Who would have won this epic showdown of Marks? PRIDEfc rule set.
I think this is probably going to be the unpopular choice but I pick Kerr to win. I think Kerr's lethal knees would win him the fight. I think Kerr has more ways to win. He had more dimensions to his game than Coleman. He was better with submissions, better with striking and equally good wrestling and mat work, positioning, ect.
Coleman didn't have much to threaten an opponent on his feet with strikes. Kerr's punching wasn't great, but his knees were crippling. Even if Coleman got a takedown, Kerr's scrambling ability would have allowed him to stand back up (unless he gasses like he did against Fujita and couldn't move with blood sugar issues). A few of those knees to Coleman's body and face would slow him down considerably and I think Kerr would break his body with it.
Coleman's one big advantage was his toughness and his fearless attitude, where Kerr was reportedly so scared to fight at times that he had to inject himself with pain killers to overcome his anxiety. But I ultimately think Kerr has more ways to win and I am still in awe of how powerful and lethal his knee strikes were, so I'm picking Kerr by that mechanism.
Fujita wrecked Kerr, Coleman made Igor Vov tape to knees.
Coleman in his prime was scary.
Coleman was the better, stronger, tougher wrestler...Did better in wrestling...far and away did better in NHB/MMA. better puncher on the feet...and Kerr isn't subbing Coleman.
Coleman beat Kerr in wrestling...Coleman held titles in UFC and PRIDE...Kerr did neither. Kerr lost to Igor Vovchanchin TWICE and bombed HORRIBLY out of the PRIDE Grand Prix...Coleman EASILY owned Vovchanchin and won the Grand Prix.
Coleman NEVER gave up and always looked for ways to win. Ultra tough and could outwrestle Kerr who was mentally weak and folded under ANY kind of adversity.
HereticMMA - Fujita wrecked Kerr, Coleman made Igor Vov tape to knees.I wouldn't say Fujita "wrecked" Kerr. Kerr ragdolled Fujita with a double leg to start the fight and hit Fujita with knees that would have KOed pretty much anybody else. He just gassed out after having blood sugar problems and couldn't move for the last portion of the fight. He offered no resistance. Fujita, if I recall correctly, didn't really damage Mark much and his strikes were more volume than power.
Coleman in his prime was scary.
Coleman, he destroyed kerr 17-3 in one wrestling match where they had to instill the mercy rule. Coleman is no fucking joke.
Can any of you remember just how dominating Coleman was on his initial run ?
He was crushing everyone and it seemed he could not be stopped.
I was at the Coleman vs Maurice Smith, not many folks thought Smith had a chance in that fight.
An amazing, fun fight.
A bit of a blueprint for what was to come in the sport.
I believe this is the fight where Smith thanked Helio Gracie for "making us all better fighters."
I would pick Kerr if not for his mental weaknesses. He had the ability.
Prime Roided Coleman was a monster. Can't go against the Hammer.
Mix6APlix - Kerr had better striking, in all aspects, punches, kicks, knees, elbows, he brought the whole package. He has excellent wrestling as well. Plus he brought a higher level of athleticism to the cage than Coleman did in regarded to his explosiveness. He beats Coleman 9 times out of 10, and I think 7 of those is handily.Take it you never saw thier matches in wrestling... Coleman handed kerr his ass a lot.
I believe Kerr had been going through quite a lot leading up to the Fujita fight, it really isn't a great example for those trying to discredit him. Re: The Smashing Machine: The Life and Times of Mark Kerr.
If they had fought prior to the happenings that led to Kerr's downfall, I'd give him the nod against Coleman all day. Kerr was a beast in his day, and arguably the most feared fighter at that time. That fight though, it would have been a fun one to see. If head butts were allowed, I may give the edge to Coleman, but under Pride rules I'd give it to Kerr.
Coleman by not wilting, and being a fucking fighter. His base skillset (wrestling and gnp) was better than Kerr's, and Coleman would have simply mentally broken Kerr at some point, just like he did in the fight against Frye.
I'd say at PRIME: Kerr would win 6/10 times, Coleman 4/10. It was THAT close. Wrestling goes to Coleman, but only by enough that it wouldn't matter much. Kerr had better cardio up till he had the blood sugar crash. Coleman gassed against high paced fights alot. Smith, Big Nog, Rizzo, Williams, etc. Coleman also would break mentally in those fights (so those saying he never did are deluding themselves.) Kerr had better striking standing up, in fact his leg kicks were quite good. As such, I'd say Coleman manages to finish Kerr early in 4 fights, Kerr outlasts Coleman in 6 of them and eventually begins beating his legs standing, then finally gets a tekdowna nd GnP late.
I have always felt Kerr was overrated. Any time he fought someone half decent, he lost. Coleman is certainly at least half decent.
So, by "Prime" Kerr, are we letting him go into the fight doped on painkillers so he can't feel the punches he takes?
That's the reason later on Kerr would fold up and quit after taking a hard punch or two, where as in his "prime" he would take really hard shots and act like he didn't feel it (because he barely did)
I'd bet on Coleman
RyannVonDoom - Coleman, he destroyed kerr 17-3 in one wrestling match where they had to instill the mercy rule. Coleman is no fucking joke.
not sure why people are continuing to ignore this
If the fight took place UFC 14 or earlier, I'd say Coleman by headbutts.