Official Conor McGregor Thread (READ MOD WARNING IN OP)

Savage Tyrant

Devastator wrote: »

I think we have enough weight classes for men in UFC. IF they ever wanted more I hope they either go super heavy or straw weight but nothing inbetween whats already in place. Boxing has far too many weights IMO

100% agree... I'd love to see a Super HW division but I'd be 100% against carving up the current divisions.

Mellor

BOHtox wrote: »

There have been 8 lightweight champions in UFC history. (I apologise in advance for the bogey tabs) Height and Reach:

The tallest lightweight champ there ever was is Pettis at 5 ft 10.
The average fighter is 172 cm, or 5 ft 8.
The average reach is 69 inches, or 175 cm.

McGregor is 3 cms above the average height and would be joint second tallest champion. His reach is superior to all of them at 74 inches, and massively so.

That's all technically true, they were the lightweight champions. But it's also very misleading.

Pulver, Penn, Sherk and Edgar are really dragging the average down there. You have to remember that all of them were fighting in days when lightweight was the smallest division. None of them were actually lightweights by todays standards. Shrek retired before they lighter classes came in. Penn and Edgar dropped down to 145. Jens Pulver was eventually fighting at 135.

If you take the averages from Bendo onwards. Conor is fraction below the average height, and his reach advantage is the reduced - although its still decent at 3".

But I don't think height and reach tells close to the whole picture for a sixe in terms of divisional size. Paddy Houlihan is 175cm apparently, the same as Conor. His reach is 175cm too, the same as the average for all 7 LW champs. Paddy would be mauled at LW.

Devastator wrote: »

Rumble Johnson is doing alright after initially fighting at WW(170) and is now at LHW(205)

Major difference is that Rumble is now a similar size to current LHWs. Conor is maybe slightly smaller than the average Lightweight, but way smaller than a typical WW.

If he wants to stay at LW, and move to WW. He needs to get bigger, slowly over a year or two.

Savage Tyrant wrote: »

100% agree... I'd love to see a Super HW division but I'd be 100% against carving up the current divisions.

The HW is shallow enough. Super heavyweight would be a puddle. I've no interest in seeing 350lb fat fighters gassed in 30 seconds.

Devastator

Mellor wrote: »

Major difference is that Rumble is now a similar size to current LHWs. Conor is maybe slightly smaller than the average Lightweight, but way smaller than a typical WW.

If he wants to stay at LW, and move to WW. He needs to get bigger, slowly over a year or two.

You've basically answered for me Conor is not training to be a WW fighter so it seems obvious he'll be smaller. Rumble was way smaller when he fought at WW because he was training to be a WW now that he's trainging as a LHW naturally he's bigger.

I said, I think yesterday, earlier in this thread that I thought all this WW talk was very premature as nobody(from sbg) has actually said when they think he'll move up. He's got at the very least 5 more fights between FW & LW before he considers moving up so I wouldn't think it will happen for at least 18 months.

Lukker-

Rumble also cut 45 lbs once to make weight. He missed weight at WW so he moved up to MW. Ended up missing weight once too I think before he moved up to heavy weight.

Devastator

He cut 45 lbs? Are you sure about that? It sounds physically impossible to me. If you said he lost 45 lbs over an 8 week camp through training, diet and eventually cutting water at the end then yeah I'd believe that but cutting 45lbs? hmmmmm I'm not an expert but that just doesn't sound plausible, can anyone else confirm or explain this further?

Mellor

I'd be highly skeptical that he once cut 45lbs too. That's mean cutting from 215lbs. :eek:

On the other hand, if you asked me who once cut 45lbs, Rumble Johnson would be my first guess.

Mellor

I'd be highly skeptical that he once cut 45lbs too. That's mean cutting from 215lbs. :eek:

On the other hand, if you asked me who once cut 45lbs, Rumble Johnson would be my first guess.

Mellor

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y4bYwQtKsS8

RedemptionZ

sxt wrote: »

That just isn't true, Sean o brien would farmer fist mighty mouse to death. How would mighty mouse beat him? Tackle him to the ground?

