USA Today/SB Nation Rankings Cross Tables (July)
by Numbers on Jul 31, 2010 12:14 PM EDT
Email
PrintThe new USA Today/SB Nation rankings were posted on Thursday.
The traditional rankings layout provides a certain view into the data; Kid Nate's and Luke Thomas' timely analysis per weight class provides additional insight; the FightLines series of posts provide another look; and I wanted to contribute yet another view-at-a-glance.
This approach utilizes the "cross table" method of charting the top 25 in each weight class and their performances against each other. The graph is meant to be read "down then across" - for example, if you refer to the heavyweight table, look at Brock Lesnar on the left side...we can see at a glance that he is 1-0 vs. Shane Carwin, 1-1 vs. Frank Mir, 1-0 vs. Randy Couture, and hasn't fought anyone else currently ranked in the top 25.
The color/number scheme is fairly self explanatory but: green means the fighter has a winning record against his opponent; red is a losing record; yellow is an even record which can be something like 1-1, or only 1 fight which they drew, or only 1 fight which was a no contest.
While the images below are quite readable, they are easier to read when clicked to reveal fullsize.
The data was compiled manually so please let me know if you see any errors and I will correct.
If there is interest in these, my plan is to compile them every month shortly after BE's rankings are released.
Heavyweight - Click for Fullsize
Light Heavyweight - Click for Fullsize
Middleweight - Click for Fullsize
Welterweight - Click for Fullsize
Lightweight - Click for Fullsize
Featherweight - Click for Fullsize
Bantamweight - Click for Fullsize
The FanPosts are solely the subjective opinions of Bloody Elbow readers and do not necessarily reflect the views of Bloody Elbow editors or staff.
67 comments
|
21 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
awesome.
Forrest’s fighting the #1,3,4,5 of the division if fucking impressive.
I am. I think. I will. - Ayn Rand
Great work
Have loved all of your contributions over here. Keep it up.
I write about basketball players with Ridiculous Upside. I know you'll love it.
by Scott Schroeder on Jul 31, 2010 3:20 PM EDT reply actions
Excellent stuff
This needs to come out regularly
Awesome work. What’s interesting is to consider whether guys having a lot of wins on the lower left half of the graph (ie-over fighters ranked higher than them) is a function of rankings being very accurate in where they place fighters, or a function of certain fighters being inconsistent or under-rated.
Welterweight has very few green marks in that lower left half, where heavyweight is more of a toss-up. It also shows you how completely GSP has cleared out the welterweight divisions, all the fighters 2-6 (minus Nick Diaz) have faced him and have losing records against him. You can see visually what a shark tank LHW is, top fighters tend to fight each other, and the W-L records don’t play out exactly as the rankings would predict.
Lots of empty space in the top of the division at HW and LW, which I’d guess you would expect with a brand new champion in each.
Looking further, the HW rankings seem pretty out of whack further down the chart. Very much a “what have you done for me lately?” kind of thing.
Randy Couture has a clear split in win-loss records right around ranks 10/11 but he’s all the way down at 22…probably a combination of no longer being in the division and his age. Sylvia’s situation is similar, Couture’s the only fighter ranked lower than 16 he doesn’t have a winning record against (that he’s faced), but the freakshow fight against Pudz and his loss to Mercer probably killed his ranking.
On the other hand Gonzaga is still ranked 13th despite being 0-4 against the top 10 and having only one win against the top 25. Gatekeeper status is obvious, I guess.
Gegard Mousasi
Is 0-1 against the top 25 and ranked in the top ten.
When a true genius appears in the world, you may know him by this sign, that the dunces are in a confederacy against him. - Jonathan Swift
Contributor for WatchKalibRun.com
Still Subo at Fightlinker.com
by Derek Suboticki on Jul 31, 2010 4:31 PM EDT reply actions
He is 1-1
He destroyed Babalu Sobral in roughly one minute.
Also, keep in mind that for much of his career Mousasi was a middlweight and only recently made the move to light heavy. He has victories over several MW’s that were ranked in the top 25 when they fought – Manhoef, Jacare, Kang. He also holds victories over Mark Hunt and Bellator MW champ Hector Lombard. He’s 16-1 in his last 17 fights, with the loss being a decision to undefeated King Mo (and one of the best amateur wrestlers in the world) King Mo and nearly ALL stoppages during that run.
