Atrain over Tavares?
Collapse
X
-
Educ8d Degener8SBR MVP
- 01-12-10
- 3177
#36Comment -
v1ySBR MVP
- 05-02-11
- 1138
#37And how much money did you win on Zhang?
I'm not saying level of competition has no relevance. I'm just saying impressively beating a proven B level fighter is a much bigger achievement than barely beating a B+ level fighter.
Beating D level fighters has no relevance to anything, unless of course you barely beat them, in which case it's very relevant.Comment -
Educ8d Degener8SBR MVP
- 01-12-10
- 3177
#38And how much money did you win on Zhang?
I'm not saying level of competition has no relevance. I'm just saying impressively beating a proven B level fighter is a much bigger achievement than barely beating a B+ level fighter.
Beating D level fighters has no relevance to anything, unless of course you barely beat them, in which case it's very relevant.Comment -
LadleSBR Wise Guy
- 03-21-11
- 835
#39
I didn't bet that fight. It was two contenders fighting and I only wager on fights when a contender fights a non-contender. So I only bet on fights when Edward Faaloloto, Matt Riddle, Ed Herman and Vagner Rocha are fighting.
Beating D level fighters has no relevance to anything, unless of course you barely beat them, in which case it's very relevant.Comment -
v1ySBR MVP
- 05-02-11
- 1138
#40So you think Duane Ludwig would be a favourite over Attonito? I don't. Or are you just saying random shit to be a moron.
My definition of a contender is clearly more inclusive than yours. Get over yourself.Comment -
v1ySBR MVP
- 05-02-11
- 1138
#41
People who like this thing called "money" bet when there is this thing called "value" in the line, which is completely independent from whether one, both, or neither fighter is a "contender" (which really has no set definition anyways).
What a terrible betting strategy you have. (Or more accurately, what a terrible joke.)Comment -
VaughanySBR Aristocracy
- 03-07-10
- 45563
#42It's not tht black and white, you're talking as if there are contenders then non-contenders. Yes Attonito should clearly be the favourite against somebody like Ludwig but tht doesnt mean Attonito is a contender. There are more than 2 levels of fighter, I'd say at least three or four.Comment -
LadleSBR Wise Guy
- 03-21-11
- 835
#43
My definition of a contender is clearly more inclusive than yours. Get over yourself.
People who like this thing called "money" bet when there is this thing called "value" in the line, which is completely independent from whether one, both, or neither fighter is a "contender" (which really has no set definition anyways).Comment -
v1ySBR MVP
- 05-02-11
- 1138
#44How on earth would one go about justifying what makes someone a contender or not a contender?
My definition happens to be more inclusive. Anyone who is relevant in the division is a contender in my book. If you haven't been demonstrated to be irrelevant and you're fighting in a big promotion, you're probably a contender. Amir is 5-2 in the UFC, with both of his losses coming to very strong contenders. I'm not saying he's a high level contender, but he is not irrelevant in the welterweight division.
Attonito is the same way. I'm not saying he's a high level contender, in fact I'll be shocked if he wins his next 3 fights (or 2 fights even). However, by beating up Daniel Roberts the way he did (you know, the whole HOW you beat someone thing which you can't seem to wrap your head around), he's shown that he's definitely NOT on the level of Daniel Roberts, and certainly on a "higher level". How high that level is is impossible to know, but it's enough to push him into relevancy -- and therefore contender status.
Btw, your betting thread says you're up 92 units this year. How much is a unit for you? Wouldn't it be funny if this invalid has made more than you betting on MMA in the last 6 months. I mean, if I'm an invalid, and you can't even make as much money as me, what would that make you? (Hey, I didn't start the personal attacks.)Comment -
LadleSBR Wise Guy
- 03-21-11
- 835
#45
My definition happens to be more inclusive. Anyone who is relevant in the division is a contender in my book. If you haven't been demonstrated to be irrelevant and you're fighting in a big promotion, you're probably a contender. Amir is 5-2 in the UFC, with both of his losses coming to very strong contenders. I'm not saying he's a high level contender, but he is not irrelevant in the welterweight division.
Attonito is the same way. I'm not saying he's a high level contender, in fact I'll be shocked if he wins his next 3 fights (or 2 fights even). However, by beating up Daniel Roberts the way he did (you know, the whole HOW you beat someone thing which you can't seem to wrap your head around), he's shown that he's definitely NOT on the level of Daniel Roberts, and certainly on a "higher level". How high that level is is impossible to know, but it's enough to push him into relevancy -- and therefore contender status.
