« RSS feeds | Home | Despite spam and trolls, we’re here with the latest headlines »
Independent World MMA Rankings – August 21, 2009
By Zach Arnold | August 20, 2009
From the office of the Independent World MMA Rankings
August 21, 2009: The August 2009 Independent World MMA Rankings have been released. These rankings are independent of any single MMA media outlet or sanctioning body, and are published on multiple web sites.
Some of the best and most knowledgeable MMA writers from across the MMA media landscape have come together to form one independent voting panel.
These voting panel members are, in alphabetical order: Zach Arnold (FightOpinion); Nicholas Bailey (MMA Ratings); Jared Barnes (Houston Chronicle); Jordan Breen (Sherdog); Jim Genia (Full Contact Fighter, MMA Memories, and MMA Journalist Blog); Jesse Holland (MMA Mania); Robert Joyner (Freelance); Todd Martin (CBS Sportsline); Zac Robinson (Sports by the Numbers MMA); Leland Roling (Bloody Elbow); Michael David Smith (AOL Fanhouse); Jonathan Snowden (Author of “Total MMA: Inside Ultimate Fighting”); Joshua Stein (MMA Opinion), Ivan Trembow (Freelance); and Dave Walsh (Total MMA).
Joachim Hansen is not currently eligible to be ranked due to the fact that he has been inactive for 12 months; and Josh Barnett is not currently eligible to be ranked due to his recent positive drug test.
August 2009 Independent World MMA Rankings
Ballots collected on August 18, 2009
Heavyweight Rankings (206 to 265 lbs.)
1. Fedor Emelianenko (30-1, 1 No Contest)
2. Brock Lesnar (4-1)
3. Frank Mir (12-4)
4. Antonio Rodrigo Nogueira (31-5-1, 1 No Contest)
5. Randy Couture (16-9)
6. Alistair Overeem (29-11, 1 No Contest)
7. Shane Carwin (11-0)
8. Brett Rogers (10-0)
9. Andrei Arlovski (15-7)
10. Fabricio Werdum (12-4-1)
Light Heavyweight Rankings (186 to 205 lbs.)
1. Lyoto Machida (15-0)
2. Quinton Jackson (30-7)
3. Rashad Evans (13-1-1)
4. Anderson Silva (25-4)
5. Mauricio “Shogun” Rua (18-3)
6. Forrest Griffin (16-6)
7. Gegard Mousasi (26-2-1)
8. Rich Franklin (25-4, 1 No Contest)
9. Keith Jardine (14-5-1)
10. Dan Henderson (25-7)
Middleweight Rankings (171 to 185 lbs.)
1. Anderson Silva (25-4)
2. Yushin Okami (23-4)
3. Dan Henderson (25-7)
4. Nathan Marquardt (28-8-2)
5. Demian Maia (10-0)
6. Jorge Santiago (21-7)
7. Robbie Lawler (16-5, 1 No Contest)
8. Vitor Belfort (18-8)
9. Chael Sonnen (23-10-1)
10. Yoshihiro Akiyama (13-1, 2 No Contests)
Welterweight Rankings (156 to 170 lbs.)
1. Georges St. Pierre (19-2)
2. Jon Fitch (19-3, 1 No Contest)
3. Thiago Alves (16-4)
4. Jake Shields (23-4-1)
5. Matt Hughes (43-7)
6. Josh Koscheck (12-4)
7. Martin Kampmann (15-2)
8. Mike Swick (14-2)
9. Carlos Condit (22-5)
10. Paulo Thiago (11-1)
Lightweight Rankings (146 to 155 lbs.)
1. B.J. Penn (14-5-1)
2. Shinya Aoki (21-4, 1 No Contest)
3. Eddie Alvarez (17-2)
4. Kenny Florian (11-4)
5. Tatsuya Kawajiri (24-5-2)
6. Diego Sanchez (21-2)
7. Gray Maynard (7-0, 1 No Contest)
8. Frankie Edgar (10-1)
9. Josh Thomson (16-2)
10. Mizuto Hirota (12-3-1)
Featherweight Rankings (136 to 145 lbs.)
1. Mike Brown (22-4)
2. Urijah Faber (22-3)
3. Wagnney Fabiano (12-1)
4. Jose Aldo (15-1)
5. Hatsu Hioki (20-3-2)
6. Leonard Garcia (13-4)
7. “Lion” Takeshi Inoue (16-3)
8. Raphael Assuncao (13-1)
9. Dokonjonosuke Mishima (19-6-2)
10. Josh Grispi (13-1)
Bantamweight Rankings (126 to 135 lbs.)
