Greetings MMA posters, this is the This content is protected in a series of threads I'll make on this forum, basically ripping off the excellent Classic Forum boxing poster Boxed Ears, who has a series in the Classic called 'Very Good Or Great', where he asks regulars whether they consider some fighters to merit the description 'great' fighters, or whether they are merely 'very good'. MMA Volume 1 was This content is protected , see thread: http://www.eastsideboxing.com/forum/...d.php?t=335373 MMA Volume 2 was This content is protected , see thread: http://www.eastsideboxing.com/forum/...d.php?t=335558 MMA Volume 3 was This content is protected , see thread: http://www.eastsideboxing.com/forum/...d.php?t=335875 MMA Volume 4 was This content is protected , see thread: http://www.eastsideboxing.com/forum/showthread.php?t=336732 The choice this time is Tito Ortiz. Some relevant info about Tito: - Tito lost his first fight for This content is protected , but then won it in his next fight and This content is protected before losing it in the cage. Later, he got another shot at the title but lost the fight and so never regained the gold. - Tito has nine losses in his career. Early on he submitted to both This content is protected and This content is protected (to strikes), when he lost the title it was to This content is protected , he was beaten This content is protected , and in the twilight of his career he was defeated by This content is protected There was also a damaging loss to his former protege, This content is protected . - The most important factor is of course resume, the guys Ortiz has beaten. Make your assessment of this list: This content is protected - UFC, 2000 - This content is protected This content is protected - UFC, 2005 - This content is protected This content is protected - UFC, 2006 - This content is protected This content is protected x3 - UFC, 2002 & 2006 - This content is protected This content is protected - UFC, 2001 - This content is protected This content is protected - UFC, 2011 - This content is protected - Other factors to consider: His record is This content is protected , with This content is protected , 5 decisions and 3 submissions, and This content is protected , 3 TKO defeats and This content is protected . I look forward to your verdicts and explanations, and hope to continue this series shortly :bbb
Most overrated fighter EVER. I don't even consider Ortiz to be very good and his best win over a prime Wanderlei is the product of fighting in a UFC where stand-ups didn't exist. The guy beat up a lot of one-dimensional hacks, blown-up MWs, and an ancient Shammy and I actually gave the Belfort fight to Vitor. Add in the shameful ducking of Chuck and the result when he finally decided to man-up and fight him and I think you have an entirely overrated fighter whose main claim to fame is his poor trash-talking ability that somehow made him a PPV draw in an age when people just didn't watch this ****. EDIT- I voted "very good" but only because there wasn't an option for "overrated Hype Job".
Wow! Vehement response against Tito being considered a great. Surely there are people out there who have the opposite p-o-v? Care to share?
:rofl Since you're asking for someone else to share an opposite POV, I'll assume that you aren't in disagreement.
This is correct (to an extent), although I don't see why a ":rofl" was used for a TS asking for an alternative p-o-v. I don't think Tito was an overhyped bum or whatever it was you said, but I don't think he's a great either, so I'm on the 'Very Good' side of the fence on this one.
I just found it humorous that you were searching for an alternate POV and seemed unable to even play devil's advocate like you did with Franklin. It wasn't laughing at you, it was laughing at the fact that Tito sucks so hard that you couldn't come up with a decent counterpoint and so far nobody else has either. He's ****. There are few major belt holders that I will unhesitatingly label an overrated Hype Job Disgrace, but this **** is a joke in AND out of the cage.
As I've said, I agree he was no great, but do you not think you might be letting personal dislike cloud your judgement here? I mean, Wandy in 2000, Vitor in 2005, and Forrest in 2006 - these are not cans. They were all extremely effective fighters at the time. No?
Like I said, the Wanderlei win is probably his best and it was the result of a UFC that didn't allow stand-ups. Tito's offense in that fight consisted of takedowns and nothing else. The only person that was hurt in that bout was Tito when Silva smashed him and sent him running across the cage in Lesnar fashion and the rest was the television equivalent of an Ambien pill. I actually thought Belfort won his fight with Tito and while I wasn't one of the many that scored Ortiz/Griffin I for Griffin it was a very narrow decision win over a guy that was only beginning to put together the tools to beat good competition. Highly overrated, and it's not just a negative opinion of the guy that leads me to that. There are plenty of top guys that I think are ****s on a personal level but still respect as being talented, Tito just isn't one of them. He's a fail on every level, from fighter to businessman and especially as commentator.
So he beat a prime Wanderlei because stand-up didn't exist in the UFC? This makes absolutely no sense to me.
Forgot about that. Duly noted. Still a largely unimpressive fight. Stand-UPS, not stand-up. Back then if a dude took you down and you couldn't get up, you were ****ed for the round. Under the current rules Wand would have had more than one chance to hit Tito per round because there was tons of stalling from top position.
Your blaming Tito because Silva wasn't prepared to use takedown defense and didn't work his BJJ? Ok well..........DAMN JON JONES FOR ELBOWING BRANDON VERA ON THE GROUND!!!!!!!! He didn't give him time to work his Muay Thai!