(you know, the whole HOW you beat someone thing which you can't seem to wrap your head around)
Btw, your betting thread says you're up 92 units this year. How much is a unit for you? Wouldn't it be funny if this invalid has made more than you betting on MMA in the last 6 months. I mean, if I'm an invalid, and you can't even make as much money as me, what would that make you? (Hey, I didn't start the personal attacks.)Comment -
Educ8d Degener8SBR MVP
- 01-12-10
- 3177
#46I have no idea what you're saying in this post.
People who like this thing called "money" bet when there is this thing called "value" in the line, which is completely independent from whether one, both, or neither fighter is a "contender" (which really has no set definition anyways).
What a terrible betting strategy you have. (Or more accurately, what a terrible joke.)
NO... I did not bet on Tiequan Zhang -314 over Reinhardt...
ps. Use all of this money you are winning to buy a sarcasm detector.
Comment -
v1ySBR MVP
- 05-02-11
- 1138
#47Jeez, we don't even agree on how to construct rankings, this is seriously hopeless.
And again, just because you disagree with my definition of a contender does not make it ludicrous, especially since the definition of a contender is completely irrelevant to any analysis.
If anything, your definition of a contender is clearly the ludicrous one. You honestly believe that anyone who is not in the "top 20" is not a contender? What a joke.
Please answer. Who on this list of welterweights do you not consider to be a contender? GSP, Shields, Koscheck, Diaz, Woodley, Askren, Ellenberger, R. Mcdonald, Pyle, Hathaway, Hendricks, Pierce, Fitch, Penn, Marquardt, Condit, Kim, Kampmann, Sanchez, Hughes.
There's 20 guys who I would absolutely consider CONTENDERS in the welterweight division. Are you honestly trying to tell me that there is no case that guys like Saffiedine, Patrick, Daley, Alves, Story, Brenneman, Rocha, and Anthony Johnson are not contenders?
Your definition of a contender is way under inclusive, and you need to get over yourself.Comment -
Educ8d Degener8SBR MVP
- 01-12-10
- 3177
#48Jeez, we don't even agree on how to construct rankings, this is seriously hopeless.
And again, just because you disagree with my definition of a contender does not make it ludicrous, especially since the definition of a contender is completely irrelevant to any analysis.
If anything, your definition of a contender is clearly the ludicrous one. You honestly believe that anyone who is not in the "top 20" is not a contender? What a joke.
Please answer. Who on this list of welterweights do you not consider to be a contender? GSP, Shields, Koscheck, Diaz, Woodley, Askren, Ellenberger, R. Mcdonald, Pyle, Hathaway, Hendricks, Pierce, Fitch, Penn, Marquardt, Condit, Kim, Kampmann, Sanchez, Hughes.
There's 20 guys who I would absolutely consider CONTENDERS in the welterweight division. Are you honestly trying to tell me that there is no case that guys like Saffiedine, Patrick, Daley, Alves, Story, Brenneman, and Anthony Johnson are not contenders?
Your definition of a contender is way under inclusive, and you need to get over yourself.
Tarec Saffiedine as an example... seriously??? Solid and scrappy fighter, heck yeah. Contender... not so much. I mean, maybe he's a contender in Dream...Comment -
v1ySBR MVP
- 05-02-11
- 1138
#49So wait, presumably you consider Mike Pierce a contender, but his best win is over Brock Larson.
But you don't consider Saffiedine a contender who beat Larson much more impressively?
I thought WHO you beat was important? You guys aren't even consistent.
Unless you mean to tell me it's HOW pierce looked against Fitch which gives him his contender status? But no, we've already established that can't be right either. (When of course in reality, both are important to establishing that Pierce and Saffiedine are contenders.)
Seriously, if you guys don't think Saffiedine is a contender, we're hopeless.Comment -
LadleSBR Wise Guy
- 03-21-11
- 835
#50Jeez, we don't even agree on how to construct rankings, this is seriously hopeless.
And again, just because you disagree with my definition of a contender does not make it ludicrous, especially since the definition of a contender is completely irrelevant to any analysis.
If anything, your definition of a contender is clearly the ludicrous one. You honestly believe that anyone who is not in the "top 20" is not a contender? What a joke.
Please answer. Who on this list of welterweights do you not consider to be a contender? GSP, Shields, Koscheck, Diaz, Woodley, Askren, Ellenberger, R. Mcdonald, Pyle, Hathaway, Hendricks, Pierce, Fitch, Penn, Marquardt, Condit, Kim, Kampmann, Sanchez, Hughes.
