Oleg Taktarov Better Than Chuck Liddell?
by Kid Nate on Dec 9, 2008 1:01 PM EST
in MMA News
Email
Print
As I slog away compiling the November meta-rankings, I came across something I just had to share from FIGHT! Magazine's light heavyweight rankings.
I'm not trying to mock them, its very hard to put together a computer model to do accurate rankings, but check out #19 and #20. Seems like a human being should have caught that one.
This is why I have a hard time taking rankings seriously as anything more than good clean fun.
79 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Are you guys drunk?
Have you watched Chuck Liddell or Oleg Taktarov fight recently? Chuck would get taken down and beaten to a pulp like the joke of a fighter he is.
Well look at Matt Hamill, he is above Chuck Liddell. Sorry, but Matt Hamill has not even came close to touching what Chuck Liddell has done. Matt Hamill lost to Rich Franklin, Chuck Liddell lost to Rashad Evans. Chuck Liddell is getting a big named fight possibly as a co-main event on a PPV, Matt Hamill is fighting on the undercard of UFC 92. Pretty laughable.
Yeah
it’s ridiculous if you’re a Tito hater,because of all the questionable rankings on this list that’s the one you pick out.Just remember that the big light heavyweight title fight coming up at UFC 92 neither of those guys beat Tito.
I actually like Tito,
but ranking him at 9 is crazy when the guy at 20 beat him decisively twice. Now neither one of them has done much since that fight to raise their stakes
The entire list is ridiculous
, but Tito that far ahead of Chuck really stands out when they are the most prominent names on the list & the majority of the comments on this list are already about Chuck.
Chuck did beat Wand's ass since then,
& how exactly is Wand so far up considering his most recent fights?
What fight did you watch
“Beat Wand’s ass”? are you serious? Watch the fight again. That was a razor thin decision in my opinion.
by Nick Travaglini on Dec 9, 2008 2:56 PM EST up reply actions
I will have to agree to disagree
with you. I scored that pretty damn close. RD1 could have gone either way and I score rd 2 for Wand. Round 3 was definitely Chuck’s. I don’t have a problem with Chuck winning, but if they scored it for Wand I wouldn’t have had a problem with it either.
by Nick Travaglini on Dec 9, 2008 3:02 PM EST up reply actions
It was not a blowout perse,
but Wand did not win any round of that fight. I have always been a Wand fan, but he really never got off in that fight.
To each his own
You say tomato, I say tomato. Wait, that works much better when you say it outloud. Whatever you get the point.
by Nick Travaglini on Dec 9, 2008 3:08 PM EST up reply actions
He got two clear knockdowns in the 2nd round…how is that not decisive enough for you to give him the 2nd round?
Granted he didn’t do much off of them, but based on any scoring I’ve EVER seen in the UFC that’s easily a 10-9 round, maybe 10-8. Even if it was a “close enough to give Chuck”, you had to give at least 10-9 for the knockdowns.
This
is just another example of why ratings are useless Taktarov higher than Liddell.I’m not even going to get into Steve Cantwell at #11. Ratings are really a waste of time they usually end up with people arguing anyway.
Rampage at 8
Is almost as bad. The person who made this system obviously didn’t spend much time on it.
One more thing.
With such a ludicrous oversight, I petition that they be ousted from the lists. Although it does make our system look a lot better.
I second that. Any rankings that is clearly erroneous, ridiculous, and downright stupid should not be included in the Bloody Elbow Meta-rankings, which have become the most definitive form of rankings on the net, in my opinion. I love FIGHT! Magazine and think they are the best printed MMA publication out there, but even their rankings system boggles my mind.
every list is prone to the occasional stupid think — MMA Weekly for example kept overrating Gomi and Kang long long long after it was obvious and yet they’re one of the most influential and popular ranking sites out there.
I personally regret dumping MMA Ratings and consider adding them back in every month.
For the most part Fighter — which is NOT FIGHT! magazine — has decent ratings, that and a fairly significant readership tells me that people pay attention to their rankings.
These things average out, that’s the beauty of the meta-rankings system.
But yes, it does make FightMatrix look even better.
Nate..
This is way, way worse than overrating Gomi and Kang though Nate. Gomi had a right to be so high, and Kang reeled off some good wins too. Taktarov has no place in a Top 100 at this point, and that’s just the half of it.
yeah its stupid but you should see MMA/VT’s rankings.
MMA ELO has had some boners too — they’re constantly putting people in the wrong divisions.
The meta-rankings don’t claim to be the average of the intelligent ranking systems. That’s a subjective judgement, I’m trying to keep this objective.
Just the facts ma’am.
The meta-rankings don’t claim to be the average of the intelligent rankings systems. That sounds like a subjective judgment but when everyone within the industry – fans, promoters, and fighters alike – agree that certain rankings are nonsensical, it becomes the standard thought of a community as opposed to a subjective judgment.
I think what you’ve done with the meta-rankings is absolutely amazing and each month they are consistently the best rankings in existance. I just think weeding out some of these nonsense system would improve it even more.