1. Brian Bowles (8-0)
2. Miguel Torres (37-2)
3. Takeya Mizugaki (12-3-2)
4. Masakatsu Ueda (9-0-2)
5. Dominick Cruz (14-1)
6. Akitoshi Tamura (14-7-2)
7. Joseph Benavidez (10-1)
8. Will Ribeiro (10-2)
9. Rani Yahya (14-4)
10. Damacio Page (11-4)
The Independent World MMA Rankings are tabulated on a monthly basis in each of the top seven weight classes of MMA, from heavyweight to bantamweight, with fighters receiving ten points for a first-place vote, nine points for a second-place vote, and so on.
The rankings are based purely on the votes of the members of the voting panel, with nobody’s vote counting more than anybody else’s vote, and no computerized voting.
The voters are instructed to vote primarily based on fighters’ actual accomplishments in the cage/ring (the quality of opposition that they’ve actually beaten), not based on a broad, subjective perception
of which fighters would theoretically win fantasy match-ups.
Inactivity: Fighters who have not fought in the past 12 months are not eligible to be ranked, and will regain their eligibility the next time they fight.
Disciplinary Suspensions: Fighters who are currently serving disciplinary suspensions, or who have been denied a license for drug test or disciplinary reasons, are not eligible to be ranked.
Changing Weight Classes: When a fighter announces that he is leaving one weight class in order to fight in another weight class, the fighter is not eligible to be ranked in the new weight class until he
has his first fight in the new weight class.
Catch Weight Fights: When fights are contested at weights that are in between the limits of the various weight classes, they are considered to be in the higher weight class. The weight limits for each weight class are listed at the top of the rankings for each weight class.
Special thanks to Eric Kamander, Zach Arnold, and Joshua Stein for their invaluable help with this project, and special thanks to Garrett Bailey for designing our logo.
Topics: Media, MMA, Zach Arnold | 51 Comments » | Permalink | Trackback |
Solid generally, but how can Robbie Lawler be ranked above Jake Shields at 185?
Ed. — This highlights the good/bad of being able to vote fighters in multiple weight classes. Personally, I vote fighters in one weight class only (i.e. Lawler at 185, Shields at 170). When you vote guys in multiple weight classes, occasionally you end up with results like this.
WAMMA is back…. Just saying! Does anybody care? UFC has 52 of the Top 70 guys listed. I think that’s the most consolidated the sport has ever been.
Heavyweight – Fabricio Werdum has no business in the Top 10. He lost to Dos Santos, and beat a Light Heavyweight since. Overeem jumps up to #6? His biggest win is against Paul Buentello. That’s a joke.
Light Heavyweight – How does Mousasi continue to get ranked so high? He never beat a Top 10 Middleweight, and was ranked Top 3. He beat a borderline at best Top 10 LHW, and now he is already up to #7? I don’t understand it.
Middleweight – Shields should be there instead of Lawler.
Welterweight – Not much to complain about.
Lightweight – Impossible to rank no matter how somebody tries to rationalize it.
The only 2 divisions the UFC really doesn’t have on lockdown are Heavyweight and Lightweight. And the UFC really has basically all the up & coming HW’s, so that is likely to change as time goes on.
And I would love to see the Lightweight Division consolidated, but I don’t think that is going to happen for a long time. Not while DREAM and Sengoku are still around.
Yeah, I hear you 45, if you aren’t in the UFC, you just can’t be ranked. We get it. We get it every time this happens. Seriously.
How on Earth is Overeem the #6 Heavyweight? Can someone please give a rational explanation of that?
Werdun at 10 is disturbing. But Overeem even in the Top 10 is laughable at best. And I don’t even like top 10 lists. I don’t think they fit MMA. I can see no rational way that Overeem is ranked there.
Very fair rankings as always. Just a few quick observations…
1. Henderson defeated Franklin at 205 back in January and neither has had a fight at 205 since then, so why is Franklin ranked ahead of Henderson?
2. As far as 45 Huddle’s comment about Mousasi… I agree he hasn’t fought a lot of top level competition at 205, but I would have a hard time putting Franklin, Jardine or Henderson ahead of him, so I think seven is more than fair. Maybe you could argue Henderson since he beat another top 10 205’er in Franklin recently, but I see him no lower than eight if that is the case.
