Greatest UFC Fighter of All-Time

Originally posted by TheHYDE49er:

Originally posted by JBrack:

Originally posted by Kolohe:

First off it's a fact, you cannot win in today's UFC with just BJJ, see Damien Maia who has been working on his stand up. Second, BJJ has evolved so much since the first UFC 1, that at the same weight of Royce, today's fighter would easily dominate back then. Why, leg and ankle locks are much more easier to pull off now and Gracie wasn't even doing those back then, Shamrock was the only one to set these up and finish. See Frank Mir vs. Brock Lesnar 1. Back then no one knew how to defend BJJ, Shamrock is the closest to ever do it but did he?

Fighters today are far more advanced in striking and on the ground, put someone like Jacare Souza in the UFC back in the 90's and he would own every single fighter including Royce Gracie in his prime.

You keep saying things have evolved. I don't think they have. Boxing is boxing and fighting is fighting. You surely must know that Gracie has studied boxing and other forms of striking. Is Muay Thai teaching new ways to strike? No they are not. Are boxing coaches teaching different techniques that im not aware of? No they havent. Do wrestling coaches now teach different ways to wrestle? Absolutely not. The only thing that has changed is the money. Now people can do this for a living and train everyday. Thats not evolution, it simply just more time to perfect your craft.

All of that is just absolutely false. Everything that you posted is just flat wrong, except the money part I suppose. You used to have guys that boxed like this lmao, but no, the sport hasn't evolved.

The UFC is only 23 years old. We have seen some of the best boxers in that era. Trying to compare the UFC to 1800 boxing is laughable at best. I have never seen a mma fighter fight like that, have you?

Originally posted by JBrack:

Originally posted by TheHYDE49er:
A sumo champion is a joke when compared to actual MMA fighter. There's nobody in the UFC right now or any kind of professional MMA promotion that would lose to a sumo wrestler. That just a terrible attempt at making your point.

Dan was also just one dimensional. If he would come in today's MMA with the exact same skill set he had 20+ years ago, he would get dominated. He would have to greatly improve his standup and BJJ, among other things.

This basically is like arguing that Bill Russel would be a great NBA player today, or Babe Ruth would also be a great baseball player, both games have evolved so much since then. Especially MMA, where literally guys off the street would come fight and then go back to their day job.

Lol, see Brock Lesnar. He actually faired quite well and won the belt. No reason to believe Dan wouldn't have done the same. Dan was actually much more polished and accomplished. Really bad way to prove your point.

Obviously you don't know anything about Brock then and his history in the UFC.

He came in with zero experience in MMA, he didn't have 10-20-30 fights under his belt already. He came in as all hype, and Mir made him look like all hype in their first fight. He had to learn BJJ and other forms of MMA before he actually won.

Lesnar didn't just come in and dominate. On top of that, Lesnar was a freak of nature. The guy ran a 4.7 at the NFL combine and had a 35 inch vertical, while being 285 lbs. It's not surprising that someone like Lesnar could adapt so fast, and that's largely due to the fact of his freakish athleticism. Dan had nothing on Brock when it came to athleticism.

Originally posted by JBrack:

Originally posted by TheHYDE49er:

Originally posted by JBrack:

Originally posted by Kolohe:
First off it's a fact, you cannot win in today's UFC with just BJJ, see Damien Maia who has been working on his stand up. Second, BJJ has evolved so much since the first UFC 1, that at the same weight of Royce, today's fighter would easily dominate back then. Why, leg and ankle locks are much more easier to pull off now and Gracie wasn't even doing those back then, Shamrock was the only one to set these up and finish. See Frank Mir vs. Brock Lesnar 1. Back then no one knew how to defend BJJ, Shamrock is the closest to ever do it but did he?

Fighters today are far more advanced in striking and on the ground, put someone like Jacare Souza in the UFC back in the 90's and he would own every single fighter including Royce Gracie in his prime.

You keep saying things have evolved. I don't think they have. Boxing is boxing and fighting is fighting. You surely must know that Gracie has studied boxing and other forms of striking. Is Muay Thai teaching new ways to strike? No they are not. Are boxing coaches teaching different techniques that im not aware of? No they havent. Do wrestling coaches now teach different ways to wrestle? Absolutely not. The only thing that has changed is the money. Now people can do this for a living and train everyday. Thats not evolution, it simply just more time to perfect your craft.

