Objective P4P Ranking System!

[lunacyfrog]

Originally Posted by Zeicon

So if Torres spent his time beating up 4 foot midgets and Fedor had to deal with 8 foot giants, Torres would still get more points by mere virtue of being smaller than Fedor. You do realize how idiotic that is don't you? I don't care if that's the original boxing meaning or whatever, it's fucking stupid.

If Torres did nothing but beat up on midgets, no one would say he had the skill to be considered in a skill/weight discussion.

[lunacyfrog]

Originally Posted by mkess101

Going by your meaning (which there is obviously some historical precedent for) then I would say that yes, p4p can mean skill/weight.

The problem then becomes what definition is used to determine "skill". Torres and GSP might have faster hands than Fedor because physiologically smaller guys have the ability to acquire better handspeed. That would give them an edge in that "skill". But Fedor can generate more power with his punches on a psi level. Does that count as a "skill" in his favor?

No matter how much someone tries to be objective about these kind of debates (and let me say that I think you're actually doing a much better job than most people do) there's always a certain level of subjectiveness that enters in.

I agree.

The framework of my method was somewhat objective, but what goes into it is going to be subjective absolutely.

I say that the framework was objective because I had absolutely no idea going into it what the outcome would be.

[lunacyfrog]

Originally Posted by XgenTapOut

You're turning what was a decent attempt at an objective system into a moronic arguement and selfish defense of your opinon.

My opinion?

I merely defined the term and relied on the etymology of it for support.

I understand that people can use a word incorrectly and that eventually enough people using a word incorrectly will change its accepted meaning.

But I was pretty clear as to what I meant by P4P.

At least I thought so...

[lunacyfrog]

Originally Posted by Bcochran

I like how you claim that it is objective and then you include aspects that can't be measured objectively. Furthermore, I think the weighting is all wrong.

Did you read the first post?

Or just the title?

[dustinst22]

Originally Posted by lunacyfrog

No.

You missed it.

"Secondly, even the best heavyweights are not as skilled, as fast, as good as the smaller guys. There could never be a heavyweight Willie Pep, even on Pep's worst day."

I still don't see how deducting points, because of weight, is applicable to this discussion.

mkess101 said it nicely.

Let's assume GSP and Torres were completely equal skill wise and 'dominating" their respective weight classes. So you are going to give the edge to Torres because he is lighther? That wouldn't make sense.

The other thing to consider, is that the heavier fighter (as mkess101 pointed out) may be slower, but also can generate more power. Shouldn't that be considered as "skill" in his favor? Or in other words, how are you going to compare skill? Not only that, but different weight classes require different types of skill, which makes things even more difficult.

[dustinst22]

Originally Posted by mkess101

Going by your meaning (which there is obviously some historical precedent for) then I would say that yes, p4p can mean skill/weight.

The problem then becomes what definition is used to determine "skill". Torres and GSP might have faster hands than Fedor because physiologically smaller guys have the ability to acquire better handspeed. That would give them an edge in that "skill". But Fedor can generate more power with his punches on a psi level. Does that count as a "skill" in his favor?

No matter how much someone tries to be objective about these kind of debates (and let me say that I think you're actually doing a much better job than most people do) there's always a certain level of subjectiveness that enters in.

Great post. Nice to see some intelligence on this thread.

[dustinst22]

Originally Posted by XgenTapOut

You're turning what was a decent attempt at an objective system into a moronic arguement and selfish defense of your opinon.

This IS MMA not boxing. Boxers don't do anything except one-dimensional punch. MMA has moves that regardless of speed are difficult to counter (I. E. Submissions, Wrestling etc.)

You take a guy like Randleman who had massive power and speed in his prime and put him aganist top submission fighters in their prime like Nog and Fedor and he gets pwnt. MMA is not boxing and while the P4P argeument is conceptually similar, you're disingenuious trying to use that article to prove your point becuase Boxing is not MMA and you don't have a 235lbs HW KO'ing Super HWs in Boxing which is the equivelent of Fedor...

Yep, you hit the nail on the head.

Only the person who started this thread thinks otherwise.

[firefly4f4]

MMA-ELO P4P List

You want objective, that's objective.

I also think some people on this forum need to read this rant.

[XgenTapOut]

Originally Posted by firefly4f4

MMA-ELO P4P List

You want objective, that's objective.

I also think some people on this forum need to read this rant.

Amazing fucking article. I'm now an Evil "Fucking" Pooh fan... WAR Evil Pooh! Finaly someone who gets it!!!!

[MMAGuruLV]

Originally Posted by SeefourDC

Who the hell is Miguel Torres anyways?

If your division can't even make a card at one of the major fighting organizations you don't count.

If your division is more suited for women you don't count.

I could go on...

Your a retard who knows nothing about P4P





IMO