3. I would rank Cain Velasquez at 9, ahead of Werdum at 10 and take Overeem out of the top 10. Cain’s win streak and victory over Kongo is more impressive than anything Werdum has done since beating Gonzaga in early 08. Not saying Cain’s streak is anything special, but I think it’s enough to be ranked ahead of Werdum at this time. If he beats Rothwell in October then that should definitely put him there. As far as Overeem, I just don’t think he has enough quality wins at HW to be ranked that high.
4. Yushin Okami at 2 is suprising. Granted, I think Okami is a victim of Zuffa finding him a boring fighter and not putting him in higher profile fights, but his last win was against Dean Lister in December 2008. In fact, he has fought three times in two years against non top-10 talent (Lister, Tanner and MacDonald). I don’t think that is enough to earn the number two ranking, but again I don’t think that is Okami’s fault.
5. Great job on the lightweight rankings. It’s such a hard category to rank because of how widespread the talent is, but I think you all did the best job you could with it.
Scott,
Franklin’s fight with Wanderlei Silva was technically a light heavyweight fight. The catchweight was within the light heavyweight limits.
I don’t know if you heard but Gilbert Yvel and Ben Rothwell are in the UFC now – so they should by default be top 10 or huddle protests.
For as much as 45 says anything UFC does is good, there are way more of you guys that say anything UFC does is bad.
These rankings seems to go against what you wrote Zach.
“The voters are instructed to vote primarily based on fighters’ actual accomplishments in the cage/ring (the quality of opposition that they’ve actually beaten), not based on a broad, subjective perception of which fighters would theoretically win fantasy match-ups.”
Ed. — I didn’t write it.
“Some of the best and most knowledgeable MMA writers from across the MMA media landscape” = “a bunch of writers from the US”
Do we really need another fighter ranking? no
Did I ever expect to see something like this on fightopinion? no
The only person who ever did a great job on ranking fighters was the guy running centralkickboxing.org
Ed. — I do not run the rankings. I vote on rankings alongside many other writers. These rankings have been published for several months now.
Overeem after beating Goodridge, Hunt, tall Korean dude, Buentello and losing to Sergei shouldn’t be ranked at HW.
Man, I wish I knew how other people were voting in this thing. I had Overeem near the end of my ballot; mainly as the HW division is a black hole and losing Barnett from the top 10 leaves some weird spaces.
Seriously, who cares? I don’t get the us vs. them attitude that prevails with a lot of people. I watch and give money just about monthly to UFC; they are the biggest and best company in MMA with most of the best fighters.. But people want variety and competition.
Some of you guys, I’m not saying you, but some of you guys just look so hard for somebody to be critical of something and boom, it is hating. People are critical of the UFC because they are the biggest company, the most visible and every move is public. People who live in the US are hypercritical of the US government as well, but when asked, still like it better than just about any other one. Criticism is a natural thing and the fact that intelligent adults still get up in arms over criticism or differing opinions is hilarious.
Dave,
If you read my comments, it is hardly if you aren’t in the UFC, you are not ranked.
The Lightweight Division is rightfully so half outside the UFC. I complained about Shields not being ranked in a second weight class.
What I did point out were the examples that made no sense at all… Which happened to contain guys outside of the UFC.
“I don’t know if you heard but Gilbert Yvel and Ben Rothwell are in the UFC now – so they should by default be top 10 or huddle protests.”
No. Who have they beaten to get in the Top 10? The answer is nobody.
the only thing that bothers me is Franklin being ranked above Henderson @ 205. i know their fight was at a catch weight, but still… really?
See, on this point, I know at least on my ballot, Babalu was previously 8 or 9, so Mousasi destroys him and, you know.
Look, 45, we all know your game. Every time rankings are discussed, regardless of your carefully chosen wording this time around, you complain about non-UFC fighters being ranked about UFC fighters. At this point you are arguing your own semantics which are completely transparent.
above*, christ.
Dave, do you see how your own post doesn’t make sense?
1. I will use Sherdog and BE’s rankings. Babalu is not in the Sherdog Top 10. He is listed as one of the next 5 contenders. He is ranked #10 by BE. So my assessment that he is a borderline Top 10 fighter is clearly backed up here.
2. Let’s say for arguments sake Babalu was #10 in the world at the time of the fight. Mousasi beating him makes him #10 in the world. Not 9, not 8, not 7. You beat the #10 guy in the world, you get ranked #10. It’s as simple as that. You need to beat higher ranked fighters to move higher (all other things considered constant).
