To get ahead in the rankings?
Michael Johnson beats Barboza and Barboza just lost again. Johnson loses to Dariush. Diaz beats Johnson
6. Johnson
7. Barboza
8. Diaz
9. Dariush 
Not many people thought BD beat him tho
MillhouseMMA - Not many people thought BD beat him thoAs though that should count for shit?
He was robbed in the dariush fight, so that I get.
But Nate straight up beat Johnson up.
BuyTheTicketTakeTheRide -MillhouseMMA - Not many people thought BD beat him thoAs though that should count for shit?
When the people responsible for the rankings are opinionated writers, yes.
something random -Totally objective? This word you keep using, I don't think it means what you think it means.
The ranking really don't mean anything. They are complied by journalists and are totally objective. Half of the people sending in their ranking may well be semi retarded. And the UFC takes no regard of the rankings when making matches.
Nate just beat MJ, but is still ranked below him. I rest my case.
MillhouseMMA -I agree that it's all subjective bullshit, and I never take these rankings serioisly, as I'm sure is the case with most MMA fabs. But a win is a win and should always play the major role in any 'credible' ranking system.BuyTheTicketTakeTheRide -MillhouseMMA - Not many people thought BD beat him thoAs though that should count for shit?
When the people responsible for the rankings are opinionated writers, yes.
If you beat someone, you should be ranked ahead of them whether it was a bad decision or not. In this case I would rank Diaz ahead of Dariush by default since it was more decisive.
BuyTheTicketTakeTheRide -Fair enough.MillhouseMMA -I agree that it's all subjective bullshit, and I never take these rankings serioisly, as I'm sure is the case with most MMA fabs. But a win is a win and should always play the major role in any 'credible' ranking system.BuyTheTicketTakeTheRide -MillhouseMMA - Not many people thought BD beat him thoAs though that should count for shit?
When the people responsible for the rankings are opinionated writers, yes.
You forgot Reem. JDS is still higher than him.
Do you know how fucking stupid that is? It's literally like if Condit beats Lawler and Lawler is still ranked on top of the division.
Ranks should be defended in fights the same way titles are... If a guy kicks your ass he should be ranked above you... Period.
SensoriaUtopia - Here is how stupid this rankings are and this right here is all you need to know about them.
They have Ronda at 14 and Holly at 15, repeat, in the p4p they have Ronda at 14 and Holly at 15
That right there tells you about how on point these guys are, the fucking crew of morons.
Seriously. Having females in the p4p talk should be a paddlin
Borgata Grille - not to take anything away from how stupid something like jds directly over overeem is, but sometimes shit like this is going to happen because mmmath doesn't always add up.
overeem just knocked out jds, who knocked out hunt, who beat rothwell, who starched overeem.
glover knocked out bader, who beat phil davis, who wrestlefucked glover.
jorge masvidal choke out michael chiesa, who choked out al iaquinta, who beat jorge masvidal.
you can find a bunch of these instances, and no matter what order you put these carousels in the rankings, you'll find something wrong with them.
I get where you're coming from, but there is no excuse for a fighter who just smoked another fighter to be ranked below the guy he just beat. I don't care about who beat who in the past. If the #4 guy loses to the #15 guy, they should be ranked somewhere in between with the winner above the loser.
I'm genuinely surprised that anyone takes these rankings seriously enough to care about who is ranked where, and how they got there.
For all I know or care, Dana has a tank of dugongs picking numbered balls when he yells fighters' names at the glass. Actually, that'd be kinda cool, but I'm almost sure that's not how they do it.
These rankings only exist to give the announcers something else to talk about between fights, and to give casuals the impression that the UFC is a more real sports organization than the WWE.
something random -Valid excuse. VuBearded Collie Herds Orca -something random -Totally objective? This word you keep using, I don't think it means what you think it means.
The ranking really don't mean anything. They are complied by journalists and are totally objective. Half of the people sending in their ranking may well be semi retarded. And the UFC takes no regard of the rankings when making matches.