All of that is just absolutely false. Everything that you posted is just flat wrong, except the money part I suppose. You used to have guys that boxed like this lmao, but no, the sport hasn't evolved.

The UFC is only 23 years old. We have seen some of the best boxers in that era. Trying to compare the UFC to 1800 boxing is laughable at best. I have never seen a mma fighter fight like that, have you?

The sport has evolved ten folds in those 23 years...It's very comparable because 20+ years ago nobody has ever heard of a BJJ, a rubber guard, and half of the other things Kolohe mentioned, if you don't recognize that, then this debate is just pointless lol. Either way, that's not the point, you said boxing has remaind similar as well as many other styles of fighting, and you were proved wrong. Boxing from the 60s, 70s, has also evolved a lot, just has boxing from the 80s, 90s, to today's boxing, where it's more about defense and not getting hit.

Originally posted by TheHYDE49er:

Originally posted by JBrack:

Originally posted by TheHYDE49er:

A sumo champion is a joke when compared to actual MMA fighter. There's nobody in the UFC right now or any kind of professional MMA promotion that would lose to a sumo wrestler. That just a terrible attempt at making your point.

Dan was also just one dimensional. If he would come in today's MMA with the exact same skill set he had 20+ years ago, he would get dominated. He would have to greatly improve his standup and BJJ, among other things.

This basically is like arguing that Bill Russel would be a great NBA player today, or Babe Ruth would also be a great baseball player, both games have evolved so much since then. Especially MMA, where literally guys off the street would come fight and then go back to their day job.

Lol, see Brock Lesnar. He actually faired quite well and won the belt. No reason to believe Dan wouldn't have done the same. Dan was actually much more polished and accomplished. Really bad way to prove your point.

Obviously you don't know anything about Brock then and his history in the UFC.

He came in with zero experience in MMA, he didn't have 10-20-30 fights under his belt already. He came in as all hype, and Mir made him look like all hype in their first fight. He had to learn BJJ and other forms of MMA before he actually won.

Lesnar didn't just come in and dominate. On top of that, Lesnar was a freak of nature. The guy ran a 4.7 at the NFL combine and had a 35 inch vertical, while being 285 lbs. It's not surprising that someone like Lesnar could adapt so fast, and that's largely due to the fact of his freakish athleticism. Dan had nothing on Brock when it came to athleticism.

I know everything about Brock, yeah steroids will have that effect on people. You made my point and dont even realize it. He had no experience yet he won. How can that be when the sport is so evolved? Yeah, exactly! !!

Originally posted by JBrack:

Originally posted by TheHYDE49er:

Originally posted by JBrack:

Originally posted by TheHYDE49er:
A sumo champion is a joke when compared to actual MMA fighter. There's nobody in the UFC right now or any kind of professional MMA promotion that would lose to a sumo wrestler. That just a terrible attempt at making your point.

Dan was also just one dimensional. If he would come in today's MMA with the exact same skill set he had 20+ years ago, he would get dominated. He would have to greatly improve his standup and BJJ, among other things.

This basically is like arguing that Bill Russel would be a great NBA player today, or Babe Ruth would also be a great baseball player, both games have evolved so much since then. Especially MMA, where literally guys off the street would come fight and then go back to their day job.

Lol, see Brock Lesnar. He actually faired quite well and won the belt. No reason to believe Dan wouldn't have done the same. Dan was actually much more polished and accomplished. Really bad way to prove your point.

Obviously you don't know anything about Brock then and his history in the UFC.

He came in with zero experience in MMA, he didn't have 10-20-30 fights under his belt already. He came in as all hype, and Mir made him look like all hype in their first fight. He had to learn BJJ and other forms of MMA before he actually won.

Lesnar didn't just come in and dominate. On top of that, Lesnar was a freak of nature. The guy ran a 4.7 at the NFL combine and had a 35 inch vertical, while being 285 lbs. It's not surprising that someone like Lesnar could adapt so fast, and that's largely due to the fact of his freakish athleticism. Dan had nothing on Brock when it came to athleticism.