I think he’s ok in the top 10 at LHW :)
Found a small mistake
Sherk’s record against Florian reads 0-1 when it should be 1-0. Florian’s column is correct though, it reads 0-1 against Sherk.
He did destroy Babalu
Who is not in the top 25. He also beat Soko – another non-top 25 LHW. The only top 25 LHW he’s faced, he’s lost to (that’s also Mo’s only win against a top 25 guy – either one of them in the top ten is fucking absurd). It’s insanity. Even Nick Diaz being at 5 with a mere victory over Cung Le makes more sense, and that is ALSO fucking absurd insanity.
You have to do something in order to earn a top ten ranking, and Mousasi’s done nothing at 205 to justify it.
When a true genius appears in the world, you may know him by this sign, that the dunces are in a confederacy against him. - Jonathan Swift
Contributor for WatchKalibRun.com
Still Subo at Fightlinker.com
by Derek Suboticki on Jul 31, 2010 4:51 PM EDT up reply actions
Good to see Robbie Lawler’s inflated name value helping out another fighter.
When a true genius appears in the world, you may know him by this sign, that the dunces are in a confederacy against him. - Jonathan Swift
Contributor for WatchKalibRun.com
Still Subo at Fightlinker.com
by Derek Suboticki on Jul 31, 2010 4:55 PM EDT up reply actions
Hah
missed that one.
These are great, Numbers.
When a true genius appears in the world, you may know him by this sign, that the dunces are in a confederacy against him. - Jonathan Swift
Contributor for WatchKalibRun.com
Still Subo at Fightlinker.com
by Derek Suboticki on Jul 31, 2010 5:06 PM EDT up reply actions
Also, Kawajiri’s overrated nature is laid bare by these graphs. Good stuff.
When a true genius appears in the world, you may know him by this sign, that the dunces are in a confederacy against him. - Jonathan Swift
Contributor for WatchKalibRun.com
Still Subo at Fightlinker.com
by Derek Suboticki on Jul 31, 2010 4:53 PM EDT up reply actions
Also, Cung Le never fought Nick Diaz. Forgive me, but I’m skeptical how much you really know about these fighters.
It's the blurriness
I didn’t blow it up as I should have – Nick Diaz has one win over a top 25 welterweight (Chris Lytle) and is ranked #5. Complete insanity.
When a true genius appears in the world, you may know him by this sign, that the dunces are in a confederacy against him. - Jonathan Swift
Contributor for WatchKalibRun.com
Still Subo at Fightlinker.com
by Derek Suboticki on Jul 31, 2010 4:55 PM EDT up reply actions
But hey, he beat Zaromskis and Scott Smith, so that makes you #5, right?
When a true genius appears in the world, you may know him by this sign, that the dunces are in a confederacy against him. - Jonathan Swift
Contributor for WatchKalibRun.com
Still Subo at Fightlinker.com
by Derek Suboticki on Jul 31, 2010 5:06 PM EDT up reply actions
Diaz is in the right cluster. Just past the 9-10 spots, guys start to having LOSING records against the top 25. I do think it should look…
5. Kampmann
6. Hardy
7/8. Diaz
7/8. Thiago
Twitter: @Mike_Fagan_13
I’d put in in a tie with Hieron for 14th and give a top ten spot to whomever wins.
When a true genius appears in the world, you may know him by this sign, that the dunces are in a confederacy against him. - Jonathan Swift
Contributor for WatchKalibRun.com
Still Subo at Fightlinker.com
by Derek Suboticki on Jul 31, 2010 5:18 PM EDT up reply actions
Diaz is a bad dude
I don’t know if the precise ranking of 5 is right for Diaz but I don’t think it’s crazy at all that he’s highly ranked; but you’re correctly noticing that there are quirky things that jump out in a view of this kind. Look at Jacare for example (as someone else also just mentioned) – ranked # 11 and has never fought anyone currently in the top 25.
