Top 20 fighters of all time

[YNWA14]

But it was easier back then for Hughes to be "much better than his competition during his reign"

So, Hughes isn't as good as Woodley. And Hughes' competition wasn't as tough as what Woodley faces. Yet, Hughes is ranked higher?

I'm not sure that's the best way to be ranking fighters

Comparing generations ignoring their relative dominance is not really fair, is it? Generally these discussions take into account accomplishments, talent and relative dominance or you could usually just list whoever the best player is in the most current period as they are 99.9% likely to be the best since they have modern advances, natural progression and historical experience as an advantage.

For example, Wayne Gretzky is widely accepted as the best hockey player ever, but there are many players right now that are better than he was then. Hardly a fair comparison, though.

Matt Hughes was very dominant in his time. Yes, most likely Woodley would wreck him prime for prime.

 

[Neutrinos]

Comparing generations ignoring their relative dominance is not really fair, is it? Generally these discussions take into account accomplishments, talent and relative dominance or you could usually just list whoever the best player is in the most current period as they are 99.9% likely to be the best since they have modern advances, natural progression and historical experience as an advantage.

For example, Wayne Gretzky is widely accepted as the best hockey player ever, but there are many players right now that are better than he was then. Hardly a fair comparison, though.

Matt Hughes was very dominant in his time. Yes, most likely Woodley would wreck him prime for prime.

I guess it just comes down to your interpretation of "top"

Personally, I like to give each fighter a score, and then those with the highest score end up atop the list

To each his own

 

[Trocity]

For example, Wayne Gretzky is widely accepted as the best hockey player ever, but there are many players right now that are better than he was then.

LMAO what?

 

[Ivan13]

Comparing generations ignoring their relative dominance is not really fair, is it? Generally these discussions take into account accomplishments, talent and relative dominance or you could usually just list whoever the best player is in the most current period as they are 99.9% likely to be the best since they have modern advances, natural progression and historical experience as an advantage.

For example, Wayne Gretzky is widely accepted as the best hockey player ever, but there are many players right now that are better than he was then. Hardly a fair comparison, though.

Matt Hughes was very dominant in his time. Yes, most likely Woodley would wreck him prime for prime.

Absolute and complete rubbish. Everybody who posts this kind of nonsense without realizing the equipment factor shouldn't be taken seriously. Wayne was on another level, give him today's skates and sticks and see him destroy the league once again.

 

[YNWA14]

Absolute and complete rubbish. Everybody who posts this kind of nonsense without realizing the equipment factor shouldn't be taken seriously. Wayne was on another level, give him today's skates and sticks and see him destroy the league once again.

If you say so. The physical level, tactics, goalies, average level of talent and equipment are all on a completely different level to when Gretzky was playing. Anyone who can't see the difference in eras is kidding themselves and burying their head in records/nostalgia. Gretzky would never do now what he did then.

 

[DingDongCharlie]

Hard to make a top 20 but wheres Machida?

 

[LSCII]

Comparing generations ignoring their relative dominance is not really fair, is it? Generally these discussions take into account accomplishments, talent and relative dominance or you could usually just list whoever the best player is in the most current period as they are 99.9% likely to be the best since they have modern advances, natural progression and historical experience as an advantage.

For example, Wayne Gretzky is widely accepted as the best hockey player ever, but there are many players right now that are better than he was then. Hardly a fair comparison, though.

Matt Hughes was very dominant in his time. Yes, most likely Woodley would wreck him prime for prime.

That's a very odd way to spell Bobby Orr...

As for your main point, I generally agree with you, and I would say that while a guy like Hughes was very dominant in his era, the quality of competition was not nearly what it is today, given the expansive and explosive growth in the sport of MMA now. There are kid prodigies now that have been training in that sport their entire lives, where as in the past a complete one trick pony like Tank Abbott had some success because not everyone was as well rounded and the talent pool was significantly smaller.

It's the same argument you can make about the NHL prior to the influx of European and Scandinavian players. The talent pool grew, meaning the overall level of talented players went up exponentially too, which makes these cross generational comparisons very difficult.

 

[LSCII]

Hard to make a top 20 but wheres Machida?

Out in an alley buying more PEDs?

 

[DaaaaB's]

That's a very odd way to spell Bobby Orr...

As for your main point, I generally agree with you, and I would say that while a guy like Hughes was very dominant in his era, the quality of competition was not nearly what it is today, given the expansive and explosive growth in the sport of MMA now. There are kid prodigies now that have been training in that sport their entire lives, where as in the past a complete one trick pony like Tank Abbott had some success because not everyone was as well rounded and the talent pool was significantly smaller.

It's the same argument you can make about the NHL prior to the influx of European and Scandinavian players. The talent pool grew, meaning the overall level of talented players went up exponentially too, which makes these cross generational comparisons very difficult.

Agreed on Bobby Orr, definitely the best player of all time. Gretzky is if you only wanna look at offensive numbers without considering that he played on a stacked team in by far the highest scoring era of hockey.

As for the influx of talent, you can add American players to that too. Prior to the 90's there weren't a lot of Americans in the league. There's more people playing hockey in Canada now then ever as well. Expansion helped offset this a bit but the league is definitely at an all time high talent wise.

 

[DingDongCharlie]

Out in an alley buying more PEDs?

Most the list were PED users.

 

[Trocity]

People trying to downplay Gretzky are comical. For example, take his 212 point year... The next highest point scorer on his team had 105. Gretzky had more than double anybody else on his team... "b-but he's only good cuz his super stacked team dewd!"

Yikes.