Gas him out then TKO him. Simple. Just has to dance around for a few minutes which he's very capable of doing. Anyone who says otherwise...well I doubt they've ever trained before. I'm not exactly a BJJ black belt but I've sparred and seen guys much better than me rolling around with much bigger guys. The bigger guys always gas, fitness in combat sports is just outrageous, so much higher than a rugby players.

Anyway the point was only made as a segway into talking about why Conor wouldn't do great at 170.

slicus ricus

Devastator wrote: »

He cut 45 lbs? Are you sure about that? It sounds physically impossible to me. If you said he lost 45 lbs over an 8 week camp through training, diet and eventually cutting water at the end then yeah I'd believe that but cutting 45lbs? hmmmmm I'm not an expert but that just doesn't sound plausible, can anyone else confirm or explain this further?

Mellor wrote:

I'd be highly skeptical that he once cut 45lbs too. That's mean cutting from 215lbs.

On the other hand, if you asked me who once cut 45lbs, Rumble Johnson would be my first guess.

I think the point was that he had 45lbs to cut (i.e. he tried to do it) but missed weight by some distance and the fight had to be changed to a "Rumble Weight" bout. In 2 of his welterweight fights, he missed weight by 7lbs and 6lbs (which in reality is 8lbs and 9lbs given neither were championship fights) which is way out! Given that, he probably actually cut 37-38lbs which is probably the limit of what is humanly possible!!

Gamebred

Rumble tried to cut crazy amount against Vitor in Brazil one time If I remember correctly.

Mellor

Gamebred wrote: »

Rumble tried to cut crazy amount against Vitor in Brazil one time If I remember correctly.

He missed by a crazy amount in that fight, 10/11lbs I think. But it was mostly down to the fact the doctors made him rehydrated before the weigh-in.

I'd say most likely he thought he had an 15lbs extra after stepping up and either took it too easy in the lead up, or even put on mass thinking he room to bulk up.

MartyMcFly84

LW to WW is difficult to go between the two. I have fights lined up at both (amateur) and really just waiting to see how they go to settle on a division.

15lbs between divisions is considerable for guys who walk around around 175-180lbs. It would be a higher % of total body weight than the 15lbs jump from WW to MW.

It makes you small for WW. But then a considerable weight cut to make 155. Which really sucks in the amateur and lower level pro organisations. A lot of guys who fight at 155 would move to 160 or 165 divisions if the option was there.

EagererBeaver

BOHtox wrote: »

There have been 8 lightweight champions in UFC history. (I apologise in advance for the bogey tabs) Height and Reach:

Jens Pulver 5 ft 7 (170cm) & 67 in (170cm)
Sean Sherk 5 ft 6 (168cm) & 67 in (170cm)
BJ Penn 5 ft 9 (175cm) & 70 in (178cm)
Frankie Edgar 5 ft 6 (168cm) & 68 in (168cm)
Benson Henderson 5 ft 9 (175cm) & 70 in (178cm)
Anthony Pettis 5 ft 10 (178cm) & 72 in(183cm)
Rafael Dos Anjos 5 ft 8 (173cm) & 70 in (178cm)

The tallest lightweight champ there ever was is Pettis at 5 ft 10.
The average fighter is 172 cm, or 5 ft 8.
The average reach is 69 inches, or 175 cm.

McGregor is 3 cms above the average height and would be joint second tallest champion. His reach is superior to all of them at 74 inches, and massively so.

Are you sure about your maths? If the average height is 5'8 and he's 3cm taller than that (he's not, he's 5'9) he'd be 5'11 but only be second tallest after Pettis at 5'10... Is there something I'm missing here?

joeguevara

EagererBeaver wrote: »

Are you sure about your maths? If the average height is 5'8 and he's 3cm taller than that (he's not, he's 5'9) he'd be 5'11 but only be second tallest after Pettis at 5'10... Is there something I'm missing here?

the'8 is inches, the cm is centi metre: different type of measurement. 3 cm isn't 3 inches.