There's 20 guys who I would absolutely consider CONTENDERS in the welterweight division. Are you honestly trying to tell me that there is no case that guys like Saffiedine, Patrick, Daley, Story, Brenneman, and Anthony Johnson are not contenders?
Your definition of a contender is way under inclusive
and you need to get over yourself.Comment -
v1ySBR MVP
- 05-02-11
- 1138
#51I've never used this term 'title contender'. Please do not insert words into my mouth.
How does my definition of contender not carry meaning? Anyone who could realistically contend for a title is a contender in my book. I don't see how logical inconsistencies follow from it in any way shape or form.
Just because it is unlikely that someone will contend for a title does not eliminate them from the possibility that they are a contender.
Way too much time debating semantics with you.
And the worst part of all? You couldn't even answer my question. (Instead you dodge it by saying "many" when clearly every single one i listed is arguably a contender under a reasonable definition.)Comment -
Educ8d Degener8SBR MVP
- 01-12-10
- 3177
#52So wait, presumably you consider Mike Pierce a contender, but his best win is over Brock Larson.
But you don't consider Saffiedine a contender who beat Larson much more impressively?
I thought WHO you beat was important? You guys aren't even consistent.
Unless you mean to tell me it's HOW pierce looked against Fitch which gives him his contender status? But no, we've already established that can't be right either. (When of course in reality, both are important to establishing that Pierce and Saffiedine are contenders.)
Seriously, if you guys don't think Saffiedine is a contender, we're hopeless.
I'm tapping out of this thread, as I don't have time to have this type of circular dialogue. According to you, Dana might as well give every fighter a belt...
ps.
one that contends; especially : a competitor for a championship or high honor… See the full definition
"Definition of CONTENDER
: one that contends; especially : a competitor for a championship or high honor"Comment -
v1ySBR MVP
- 05-02-11
- 1138
#53Homez -- I don't have time to address every fighter on your list... I have this whole "life" thing preventing me from doing so... I'm tapping out of this thread, as I don't have time to have this type of circular dialogue. According to you, Dana might as well give every fighter a belt... ps. http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/contender "Definition of CONTENDER : one that contends; especially : a competitor for a championship or high honor"
And that definition of contender fits in perfectly with my reasoning. Anyone in the UFC is arguably a contender since they are all ultimately competing for the UFC title. The dictionary definition is broader than mine.Comment -
LadleSBR Wise Guy
- 03-21-11
- 835
#54I've never used this term 'title contender'. Please do not insert words into my mouth.
How does my definition of contender not carry meaning? Anyone who could realistically contend for a title is a contender in my book. I don't see how logical inconsistencies follow from it in any way shape or form.
So now someone who could POTENTIALLY SOME DAY contend for a title is a contender?
Hey, you want to know what I categorise those fighters as? Potential contenders.
Very, very simple semantics.
You see, the great thing about having the terms "contender" and "potential contender" is that we can now differentiate the Nick Diazes of the world from the Rich Attonitos of the world. Much more informative, isn't it?
No? You'd rather carry on calling Amir Sadollah a contender? A guy who could maybe, someday, somehow miraculously defeat a string of great wrestlers at the top of the division, and perhaps enter title contention?
Sure. Okay. You keep saying that.
And the worst part of all? You couldn't even answer my question. (Instead you dodge it by saying "many" when clearly every single one i listed is arguably a contender under a reasonable definition.)
Shields, Koscheck, Diaz, Woodley, Askren, R. Mcdonald, Pyle, Hathaway, Hendricks, Pierce, Marquardt... and that's not all of them.
Also, don't accuse me of dodging things. You've failed to respond to the vast majority of my points. You lost this debate a long time ago.Comment -
v1ySBR MVP
- 05-02-11
- 1138
#55But there are no such things as potential contenders. Anyone who becomes a contender always WAS a contender. That's the point. There can be no "magical" fight where someone becomes a contender. It's a slow progress, and the moment you get signed to a big promotion, you've no doubt crossed the contender line in my book.
Think about it, if you have to beat a certain person to become a contender, then how did the initial contender list get established? Seriously, think hard.Comment -
VaughanySBR Aristocracy
- 03-07-10
- 45563
#56Jeez, we don't even agree on how to construct rankings, this is seriously hopeless.
And again, just because you disagree with my definition of a contender does not make it ludicrous, especially since the definition of a contender is completely irrelevant to any analysis.
If anything, your definition of a contender is clearly the ludicrous one. You honestly believe that anyone who is not in the "top 20" is not a contender? What a joke.
