No, not the usual boring shit about which is better, but a throwback to our old discussions about ''dominance'' in each sports (and to be honest, also topat myelf a bit on the back). The general consensus was that MMA was far more unpredictable, thus harder to establish dominance and hold a long undefeated streak (I remember especially Sly claiming this, poor guy, seems like he's always on the wrong side of things). Even though it's far from a check mate, this seems to indicate it's far from the case Lewis KO's Blaydes in biggest upset in 5 years
I always maintained that MMA unpredictability had a lot more to do with the fewer weight classes and est fighting the best (though this seems to be less the case recently). If boxing was runned like this, you'd see a lot less dominant chamions and unbeaten records. Though, I must admit I don't really see the point you're trying to make with this article
If Lewis, a decent hw fighter with a megaton punch, beating Blaydes, a slightly above decent hw fighter with a proven crystal chin, is the biggest upset for a main event in the last 5 years (and even the next biggest one, Bisping beating Rockhold, wasn't that big of an upset imo), then it seems to me that the sport is quite predictable indeed (and yeah, I know that this unpredictability could be reflected in a ''narrower'' odds spread, wouldn't change my first point though). Far moreso than boxing in fact (whether that's good thing or a bad thing is for another discussio though).
I don't quite follow your point here either. If this was the most surprising result in UFC for a while, couldn't that also simply indicate that there are less mismatches in UFC. When the fighters are evenly matched beforehand, no result is a huge surprise, but it doesn't say anything about the nature of the sport. Also, I think there is a major difference in which level of fighters were are talking about. If you make a boxing match between 6-1 and 4-4 rookies, practically anything can happen. However, (legitimate) titles don't change hands all that often. I'd assume title reigns are, in general, shorter in the UFC but I don't have statistics to back it up
please move this topic to its appropriate location. lets not spam the main forum with cage talk fuckery.
In MMA if you get clocked with a kick or punch that sends you to the ground the opponent is going to immediately pounce on top and start wailing away. Even if your ground defense is good 9 times out 10 the fight is going to be stopped because of the unanswered blows and vulnerable position you're in. With boxing most often a fighter will get a chance to recover even if they were much more hurt from a shot than the MMA fighter was. Mistakes are much more costly and the more fights you're involved the more opportunities to make that one fatal error.
I think Blades was obviously the favorite to win. But to call it the biggest upset in the UFC in the last 5 years....who is saying that? First of all its the heavyweight division. These guys can knock each other out at any point with one punch. Second its the Black Beast never count a guy out with tnt on his fist. And third whats the question or point of this thread again?