They might average out based on the sheer amount of rankings involved, but putting in ridiculous rankings systems taints the overall process. Even if a small difference in points places one fighter a spot above or below where he would’ve been, it’s tainted.
Again, I love FIGHT! as a whole but their rankings system doesn’t make sense. They try to push it off as though they are taking fighter “name value” out of it, which biases a lot of rankings. Their goal is commendable but the remedy they have invented simply doesn’t work. I don’t even know where to start with the problems.
the goal of the meta-rankings to reflect the consensus of the online mma community.
I hate to break it to you, but utter fucking idiots are a BIG ASS chunk of that population.
by Kid Nate on Dec 9, 2008 2:37 PM EST up reply actions 2 recs
Its clear
That their system has a problem with extremes (long inactivity, overrating win streaks, etc).
I’ll agree with you though, I guess keep them in. Some of their rankings don’t seem TOO bad.
Wow. Where to even begin.
Apparently GSP is only the #6 WW — behind both Carlos Condit and Jake Shields, not to mention a Jon Fitch that GSP absolutely beat up for 5 rounds.
Jason MacDonald is the #4 MW.
Oh and BJ — yeah, he’s not even ranked in any of the available weight classes, apparently.
That’s … amazing?
I almost went ape shit...
then i realized the rankings have not been updated in 3 months
Being on the internet gives me a right...nay a responsibility to bitch about things
Think back three months, to where everyone stood… They weren’t much better THEN.
"I'm AJB and I endorse this nut-puncher."
by AJB on Dec 9, 2008 3:42 PM EST up reply actions
Nooooooooo!
Nate, keeping these guys in is fine; while some of us may think the rankings are wonky, they could at least make a legitimate argument that it’s based on an impartial “system”. MMA Ratings, though… there was like a general revolt against their rankings because they were just… stupid. With no rationale other than “THIS GUY IS OVERRATED! I KNOW BECAUSE I’M SMARTER!” Don’t add them back. Please.
"I'm AJB and I endorse this nut-puncher."
by AJB on Dec 9, 2008 2:59 PM EST up reply actions
I'm not
I took another look. But I did slander MMA Ratings — a perfectly unobjectionable ranking site. Its MMA Ranks that sucks.
I got it wrong too, but I knew which one you meant. I still remember the “wait, GSP is WHERE?” discussion from a few months back.
"I'm AJB and I endorse this nut-puncher."
by AJB on Dec 9, 2008 3:41 PM EST up reply actions
This is clearly ridiculous. Oleg Taktarov is now and always will be #1. Oleg by Kneebar is the new Rickson by Armbar.
God Damnit
You beat me to that joke.
"I'm a man who discovered the wheel and built the Eiffel Tower out of metal and brawn. That's what kind of man I am." - Ron Burgundy
by monkeyfightclub! on Dec 9, 2008 2:03 PM EST up reply actions
Maybe the guy who came up with this list was married to the woman Chuck allegedly fondled.
"I'm a man who discovered the wheel and built the Eiffel Tower out of metal and brawn. That's what kind of man I am." - Ron Burgundy
by monkeyfightclub! on Dec 9, 2008 2:07 PM EST reply actions
I can’t rule that out until I see who is ranked #1.
"I'm a man who discovered the wheel and built the Eiffel Tower out of metal and brawn. That's what kind of man I am." - Ron Burgundy
by monkeyfightclub! on Dec 9, 2008 2:15 PM EST up reply actions
They also rank Chael Sonnen as the #4 Middleweight in the world and Mike Swick as the #3 Welterweight in the world.
How are their rankings compiled?
As you said, it’s difficult to come up with an algorithm to rank fighters accurately. I can give them some leeway if they’re attempting to develop an entirely objective, algorithm based method. One might argue that a human should intervene and switch obvious errors, but I personally would rather see what the system comes up with. It might not be possible to form a completely objective ranking system, but it’s interesting to see what the attempts come up with (I’m not saying theirs was—I don’t know how they did it). It’s not as if their accuracy is particularly important anyway.
by Patrick McCauley on Dec 9, 2008 2:56 PM EST reply actions
I don’t know that they’ve posted their complete methodology but their goal was an objective system that would take fighter reputation and hype out of the process.
I understand that this methodology is
not public, but this must be somewhat based on past accomplishments? Otherwise, how could Tito & Oleg be that high?
I view it like the power rankings from fightlines. They might not come up with an entirely reasonable result, but the objectivity of the results are interesting nonetheless. However, it’s a bit difficult to assess if their methodology is unclear or not public.
by Patrick McCauley on Dec 9, 2008 3:02 PM EST up reply actions
Vladimir’s nickname is #1 in my powe rankings.
Yeah, who got the final Death Blow? 'Cause I thought that Hawaiian guy had it comin' to him. - C. K.
by monkeyfightclub! on Dec 9, 2008 4:38 PM EST up reply actions
This thread needs a picture to sum things up
Certain MMA Rankings ’Nuff said.
by Sokonojudo on Dec 9, 2008 4:29 PM EST reply actions 1 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Bloody Elbow
Related FanShots on Bloody Elbow
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
MMA Rankings
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
