By: Jamie Penick, MMATorch Editor-in-Chief
"You know, he?s claiming that I didn?t defeat anybody that?s in the top 10 so why should you rank me. That?s true but the fact of the matter is that I?m a very active fighter and you can see that I?m a different fighter then I was at 205lbs. I?m undefeated since 2008 when I became heavyweight and even more important I have finished all the fights in the first round but then again Dana is president of a company so he?s going to say stuff like that. To be honest it doesn?t bother me because I can make a good case for being in the top 10...
After what Cain did to Brock it?s silly to give Brock a top 5 spot, but that?s my opinion. He?s still a good fighter but having a 5-2 record and almost losing to Carwin and having wins over Herring, Couture and Mir (which he lost to as well) is not something that I?m very impressed about. I?m not going to call the media stupid like Dana but let me put it this way; how can a real M.M.A. insider put a Brock Lesnar above Fedor Emelianenko or even JDS. The fact of the matter is I like that people are debating the rankings but I don?t take them that seriously...
People have to define first which criteria comes into play when creating a ranking system. Some people use only their last fight and what opposition they have fought. Other people look at skill set, talent, way of fighting and popularity. Now people tend to use both criteria and therefore you have ranking that can be heavily debated. That?s why Dana White is saying that I don?t belong in the top 10 because he doesn?t take into account my K-1 fights and doesn?t think that beating one top 10 fighter is good enough for entering the ranking. On the other hand you have Bas Rutten that says that I?m the number one heavyweight in the world. He uses my experience, potential, skill set and the way I finished fights against opposition that is not considered top 10. He also knows that my striking is improved very much and therefore uses my K-1 experience. So let?s say that the truth is somewhere in the middle. I?m fully aware that I have to prove myself, I know I can defeat anybody so it?s my job to prove it to my fans and to my doubters."
-Alistair Overeem talks to MixFight.nl (translated at BloodyElbow.com), and responds to UFC President Dana White saying he's not a top 10 heavyweight.
Penick's Analysis: Again, with how thin the division is, Overeem absolutely has a case for the bottom part of the top 10, but his level of competition doesn't justify his placement any higher than that. Rankings should not be about potential or skill set, and Overeem's K-1 fights don't count towards his spot in the rankings in MMA. Of course, lots of different writers have different criteria that they use, so I can only speak for myself, but my rankings are dependent upon a fighter's activity and level of competition. And it's not a matter of what fighters have accomplished in the past, either, as wins from beyond the last two to three years at the most cannot count for where a fighter is placed in today's rankings. So with that said, Lesnar remains in the top five as his wins over Herring, Couture, Mir and Carwin have him there, despite the loss to Velasquez. Again, it's not about who may beat who in a theoretical matchup, it's about who has already beaten who and how often they've done so. Overeem simply hasn't fought the competition to place him higher than probably #8, but if he can get into the cage with Werdum and Fedor in Strikeforce and defeat them he can get himself into the top five. I'm glad he doesn't put much stock into the rankings, because really they are useful to get a snapshot of the divisions, but aren't much more than conversation pieces outside of that, and really this entire conversation won't matter if he starts fighting guys that can help prove he belongs in the picture at the top of the division.
After what Cain did to Brock it?s silly to give Brock a top 5 spot, but that?s my opinion. He?s still a good fighter but having a 5-2 record and almost losing to Carwin and having wins over Herring, Couture and Mir (which he lost to as well) is not something that I?m very impressed about. I?m not going to call the media stupid like Dana but let me put it this way; how can a real M.M.A. insider put a Brock Lesnar above Fedor Emelianenko or even JDS. The fact of the matter is I like that people are debating the rankings but I don?t take them that seriously...
People have to define first which criteria comes into play when creating a ranking system. Some people use only their last fight and what opposition they have fought. Other people look at skill set, talent, way of fighting and popularity. Now people tend to use both criteria and therefore you have ranking that can be heavily debated. That?s why Dana White is saying that I don?t belong in the top 10 because he doesn?t take into account my K-1 fights and doesn?t think that beating one top 10 fighter is good enough for entering the ranking. On the other hand you have Bas Rutten that says that I?m the number one heavyweight in the world. He uses my experience, potential, skill set and the way I finished fights against opposition that is not considered top 10. He also knows that my striking is improved very much and therefore uses my K-1 experience. So let?s say that the truth is somewhere in the middle. I?m fully aware that I have to prove myself, I know I can defeat anybody so it?s my job to prove it to my fans and to my doubters."
-Alistair Overeem talks to MixFight.nl (translated at BloodyElbow.com), and responds to UFC President Dana White saying he's not a top 10 heavyweight.
Penick's Analysis: Again, with how thin the division is, Overeem absolutely has a case for the bottom part of the top 10, but his level of competition doesn't justify his placement any higher than that. Rankings should not be about potential or skill set, and Overeem's K-1 fights don't count towards his spot in the rankings in MMA. Of course, lots of different writers have different criteria that they use, so I can only speak for myself, but my rankings are dependent upon a fighter's activity and level of competition. And it's not a matter of what fighters have accomplished in the past, either, as wins from beyond the last two to three years at the most cannot count for where a fighter is placed in today's rankings. So with that said, Lesnar remains in the top five as his wins over Herring, Couture, Mir and Carwin have him there, despite the loss to Velasquez. Again, it's not about who may beat who in a theoretical matchup, it's about who has already beaten who and how often they've done so. Overeem simply hasn't fought the competition to place him higher than probably #8, but if he can get into the cage with Werdum and Fedor in Strikeforce and defeat them he can get himself into the top five. I'm glad he doesn't put much stock into the rankings, because really they are useful to get a snapshot of the divisions, but aren't much more than conversation pieces outside of that, and really this entire conversation won't matter if he starts fighting guys that can help prove he belongs in the picture at the top of the division.
Source: http://www.mmatorch.com/artman2/publish/Affliction2/article_7555.shtml