Question regarding the term "pound for pound"

[Nastycrow]

Originally posted by: majinrevan666
Date: May 10, 2012 at 03:16 PM
Source: https://forum.mmajunkie.com/threads/question-regarding-the-term-pound-for-pound.46507/

What does it really mean?
My understanding is that it means something like the skill level of fighters when they are on an equal playing field as far as weight goes.
However, people seem to base this on wins rather than on actual skill sets.
For example: Anderson is now ranked ahead of Jon Jones when Jones has no real weaknesses and Silva has a big one in the wrestling department.
If the two fought, I'd give the edge to Jones and so would most other people.
So, which is it?
Skills or wins?

 

[Nastycrow]

Originally posted by: Fight Magnet
Date: May 10, 2012 at 03:32 PM
Source: https://forum.mmajunkie.com/threads/question-regarding-the-term-pound-for-pound.46507/

That weakness of wrestling for Anderson is an illusion until he loses because of it. Long live the King.
P4P: It's a hypothetical guess, that when any given fighter is matched against any other fighter at the same weight with his skill set, and what the outcome would be .
(The deeper you look into it, the farther from reality you become, it's a mixed martial arts PARADOX.)

 

[Nastycrow]

Originally posted by: AllDay
Date: May 10, 2012 at 03:43 PM
Source: https://forum.mmajunkie.com/threads/question-regarding-the-term-pound-for-pound.46507/

I think of P4P....A fighter that will fight anyone anytime any weight class within his natural weight class( and Dominate). Much respect to Dan Henderson and BJ Penn. If GSP, Anderson Silva, Bones, Aldo would say they would fight anyone if allowed by Dana, I would consider them. Chael says he would fight anyone even 205 pounders, I would like to see that!

 

[Nastycrow]

Originally posted by: Pandragon
Date: May 10, 2012 at 03:48 PM
Source: https://forum.mmajunkie.com/threads/question-regarding-the-term-pound-for-pound.46507/

P4P is used to determine the best fighters when obviously pitting a sub-par heavyweight against the best flyweight would result in a dead flyweight.
The actual term is like saying how much skill/ability a person has on average per pound. So if the scale is 1-10, Anderson Silva has 9 skill per pound and Tim Sylvia has 1, so even though Tim Sylvia could quite possibly beat Anderson Silva in a fight, we still determine Anderson is a better fighter.
As for your other question it is not specifically just about quantifiable skill. Anderson Silva may have an identifiable weakness in the wrestling department and JJ may not have any identifiable weakness' but Anderson Silva has proven over a much longer time period that it is a perceived weakness. Only one person has demonstrated the ability to exploit that weakness, and oh by the way Anderson Silva won that fight.
It's sort of like saying, how much of a weakness is it really if he is still winning all of his fights?
It also can take into account division strength. I think I'm not alone that suppose AS continues winning and so does JJ that eventually JJ will overtake Silva as #1 P4P simply because his track record will involve defeating higher skilled opponents then Anderson Silva.
If Silva moves up and beats JJ up then I guess we'd know who the real p4p was at that point

 

[Nastycrow]

Originally posted by: MMAFTM13
Date: May 10, 2012 at 03:48 PM
Source: https://forum.mmajunkie.com/threads/question-regarding-the-term-pound-for-pound.46507/

A bit of both..I think it's the absolute best in each weight class..If Bones moved up and fought JDS at heavyweight and got knocked out..That still doesn't mean he's not the best at 205 and knocked off the top three p4p list so why shouldn't AS be any different if he moved up to face Jones..
AS is the best for a reason,he's not been beaten for years and a small weakness in wrestling won't matter as he keeps submitting people and winning...

 

[Nastycrow]

Originally posted by: Bucho
Date: May 10, 2012 at 05:21 PM
Source: https://forum.mmajunkie.com/threads/question-regarding-the-term-pound-for-pound.46507/

majinrevan666 said:
So, which is it?
Skills or wins?
Click to expand...
Firstly, skills and wins are not mutually exclusive. The question should never be "skills OR wins". There is no "or" between skills and wins. You can't separate them in any meaningful way. In truth wins are a significant part of what informs you about a fighter's skills.
Secondly - and this may simply be a case of semantics - a better way to look at it than "skills" is to look at "abilities". "Abilities" encompases skills, cardio, chin, finishing power, heart etc. Ability to win is the be all and end all of sport. In any sport skill alone is rarely enough to become an elite competitor. Ultimately it's the mix of abilities which determines any athlete's effectiveness in terms of winning vs losing.
As for Bones vs Anderson, I agree that Anderson appears the more beatable of the two because of his age and because of the fact a very good wrestler controlled him for long periods of a recent fight. Where I disagree is that anyone who saw Bones fight Lyoto could still feel the champ has no weaknesses. Against a quick fighter with good footwork he's clearly beatable, and was in fact level, at best, with Machida until Machida "got caught". The dramatic second round end to that fight has made many people forget that Bones was far from dominant in it.