You can call it what you want, but while you bash me, you make little sense yourself.
Also, this idea that if guys don’t lose, they somehow magically continue to move up the rankings is the biggest joke used by people who constantly bash the UFC.
It’s very simple. If 8+ Top Ten guys in one division are all in the same company, they should not be penalized for fighting top competition. That doesn’t mean a guy like Mousasi or Shields shouldn’t be ranked, but they shouldn’t keep on creeping up by fighting guys outside the Top 10.
By doing this, people benefit the fighters with the weaker fighting schedule. In a given year, likely half of the UFC Top 10 guys are basically guaranteed to lose a fight. It’s just the way their matchmaking works, because they put the best against each other. To penalize that, and to continue to push guys who are outside that organization, is a joke.
Like I said, it doesn’t mean guys fighting outside that division shouldn’t be ranked, but they shouldn’t continue to move up without those key wins. Arlovski is a perfect example…. He beat two guys outside the Top 10 (Rothwell & Nelson), and magically went to #2.
The principle applies to the Lightweight Division, only it’s really two companies. If you aren’t fighting in the UFC or DREAM, you shouldn’t be getting the benefit of the doubt.
That’s not some game. That’s just rewarding the guys who take the tougher fights. Your system benefits the guys who duck or avoid top competition. That should never be the case.
lol, you are good. Semantics, again. With me discussing these rankings I refer to previous incarnations of the same rankings. Why would I be talking about Sherdog or BloodyElbow?
So, once again, you are just arguing the inane. I can only argue to my own points and how I’ve voted for this previously. I had Babalu as 8 last month, Mousasi was 9 this time around on mine, with Babalu dropped to the 11 “just in case” vote.
Maybe if you are going to have a strong opinion about these rankings you should consider emailing Ivan to be involved in it somehow?
By these very rankings, Renato Sobral was ranked #9 last month. Mousasi is 2 places higher then that at #7. Franklin & Jardine did not lose since then, heck they haven’t even fought.
So once again, it makes no sense.
Franklin dropped from #6 to #9 without fighting, and without a fighter ranked higher then him losing.
That isn’t semantics. That just is illogical.
A good ranking system wouldn’t have such glaring issues. And that is the point.
Just like it wouldn’t have Robbie Lawler ranked and Jake Shields not, despite the fact that Shields beat him in their last fight.
Personally, I just blame Jordan Breen for all of these issues.
I know Zach is like me (as are a few others) and our ballots remain logical and don’t change too much.
If the UFC has proven anything, it’s that rankings are largely irrelevant.
Why hasn’t Okami had a shot at the MW title by now? Why did Lesnar get a HW title fight? Why will A.Silva not challenge Machida?
It all comes down to politics, friendships, and who will pull in the most PPV dollars.
I don’t think Dana White or anyone else particularly cares what fighters’ win/loss records are.
Anyone who thinks Jardine or Forrest Griffin would last a round with Mousasi is insane. Man I really wish he were in the UFC, because I honestly think he would pose the biggest threat to Machida other than maybe Anderson Silva.
I’m not saying this to demean the rankings, but rather 45’s assertion that Jardine shouldn’t be punished for Mousasi’s demolition of Babalu. I know there is no literal link between Mousasi and Babalu, but voters are not immune to looking not only at win-loss records, but also using their minds to vote. Wild brawlers like Jardine and Forrest would have no chance against someone with Mousasi’s hand speed, punching power, and all-around athleticism.
I’m not sold on Mousasi yet. Everyone looks great against poor competition (Bisping anyone?). I’ll wait until I see him against an established and proven top 10 fighter before I decide how good he is.
Ranking philosophy is one subject on which I agree with 45 Huddle. His objections to the rankings are absolutely correct.
Overeem has no business in the Top 10 and neither does Musasi. Musasi has POTENTIAL to rise through the ranks, there’s no doubt about that, but until he starts taking out Top 10 fighters, he shouldn’t be there.
The major objection that I would add is to Zach’s aversion to ranking a fighter in multiple weight classes. Going by the fighter’s last fight is arbitrary when you have so many fighters fluctuating, like Anderson Silva, Franklin and Henderson. Those guys must be ranked in both divisions. And furthermore, there must be consistency in their rankings in both divisions, in other words, Henderson must be ranked above Franklin in both divisions. Anything else is just absurd.
