i know on paper frank appears the better fighter but ken would win. hes too big, too strong and knows franks game inside out. ken tried many times to get this fight signed but frank wont have any of it. even despite the fact it would have made more money for him than all of his previous fights. As great hamza said ken used to kick franks ass in training. frank was genuinely in awe of ken back when ken was at his best.
I can kick the ass of a world Muay Thai champion every week, but she is a girl and only 5'2". The only thing Ken has over Frank is size. Frank won fights in K1, he was the king of Pancrase, and beat Tito Ortiz. Ken got smashed twice.
You said Ken is too big and strong for Frank. I'm pointing out that isn't really relevant. Thought you could put it together...
everything he LEARNED FROM KEN.. people are quick to point out the ortiz fight. frank won that fight thanks to his awesome cardio and a great rope a dope gameplan. but if you watch that fight tito was winning quite handily. now consider how that fight would have gone if tito knew EVERYTHING frank was capable of and what his gameplan would be. you think frank still springs that victory?? thats the case your looking at with frank vs ken. If they were two random guys that had just met off the street then yes i think in a one off fight frank wins. but they werent random guys off the street. its huge, athletic and freakishly strong trainer vs much smaller (albeit more skillful) trainee in this case.
agree ken was a pioneer of the sport but frank had a better skillset and all-around game. and frank won and defended the ufc belt a few significant times..
At their best - Frank beats the **** out of Ken, better submissions, faster, more agile, better striker, better athlete. Wrestling & size go to Ken... everything else goes to Frank.
