MMA News Forums » MMA Forums » General MMA Forum

[beardown98]

Originally Posted by Sakara=Excitement

Well he sent Chuck over to fight Wanderlei and only Wanderlei. Problem was, Pride didn't want Chuck to fight Wandy so they said he had to go through the tourney to fight Wandy.

THEN they were supposed to fight after Chuck beat Babalu, do the co-promotion thing and Pride FUCKED Dana White. That's why there is and has never been co-promotion.

It was more of Pride protecting Wandy if you ask me.

True on those points I think prime Wand VS Chuck would of been a great fight. Pride protecting Wand or not. It wouldn't of mattered to Wand he would of came at Chuck and Chuck would of thrown everything at him. Still when they clashed after they both had faded a bit that is still one of my fav fights all time.


On topic now best American fighter all time I give it to
Frank Shamrock when he was in his prime he was trouble for anyone not named Bas.

Liddel is 2nd, 3rd Hughes, 4th Penn, 5th Couture


The top three are interchangeable in my eyes but in this moment right now i give to Frank.

Honorable mention KJ Noons

[Esox Express]

Originally Posted by beardown98

True on those points I think prime Wand VS Chuck would of been a great fight. Pride protecting Wand or not. It wouldn't of mattered to Wand he would of came at Chuck and Chuck would of thrown everything at him. Still when they clashed after they both had faded a bit that is still one of my fav fights all time.


On topic now best American fighter all time I give it to
Frank Shamrock when he was in his prime he was trouble for anyone not named Bas.

Liddel is 2nd, 3rd Hughes, 4th Penn, 5th Couture


The top three are interchangeable in my eyes but in this moment right now i give to Frank.

Honorable mention KJ Noons

Really? Frank Shamrock?!? He was 4-2-1 going into his first fight with Bas, 4-3-1 after, obviously. I don't know if I would consider that to be the "best" by any interpretation of the definition.

This is a really tough decision... guys like Matt Hughes and Chuck Liddell were dominant champions but they really fell hard towards the end of their careers so it's hard to say where to draw the line as to what constitutes a dominant career. Then again, it is easy to say our current legends like GSP and Jones are dominant, but if they trail off at the end of their career does that tarnish their legacy just as much? Tough to say... to me this is like arguing politics and religion - it's all subjective and therefor the argument will never cease.

[goodtimes]

Originally Posted by Esox Express

Really? Frank Shamrock?!? He was 4-2-1 going into his first fight with Bas, 4-3-1 after, obviously. I don't know if I would consider that to be the "best" by any interpretation of the definition.

This is a really tough decision... guys like Matt Hughes and Chuck Liddell were dominant champions but they really fell hard towards the end of their careers so it's hard to say where to draw the line as to what constitutes a dominant career. Then again, it is easy to say our current legends like GSP and Jones are dominant, but if they trail off at the end of their career does that tarnish their legacy just as much? Tough to say... to me this is like arguing politics and religion - it's all subjective and therefor the argument will never cease.

That's always a tough one, how much of an affect does it have on a guys legacy when he keeps fighting past his prime? I give them a pass on it. The same desire to compete that made them great champs also makes them continue to fight when they shouldn't. Some of the smarter guys retire early, a great example being Bas in MMA or Lennox Lewis in boxing, but they are definitely in the minority.

[beardown98]

Originally Posted by Esox Express

Really? Frank Shamrock?!? He was 4-2-1 going into his first fight with Bas, 4-3-1 after, obviously. I don't know if I would consider that to be the "best" by any interpretation of the definition.

You don't have to agree with me but to discount Frank as one of the best if not the best especially of his era is short sighted.

He was interim king of Pancrase and was a pioneer in MMA. He was the first UFC LHW champ he defended it 4 times and then retired after beating a Ortiz never losing the strap. He then became the the WEC LHW. He did fight to long yes but at one point he had a stretch were he went 11-0-1 over 12 fights.

[Esox Express]

Originally Posted by beardown98

You don't have to agree with me but to discount Frank as one of the best if not the best especially of his era is short sighted.

He was interim king of Pancrase and was a pioneer in MMA. He was the first UFC LHW champ he defended it 4 times and then retired after beating a Ortiz never losing the strap. He then became the the WEC LHW. He did fight to long yes but at one point he had a stretch were he went 11-0-1 over 12 fights.

All true, but keep in mind that this was 'back in the day' when Frank was still fighting guys who were 'nobodies' to phrase it under today's standards. The problem is that what was considered tough competition back in those days - the dark ages, so to speak - was not anywhere near to what it is today. This was at a time when the sport had not nearly evolved to the multidisciplinary state that it is currently at. Guys like GSP or Jon Jones would storm through everyone if people were still focused on showcasing a style.

That being said, does that take away from the dominance of fighters from the 'unrounded' generation? Flip a coin and let me know

[dbader08]

It's definitely not Liddell or Couture...

[Sniggles]

Originally Posted by dbader08

It's Nick Diaz

teehee

[Qball1974]

Sorry for the Neg Esox Express I was drinking and read the whole post wrong.

[Cat--Smasher]

Originally Posted by Sniggles

O.o

Why was your name Brazil?

What spurred you to change it? WillPunisher's actions? Lol!

Yeah when I signed up it was as Brazil. It is the nicname my buddies call me in real life off the interwebs. Strangest nic name ever I know.. even more so for some Canadian kid. Long story short, in my university days, a buddy kept making up stupid stories to tell girls at the bar about me being an exchange student from Brazil, then it moved on to each semesters first day of classes introductions it would turn into an even more elaborate story about how I came from Brazil with some crazy story attached to it.. And since it has just stuck with me through this group of friends.

Anyways, I changed it on here just because Brazil means so much more on an mma website. Everyone thought I was a huge supporters of Brazillian fighters and I would get comments about how some Brazilian guy is a big fan of Leben and other American, Canadian wrestlers... Sooo I changed it to the much 'cooler' user name Cat--Smasher. < best user name on the boards if you ask me

[goodtimes]

Originally Posted by Esox Express

All true, but keep in mind that this was 'back in the day' when Frank was still fighting guys who were 'nobodies' to phrase it under today's standards. The problem is that what was considered tough competition back in those days - the dark ages, so to speak - was not anywhere near to what it is today. This was at a time when the sport had not nearly evolved to the multidisciplinary state that it is currently at. Guys like GSP or Jon Jones would storm through everyone if people were still focused on showcasing a style.

That being said, does that take away from the dominance of fighters from the 'unrounded' generation? Flip a coin and let me know

I don't think it's fair to discount what guys did 10 years ago compared to today, since the guys fighting today have based their game off of what was successful 10 years ago.

If it wasn't for guys like Coleman, Severn, Kerr, etc people would not have known how important wrestling was for MMA. Also, it made guys aware that they had to learn how to defend against it. Ya, those guys were really one-dimensional by today's standards, but someone had to show the world how good wrestling was in the first place. Then it goes to Matt Hughes, much more well-rounded, better GnP, better JJ, but still compared to GSP, he was very one-dimensional. And now we've got Rory Mac, maybe not better than GSP yet, but in 5-10 years I bet the fight wouldn't even be that competitive. Still, Rory learned from GSP, and a huge part of his style is based off of watching him and how successful he has become.