Mellor

EagererBeaver wrote: »

Are you sure about your maths? If the average height is 5'8 and he's 3cm taller than that (he's not, he's 5'9) he'd be 5'11 but only be second tallest after Pettis at 5'10... Is there something I'm missing here?

5'11 is 8cm more than 5'8, not 3cm.

Mixing imperial and metric is generally not a good idea.

Devastator

slicus ricus wrote: »

I think the point was that he had 45lbs to cut (i.e. he tried to do it) but missed weight by some distance and the fight had to be changed to a "Rumble Weight" bout. In 2 of his welterweight fights, he missed weight by 7lbs and 6lbs (which in reality is 8lbs and 9lbs given neither were championship fights) which is way out! Given that, he probably actually cut 37-38lbs which is probably the limit of what is humanly possible!!

I know what the point was. My point was and is, it sounds completely wrong! My understanding was a weight cut was to get rid of water retention and would get rid of about 15-20lbs(obviously this will be differ in diff weight classes, ie HW body frame will hold far more than a BW). Any talk of 30+lbs to me sounds crazy! Even if we take a low number of 30lbs to weight cut to get to 170, thats 15% of his bodyweight in a few days.

As I said before, loosing 45lbs over an 8 week camp is completely within reason but cutting 45lbs(or anything similar) within a few(3/4) days sounds way too far fetched imo.

EagererBeaver

Mellor wrote: »

5'11 is 8cm more than 5'8, not 3cm.

Mixing imperial and metric is generally not a good idea.

D'oh! Quite embarrassed by that one :eek::eek::eek:

Even typed "cms" and it didn't even register!

Lukker-

Devastator wrote: »

He cut 45 lbs? Are you sure about that? It sounds physically impossible to me. If you said he lost 45 lbs over an 8 week camp through training, diet and eventually cutting water at the end then yeah I'd believe that but cutting 45lbs? hmmmmm I'm not an expert but that just doesn't sound plausible, can anyone else confirm or explain this further?

http://espn.go.com/blog/mma/post/_/id/20678/anthony-johnson-ill-never-cut-below-light-heavyweight

I don’t think losing too much weight is healthy at all, but look who’s talking. I used to lose 40-to-50 pounds.

I don't see why he'd exaggerate, to me, even when he was fighting at WW he looked like a LHW to me.

He said he thinks he probably nearly died after some cuts.

Devastator

Lukker- wrote: »

http://espn.go.com/blog/mma/post/_/id/20678/anthony-johnson-ill-never-cut-below-light-heavyweight

I don't think that link backs up what you've claimed. "I used to lose 40-to-50 pounds.” doesn't clarify and as I said before sounds much more likely to be over a training camp than a weight cut at end of camp. I would like to hear from some peple with more knowledge about this though, where are the fighters on here and whats your experience?

MartyMcFly84

I don't think that link backs up what you've claimed. "I used to lose 40-to-50 pounds.” doesn't clarify and as I said before sounds much more likely to be over a training camp than a weight cut at end of camp. I would like to hear from some peple with more knowledge about this though, where are the fighters on here and whats your experience?

Its likely a combination of both I would say he likely dieted approx half and "cut" the other half about 20lb's. American wrestlers are known for cutting large amounts of weight and it is a big part of their culture. Sometimes they over estimate how much they can actually cut in the short term

The larger the person and greater the muscle mass the more weight they can loose through dehydration.

muscle stores more water than fat.

Roughly say he weighs 100Kg (220lbs) moderate dehydration is between around 6-10% of total body weight. 10% would be 10kg or 22lbs

moneyman

UFC 194 did 1.2 million PPV buys. Second most in UFC history.

http://www.tapology.com/fightcenter/events/34444-ufc-195-aldo-vs-mcgregor

Lukker-

MartyMcFly84 wrote: »

Its likely a combination of both I would say he likely dieted approx half and "cut" the other half about 20lb's. American wrestlers are known for cutting large amounts of weight and it is a big part of their culture. Sometimes they over estimate how much they can actually cut in the short term

The larger the person and greater the muscle mass the more weight they can loose through dehydration.

muscle stores more water than fat.

