Bloody Elbow July MMA Meta-Rankings: Heavyweight
| Fighter | Points | Promotion | Last Rank |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Fedor Emelianenko | 475 | Affliction | 1 |
| 2. Antonio Rodrigo Noguiera | 455 | UFC | 2 |
| 3. Randy Couture | 428 | *** | 3 |
| 4. Andrei Arlovski | 404 | Affliction | 6 |
| 5. Josh Barnett | 398 | Affliction/WVR | 4 |
| 6. Fabricio Werdum | 376 | UFC | 7 |
| 7. Tim Sylvia | 372 | Affliction/Adrenaline | 5 |
| 8. Gabriel Gonzaga | 320 | UFC | 8 |
| 9. Mirko Filipovic | 307 | DREAM | 9 |
| 10. Ben Rothwell | 207 | Affliction/Adrenaline | 10 |
| 11. Aleksander Emelianenko | 190 | Affliction | 11 |
| 12. Heath Herring | 134 | UFC | 12 |
| 13. Alistair Overeem | 132 | DREAM/Strikeforce | NR |
| 14. Cheick Kongo | 130 | UFC | 14 |
| 15. Frank Mir | 127 | UFC | 13 |
| 16. Sergei Kharitonov | 114 | ??? | NR |
| 17. Roy Nelson | 95 | IFL(?) | NR |
| 18. Cain Velasquez | 89 | UFC | NR |
| 19. Jake O'Brien | 79 | UFC | 16 |
| 20. Pedro Rizzo | 78 | Affliction | NR |
| 21. Antonio Silva | 75 | EliteXC | NR |
| 22. Jeff Monson | 71 | WVR | NR |
| 23. Mark Hunt | 67 | DREAM | NR |
| 24. Travis Wiuff | 62 | YAMMA | NR |
| 25. Marcio Cruz | 60 | WVR | NR |
| 25. Chris Tuchscherer | 60 | YAMMA | NR |
Alright, here's the first installment of the July MMA Meta-Rankings. As I've said before, we believe the Bloody Elbow Meta-Rankings are the most informative system out there if you want to know who's highly regarded by the MMA community.
I've made some major adjustments this month. Thanks to the brain trust at Fight Matrix, I was able to include top 25 rankings instead of just top 10 lists. I think this gives a better perspective of how the MMA community evaluates fighters.
The biggest movement this month came from the Affliction event. Arlovski jumped several slots based on his impressive performance over Rothwell. Sylvia's fetal position loss to Fedor drops him a couple of slots. Alistair Overeem's win over Mark Hunt at the last DREAM event, combined with his demolition of Paul Buentello at Strikeforce a while back has the Dutchman cruising up the charts. I hope we'll get to see Alistair against some more top competition soon.
I expect a win by Antonio Silva over Justin Eilers for the EliteXC belt will cause him to shoot several slots higher. Nothing moves a fighter up the rankings like exposure. Ask Cain Velasquez. Dude's on the fast track after his beat down of Jake O'Brien on the free Spike TV UFN last week.
More on the methodology in the full entry.
Based on the premise that opinions are like assholes, everybody has one and they all stink. instead of putting up our own subjective fighter rankings, we compile and average the rankings of every source we could find online.
The goal is to show how the MMA community rates the fighters, not to bore you with our opinions.
Be sure and look at the points, they're a much more telling number than the ranking. There's clearly a huge gulf between the top 9 fighters and those that follow.
A total of 42 fighters were ranked in the top 25 by one source or another, for reasons of sanity I only track the top 25 (26 due to a tie) most highly rated fighters.
25 points are awarded for a first place ranking, 16 for a 10th place ranking, 1 for a 25th place ranking. A formula is used to "normalize" the data so all fighters are awarded points from those lists that do not include a full 25 fighters. Fuller explanation below.
Rankings were compiled from the following sites: TAGG Radio, MMA News, Sherdog, Cage Potato, MMA On Tap, Five Ounces of Pain, Houston Chronicle's Brawl Sports, WAMMA, MMA Fighting, MMA-ELO, FCFighter, 411 Mania, MMA Madness, FightMatrix, MMA Playground, HDNet/Inside MMA, MMAVT (Japan), and Total MMA. Figure 4 Online hadn't updated their rankings for July.
The normalization scheme as explained by JCS of FightMatrix is here:
The “normalization number” (new name) would be:
120
divided by
(Total Fighters Found in Any List minus 10)Every fighter found somewhere else, but on a Top 10 list would be assigned this number.
The “normalization” number would not apply to a fighter not found on a Top 25 list. They would simply get 0.
So the process would be:
Do all of the Top 25 lists first, #1 = 25, #2 = 24…. #24 = 2, #25 = 1
Do all of the Top 10 lists, same scoring structure.. stops at #10 = 16Figure out that normalization variable.
Fill in the normalization variable to all fighters not found in the Top 10 lists, but found elsewhere.
Do your totals and rank.
1 recs |
18 comments
Comments
So...
technically the UFC has 4 of the top 10 Heavyweights. Nog.. Werdum..Gonzaga.. and Couture even he though he’s not fighting anymore.
by asmiley420 on Jul 26, 2008 12:21 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Looks..
like the UFC could have a good future ahead in their heavyweight division.
by asmiley420 on Jul 26, 2008 12:25 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Tuchscherer and YAMMA… oh the memories. =)
![]()
by Nick Thomas on Jul 26, 2008 1:37 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
You're missing one...