 

[Nastycrow]

Originally posted by: Thak27
Date: May 10, 2012 at 06:06 PM
Source: https://forum.mmajunkie.com/threads/question-regarding-the-term-pound-for-pound.46507/

Twostrikes said:
As for your other question it is not specifically just about quantifiable skill. Anderson Silva may have an identifiable weakness in the wrestling department and JJ may not have any identifiable weakness' but Anderson Silva has proven over a much longer time period that it is a perceived weakness. Only one person has demonstrated the ability to exploit that weakness, and oh by the way Anderson Silva won that fight.
Click to expand...
It's not just that Anderson has an "identifiable" weakness in wrestling. It's the sub par level of competition that he's faced in the MW division compared to big names that Jon Jones has dismantled in the LHW division.
And yes, Sonnen has been the only MW to exploit Anderson's weakness in wrestling, however Sonnen's also one of the few quality wrestlers in the MW division.
Until Anderson can move up to the LHW division and beat a quality wrestler (like Rashad, Rampage or Bader) - I think Jon Jones is clearly the top P4P fighter in the UFC.

 

[Nastycrow]

Originally posted by: PsychoIcon
Date: May 10, 2012 at 06:12 PM
Source: https://forum.mmajunkie.com/threads/question-regarding-the-term-pound-for-pound.46507/

raw god given born with talent.... p4p = whoever has the most of it.

 

[Nastycrow]

Originally posted by: CoffeeAndBeer
Date: May 10, 2012 at 06:20 PM
Source: https://forum.mmajunkie.com/threads/question-regarding-the-term-pound-for-pound.46507/

It's neither.
Or it's both.
There's an aspect of comparing how a fighter does relative to his division, there's a skill aspect, and there's the question of how well fighters would match-up against each other (if size was even).
Note: better
skilled
does not = better fighter

 

[Nastycrow]

Originally posted by: mabrown45
Date: May 10, 2012 at 06:35 PM
Source: https://forum.mmajunkie.com/threads/question-regarding-the-term-pound-for-pound.46507/

Thak27 said:
Twostrikes said:
As for your other question it is not specifically just about quantifiable skill. Anderson Silva may have an identifiable weakness in the wrestling department and JJ may not have any identifiable weakness' but Anderson Silva has proven over a much longer time period that it is a perceived weakness. Only one person has demonstrated the ability to exploit that weakness, and oh by the way Anderson Silva won that fight.
Click to expand...
It's not just that Anderson has an "identifiable" weakness in wrestling. It's the sub par level of competition that he's faced in the MW division compared to big names that Jon Jones has dismantled in the LHW division.
And yes, Sonnen has been the only MW to exploit Anderson's weakness in wrestling, however Sonnen's also one of the few quality wrestlers in the MW division.
Until Anderson can move up to the LHW division and beat a quality wrestler (like Rashad, Rampage or Bader) - I think Jon Jones is clearly the top P4P fighter in the UFC.
Click to expand...
"big names"..........and "sub par" competition is all relative. Sure we can think Jones destroyed some "big names" but only because someone made us believe they WERE big names. To me it looks like Jones beat a lot of guys with good records........Silva has done the same but for a longer amount of time
P4P is suppose to be equal size but its just a big question.........the only way we can really think about it is to review fighters records.
if Silva and jones were the same size silva would KO jones pretty easily..........and hell he might even now

 

[Nastycrow]

Originally posted by: mabrown45
Date: May 10, 2012 at 06:57 PM
Source: https://forum.mmajunkie.com/threads/question-regarding-the-term-pound-for-pound.46507/

People need to really look at who Jones has beaten and now who they THINK he has beaten
Shogun - after knee surgery and the most inconsistent fighter in ufc history
Rampage - nothing but boxing for YEARS and has had lack luster fights for YEARS
Machida - didn't even deserve title shot in the first place. Then look at the shogun and rampage fights to see where he stands
Rashad - what is his last true dominate performance?........tito freakin ortiz. He did outclass Davis but add in his Silva and Rampge fights and where exactly is a super elite fighter?
These are all great wins but i seriously think the UFC hype machine has added to it. If you compare these to the wins by Silva against Franklin, Henderson, Sonnen, Vitor, Griffin and Nate Marquardt i don't see much of a difference.
again not bashing the fighters Jones has faced but i think people have some super hero mentality about the LHW division that is just wrong

