MMA News Forums » MMA Forums » General MMA Forum

[Diegonightmare]

Guys, I'd like your thoughts on a method I use to "rank" fighters. I've had this approach for a while but never formalized it till just now.

I believe in true "rankings" (say, 1 thru 10) as much as the next guy, but another approach I like a lot is the "level grouping" approach.

This method is applied per organization - so for example UFC fighters would be grouped without consideration to anybody in Strikeforce. It's a less "stringent" approach than a 1-thru-10 ranking, while generally keeping a broad view of pecking order for title contention. It also has the advantage of keeping visibility on all fighters under contract (say, to the UFC) which makes it easier to speculate on "what's next" for a given fighter.

Here is how I originally described my approach in this thread:

Briefly explained, I try to separate each UFC weight class into "group 1" through "group 4" level fighters.

Group 1 is your champs, former [recent] champs and immediate contenders. So at LHW that is Machida, Shogun, Rashad, Rampage, arguably Forrest (although he's on the border) etc.

Group 2 is the fighters just below them. I would class Franklin (a former MW champ and right on the cusp of "group 1" at LHW) in this group, as well as arguably Tito (an x factor due to his activity and layoff), Cane, Wanderlei Silva (who's supposed to be on his way to 185 anyway), Thiago Silva, etc, here.

Group 3 are known as solid to excellent fighters but haven't yet either 1) shown the skills or 2) had the fights/results that allow them to be considered group 2. I put Brandon Vera in here; I had Soszynski here before this fight; Bader, Jon Jones, Jardine (whom I had as group 2 before last night) and others are here.

Group 4 is basically everyone else. All four groups are great fighters, of course - pretty much anyone in the UFC is a badass - but group 4 are guys that fight amongst themselves to stay in the org or provide a buildup fight for group 3 guys, and who are far away from a title shot.

I got some good feedback after posting the above and am finally moving forward with formalizing the groupings. What do you guys think of this method?

I have grouped all UFC fighters, in each weight class, according to this model. I'll be posting them all and I hope to spur discussion as to where guys should be slotted.

[mattyc]

I like it. Can you give us your group rankings as an example?

[GL Jeff]

Your ranking is flawed because you say Forest is borderline. While Shogun, and Rampage are for sure, when he beat both of them, is a former champion and still relevant.

[Diegonightmare]

Originally Posted by mattyc

I like it. Can you give us your group rankings as an example?

Thanks...yes, I'm going to do exactly that and hope to spur some good discussion about where guys should be slotted. And then keep & share those "rankings" going forward.

The idea originally came about not through an effort to create a new approach to rank guys, but as a thought experiment: I've often speculated about how Joe Silva "ranks" guys, how he approaches matchmaking. Whether a system like this is what he actually uses I have no clue, but it seems like a good one to me

Originally Posted by GL Jeff

Your ranking is flawed because you say Forest is borderline. While Shogun, and Rampage are for sure, when he beat both of them, is a former champion and still relevant.

One advantage this system has is that it doesn't require a rigid "1-thru-10" kind of ranking. So whether or not you consider Forrest a "borderline" level-1 fighter is much less important than that you do place him in that group.

Fighters on the fringes of levels are the ones where I anticipate, and welcome, some discussion as to proper placement. I think it's fair to say most agree that Forrest is a level-1 LHW in this system.

I am going to post all my "groupings" shortly and hope to generate some good discussion.

[KevoOnTheRadio]

I think its a pretty interesting idea. I guess you can rank the fighters in each level if you wanted, with the champ and the #1 contender being 1 and 2. When I'm not completely brain dead I'll give it hell, see where everyones rankings compare.

