Comments on: Independent World MMA Rankings – January 15, 2010

By: trevorwitthebiz

trevorwitthebiz — Mon, 18 Jan 2010 21:26:56 +0000

Where the fuck is nick diaz in your rankings? Embarassing frank shamrock and scott smith to the point it appeared they didn\’t belong in the same ring with him doesn\’t put him top 10? Keep in mind he fights at ww so he outclassed two guys who fight a weightclass up. Come on.

By: Isaiah

Isaiah — Sun, 17 Jan 2010 00:10:01 +0000

The No. 2 guy should still drop if he loses to the No. 1 guy because of the inherent uncertainty in the rankings. It’s better to picture a guy’s position as a cloud than a point on a graph. If he loses to anyone, your best guess of his ceiling becomes reduced, while the floor remains the same.

Also, a loss is a real and negative event, and if rankings are to be based on accomplishments, negative accomplishments like losses need to be figured in.

By: Alan Conceicao

Alan Conceicao — Sat, 16 Jan 2010 22:26:04 +0000

Lemme put this another way: The ratings aren’t linear. Never were, can’t be. There is no original number 8 lightweight in the world that we track back to in terms of performance. The only thing that can be traced in a linear fashion are champs.

By: Alan Conceicao

Alan Conceicao — Sat, 16 Jan 2010 22:21:27 +0000

At some point, though, someone who keeps losing (even if to higher ranked competition) will need to drop. Rarely can you find direct comparisons with *all* the guys around them above and below – we rate lots of these guys off imagined performance. Look at Kenny Florian; What ties him to being clearly better than Kawajiri? Nothing. Its guesswork.

By: klown

klown — Sat, 16 Jan 2010 21:59:00 +0000

A fighter shouldn’t drop if he loses to a fighter ranked higher than he is. When that happens, the rankings should stay exactly the same. The outcome has merely confirmed what the rankings told: that the #1 guy is better than the #2 guy, according to the record.

By: Dave

Dave — Sat, 16 Jan 2010 19:12:05 +0000

It’s funny, every month it is BLARG~!!! OVEREEM TOO HIIIIIIIIIIIGH and this time around it is Mir?!!?

I can understand not liking Overeem’s position, I really can. Is he on my list? Absolutely, on the fringe of it as I feel the HW division really isn’t that great, but you know.

Dissing Mir, though? Regardless of HOW he beat Nog, he beat Nog.

By: Isaiah

Isaiah — Sat, 16 Jan 2010 18:21:44 +0000

I’d put Nog at or near the top (after Fedor, who is pretty much hors concours). He’s recently beaten Sylvia, Barnett, Herring, and Couture and just has the loss to Mir. Plus he was a top guy before that run.

Brock has had three straight decent wins, and the loss is forgivable because it was just his second pro fight. He’d have to go behind Nog (given the similarity of their recent records and Nog’s vast superiority in the time I’m considering “pre-recent”). If Barnett is off the list for inactivity, Nog is the only guy who is definitely ahead of Brock. You could argue about JDS or Rogers.

By: JRN

JRN — Sat, 16 Jan 2010 17:56:08 +0000

Mir did get soundly beaten the next time out, but it was to a top 10 opponent, since Lesnar had just beaten Couture (who I think we can agree was a top heavyweight at the time). So even though it was a lopsided loss, it wasn’t a terrible loss in ranking terms.

Out of curiosity: if you think Mir is too high, where would you put Lesnar and Nogueira?

By: Isaiah

Isaiah — Sat, 16 Jan 2010 17:28:49 +0000

Mir’s next fight after the win over Nog was a one-sided loss and Nog’s next fight was a one-sided win over Couture. So yes, I agree that the extent to which a result is anomalous is partly determined by what happens after, but I don’t agree that that consideration improves Mir’s case.

And I also agree that people should move up on the basis of a single result. The discussion is about the extent of that bump. Mir moved from the lower part of the top 20 all the way up to No. 2 on some lists. I think that’s ridiculous. And then he just drops one spot by losing to Brock? Doesn’t add up to me.

And finally, I agree with you once again that the rankings should eventually right themselves. Mir has another very overrated opponent up next, but after that, he’ll probably lose to the next decent opponent he faces. If that just drops him one spot, and whoever beats him moves to No. 3, we’ll have another discussion.

By: JRN

JRN — Sat, 16 Jan 2010 17:21:13 +0000

People move way up on the basis of single wins when they beat someone much higher ranked. They move way down on the basis of single losses when they lose to someone much lower ranked. I don’t see what ought to be controversial about that.

Whether or not a result is anomalous depends not only on the results that came before it, but also on the results that follow. If Mir continues to generally beat top fighters and Nogueira to generally lose to them, then it’s not an anomaly, it’s the beginning of a trend. (Nog may have already indicated that this is not the case with his win over Couture, but it’s still too early to say.)

If it’s an anomaly, then the rankings will right themselves over time. But until then, you reserve judgment and count the fight the same as you would any other. That’s my take, anyway.