Jake Shields, proving that Strikeforce > UFC.
I think he has added weight the right way. He was around 167 to 169 weeks of fights before.
He is around 175 to 180 now and has put good weight on.
I dont know how he will look, but I like he seems to be giving it an honest go.
Clay Guida beats Takanori "The Fireball Kid" Gomi by Submission (Gulliotine Choke) at 4:27 Rd 2
This sig was bestowen upon me by XXXvaletudoXXX
I'll give you Wandy over Bisping slightly. I count Bisping as a veteran of the sport, but I guess that fight applies.
I wasnt thinkning back far enough to include Randys wins over Chuck/Tito/Vitor.
I would say Randy/Gonzaga would apply. Gabe was a young hungry killer fresh from decapitating the favored CroCop.
Good call on Tito/Bader.
Dont care about the boxing ones.
Im thinking more along the lines of when a young superstar comes along. Such as Jones/Aldo/Rory. My fault for not clarifying, but I definitely should not have said never.
i agree that it doesnt apply though. Shogun lost roids and hendo found TRT
If Fedor was still ducking everyone, half the forum would have him at #1 and insist that JDS has no chance against him
1) what is the definition of either one of them?? It's up for debate.
Is "old" old in fight years or regular years and in either case, how old in years or fights is "old"?? How young in years or fights is "young"
IMO Fitch beating Erick Silva is DEFINITELY an old Lion beating a young lion with a lot of hype. Fitch is 34 with 30 fights, Silva 28 with 18 fights and TONS of hype....that's a picture perfect example IMO.
2)....It's sort of a straw man argument if you say that it needs to involve a "young superstar" coming along...because...you see....that superstar became one by beating a whole number of different fighters, some of whom we might consider "old lions"...but they might beat them before they are even recognized as "super stars" so it goes without noticing.
So then these "superstars" do not count as losing to or beating "old lions" until they already have so many high level wins under their belt that them losing to ANYONE is unlikely.
There could be, and probably have been, many cases of a guy who COULD have in theory become a "superstar", who won a couple good fights but not enough to be warranted a "killer" like the guys you mentioned, but before they can even build up enough hype they are defeated by an "old lion"...and their hype is ended but again, we don't count it as an "old lion" beating a "young lion" but just an older fighter beating a younger dude who, had a he just won a couple more fights first, COULD have been a superstar.
So...yeah...might be confusing the way I stated it, but you see, if we are going by the standards of an "old lion" beating a young SUPERSTAR....again....by the time the fight between the two even occurs the "young superstar" has beaten so many fighters that his losing to anyone is unlikely, because he's been proven to be just "that good", if you get my meaning.
Another example I can think of is Jens Pulver beating Cub Swanson.
Swanson was fairly highly ranked I think and Pulver subbed him with a sick guillotine.
Last edited by Toehold; 11-25-2012 at 11:59 AM.
I agree with all of that and it is a touchy subject that would be hard to debate.
I also like both of your examples