[GSPvsSILVA2012]

HW
1. Fedor
2. Lesnar
3. Lashley
4. Valasquez
5. Carwin
6. Dos Santos
7. Mir
8. Rogers
9. Big Nog
10. Dufee

LHW: (Anderson Silva not counted, would be #1)
1. Machida
2. Shogun
3. Jones
4. Jackson
5. Evans
6. Mousasi
7. T.Silva
8. Lil Nog
9. Bader
10. Griffin

Those 2 divisions are who I believe are the top 10 actual fighters, not top 10 most accomplished. I believe that ranking system style is more fun for fans. The rankings on big well known mma sites should continue to go by accomplishments. However the actual match maker rankings I think need to be a little more potential based. It would result in better fights. People wanna see the best possible, most exciting match ups. Bobby Lashley, Jon Jones, and Cain Valasquez are examples of guys that are under-ranked, but are better than guys ranked higher based off "accomplishments." I agree it does ruin the hype if you just throw them in with top guys right away and they get knocked out but should still be considered before putting matchups like: BaderVSJardine, JonesVSVera, ValasquezVSRothwell. Everybody knew Valasquez was gonna kill Rothwell....And now mark my words: Bader and Jones are gonna emerge victorious against those two "accomplishment ranked" fighters.

[GL Jeff]

Originally Posted by Diegonightmare

One advantage this system has is that it doesn't require a rigid "1-thru-10" kind of ranking. So whether or not you consider Forrest a "borderline" level-1 fighter is much less important than that you do place him in that group.

Fighters on the fringes of levels are the ones where I anticipate, and welcome, some discussion as to proper placement. I think it's fair to say most agree that Forrest is a level-1 LHW in this system.

I am going to post all my "groupings" shortly and hope to generate some good discussion.

Put Forest in Group 1. Or the KGB will come to your door.

[notBJpenn]

Originally Posted by GSPvsSILVA2012

And now mark my words: Bader and Jones are gonna emerge victorious against those two "accomplishment ranked" fighters.

I will mark your words, and hold them against you accordingly in time.

I think your idea for a ranking system is good, it seems more effective to a degree, and also something people can agree on without nitpicking over a fighter being ranked 3rd instead of 4th in the conventional 10 point system.

Though I do not believe it would be as effective in determining number one contenders.

[Fedorlei Gomipierre]

Originally Posted by GL Jeff

Your ranking is flawed because you say Forest is borderline. While Shogun, and Rampage are for sure, when he beat both of them, is a former champion and still relevant.

Forrest is absolutely on the borderline of the top tier in my books. He dominated a bad Shogun three years ago and leg kicked Rampage to a title, but he's also been ruined by Anderson and TKO'd quite violently by Rashad. I think of all fighters to be listed in the top of the TOP tier, he's one guy who'll lose more than he'll win.

I've always felt Forrest was a really, REALLY good fighter who came along at a GREAT time wth a GREAT personality and has a GREAT work ethic and gameplan and combined, made for a legendary GREAT MMA competitor, although I don't think he's as talented as others within that top tier. It's not to say he's not top ten, but he's not a champion who'll defend his title several times and always be the favourite to dominate every fight. With Forrest, there's a struggle and he's not a phenom or hurricane of violent proportions who'll destroy a foe. He's technical and intelligent and he wins fights because he's smart. He loses fights when he gets outclassed by better athletes/fighters.

I see him beating within the top ten Vera, Couture, Franklin and maybe T. Silva. Maybe Jardine if you consider him top ten still. Babalu and Jones depends on how they go into the fight moreso than Forrest, but he's probably a favourite.

Rashad, Rampage, Machida, Shogun, Mousasi RIGHT NOW, all beat the piss out of Forrest because they're better athletes/fighters in MMA, Forrest wins these fights based off of gameplans, intelligence and technique and IMO, that won't be terribly often as time progresses and these fighters evolve.

[lwbrewer]

Decent ranking system especially with fighters just faught injuries & ect a lot of times the # 2 fighter doesn't get the title shot. On Forest he took leasons from Randy he wins when you think he won't, and Greg jackson seems to have his number. The hype may of got to Forest as I turely believe he didn't think he would win the title from Rampage, so I'm not completly sure on the Rashad fight. All in all I won't bet money against Forest! Anderson Silva fight Silva is a freak some what like BJ is to 155#