Comment #23 (by David M) exactly demonstrates the opposite philosophy. David M is playing fantasy matchmaker and wondering, who WOULD win in a fight between X and Y? And he ranks them accordingly.
As opposed to a system based on what has ACTUALLY HAPPENED, i.e. who has actually beaten who else in reality, not in hypothetical fantasy land.
David, I also Musasi stands a good chance of defeating Jardine. If he were to do so, then he’d take Jardine’s spot in the rankings. Until then, he has not earned that status. We can’t rank him there just because you and I subjectively THINK he WOULD beat Jardine.
Funny how the people who think that Mousasi and Overeem are overrated aren’t saying anything about Carwin. Or for that matter, would you guys be OK with Fedor never fighting a top opponent but staying ranked No. 1? Because that’s what your principles would lead to.
The fact is, fights against non-top-10 fighters are absolutely relevant to the rankings. The idea that beating the No. 9 guy means you should be ranked No. 9 yourself, while beating the No. 11 guy is completely meaningless will inevitably lead to absurdities if you try to be consistent about it.
david m,
While I’m not sold completely on Mousasi yet either, I think he matches up very well to Jardine & Forrest. I would likely pick Mousasi to beat both of them as well.
However, rankings are not about that. It’s about what has been done, not what they could potentially do. And for that reason, Mousasi doesn’t deserve his high ranking.
And that seems to be the problem. A guy like Mousasi looks fantastic and beats Babalu in awesome fashion, so people have the tendancy to rank him higher then he should be. When really, it’s more about logical thinking then it is about feelings.
And like everybody else, I would love to see him in the UFC to see how he would do against guys like Anderson Silva, Lyoto Machida, Quinton Jackson, and others…. But until he is, he cannot continue to rise in the rankings. It just doesn’t make sense. If anything, he can go lower if guys above him lose.
Heck, I think Shinya Aoki in the UFC would lose to Penn, Sherk, Florian, Maynard, Sanchez, & Edgar. However, he still deserves to be ranked in the Top 3.
Carwin is borderline Top 10….
I might be messing it up along the way, and perhaps klown can change correct if me if I’m wrong…. But the Heavyweight Top 15 goes something like this….
1) Fedor Emelianenko
2) Brock Lesnar
3) Frank Mir
4) Antonio Rodrigo Nogueira
5) Randy Couture
6) Ray Mercer
7) Tim Sylvia
8) Brett Rogers
9) Andrei Arlovski
10) Junior Dos Santos
11) Fabricio Werdum
12) Shane Carwin
13) Gabriel Gonzaga
14) Mirko Filipovic
15) Josh Barnett
And one could make the argument that Sylvia was so fat and out of shape for his last fight that he is removed from the equation (along with Ray Mercer), in that case everybody below them would bump up too.
So if that is the case, Shane Carwin becomes #10. Notice that Alistair Overeem isn’t even on the list. Hence why I pointed him out. He was the biggest joke on any of the list.
you must be joking with Mercer in top 15
To me, Overeem being in the Top 10 is just people trying legitimize Strikeforce and the eventual Overeem/Fedor fight.
I’m not bashing SF. But Overeem shouldn’t be near a top 10. If he is at 6 why isn’t CroCop up there too?
Oveerem’s has been a Heavyweight for 2 years. In that time he beat Michael Knapp (.500 fighter), Mark Hunt, Paul Buentello and Gary Goodrich. Hunt, Goodrich and Buentello are all recognizable names but aren’t top 15 or 20 fighters. He lost to Kharitonov also not a top 15 or 20 guy and had a draw with Cro Crop. Number 6? Really?
Wolverine,
Yes! No system of ranking is perfect, but if you don’t base it on “who beat who”, the ranking quickly loses credibility.
Now, if a fighter really looks to be a shell of their former self, I think it is reasonable to lower their ranking or remove them from the Top 10. Tim Sylvia is an example of this. Chuck Liddell is another example. Technically, they should both be Top 10 fighters still, but I think almost all fans can say they just aren’t the same.
Antonio Rodrigo Nogueira could potentially suffer the same fate. Now, if he has a competitive fight with Couture, even if he loses, I think a Top 10 ranking is legit. They will just switch positions. However, if he looks like he did against Mir and just looks out of it, I think it’s time to take him out of the rankings.
Arlovski’s another guy who is guy is close as well. He is at #9 right now… And I think it’s unfair to give up on him based on just those two last performances. One he looked good in before getting caught, and the other he just got caught….