 

[Nastycrow]

Originally posted by: Magson13
Date: May 10, 2012 at 07:27 PM
Source: https://forum.mmajunkie.com/threads/question-regarding-the-term-pound-for-pound.46507/

mabrown45 said:
again not bashing the fighters Jones has faced but i think people have some super hero mentality about the LHW division that is just wrong
Click to expand...
The problem here is that the light heavyweight division has been even for the past few years. A bunch of fighters have traded off holding the belt after every one or two fights. The middleweight and welterweight divisions, on the other hand, have had a dominant champ for quite some time, so it's not competitive. So to have a bunch a former champs on Jones's win list, makes him seem like he's better. But in reality, the guys in the middleweight division have just as much talent, but they can't become a 'former champ' when the current champ never loses.

 

[Nastycrow]

Originally posted by: mabrown45
Date: May 10, 2012 at 07:29 PM
Source: https://forum.mmajunkie.com/threads/question-regarding-the-term-pound-for-pound.46507/

Magson13 said:
mabrown45 said:
again not bashing the fighters Jones has faced but i think people have some super hero mentality about the LHW division that is just wrong
Click to expand...
The problem here is that the light heavyweight division has been even for the past few years. A bunch of fighters have traded off holding the belt after every one or two fights. The middleweight and welterweight divisions, on the other hand, have had a dominant champ for quite some time, so it's not competitive. So to have a bunch a former champs on Jones's win list, makes him seem like he's better. But in reality, the guys in the middleweight division have just as much talent, but they can't become a 'former champ' when the current champ never loses.
Click to expand...
that is what i've been saying for a while.............i also like to point out to people that all of a sudden now that LHW has a dominate champ people are starting to realize that LHW is a "thin" or some even say weak division.

 

[Nastycrow]

Originally posted by: Bucho
Date: May 10, 2012 at 08:07 PM
Source: https://forum.mmajunkie.com/threads/question-regarding-the-term-pound-for-pound.46507/

mabrown45 said:
Magson13 said:
mabrown45 said:
Shogun - after knee surgery and the most inconsistent fighter in ufc history
Rampage - nothing but boxing for YEARS and has had lack luster fights for YEARS
Machida - didn't even deserve title shot in the first place. Then look at the shogun and rampage fights to see where he stands
Rashad - what is his last true dominate performance?........tito freakin ortiz. He did outclass Davis but add in his Silva and Rampge fights and where exactly is a super elite fighter?
again not bashing the fighters Jones has faced but i think people have some super hero mentality about the LHW division that is just wrong
Click to expand...
The problem here is that the light heavyweight division has been even for the past few years. A bunch of fighters have traded off holding the belt after every one or two fights. The middleweight and welterweight divisions, on the other hand, have had a dominant champ for quite some time, so it's not competitive. So to have a bunch a former champs on Jones's win list, makes him seem like he's better. But in reality, the guys in the middleweight division have just as much talent, but they can't become a 'former champ' when the current champ never loses.
Click to expand...
that is what i've been saying for a while.............i also like to point out to people that all of a sudden now that LHW has a dominate champ people are starting to realize that LHW is a "thin" or some even say weak division.
Click to expand...
Wooooooooooooooooooooooord.
You guys are speaking my language.

 

[Nastycrow]

Originally posted by: mma_guru333
Date: May 11, 2012 at 02:53 AM
Source: https://forum.mmajunkie.com/threads/question-regarding-the-term-pound-for-pound.46507/

Magson13 said:
mabrown45 said:
again not bashing the fighters Jones has faced but i think people have some super hero mentality about the LHW division that is just wrong
Click to expand...
The problem here is that the light heavyweight division has been even for the past few years. A bunch of fighters have traded off holding the belt after every one or two fights. The middleweight and welterweight divisions, on the other hand, have had a dominant champ for quite some time, so it's not competitive. So to have a bunch a former champs on Jones's win list, makes him seem like he's better. But in reality, the guys in the middleweight division have just as much talent, but they can't become a 'former champ' when the current champ never loses.
Click to expand...
Really don't think having the title 'former champ' has anything to do with it.
LHW has a handful of studs, but beyond that there isn't much. The problem is, a couple of their studs are either getting old, or are wildly inconsistent. The MW division is pretty solid throughout the top 15 or so, but doesn't have much by way of elite talent. Really it depends on whether you like quality or quanity to consider a division deep, or a mix of both, which neither LHW or MW have.
WW has almost no 'former champs' yet I consider that to be one of, if not the most stacked division in MMA.
I agree partially with the part about having a dominate champ making the division seem thinner though.
As far as the OP...
Honestly, it's a good question. Although many find it pointless to debate which I can see why, but I still enjoy hypothetically debating it, when people actually know what the term means. But you can see just by the answers in this thread, it's been defined multiple times.
It's really a hypothetical rating about the abilities of fighters. Of course you can back that with wins and losses, but that's not really what it should be about.