However, one thing to keep in mind with ALL these rankings is that word “currently”. Just because someone hasn’t beaten someone currently in the top 25 doesn’t mean they haven’t beaten a LOT of guys that were ranked when they beat them. Older veterans like Liddell, for example, Nogueira, Fedor – their accomplishments are more impressive than a view like this makes them appear, because this is only their record against fighters CURRENTLY ranked top 25.
Other folks suffer from a weight change. Rich Franklin isn’t currently ranked at MW per these rankings – rather at LHW – but his LHW accomplishments aren’t terribly impressive. However, if he were still at 185 I’d have him top-3 or at worst top-5 in the world. Wanderlei Silva is another one – he isn’t ranked at LHW, his longtime weight, on these rankings, but rather at 185. Well, his accomplishments there are a little then, but one shouldn’t look at that and conclude he is not a bad, bad, bad dude.
This view has a lot of benefits, I think, although it does have some shortcomings as I’ve enumerated. Among its main benefits are – it lets you see at a glance who has and hasn’t fought who and therefore what matchups make sense. For example, the fact that Koscheck and Fitch have refused to fight really jumps out at you when you look at the matchups at the top of 170 pounds. And there are other such things that really hit you when you view these tables. I think they are great for that purpose.
It’s not like Nick built a resume at some other weight class and is new to 170.
Rankings are of course a mixture of resume and “who beats who” matchmaking, but it has to be based primarily on accomplishments inside the cage to ring true to me, and Diaz at 5 is flat out bullshit.
When a true genius appears in the world, you may know him by this sign, that the dunces are in a confederacy against him. - Jonathan Swift
Contributor for WatchKalibRun.com
Still Subo at Fightlinker.com
by Derek Suboticki on Jul 31, 2010 5:15 PM EDT up reply actions
“Diaz at 5 is flat out bullshit.”
Like above, I don’t disagree that he’s ahead of a couple of guys he shouldn’t. But this sort of argument is really bad. “Fighter X at spot Y is bullshit.” You can’t really make that statement without offering the context, who he/she’s surrounded by, who deserves to be ahead (and why).
It was the same thing before Fedor lost. “He doesn’t deserve the spot as the number one heavyweight” without offering who SHOULD be and why they have a better case.
Twitter: @Mike_Fagan_13
Ok, fighter X (Diaz) at spot Y (5) is bullshit because he has one win over the 24th ranked welterweight and no other fights against anyone else currently in the top 25.
Better?
When a true genius appears in the world, you may know him by this sign, that the dunces are in a confederacy against him. - Jonathan Swift
Contributor for WatchKalibRun.com
Still Subo at Fightlinker.com
by Derek Suboticki on Jul 31, 2010 5:19 PM EDT up reply actions
Hardy, Kampmann, Thiago and Hughes – all have more impressive resumes against better competition.
Take Hughes for example – beating Matt Serra last year was, and is, more impressive than anything Nick has done since leaving the UFC.
When a true genius appears in the world, you may know him by this sign, that the dunces are in a confederacy against him. - Jonathan Swift
Contributor for WatchKalibRun.com
Still Subo at Fightlinker.com
by Derek Suboticki on Jul 31, 2010 5:23 PM EDT up reply actions
On the face of it, I rank Nick higher than Matt, but let’s walk through it.
Nick’s record over the past three years (I believe all his EXC fights were at the weird 160 LW?):
W – Aina @ 160
L – Noons @ 160
W – Inoue @ “WW” in Japan
W – Corbbrey @ 160
W – Denny @ 160
W – F. Shamrock @ 179
W – Scott Smith @ 180
W – Zaromskis @ 170
W – “Mach” Sakurai @ “WW” in Japan
Hughes
W – Lytle
L – St-Pierre
L – Alves @ 174
W – Serra
W – R. Gracie
To me, I think a lot of it is how you factor in fights at other weights. Even if we just go by wins at 170, Lytle/Serra/Renzo isn’t that much better than Zaromskis/Sakurai that putting Diaz > Hughes is real bad. When you combine that Diaz has been more the more active fighter, has a better overall record…I mean, it’s not egregious. To me, anyway.
Twitter: @Mike_Fagan_13
I think Lytle/Serra/Renzo is infinitely more impressive than Zaromskis and Fat Sakurai. I’d pick Lytle and Serra to beat both of them.