Mr. Roadblock,
I agree. Same way Arlovski & Barnett increased their rankings before fighting Fedor. It didn’t make sense.
The major issue in trying to do rankings is what I call “The Ohio State Problem”.
I may lose some of our non-American friends with this example, and if so I apologize. American College Football’s rankings are the most similar rankings system to that of MMA and Boxing. In most sports leagues all teams face similar competition. In Tennis and Golf where you have rankings everyone plays each other or enough similar opponents often enough in a year to have legitimate rankings.
In MMA fighters only compete 2-4 times per year and against different opponents in different stages of their careers. Brandon Vera’s win over an injured Frank Mir is not as impressive to many as Brock Lesnar beating a healthy Mir.
College Football faces a similar problem. There are 100 someodd teams in the top division and they each play 10-12 games per year. A lot of times teams in the Top 25 only play 2-3 other Top 25 teams.
Ohio State’s Athletic Director sets it up each season where Ohio State plays 2 or 3 good teams, always Michigan State and Penn State and then one other school. The other 8 games they play are against horrible opponents. If Ohio State goes 2-1 against the good teams they guarantee themselves a place near the Top 5. They do it every year. They climb the rankings as the other good teams lose to each other.
There was another problem last year where the SEC conference got overhyped. People thought Texas, Texas Tech and Oklahoma were power houses. They were ranked ridiculously high and helped each other climb the rankings by all three teams going 1-1 against each other. Then in the Bowl games (where they were matched up with good teams from other conferences) they all got manhandled.
Josh Barnett rose the ranks the way Ohio State did for years. Overeem is being given that luxury now. Mousasi you can already see is going to be granted the same opportunity if he wins his next several fights.
to 45 Huddle,
I agree with your principles on kind of cascading fighters upon victories over ranked fighters. But personally, I would also take into consideration the fighter’s “stability” and his opponent’s rank.
2 Examples:
Nogueira at #2 loses to Mir at approx. #20. Nogueira doesn’t lose too many spots because he has a lot fo quality wins, so Mir moves over him. Now THIS is where people’s opinion should differ as it is debateable where they are and thats why having ranking panels are good to sort that out. But the polsters need to be aware of the procedure.
Other example, Tim Sylvia losing 3 out of 4 fights then losing to a debuting MMA fighter (i.e. not ranked) so Tim drops like a stone.
I like this Independent MMA idea, but there needs to be guidelines on how to handle fighters/situations, because right now everyone does what they want and we end up with Overeem at #6.
The biggest problem I have with these rankings is where the hell is Nick Diaz?!
Ohio State gets the benefit of the doubt precisely because they beat those good teams and win bowl games. No one gave Michigan or Notre Dame the benefit of the doubt last year because they had really tough schedules and left them in the top 25 in spite of repeated poor performances against what were generally solid squads. You still have to win.
45 Huddle/Klown,
I know (and I wrote in my post) that there is no direct link between Mousasi beating Babalu and Jardine falling in the rankings, but my point was that it is impossible to entirely remove that subjective aspect from rankings. That is why rankings are so worthless. If Babalu wasn’t top 10 before the fight, then does Mousasi deserve to be top 10 after? Who knows. The point is, we know greatness when we see it, and Mousasi dominated Babalu in a way that not even Chuck in his prime did.
So while you may say that “objectively” Mousasi may not deserve to be ranked above Jardine, I think the idea that there is pure objectivity in rankings is silly to begin with. We are all prisoners of what we have seen and what we think. It is natural to make comparisons. That is why rankings are ridiculous. Some voters may have been more impressed with some fighters than others. Rankings are entirely based on opinion, and our opinions can be molded however we see fit. For instance, I think Jardine, who lost to Houston Alexander in like 1 minute, should not be ranked in the top 10. One could make an argument that Robbie Lawler should not be ranked above Jake Shields; how he is, I have no idea. The point is, our “objective” opinions are loaded with subjectivity.
As Zach wrote in response to my comment on Lawler being ranked above Shields, he only votes for fighters in 1 weight class. That is his subjective choice. Surely Anderson Silva and BJ Penn deserve to be ranked top 10 in multiple classes, yet some “objective” voters only vote for them in a single class.
At the end of the day, the only reason to have rankings is to create discussion about where fighters should or should not be ranked. In that sense, this month’s rankings have succeeded.
