why not? he was champ in two big leagues: UFC and Pancrase He beat just about everyone you could beat in old school pancrase and he helped mma's reputation through announcing with the baddass-ness only he could do it with
Mark Coleman not getting any love. Absolutely unstoppable in MMA until they changed the rules due to his dominance. Winner of 2 UFC Tournaments, The first ever UFC Heavyweight Champion, UFC Ultimate Ultimate Champion... and first ever Pride Grand Prix Champion. Came into the sport late, having already been in his 30's and so his staying power took a hit. However, even after he turned 40 years old he beat the 2005 fighter of the year in Shogun. Also, he introduced the Ground -n- Pound into MMA.
You can't look at things that way. That is like saying that Ken Norton should be at the top of the all time list because he beat Ali. McCall and Rahman should because they beat Lewis... doesn't work that way. Matt Hughes is at the end of his rope, and had beat GSP when he was a few years younger and closer to his prime. Hughes is on the list based on his own accomplishments throughout his long career. GSP is going to have to pave out his own path, and he is doing a great job so far. However, he isn't there yet.
I love Bas... but c'mon... Pancrase only allowed open hand strikes, and submission attempts had to be broken once the other fighter made it to the ropes. It was more of a professional wrestling rules type of fight.. so that can be thrown out for the most part. Also, he normally split wins with the best guys in Pancrase, he didn't dominate them. Ken Shamrock beat him both times that they faced in pancrase... and as I said... Pancrase was just too much different than real MMA so it can only be used to a limited extent to explain a fighters worth in modern MMA. In his few actual MMA fights, he looked very good against TK, but got a gift decision against Randleman. Everyone in their right mind knows that Randleman beat Rutten. That was about it other than his return fight. I love Bas. Bad ass fighter, great commentator.... but he doesn't deserve to be in the top ten list.
:think Mark Kerr didn't even enter MMA until Mark Coleman had already won UFC 10 and 11 tournaments and made the GnP extremely popular. Maybe it's time for you to do your research before you go spewing off at the mouth about something that you don't know.:yep
We're goin to have to agree to disagree then here because yes pancrase did have some diffrent rules but so does nearly every other promotion back before the unified rules became popular. if you want to throw out someones wins just because of diffrent rules then i guess most pride fighters would lose their wins because they had different rules and no big org still uses them. or atleast throw out all the wins they had using kicks to the head on the ground, stomps, and knees on the grounds. and yes bas did split wins with frank but if you look at my list i got frank only a couple behind bas. and i would have ken up there but he did too many dumb things in his later career that pretty much ruined his resume.
Geez your so highly strung. Be easy man dam. So while Coleman was doing it in the UFC Kerr was doing it in Vale Tudo tournys just under a year later. Both too boot were relatively uknown with Vale Tudo tournys being way more popular in Brazil since the 80`s.:roll:
That is fair, we can agree to disagree. I think that we are making more out of this than needed. Bas Rutten is one of the best Pancrase fighters of all time. There is nothing wrong with that. If we are making a greatest Pancrase fighters of all time list, then he should be right at or near the top. However, we shouldn't throw pancrase in there with a traditional MMA all time list. We may as well start putting Olympic wrestlers in it.
I am not high strung. When you make comments towards me about getting another man's dick out of my mouth, then you are going to get a response back like that. Coleman had won two UFC tournaments before Kerr entered MMA, and the GnP was made extremely popular by Coleman at that point... yet you argue that Kerr brought the GnP? Makes no sense. You have a problem with being wrong. You also have a problem with turning conversations personal by adding comments like you did.
O for ****s sake Widdow chill man dam. How long you been on this forum? Geez man get laid or something. This isnt about right wrong its called a diffrence of opinion. I said something in jest as for years you`ve been riding Colemans jock into the sunset..:tong
It's nothing like the Norton Ali comparison, and definitely not the Lewis Rahman/McCall comparison. I made a point to state that GSP has already beaten a whos who and has one of the best WW resumes in the sport, if not the best. Watching their 3 fights, it is clear that GSP is the better fighter, he is better in every aspect. Even watching the first fight, you come away with the feeling that if they fought again GSP would win because he just appeared to be superior, only he made dumb dumb beginner mistake. Hughes has the deeper resume, he has proved that he can become Champ and stay champ. Hell GSP doesn't even have a successful title defense, I know that. But looking at the caliber of opponents they both beat and the manner in which they beat them. It isn't out of the question to put them on the same level. That is why the Norton Ali and Lewis Rahman/McCall comparisons are horse ****.
You made your point. GSP has yet to have a successful title defense. He simply cannot be in the top 10 all time because he beat Hughes. Especially a Hughes who is at the end of his rope. I am not going to argue with you, because I have already seen the extent that you will go to in order to argue GSP into the ground, whether or not it makes sense.:good GSP is a great fighter, and I POSITIVE that by the end of his career, he will be securely in the top 10 of all time, maybe in the top 3. We don't need to rush things when he has only one title defense, and it was a loss.