I know everything about Brock, yeah steroids will have that effect on people. You made my point and dont even realize it. He had no experience yet he won. How can that be when the sport is so evolved? Yeah, exactly! !!

He lost with no experience, wtf are you talking about? He lost against Mir...But ya, you know a lot about Brock...

And ya...it's all steroids. Go ahead and go take some steroids and try your luck in the UFC, let me know how it goes. I'm done with this, good luck finding somebody else to troll.

Originally posted by TheHYDE49er:

He lost with no experience, wtf are you talking about? He lost against Mir...But ya, you know a lot about Brock...

And ya...it's all steroids. Go ahead and go take some steroids and try your luck in the UFC, let me know how it goes. I'm done with this, good luck finding somebody else to troll.

He did lose against Mir with a damn heal hook. My point is Lesnar had no skills but still managed to win the belt. I never liked Lesnar. When you strike him he folds up like a taco. Straight b***h mode. Fact remains he won a title in this super evolved form of fighting with no prior experience.

Originally posted by TheHYDE49er:

The sport has evolved ten folds in those 23 years...It's very comparable because 20+ years ago nobody has ever heard of a BJJ, a rubber guard, and half of the other things Kolohe mentioned, if you don't recognize that, then this debate is just pointless lol. Either way, that's not the point, you said boxing has remaind similar as well as many other styles of fighting, and you were proved wrong. Boxing from the 60s, 70s, has also evolved a lot, just has boxing from the 80s, 90s, to today's boxing, where it's more about defense and not getting hit.

Obviously im talking modern era that shares the same time line as the UFC. Dont be that guy and pretend you don't know what im talking about!

Originally posted by Kolohe:

Originally posted by jedediahyork:

Originally posted by Kolohe:

Originally posted by jedediahyork:

Originally posted by Kolohe:

What are you even arguing jedediah? I think you're farther than the point of my post' than ever. lol

My main point to my arguments have been:

1. Would prime Royce Gracie win in today's UFC?

2. Would present Royce Gracie win in today's UFC?

It seems like your post took a left turn somewhere and got lost. lol

What turn? I'm saying the exact same thing I've been saying the entire time.

You don't seem to understand that prepping for and winning a tournament is much harder than prepping for and winning a single fight. You prep for a single fight, you get to study hours of film, plan your fight to counter your opponents strengths, etc... You can't do that in a tournament because you don't know who you're fighting...

And doing it with no weight class restrictions, while being the smallest guy in the tournament is even harder. And doing it with no rules against striking certain body parts, or using the gi for leverage, etc is harder than fighting in today's UFC with all the rules and restrictions. And he won the tournament three times.

You can claim it was because nobody knew how to defend his style -- the first time -- but not the second and third time. Ask Ken Shamrock, who trained in BJJ after he got beat the first time, and then got beat again but got called a draw because of -- guess what -- time limit.

Would today's fighters win back then, when they fought multiple times in a day, against opponents they couldn't prepare for? Today's fighters lose 40% of their matches to replacement fighters who haven't even been training for the fight... and that's with more than a month's notice. s**t, who was that dude a few years ago who won the championship as a replacement fighter?

http://www.betmma.tips/ufc_late_replacement_fight_stats.php

Would a 50 year old win in today's UFC? Really?

One of his two losses came when he was 40 years old. The other came when he was 35. Royce in his prime would submit every fighter in today's UFC, no question.

Like I said you're side tracking from what my argument was geared toward. No one is questioning Royce Gracie as a fighter, nowhere in any of my post did I do that.

It's a simple question or questions, would Royce Gracie win in today's UFC. And you keep going on about how Royce had to do this or that, I don't care about any of that, WOULD HE WIN IN TODAY'S UFC!!!!

FYI you were jumping into the conversation between JBrack and I then totally miss the point to our conversation. lol

And you totally just proved you're arguing without even reading the post, since I answered you.

Still unable to answer the question directly without beating around the bush.

My reason for not replying to all that you've mentioned, again that's not what I'm arguing against. It' like you post other things to avoid my question, hoping I'm gonna somehow take things outta context and argue a different angle.