Ohio State hasn’t won a bowl game in 3 years. They snuck into the National Championship game and were humiliated two years in a row. The same way Josh Barnett snuck up to the #2 ranking.
http://www.collegefootballpoll.com/bowl_history_ohio_state.html
Ohio State gets by on soft competition and reputation. That is precisely what plagues MMA rankings.
1 year from today there is a good chance that from today to then Brock will have beaten Carwin, Nog or Couture and Junior dos Santos. In that time frame Fedor will have beaten Werdum, Overeem and Brett Rogers. Fedor will still be number 1 because of reputation.
nb If Carwin beats Brock and then the next 2 guys he’ll be #2 to Fedor for the same reason.
Dave,
“The biggest problem I have with these rankings is where the hell is Nick Diaz?!”
Who has he beaten to get into the Top 10? He hasn’t beaten a Top 10 Welterweight since perhaps his early UFC career.
And at Middleweight, he only beat Scott Smith & Frank Shamrock, who both might not even be ranked in the Top 20.
Jeff & david m,
I definitely understand what you are saying. And I think even the system I put out is almost too restrictive to a degree. However, it needs to be the primary basis for rankings, and then exceptions need to be made accordingly.
I think the biggest problem is how quickly people try and move fighters in and out of the Top 10, not to mention how quickly they move around it.
To me, you need to earn it to get to the Top 10. Just like you need to earn it to get to the Top 5. It doesn’t seem like that earning is happening with guys like Mousasi. I agree, he looks great in there, but he isn’t looking great against Machida, Rampage or Silva…. but against Babalu…. Which is very different.
*************
An interesting rankings issue could come up within the next year. If Brock Lesnar beat Shane Carwin, Antonio Nogueira, and then another Top 10 Heavyweight…. And the UFC mangers to steal Brett Rogers away from Strikeforce before he fights Fedor (Which I am predicting, and I’m not alone)…. Well then what happens? Fedor will have likely fought Werdum who is borderline Top 10, and then Overeem who isn’t even Top 15….
A lot of people will likely start putting Lesnar up at #1…. And it might be hard to argue, even with the system I agree with. Because Sylvia was never Top 5 when he fought Fedor… And while I don’t think so, some people think Arlovski was Top 5.
That means since August 2005, Fedor will have only fought ONE Top 5 fighter. At some point, you need to lose that spot if another dominant champion emerges who is beating top tier fighters constantly.
45 Huddle,
I know what you are saying about moving guys in too quickly, but on the other hand, it is very bad to just keep guys in the top 10 because of their names. Take Jardine for instance, he is 2-3 in his last 5 fights, with his 2 wins being split decisions, and 2 of his losses being knockouts in which he was separated from consciousness in under 1 minute. I know he fought against a top fighter in Rampage (as well as 2 shot fighters in Liddell and Silva), but at some point you have to look at results. I don’t consider someone who has been knocked out in under a minute 2 times in his last 5 fights to be a top 10 fighter. The fact that he has fought guys who we consider to be elite and not embarrassed himself every time does not mean he should not be punished when he loses.
I also think having Forrest at 6 is ridiculous. The fact that he beat a fat Rampage a year or 2 ago doesn’t mean he is still a top 10 fighter RIGHT NOW. He is 3-3 in his last 6 fights, and all 3 losses (including his last 2 fights in a row) were brutal stoppages. Why is he still considered top 10? Just as it is improper to judge based purely on future potential, it is also wrong to judge based on past accomplishments.
If we have learned anything from Couture, Nog, Liddell, Silva, etc, it is that after you get knocked out, it is easier to get knocked out again. Forrest has taken some hellacious beatings and I have no idea how he will respond to getting hit after his latest beating. Chuck was still ranked in the top 10 even after Jardine beat him, even though he clearly did not deserve to be. He was there purely on reputation, and I consider that to be a serious mistake.
Forrest would almomst certainly lose to Quinton Jackson in a rematch. And I would say he could potentially lose to Rua as well. Griffin has never been that good…. He just fought two guys at the perfect points in their career for him to win. So I agree with you that he is probably slightly over ranked, but he does still technically have those two big wins….
As for Jardine…. He is about as impossible to rank as Joachim Hansen. Both have big wins, but even bigger loses.
Jardine has one big win — over a shot Liddell. The questionable decision over Vera I guess could be described as “big.” But he’s embarrassing to watch, he has a very poor recent record, and he’s had some terrible losses. He’s generally high regard (most have him in the top 10) is really baffling to me.
