PDA

View Full Version : Alex Ignashov deserves to be champ



kickbox
03-21-2007, 03:04 PM
i know hes lame now but imagine in his prime he could have been the k1 champ more thenv hoost. discuss

valheruking
03-21-2007, 10:36 PM
I think the best fighters to never win the title are Sefo and LeBanner.
Alexey is a very good fighter though and he could beat just about anyone when hes on form.
But why does he deserve to be champ, he's been around as a contender for the world gp since 2001, thats 3 years without winning it, and about his prime, Peter Aerts is ranked no.2 in the world and hes 37 (and past his prime).
What is your reasoning for thinking he could have been champ more times than Hoost, i mean they were around at the same time from 2001 and Alexey wouldnt even reach Hoost in the tournament cause he was put out by guys like Filho,and Hoost is 13 years older so guess which one was in their prime.
The reason Hoost is the only 4 time k1 champ is because he's one of the best strikers ever, you don't hold a 3-0 record against cro cop in a standup only org unless you are.

kickbox
03-22-2007, 02:43 PM
I think the best fighters to never win the title are Sefo and LeBanner.
Alexey is a very good fighter though and he could beat just about anyone when hes on form.
But why does he deserve to be champ, he's been around as a contender for the world gp since 2001, thats 3 years without winning it, and about his prime, Peter Aerts is ranked no.2 in the world and hes 37 (and past his prime).
What is your reasoning for thinking he could have been champ more times than Hoost, i mean they were around at the same time from 2001 and Alexey wouldnt even reach Hoost in the tournament cause he was put out by guys like Filho,and Hoost is 13 years older so guess which one was in their prime.
The reason Hoost is the only 4 time k1 champ is because he's one of the best strikers ever, you don't hold a 3-0 record against cro cop in a standup only org unless you are.

a healthy Alex>>anyone in k1 besides andy Hug and Aerts possibly

valheruking
03-23-2007, 02:34 PM
a healthy Alex>>anyone in k1 besides andy Hug and Aerts possibly
If your going to say only Andy Hug and Aerts are the only people that could beat a prime Alexey then i really don't know what to tell you besides your wrong.
That is also a pretty dumb statement because of the fact that a prime Hoost would and did beat Hug and Aerts and you didnt even include him.
I know they might be your favourites or whatever but you can't just ignore the fact that Hoost was better than both and yet you say they are the only ones who coud beat a prime alexey, doesnt make sense, its like saying that Cro cop and Barnett are the only people that could beat Big Nog and just completely ignore Fedor.

kickbox
03-23-2007, 08:13 PM
If your going to say only Andy Hug and Aerts are the only people that could beat a prime Alexey then i really don't know what to tell you besides your wrong.
That is also a pretty dumb statement because of the fact that a prime Hoost would and did beat Hug and Aerts and you didnt even include him.
I know they might be your favourites or whatever but you can't just ignore the fact that Hoost was better than both and yet you say they are the only ones who coud beat a prime alexey, doesnt make sense, its like saying that Cro cop and Barnett are the only people that could beat Big Nog and just completely ignore Fedor.

your right Hoost lost to Andy and Hug lost to Hoost etc and Peter Aerts to they are all great fighters just that Alex probably was the only heavyweight with pure muay thai skills in k1.

valheruking
03-23-2007, 11:58 PM
Hug, Hoost and Aerts are definately 3 legends in the k1 world
and your right, when he's on form alexey ignashov can beat anyone,
Hell he knocked out Semmy schilt in the first round, nobody else has even come close to knocking out Semmy in k1 nevermind doing it in the first round.

Ares
03-26-2007, 06:12 AM
Ignashov is a great fighter when he is on form (I remember the first fight i saw of him, breaking Nicholas Peta's nose with a knee) but that does not mean he deserves to be K1 champ. He has had the same opportunities as any other K1 fighter to be GP winner and has failed - end of story.

As for him being only third to Hugg and Aerts???? sorry but that is just wrong. I would rate Cro Cop, Bonjaskey, Hoost and (although he isn't one of my favourites) Schilt above him. With the likes of Sefo, Filho, Le Banner all in the mix as well.

On their day, the top 10 K1 HW's could probably beat the shit out of each other with not much to seperate them - but you gotta give most respect to Hoost.

kickbox
05-16-2007, 10:04 PM
Hug, Hoost and Aerts are definately 3 legends in the k1 world
and your right, when he's on form alexey ignashov can beat anyone,
Hell he knocked out Semmy schilt in the first round, nobody else has even come close to knocking out Semmy in k1 nevermind doing it in the first round.

Ignashov looked impressive in his mma fights didnt he??

bobcat
06-17-2007, 06:08 AM
I don't think that anyone deserves to be a champion. He had the same chances as any other fighter and didn't get the job done. I'm a big fan of the late Andy Hug, but he had a fair few losses and I don't think he was a top 3 of all time in K1. Personally I think Jerome Lebanner is the best fighter who has never won the K1 title. As for a list of the K1 best fighters , i would go with:

1.Hoost
2.Aerts
3.Lebanner
4.Schilt
5.Sefo
6.Hug
7.Cro-Cop
8.Ignashov
9.Hunt
10.Bernardo

bobcat
06-17-2007, 06:27 AM
I'm bored at work so decided to work out the loss ratio for my top ten list above, its comes out alot different than I expected. Just goes to show that top tens tend to be more who our favorite fighter are (at least with me anyway) here is the order of loss ratio for my top ten:

1.Schilt 8.3% loss ratio
2.Cro-Cop 11.1% loss ratio
3.Ignashov 12.2% loss ratio
4.Hoost 16.1% loss ratio
5.LeBanner 19.4% loss ratio
6.Hug 19.6% loss ratio
7.Sefo 19.7% loss ratio
8.Aerts 21.8% loss ratio
9.Bernardo 23.7% loss ratio
10.Hunt 28% loss ration

Was amazed that Hoost comes lower than Ignashov.

valheruking
06-17-2007, 01:05 PM
I'm bored at work so decided to work out the loss ratio for my top ten list above, its comes out alot different than I expected. Just goes to show that top tens tend to be more who our favorite fighter are (at least with me anyway) here is the order of loss ratio for my top ten:

1.Schilt 8.3% loss ratio
2.Cro-Cop 11.1% loss ratio
3.Ignashov 12.2% loss ratio
4.Hoost 16.1% loss ratio
5.LeBanner 19.4% loss ratio
6.Hug 19.6% loss ratio
7.Sefo 19.7% loss ratio
8.Aerts 21.8% loss ratio
9.Bernardo 23.7% loss ratio
10.Hunt 28% loss ration

Was amazed that Hoost comes lower than Ignashov.
Thanks, for that, it was interesting, haha yeah i base my top 10 on favourites aswell, i rarely rank according to actual achievement, which would place Hoost at no. 1 everytime and im a bigger fan of some other fighters.
Its interesting to see the loss ratio, it shows how under-rated Ignashov can be, hes one of the most consistent and definately one of the most talented, he just never took advantage of that talent, he reminds me of BJ Penn in some ways.
I can see how Schilt has such a small loss ratio as this generation of k1 fighters isnt as densely populated with top class fighters, it depends basically on old fighters from the 90's for competition for Schilt, the reason why Peter Aerts is ranked number 2.
It also explains why Guys like Hoost, Hug, Sefo,LeBanner etc have a higher loss ratio as there generation was far more competitive,
I'll post my top ten when i get some time.