Nate just beat MJ, but is still ranked below him. I rest my case.
Sorry, subjective. Had a few beers:)
something random -
And just to add, If a fighter beats another fighter decisively as Nate just did, no one with a brain let alone a so-called MMA journalist can justify ranking that fighter below the fighter they just beat.
I disagree.
Imagine fighter A is ranked very high and has beaten many other high ranked fighters. He gets upset by fighter B (wild swing, fluke KO, whatever) who has no other noteworthy wins. Should fighter B immediately shoot all the way up the rankings over fighter A and also all the other high ranking fighters that fighter A beat? Of course not. Fighter A beats him 9/10 times, and the other fighters that he would leapfrog over got there by virtue of numerous quality wins, not one fluke win.
When Matt Serra beat GSP, should he have been immediately ranked higher than GSP, Koschek, Hughes, Alves, etc.?
KirkBJJ -Borgata Grille - not to take anything away from how stupid something like jds directly over overeem is, but sometimes shit like this is going to happen because mmmath doesn't always add up.
overeem just knocked out jds, who knocked out hunt, who beat rothwell, who starched overeem.
glover knocked out bader, who beat phil davis, who wrestlefucked glover.
jorge masvidal choke out michael chiesa, who choked out al iaquinta, who beat jorge masvidal.
you can find a bunch of these instances, and no matter what order you put these carousels in the rankings, you'll find something wrong with them.
I get where you're coming from, but there is no excuse for a fighter who just smoked another fighter to be ranked below the guy he just beat. I don't care about who beat who in the past. If the #4 guy loses to the #15 guy, they should be ranked somewhere in between with the winner above the loser.
What kind or ranking system is it if it doesn't take into account history at all? If somebody has beaten 8 top ranked fighters they are most likely a better fighter than someone who has managed to upset one of them.
misterw -KirkBJJ -Borgata Grille - not to take anything away from how stupid something like jds directly over overeem is, but sometimes shit like this is going to happen because mmmath doesn't always add up.
overeem just knocked out jds, who knocked out hunt, who beat rothwell, who starched overeem.
glover knocked out bader, who beat phil davis, who wrestlefucked glover.
jorge masvidal choke out michael chiesa, who choked out al iaquinta, who beat jorge masvidal.
you can find a bunch of these instances, and no matter what order you put these carousels in the rankings, you'll find something wrong with them.
I get where you're coming from, but there is no excuse for a fighter who just smoked another fighter to be ranked below the guy he just beat. I don't care about who beat who in the past. If the #4 guy loses to the #15 guy, they should be ranked somewhere in between with the winner above the loser.
What kind or ranking system is it if it doesn't take into account history at all? If somebody has beaten 8 top ranked fighters they are most likely a better fighter than someone who has managed to upset one of them.
I guess if Condit wins, Lawler should still be champ too then right? If somebody has beaten 8 top ranked fighters then he shouldn't be fighting somebody so low in the rankings to make that an issue.
Also the rankings do take into account history... That's how they got their rank to begin with. But new fights change that
Borgata Grille - not to take anything away from how stupid something like jds directly over overeem is, but sometimes shit like this is going to happen because mmmath doesn't always add up.
overeem just knocked out jds, who knocked out hunt, who beat rothwell, who starched overeem.
glover knocked out bader, who beat phil davis, who wrestlefucked glover.
jorge masvidal choke out michael chiesa, who choked out al iaquinta, who beat jorge masvidal.
you can find a bunch of these instances, and no matter what order you put these carousels in the rankings, you'll find something wrong with them.
This is spot on.
It isn't only head to head wins that factor in, body of work over a given time period matter as well. Besides Nate's win over MJ, what other quality wins does he have over the past year? And are those wins better than MJ's resume over the same period of time? The man with the better resume should be ranked higher. The head to head absolutely matters and should be part of that body of work. Surely some of you can follow this, I hope.