 

[Nastycrow]

Originally posted by: Magson13
Date: May 11, 2012 at 03:52 AM
Source: https://forum.mmajunkie.com/threads/question-regarding-the-term-pound-for-pound.46507/

mma_guru333 said:
Magson13 said:
mabrown45 said:
again not bashing the fighters Jones has faced but i think people have some super hero mentality about the LHW division that is just wrong
Click to expand...
The problem here is that the light heavyweight division has been even for the past few years. A bunch of fighters have traded off holding the belt after every one or two fights. The middleweight and welterweight divisions, on the other hand, have had a dominant champ for quite some time, so it's not competitive. So to have a bunch a former champs on Jones's win list, makes him seem like he's better. But in reality, the guys in the middleweight division have just as much talent, but they can't become a 'former champ' when the current champ never loses.
Click to expand...
Really don't think having the title 'former champ' has anything to do with it.
LHW has a handful of studs, but beyond that there isn't much. The problem is, a couple of their studs are either getting old, or are wildly inconsistent. The MW division is pretty solid throughout the top 15 or so, but doesn't have much by way of elite talent. Really it depends on whether you like quality or quanity to consider a division deep, or a mix of both, which neither LHW or MW have.
WW has almost no 'former champs' yet I consider that to be one of, if not the most stacked division in MMA.
I agree partially with the part about having a
dominate
champ making the division seem thinner though.
Click to expand...
Dominant*
I was only saying that that is how it is perceived. Middleweight and light heavyweight have just as much talent as all the other divisions, they just don't look like it anymore because everyone that steps up to the champ gets beaten.

 

[Nastycrow]

Originally posted by: Brick
Date: May 11, 2012 at 08:05 AM
Source: https://forum.mmajunkie.com/threads/question-regarding-the-term-pound-for-pound.46507/

It's simply who would win in a fight between two fighters hypothetically in the same weight class, in order to remove the obvious weight advantage. For example, a HW Faber against a HW Lesnar, or a LW Dos Santos vs. a LW Frankie Edgar.

 

[Nastycrow]

Originally posted by: Spud
Date: May 11, 2012 at 08:42 AM
Source: https://forum.mmajunkie.com/threads/question-regarding-the-term-pound-for-pound.46507/

It's looking at the technical ability of fighters. It's a way of comparing fighters in the hypothetical situation that they're in the same weight class.
A lot of people think moving up/down weight classes is important, IMO it has nothing to do with P4P.

 

[Nastycrow]

Originally posted by: PsychoIcon
Date: May 11, 2012 at 02:29 PM
Source: https://forum.mmajunkie.com/threads/question-regarding-the-term-pound-for-pound.46507/

Wikipedia -
Adjective
pound-for-pound
(comparative more pound-for-pound, superlative most pound-for-pound)
1
. (sports, boxing) A comparison of fighters' (usually boxers) skill levels, regardless of what weight class they are in. Sugar Ray Robinson is pound for pound the best boxer ever.  [quotations ▼]
2
.Pertaining to how any two things compare when bearing in mind their real or relative, figurative weight. A tin of tomatoes weighing 250 g and costing $2.50 is more expensive, pound-for-pound, than one weighing 500 g and costing $4 (as the former costs $1.00 per 100 g and the latter $0.80 per 100 g). My gal is pound for pound sweeter than chocolate.

 

[Nastycrow]

Originally posted by: Knippz
Date: May 11, 2012 at 04:10 PM
Source: https://forum.mmajunkie.com/threads/question-regarding-the-term-pound-for-pound.46507/

Wow. F*cking incredible, not a single correct response yet.
P4P means who would be the best if size - weight, height, reach - were the same.
For example, how would Jose Aldo fare against Jon Jones if they both weighed the exact same, with the exact same reach, exact same height? I personally think Aldo would utterly destroy Jones under those conditions - he's a far superior striker, has insane takedown defense, and is superior in BJJ as well.
In my honest opinion, Jon Jones is at best #4 P4P. His reach advantage and huge size advantage weigh heavily on the results of his fights. P4P, Anderson, Aldo, and GSP are a few levels above him.