Who had the better cardio and chin in their prime, Nate Diaz or Tony Ferguson?

Discussion in 'MMA Forum' started by Ironfox222, Sep 17, 2022.



  1. Ironfox222

    Ironfox222 Member Full Member

    107
    18
    Feb 20, 2022
    who's the more durable fighter?
     
  2. f1ght3rz

    f1ght3rz Ronaldoooo is crying in his caaaaaar Full Member

    17,693
    21,258
    Jan 31, 2018
    lmfao

    Of course Nate Diaz.
     
  3. exocet76

    exocet76 Boxing Junkie Full Member

    10,893
    16,523
    Feb 28, 2012
    Tony got wobbled more but went on a great run winning so not that straight forward.
    Nate only got stopped by Thompson and Masvidal. Tony it was Chandler and Gaethje and yes Tony has had a bad recent run but both men were durable in their respective primes Tony was the better fighter due to his unconventional style and having that great run.
     
    Ph33rknot and Suspect.chin like this.
  4. exocet76

    exocet76 Boxing Junkie Full Member

    10,893
    16,523
    Feb 28, 2012
    Wrong....we are talking prime Tony wrecks Nate and I like both equally. Nate was never elite Tony was beating the rest of the division other than Khabib and that fight not happening is a thread in itself.
     
    Ph33rknot and Suspect.chin like this.
  5. f1ght3rz

    f1ght3rz Ronaldoooo is crying in his caaaaaar Full Member

    17,693
    21,258
    Jan 31, 2018
    lmfao prime Tony was always overrated as ****.
     
    mark ant and BEATDOWNZ like this.
  6. exocet76

    exocet76 Boxing Junkie Full Member

    10,893
    16,523
    Feb 28, 2012
    Yet still went on a 12 win fight streak against many notable names in a deep division.
    So again you are completely clueless.....
    Log off...
     
  7. TMLT87

    TMLT87 Active Member Full Member

    724
    683
    Feb 21, 2021
    Nate for both. Although I think Tony was the better overall fighter even if he was perhaps a little overrated due to people really wanting to believe he was the guy to beat Khabib.
     
  8. Rakesh

    Rakesh Active Member Full Member

    1,313
    1,848
    Jul 6, 2021
    Tony was the way better fighter but I'd lean Nate on chin, cardio can be debatable as Tony's pace was fantastic as well Nates
     
  9. Suspect.chin

    Suspect.chin Active Member Full Member

    619
    305
    Dec 3, 2017
  10. mark ant

    mark ant Canelo was never athletic Full Member

    36,654
    16,430
    May 4, 2017
    MMA wasn`t as evolved back then.
     
  11. mark ant

    mark ant Canelo was never athletic Full Member

    36,654
    16,430
    May 4, 2017
    Don`t know but both of them got caught flush way to often, that`s why Fergie got rocked so much, silly tactics.
     
  12. Francis75

    Francis75 FAB 4 Full Member

    14,101
    2,758
    Oct 1, 2007
    Prime 4 prime

    Tony > Diaz as a fighter and cardio.

    Chin is equal imo.
     
    UnleashtheFURY likes this.
  13. exocet76

    exocet76 Boxing Junkie Full Member

    10,893
    16,523
    Feb 28, 2012
    What has evolution have to do with gas tank and chin?
    I'll give you a clue it doesn't...
    Also you're talking as if they fought decades apart....they didn't
    Tony is a year older yet started 4 years later...
    So your whole post is complete nonsense and has been completely destroyed...
     
  14. mark ant

    mark ant Canelo was never athletic Full Member

    36,654
    16,430
    May 4, 2017
    I was attacking his 12 - win steak in world title fights
     
  15. exocet76

    exocet76 Boxing Junkie Full Member

    10,893
    16,523
    Feb 28, 2012
    Yeah but you are still wrong..
    Tony's run was pretty solid....very few have achieved the same....