Here let me repeat this for you one last time before I choose to move on with my life.

Would Royce Gracie win in today's UFC?

or

Would a Royce Gracie in his prime win in today's UFC?

I've answered and refuted that question. What say you?

I literally answered you, in a very straightforward way. Perhaps read the whole post.

Originally posted by TheHYDE49er:

Originally posted by jedediahyork:

Originally posted by TheHYDE49er:

You have to joking lmao. Some fat ass is proof that he could beat a world class athlete like Lesnar?

Dan Severn was a 2 time national wrestling champ, 13 time AAU national wrestling champ, 2 time state high school wrestling champ, and is an ASU hall of famer.

Dan Severn is 6'2", weighed in at 265.

Lesner is 6'3", weighed in at 265.

Who won?



A 486 lbs sumo wrestling champion is a joke?

A sumo champion is a joke when compared to actual MMA fighter. There's nobody in the UFC right now or any kind of professional MMA promotion that would lose to a sumo wrestler. That just a terrible attempt at making your point.

Dan was also just one dimensional. If he would come in today's MMA with the exact same skill set he had 20+ years ago, he would get dominated. He would have to greatly improve his standup and BJJ, among other things.

This basically is like arguing that Bill Russel would be a great NBA player today, or Babe Ruth would also be a great baseball player, both games have evolved so much since then. Especially MMA, where literally guys off the street would come fight and then go back to their day job.

Wait. So he was one dimensional, yet had the same skill set as Brock Lesnar?

Originally posted by jedediahyork:

Originally posted by TheHYDE49er:

Originally posted by jedediahyork:

Originally posted by TheHYDE49er:

You have to joking lmao. Some fat ass is proof that he could beat a world class athlete like Lesnar?

Dan Severn was a 2 time national wrestling champ, 13 time AAU national wrestling champ, 2 time state high school wrestling champ, and is an ASU hall of famer.

Dan Severn is 6'2", weighed in at 265.

Lesner is 6'3", weighed in at 265.

Who won?



A 486 lbs sumo wrestling champion is a joke?

A sumo champion is a joke when compared to actual MMA fighter. There's nobody in the UFC right now or any kind of professional MMA promotion that would lose to a sumo wrestler. That just a terrible attempt at making your point.

Dan was also just one dimensional. If he would come in today's MMA with the exact same skill set he had 20+ years ago, he would get dominated. He would have to greatly improve his standup and BJJ, among other things.

This basically is like arguing that Bill Russel would be a great NBA player today, or Babe Ruth would also be a great baseball player, both games have evolved so much since then. Especially MMA, where literally guys off the street would come fight and then go back to their day job.

Wait. So he was one dimensional, yet had the same skill set as Brock Lesnar?

Yeah I don't think he is thinking before he posts. He is arguing against himself and doesn't even realize it.

Originally posted by TheHYDE49er:

He came in with zero experience in MMA, he didn't have 10-20-30 fights under his belt already. He came in as all hype, and Mir made him look like all hype in their first fight. He had to learn BJJ and other forms of MMA before he actually won.

Lesnar didn't just come in and dominate. On top of that, Lesnar was a freak of nature. The guy ran a 4.7 at the NFL combine and had a 35 inch vertical, while being 285 lbs. It's not surprising that someone like Lesnar could adapt so fast, and that's largely due to the fact of his freakish athleticism. Dan had nothing on Brock when it came to athleticism.

learn to freaking read. I said he came in as a one dimensional fighter, got beat, and had to evolve as a fighter before he won.

why am i even responding, i said i was done.

Originally posted by jedediahyork:

Originally posted by Kolohe:

Originally posted by jedediahyork:

Originally posted by Kolohe:

Originally posted by jedediahyork:

Originally posted by Kolohe:
What are you even arguing jedediah? I think you're farther than the point of my post' than ever. lol

My main point to my arguments have been:

1. Would prime Royce Gracie win in today's UFC?

2. Would present Royce Gracie win in today's UFC?

It seems like your post took a left turn somewhere and got lost. lol

What turn? I'm saying the exact same thing I've been saying the entire time.