Where’s Brock Lesnar?
by lucas_x on Jul 26, 2008 5:15 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Not a single source
ranks Lesnar in the top 25. If he beats Herring convincingly I expect that to change but he’s got a ways to go to make the top 10. Due to his proven drawing power though I expect he’ll be on a fast track to a title shot if he can string together even a few wins. Noguiera would seem to have the perfect style to beat Lesnar however.
by Kid Nate on Jul 26, 2008 2:46 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Top 25 according to a linear system that privileges more recent fights
1. F. Emilianenko
2. Nogueira
3. Couture
4. Sylvia
5. Arlovski
6. Werdum
7. Gonzaga
8. Velasquez
9. O’Brien
10. Herring
11. Kongo
12. CroCop
13. Barnett
14. A. Emilianenko
15. Kharitanov
16. Overeem
17. Rizzo
18. Monson
19. Vera
20. Mir
21. Hunt
22. Rothwell
24. Nelson
25. A. Silva
by klown on Jul 26, 2008 5:51 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
These are my favourite set of rankings out there. I can’t argue with the method you got to get them or the results.
by SamCupitt on Jul 26, 2008 6:47 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Very nicely done…my only gripe is Couture at #3…I have him at #5. Barnett at #3 and AA at #4.
http://tharealness.wordpress.com/
by Tha Realness on Jul 26, 2008 8:38 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
as long as Fedor is #1 on everybody’s list then the world is right.
by Rob Dib on Jul 26, 2008 10:03 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Barnett's high rankings
I strongly object to Barnett’s high rankings and I know that argument alone won’t be persuade anyone to rank him lower. So I’d like to see him fight anyone who is ranked above him (according to my list).
Since Arlovski is fighting for the title, I hope Barnett gets matched up with Sylvia. If Barnett wins, he jumps to #4 on my list and I drop my objection. If he loses, no change to the rankings, and hopefully people stop taking him up as a Top 5er.
by klown on Jul 26, 2008 10:15 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
don't blame me
The Meta-rankings merely calculate the conventional wisdom of the collective MMA community rather than anyone’s personal opinion. Barnett has been winning against decent competition and most are willing to overlook his 3 losses to Cro Cop. I’d like to see him against Rothwell next or maybe Ben Nelson depending on who Affliction or WVR can sign. I expect we won’t see him in affliction again until/unless he fights Fedor due to their need to cut costs.
by Kid Nate on Jul 26, 2008 2:49 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
What’s your reasoning for not having him as a top 5’er?
http://tharealness.wordpress.com/
by Tha Realness on Jul 26, 2008 11:17 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
To be a Top 5er, beat a Top 5er
1. Barnett’s fight with Couture doesn’t count – it was 6 years ago, plus Barnett tested positive for steroids.
2. The best argument for Barnett’s high ranking is the fact that he is 1-1 with Nogueira. In such cases, you look at who won the more recent fight (Nog) who won more decisively (Nog) and other opponents they have faced in common (CroCop). Nog beat CroCop, so he must be ranked above CroCop and Barnett. Barnett lost (at least twice) to CroCop, so he must be ranked below Nogueira and CroCop.
3. CroCop beat Barnett decisively on more than one occasion, so Barnett must be ranked below him. CroCop has lost to Gonzaga and Kongo (who lost to Herring who lost to O’Brien who lost to Velasquez) so he must be ranked below ALL of the names listed above. This knocks Barnett well out of the Top 10, much less the Top 5.
4. All of Barnett’s recent victories, besides Nog, are against opponents who are appropriately ranked below him: Rizzo, Monson, Hunt, A.Emilianenko. Beating opponents who are lower ranked does not improve your rankings, no matter how many you beat.
5. To be a Top 5er, it doesn’t matter how cool you seem, how well-rounded we think you are, how many fights you have on your record, or how many lesser-ranked opponents you have beaten. All that matters is that you beat one or more Top 5ers in the last few years. Barnett has the opportunity, with Affliction, to face some of weight class’s top fighters: F.Emilianenko, Sylvia and Arlovski. Since Arlovski is rightly the #1 contender, it makes perfect sense to have Barnett fight Sylvia. If Barnett wins, he will have certainly earned his place in the Top 5.
by klown on Jul 26, 2008 11:45 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
you're using MMAth
Its fine to rank guys beneath fighters they’ve lost to, but ranking them beneath fighters who have beaten fighters they’ve lost to breaks down. You should check out Mike Fagen’s fightlines, they’ll show you how often circular loops of fighter a > fighter b > fighter c > fighter a occur.
by Kid Nate on Jul 26, 2008 2:50 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
having said that
your list is decent although i think you’re getting yourself into a pickle with the barnett/cro cop thinking.
by Kid Nate on Jul 26, 2008 2:51 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Hopefully I can have a FightLines graph up tomorrow. Maybe late tonight if I work on it while watching CBS.
Good stuff, Nate. Definitely one of my favorite things on the site.
by Mike Fagan on Jul 26, 2008 3:01 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Fightlines
I love Fightlines and I think they are an excellent tool for ranking, although I realize the creator explicitly dissociates himself from the notion. I propose a way to “break the loop” in cases of a 1-1 record against an opponent or a case of A>B>C>A:
1. more recent fights are privileged over earlier fights
2. relative decisiveness of victories
3. respective records against mutual oponnents
Kid and Mike, what do you guys think of these factors as determinants to “break the loop”?
by klown on Jul 27, 2008 8:43 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

by 

