Please answer. Who on this list of welterweights do you not consider to be a contender? GSP, Shields, Koscheck, Diaz, Woodley, Askren, Ellenberger, R. Mcdonald, Pyle, Hathaway, Hendricks, Pierce, Fitch, Penn, Marquardt, Condit, Kim, Kampmann, Sanchez, Hughes.
There's 20 guys who I would absolutely consider CONTENDERS in the welterweight division. Are you honestly trying to tell me that there is no case that guys like Saffiedine, Patrick, Daley, Alves, Story, Brenneman, Rocha, and Anthony Johnson are not contenders?
Your definition of a contender is way under inclusive, and you need to get over yourself.Comment -
LadleSBR Wise Guy
- 03-21-11
- 835
#57
But there are no such things as potential contenders.
Anyone who becomes a contender always WAS a contender.
It's a slow progress, and the moment you get signed to a big promotion, you've no doubt crossed the contender line in my book.
Think about it, if you have to beat a certain person to become a contender, then how did the initial contender list get established? Seriously, think hard.Comment -
v1ySBR MVP
- 05-02-11
- 1138
#58
I can list 100 welterweights for you who are not contenders. Would that help you? (Even though technically I'd only need to list one to demonstrate that you are misunderstood.)Comment -
Educ8d Degener8SBR MVP
- 01-12-10
- 3177
#59
Everyone is a contender.
And by contender, I mean "fighter"...
v1y doing a superb troll job here... well done. Had some good laughs.
ps. Will be great watching two contenders in Bader and Tito battle it out Saturday...Comment -
LadleSBR Wise Guy
- 03-21-11
- 835
#60Yeah Vaughany! Don't you know there's a difference between "title contender" and "contender"?! They're totally different things dude! All UFC fighters are contenders! Rich Attonito to beat GSP! Woop!Comment -
LadleSBR Wise Guy
- 03-21-11
- 835
#61
ps. Will be great watching two contenders in Bader and Tito battle it out Saturday...Comment -
v1ySBR MVP
- 05-02-11
- 1138
#62I must say, you have an interesting sense of humour if you've actually LOL'ed at any point during this thread.
I mean, you don't consider Shields a contender, and my definition is ridiculous?
I try to pick the most retarded thing you say out of each post to refute. Addressing everything would drive me mad.Comment -
illmatickSBR Hall of Famer
- 01-05-09
- 5456
#63time to throw in the towel V1y.
what are your plays for tomorrow?Comment -
v1ySBR MVP
- 05-02-11
- 1138
#64Big on cruz.
And how does one throw in the towel in a debate they've remained completely logically consistent with. The fact that lots of people disagree with me tells me that lots of people are stupid, not that I'm wrong.
I'm not saying that Ladle's definition of a contender is necessarily wrong. He just doesn't understand how to keep an open mind, and thinks it's somehow an absurd notion that there might be more than 20 people in the world who are legitimate contenders.Comment -
LadleSBR Wise Guy
- 03-21-11
- 835
#67
I mean, you don't consider Shields a contender, and my definition is ridiculous?
I try to pick the most retarded thing you say out of each post to refute. Addressing everything would drive me mad.
Translation: you had no rebuttal for the vast majority of the things I was saying, because you were aware of the fact that your opinion was flawed and nonsensical.
The fact that lots of people disagree with me tells me that lots of people are stupid, not that I'm wrong.
He just doesn't understand how to keep an open mind, and thinks it's somehow an absurd notion that there might be more than 20 people in the world who are legitimate contenders.Comment -
CamdemoniumSBR High Roller
- 02-02-11
- 126
#68I clicked on this to get some thoughts on Simpson-Tavares, instead I was entertained. Bravo gentlemen.Comment -
v1ySBR MVP
- 05-02-11
- 1138
#69We can't even agree that Jake Shields is a contender in the UFC welterweight division. You can not be reasoned with.Comment -
LadleSBR Wise Guy
- 03-21-11
- 835
#70
All I ask is for you to stop defending your ridiculously foolish and preposterous idea that the likes of Rich Attonito and Amir Sadollah are contenders, and everything will be fine.Comment
SBR Contests
Collapse
Top-Rated US Sportsbooks
Collapse
#1 BetMGM
4.8/5 BetMGM Bonus Code
#2 FanDuel
4.8/5 FanDuel Promo Code
#3 Caesars
4.8/5 Caesars Promo Code
#4 DraftKings
4.7/5 DraftKings Promo Code
#5 Fanatics
#6 bet365
4.7/5 bet365 Bonus Code
#7 Hard Rock
4.1/5 Hard Rock Bet Promo Code
#8 BetRivers
4.1/5 BetRivers Bonus Code