You don't seem to understand that prepping for and winning a tournament is much harder than prepping for and winning a single fight. You prep for a single fight, you get to study hours of film, plan your fight to counter your opponents strengths, etc... You can't do that in a tournament because you don't know who you're fighting...

And doing it with no weight class restrictions, while being the smallest guy in the tournament is even harder. And doing it with no rules against striking certain body parts, or using the gi for leverage, etc is harder than fighting in today's UFC with all the rules and restrictions. And he won the tournament three times.

You can claim it was because nobody knew how to defend his style -- the first time -- but not the second and third time. Ask Ken Shamrock, who trained in BJJ after he got beat the first time, and then got beat again but got called a draw because of -- guess what -- time limit.

Would today's fighters win back then, when they fought multiple times in a day, against opponents they couldn't prepare for? Today's fighters lose 40% of their matches to replacement fighters who haven't even been training for the fight... and that's with more than a month's notice. s**t, who was that dude a few years ago who won the championship as a replacement fighter?

http://www.betmma.tips/ufc_late_replacement_fight_stats.php

Would a 50 year old win in today's UFC? Really?

One of his two losses came when he was 40 years old. The other came when he was 35. Royce in his prime would submit every fighter in today's UFC, no question.

Like I said you're side tracking from what my argument was geared toward. No one is questioning Royce Gracie as a fighter, nowhere in any of my post did I do that.

It's a simple question or questions, would Royce Gracie win in today's UFC. And you keep going on about how Royce had to do this or that, I don't care about any of that, WOULD HE WIN IN TODAY'S UFC!!!!

FYI you were jumping into the conversation between JBrack and I then totally miss the point to our conversation. lol

And you totally just proved you're arguing without even reading the post, since I answered you.

Still unable to answer the question directly without beating around the bush.

My reason for not replying to all that you've mentioned, again that's not what I'm arguing against. It' like you post other things to avoid my question, hoping I'm gonna somehow take things outta context and argue a different angle.

Here let me repeat this for you one last time before I choose to move on with my life.

Would Royce Gracie win in today's UFC?

or

Would a Royce Gracie in his prime win in today's UFC?

I've answered and refuted that question. What say you?

I literally answered you, in a very straightforward way. Perhaps read the whole post.

Perhaps keep avoiding the question.

Not sure what's so hard in answering it instead of continuing to post things like this.

Originally posted by JBrack:

Originally posted by Kolohe:
First off it's a fact, you cannot win in today's UFC with just BJJ, see Damien Maia who has been working on his stand up. Second, BJJ has evolved so much since the first UFC 1, that at the same weight of Royce, today's fighter would easily dominate back then. Why, leg and ankle locks are much more easier to pull off now and Gracie wasn't even doing those back then, Shamrock was the only one to set these up and finish. See Frank Mir vs. Brock Lesnar 1. Back then no one knew how to defend BJJ, Shamrock is the closest to ever do it but did he?

Fighters today are far more advanced in striking and on the ground, put someone like Jacare Souza in the UFC back in the 90's and he would own every single fighter including Royce Gracie in his prime.

You keep saying things have evolved. I don't think they have. Boxing is boxing and fighting is fighting. You surely must know that Gracie has studied boxing and other forms of striking. Is Muay Thai teaching new ways to strike? No they are not. Are boxing coaches teaching different techniques that im not aware of? No they havent. Do wrestling coaches now teach different ways to wrestle? Absolutely not. The only thing that has changed is the money. Now people can do this for a living and train everyday. Thats not evolution, it simply just more time to perfect your craft.

So BJJ hasn't evolved then. that's what you're saying......do you even Jits bro!!!

Keep telling me BJJ hasn't evolved and you're gonna keep showing me that you know nothing about BJJ. I'll tell you right now if Royce Gracie was to challenge someone like Marcelo Garcia, Vinny Magalhales or even Braulio Estima he would get schooled....why because BJJ has evolved, it's no longer a simple close guard - cross collar choke anymore it's a lot of open guard and 50/50 guard to heel hooks now.

Originally posted by TheHYDE49er:

Originally posted by TheHYDE49er:

He came in with zero experience in MMA, he didn't have 10-20-30 fights under his belt already. He came in as all hype, and Mir made him look like all hype in their first fight. He had to learn BJJ and other forms of MMA before he actually won.