I still want an answer on why Shane Carwin is top ten. He beat Gonzaga who was definitely NOT a top ten guy when Carwin knocked him silly. He’s good, and can easily be in the top ten, but he really shouldn’t be there yet.
I think Carwin and Rogers get a boost from being new, undefeated and each having a victory over a guy who was considered impressive. Just like Brandon Vera flew up rankings a couple years ago. If either guy gets blown out in his next fight he’ll fall.
Reference the bottom half of my above example about the SEC. The way those teams were overrated so too Gonzaga and Arlovski probably were. This is another thing that makes rankings difficult/inaccurate/meaningless. Gonzaga and Arlovski were overrated when Couture/Carwin and Fedor/Rogers beat them. So they artificially inflate the rankings of all four of those guys. Not that Fedor needs inflating, as he is number 1. But Couture for example beat Gonzaga and Tim Sylvia who were overhyped. Minus that he’s a washout at 205 who couldn’t beat another guy that was washed out. So maybe that hurts Brock’s ranking too since he beat an overvalued Couture and Mir who beat an injured Nog.
Bottom line, rankings are meaningless. But they can be fun to talk about.
How is Kenny Florian top 5 when he has no top 10 wins and has gotten blown out the only 2 times he ever fought an A-level guy?
klown’s comprehensive HW ranking:
1. F. Emilianenko
2. Lesnar
3. Mir
4. Nogueira
5. Couture
6. Sylvia
7. Rogers
8. Arlovski
9. Dos Santos
10. Werdum
11.Carwin
12. Gonzaga
13. Velasquez
14. O’Brien
15. Herring
16. Kongo
17. CroCop
18. Barnett
19. A. Emilianenko
20. Monson
21. Kharitanov
22. Overeem
23. Yvel
24. Rizzo
Note: I just couldn’t bear to rank Mercer up there (above Sylvia). I’m just gonna pretend that fight never happened. I mean, it wasn’t REALLY a MMA fight, was it? Let’s just take it as a freakshow/exhibition match up and forget about it…
Another note:
I know O’Brien dropped to LHW but I believe, for consistency’s sake, in ranking a fighter in every weight class in which he has competed in the last 3 years. (Maybe I should make it 2 years? That’s the arbitrary part.)
I’ve seen that when I do a top 10 list, the difference between two guys is often arbitrary. The #6 and #8 guy may have no common opponents, and so I’m stuck saying, well, I guess this win means more than that win, but I have no lineage to show as evidence. Then someone might come in and beat one of them, and now that new guy’s rank is somewhat arbitrary, and the whole thing cycles and now becomes entirely based on a difference that was originally very subjective.
So what I do is I list fighters into tiers, and instead of thinking “This guy beat the #5 while this other guy beat the #7,” I might say they both have wins over tier 3 fighters, and I judge those wins as more or less equal (unless #5 has a direct win over #7, but in that case he’s usually in the next tier up unless he also has a recent loss against similar competition).
So for example, in the WW division, it’d look like this (no specific order within tiers):
Tier 1:
GSP
Tier 2:
Alves
Fitch
Tier 3:
Hughes
Kos
Thiago
Karo
Shields
etc.
and so on. Within a tier, you can move ahead of someone without necessarily having to beat that person, you just need to make a case for yourself by having a more impressive record with regards to quality wins. But a tier 3 guy can never get to tier 2 by beating tier 4 guys, they have to beat a tier 2 guy or beat a couple of tier 3 guys to move up. After that, I just rank them as best I can within their tier to make a top 10 list.
Considering that there’s not enough matches within a top 10 list to make a definite pecking order most of the time (the UFC WW and LHW divisions are as close as you can theoretically expect), this is the best compromise I have between an objective system that might place a little too much importance on “ranking legacies” and a subjective system that allows a fighter to move up in rank against guys that aren’t in his pool of opponents (but only to a point, eventually you have to move up to better opponents if you want a better ranking).
The other thing is…. Rankings have such little meaning when all the same guys in one weight class are fighting for the same company.
As long as champions are fighting what are perceived to be worthy challengers and no fighters are being given unfair or protective treatment…. Rankings are kind of a side topic at best.
Machida should be fighting Jackson. But instead he is fighting Rua. Still a worthy challenger, and the winner of Jackson/Evans will get a shot anyways. Not a big deal.
There are no longer heated debates about LHW & WW rankings fir this very reason. Things always work themselves out in the long run. It’s the HW & LW divisions that get put under the microscope because the divisions are fractured to a degree.