
This doesn't account for the vast majority of heavyweights being untechnical though.Well, there are some factors to consider with that, I think. In HW, it's murderers row for everyone, in terms of threat level. Anyone can get knocked out by anyone. They have a smaller window to excel, and less room for error. You pretty much have to be the best of the best to get anywhere, and a couple of hard losses can derail a career. You could be the most technically proficient HW in the world, but if you get your block knocked off a few times, that could be all she wrote. I'd say the smaller talent pool has a lot do with it just being the nature of the division, of sharks eating sharks. Whereas in the lighter divisions, you're going to see more longevity for them because it's simply not as dangerous, and the talent pool will naturally swell, because they're not being eliminated from the pool as often as HW's are.