Lesnar didn't just come in and dominate. On top of that, Lesnar was a freak of nature. The guy ran a 4.7 at the NFL combine and had a 35 inch vertical, while being 285 lbs. It's not surprising that someone like Lesnar could adapt so fast, and that's largely due to the fact of his freakish athleticism. Dan had nothing on Brock when it came to athleticism.

learn to freaking read. I said he came in as a one dimensional fighter, got beat, and had to evolve as a fighter before he won.

why am i even responding, i said i was done.

Lesnar lost in his UFC debut against Frank Mir (june 2007) and then won his second fight against Heath Herring. In November 2008, Lesnar defeated Randy Couture to become the UFC Heavyweight Champion.

When in that time frame did you see him utilize any of these skills you say he learned? He was the same guy in all his fights. In fact he was kicking the s**t out of Mir in his first fight even. He just got caught slipping.

So you are saying you can learn the super advanced UFC in a year? You make it sound super challenging. Because thats how long it took him to win the belt with no prior experience.

Originally posted by Kolohe:

Originally posted by jedediahyork:

Originally posted by Kolohe:

Originally posted by jedediahyork:

Originally posted by Kolohe:

Originally posted by jedediahyork:

Originally posted by Kolohe:
What are you even arguing jedediah? I think you're farther than the point of my post' than ever. lol

My main point to my arguments have been:

1. Would prime Royce Gracie win in today's UFC?

2. Would present Royce Gracie win in today's UFC?

It seems like your post took a left turn somewhere and got lost. lol

What turn? I'm saying the exact same thing I've been saying the entire time.

You don't seem to understand that prepping for and winning a tournament is much harder than prepping for and winning a single fight. You prep for a single fight, you get to study hours of film, plan your fight to counter your opponents strengths, etc... You can't do that in a tournament because you don't know who you're fighting...

And doing it with no weight class restrictions, while being the smallest guy in the tournament is even harder. And doing it with no rules against striking certain body parts, or using the gi for leverage, etc is harder than fighting in today's UFC with all the rules and restrictions. And he won the tournament three times.

You can claim it was because nobody knew how to defend his style -- the first time -- but not the second and third time. Ask Ken Shamrock, who trained in BJJ after he got beat the first time, and then got beat again but got called a draw because of -- guess what -- time limit.

Would today's fighters win back then, when they fought multiple times in a day, against opponents they couldn't prepare for? Today's fighters lose 40% of their matches to replacement fighters who haven't even been training for the fight... and that's with more than a month's notice. s**t, who was that dude a few years ago who won the championship as a replacement fighter?

http://www.betmma.tips/ufc_late_replacement_fight_stats.php

Would a 50 year old win in today's UFC? Really?

One of his two losses came when he was 40 years old. The other came when he was 35. Royce in his prime would submit every fighter in today's UFC, no question.

Like I said you're side tracking from what my argument was geared toward. No one is questioning Royce Gracie as a fighter, nowhere in any of my post did I do that.

It's a simple question or questions, would Royce Gracie win in today's UFC. And you keep going on about how Royce had to do this or that, I don't care about any of that, WOULD HE WIN IN TODAY'S UFC!!!!

FYI you were jumping into the conversation between JBrack and I then totally miss the point to our conversation. lol

And you totally just proved you're arguing without even reading the post, since I answered you.

Still unable to answer the question directly without beating around the bush.

My reason for not replying to all that you've mentioned, again that's not what I'm arguing against. It' like you post other things to avoid my question, hoping I'm gonna somehow take things outta context and argue a different angle.

Here let me repeat this for you one last time before I choose to move on with my life.

Would Royce Gracie win in today's UFC?

or

Would a Royce Gracie in his prime win in today's UFC?

I've answered and refuted that question. What say you?

I literally answered you, in a very straightforward way. Perhaps read the whole post.

Perhaps keep avoiding the question.

Not sure what's so hard in answering it instead of continuing to post things like this.

Again, read the post. Hell, you don't even have to read the entire post, just the last part of it. I answered both your questions, very directly. Not so sure whats so hard about reading the post. You quoted it, the least you can do is read it.