When a true genius appears in the world, you may know him by this sign, that the dunces are in a confederacy against him. - Jonathan Swift
Contributor for WatchKalibRun.com
Still Subo at Fightlinker.com
by Derek Suboticki on Jul 31, 2010 5:42 PM EDT up reply actions
You gotta show me you’re a top ten guy, and you do that by beating top ten guys.
When a true genius appears in the world, you may know him by this sign, that the dunces are in a confederacy against him. - Jonathan Swift
Contributor for WatchKalibRun.com
Still Subo at Fightlinker.com
by Derek Suboticki on Jul 31, 2010 6:07 PM EDT up reply actions
URIJAH NUMBER 4 AND HE'S 1-3 AGAINST THE TOP 25
WAAAAHHHHH
a kitten dies every time you compare an individual sport to a team sport.
by Marvin Malehooves on Jul 31, 2010 5:59 PM EDT up reply actions
Faber is 2-3 againts the Top 25...
And his only losses have come to those ranked above him. The fact that he fights the best in the world will always put him at risk and should be seen as a boost to his ranking IMO, not a detriment.
Excellent Stuff
I could look at these all day.
Yo, I'm smokin herbals till it hurts you
I keep your daughter way out past her curfew
Numbers, at first I thought this was stupid, but then I saw the value. I used to do something similar in the earlier iterations of FightLines behind the scenes, as well. Combined with FL and the Metas, I like it a lot.
Twitter: @Mike_Fagan_13
I’m thinking all-time – it includes Randy’s “loss” to a roided out Barnett
When a true genius appears in the world, you may know him by this sign, that the dunces are in a confederacy against him. - Jonathan Swift
Contributor for WatchKalibRun.com
Still Subo at Fightlinker.com
by Derek Suboticki on Jul 31, 2010 5:22 PM EDT up reply actions
Thanks....I think :)
I was worried when I read you thought it was stupid, but glad that you stayed with it :) Like I say above, the view has some shortcomings – no view of rankings and relative performance is absolutely perfect – but I think it’s very solid and has a lot of advantages that other views don’t. I think it has advantages over FL just as I think FL has advantages over it.
And to answer your Q, it’s all-time. I have considered maybe making a second one each month that is only recent times – say, last three years. The only think I’d struggle with is what time period is appropriate. Three years? Five?
As Derek points out, the Barnett vs. Couture fight is here, the Tito vs. Janitor fight is here, Tito vs. Wanderlei is here…it’s all time.
I use the last three years for FL. The unfortunate par of MMA is that guys just don’t fight often enough to make a useful number of data points.
Twitter: @Mike_Fagan_13
Ah, I gotcha
Three years does make sense.
On the other hand, it’s really strange to think that in tables such as these, using three years means that EVERY ONE of the great battles in PRIDE would not appear.
I can just hear now the hue & cry for those who believe, for example, that Fedor is over-rated – if I limit these tables to just three years, his wins over Cro Cop and Nogueira vanish, so that it appears he has only a few wins against the top 25 and is 0-1 against the top 10.
I think three years is just the intuitive (and correct) timeframe to use. If you go back five years, you just barely pick up Fedor’s Cro Cop fight. But you also get Ortiz/Shamrock II and III. I’m not sure any fight from five years ago is relevant in terms of rankings now.
Twitter: @Mike_Fagan_13
but
isn’t that sorta like shaping the stats a bit to fit your opinion? I agree with mike here, 3 years would be the best time frame. What happened 5-6+ years ago isn’t relevant to the rankings today.
He beat Nog twice, around 6 and 7 years ago. (I didn’t realize it’s been that long, until I checked again)
but I hope you don’t get me wrong, cause I really love this post (well like majority of your posts).
by Anton Tabuena on Jul 31, 2010 10:49 PM EDT up reply actions
Important point made above
“Diaz is in the right cluster. Just past the 9-10 spots, guys start to having LOSING records against the top 25.”
This is an important point rightly brought to light. When you understand the nature of the diagonal gray line, then you realize that in general, if there are far more red boxes/losing records to the LEFT side of the line,and far for green boxes/winning records to the RIGHT side of the line, then it means fighters are in general appropriately ranked.
In putting together all 7 charts, I was actually quite impressed with how appropriately most fighters seem slotted in from that perspective. There are small quibbles to be made of course, but in general I don’t see anyone that is truly egregious, to use Mike’s fitting word. To me the thing that really stands out most prominently, big-picture view, in all 7 tables is that in general all fighters on them are relatively appropriately situated relative to the others.
Curse the typos
I meant to say, obviously, “far more” green boxes … fortunately, I proofread FanPosts much more diligently than I do my responses to them ;-)
What's interesting to me
Is the WW division. In every chart, the bottom left has more red than the top right. It makes sense, because worse fighters lose to better fighters.
But if you look at WW, the red and green are almost entirely separated. It’s by far the most stratified division. the guy with the better ranking is the guy who won the fight, almost certainly.
Jeremiah Johnson, Cageside Seats
Follow me @J_JohnsonMMA
by Jeremiah Johnson. on Jul 31, 2010 5:41 PM EDT reply actions
a lot of that is because the WW division has
been a UFC fiefdom longer than any other division so pretty much every has gotten to mix it up.
Follow me on Twitter @KidNate
And that just doesn’t suck even a little bit.
When a true genius appears in the world, you may know him by this sign, that the dunces are in a confederacy against him. - Jonathan Swift
Contributor for WatchKalibRun.com
Still Subo at Fightlinker.com
by Derek Suboticki on Jul 31, 2010 11:15 PM EDT up reply actions
Awesome
Thanks for doing this. It’s a lot of fun to review. Noticed a few mistakes. First, Henderson-Wanderlei are tied 1-1 but is marked red. Second, Faber beat B. Fernandez but it shows up blank.
Great job!
Funny
Hamill is always going to be known as the only guy who ever beat Jones.
Obviously, our understanding of the big bang and related cosmology is incomplete; therefore, we must pray to the water-walking zombie or burn in a pit of fire.
Jesus
Jones is vewy, vewy young and really hasn’t beaten anyone yet.
When a true genius appears in the world, you may know him by this sign, that the dunces are in a confederacy against him. - Jonathan Swift
Contributor for WatchKalibRun.com
Still Subo at Fightlinker.com
by Derek Suboticki on Jul 31, 2010 9:57 PM EDT up reply actions
So was Bill Russell when he first got to the NBA
And then he won 11 championships in 13 seasons. Jones is going to be the Bill Russell of MMA.
Remember when we were breaking up and I told you I hoped that thing on your leg turned out to be cancer? That was just the wounded little boy in me talking.
Jones is special
but keep dreaming kid, nobody goes undefeated in this sport.
But, who cares about little things, wrestling is wrestling, right? Wrong. And Hendo found out the hard way. - kyfm621
by MrTechnique420 on Aug 1, 2010 12:55 AM EDT up reply actions
Who said undefeated?
He already has a loss.
Remember when we were breaking up and I told you I hoped that thing on your leg turned out to be cancer? That was just the wounded little boy in me talking.
if Jones wins 11 championships,
that means he’ll have around 10 losses.
by Anton Tabuena on Aug 1, 2010 6:41 AM EDT up reply actions
These are great in letting you realise how many new challengers are still left out there for the current champions.
Good stuff.
Not that I condone facism or any ism for that matter. Isms are in my opinion, not good. A person shouldn't believe in an ism, he should believe in himself.
I quote John Lennon, "I don't believe in Beatles, I just believe in me". Good point there, after all he was the walrus. I could be the walrus. Wouldn't change the fact I have to bum rides off of people.
One suggestions...
What if you added another column to the far right that showed us each of the fighter’s complete win-loss totals for the top 25? They could also be green, red, or yellow depending on whether it was a winning overall record or not.
This is something I thought about too. It might be an assload of work, though.
Twitter: @Mike_Fagan_13
I caught one more mistake
Joachim Hansen has a win over Cavalcante but it doesn’t show up as a loss on Cavalcante’s square.
Thanks, got it...
In total I had roughly a 0.5% error rate…not bad, but I’ll figure out what caused that and be better for next time ;-)
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
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.