Roughly say he weighs 100Kg (220lbs) moderate dehydration is between around 6-10% of total body weight. 10% would be 10kg or 22lbs

Look at pictures from his WW days, he looks worse then Connor during a cut. Conor's a much lighter guy and is cutting 23-25 lbs. A 25lb cut wouldn't be too bad for him considering his muscle mass, I'd say he was cutting at least 35lbs for fight week most camps when he was at WW and even MW.

He didn't seem to balloon between camps like Hendricks either, so he definitely trims a bit of body fat over his training camp but not a huge amount anyways.

For me hew as always a LHW trying to cut down to MW or WW, he isn't much bigger since moving up.

BOHtox

RedemptionZ wrote: »

Gas him out then TKO him. Simple. Just has to dance around for a few minutes which he's very capable of doing. Anyone who says otherwise...well I doubt they've ever trained before. I'm not exactly a BJJ black belt but I've sparred and seen guys much better than me rolling around with much bigger guys. The bigger guys always gas, fitness in combat sports is just outrageous, so much higher than a rugby players.

Anyway the point was only made as a segway into talking about why Conor wouldn't do great at 170.

I wonder on the rugby forum do they talk about
'who'd win at rugby, Ireland XV or the top XV male fighters in the UFC roster?'

Such an irrelevant argument

RedemptionZ

BOHtox wrote: »

I wonder on the rugby forum do they talk about
'who'd win at rugby, Ireland XV or the top XV male fighters in the UFC roster?'

Such an irrelevant argument

Conversation has moved on, why bring it up if it's so irrelevant?

The Mighty Mouse point was made as a small intro into my response as to whether weight was important. I said that if skills are similar then size will have a massive part to play. BJ/Machida was cited and I said that was a different era where training wasn't up to scratch by today's standard and implies that nowadays a LW could never compete with a LHW.

RedemptionZ wrote: »

Completely different era, other than the HW division, which is a bit of a joke, the UFC is full of elite athletes in prime condition. If Conor/RDA/Khabib took on Jones/Gus/Cormier it'd be a bloodbath. There's a reason weight classes exist.

With all that said, Mighty Mouse would still beat anyone on the Irish rugby team in an MMA fight. Or any fight for that matter. Skill will always be more important than size. It's when the gap between the skills becomes small that size plays a major part and thus why we have weight classes. Conor is a perfect size for LW in my opinion. Any higher and he's fighting fellas that are naturally much bigger than him.

The overriding point here is weight classes exist for a reason. How that is the equivalent to 'who would win in a fight Bruce Lee or Mike Tyson' is beyond me. I made one reply, quite brief about why MM would win, in response to another person who said I was being ridiculous.

I'm not looking for an argument so I'm not going to dwell on this any longer in the thread but had to defend myself.

Dtp1979

RedemptionZ wrote: »

Conversation has moved on, why bring it up if it's so irrelevant?

The Mighty Mouse point was made as a small intro into my response as to whether weight was important. I said that if skills are similar then size will have a massive part to play. BJ/Machida was cited and I said that was a different era where training wasn't up to scratch by today's standard and implies that nowadays a LW could never compete with a LHW.


The overriding point here is weight classes exist for a reason. How that is the equivalent to 'who would win in a fight Bruce Lee or Mike Tyson' is beyond me. I made one reply, quite brief about why MM would win, in response to another person who said I was being ridiculous.

I'm not looking for an argument so I'm not going to dwell on this any longer in the thread but had to defend myself.

Obviously Bruce lee would win

Mellor

moneyman wrote: »

UFC 194 did 1.2 million PPV buys. Second most in UFC history.

http://www.tapology.com/fightcenter/events/34444-ufc-195-aldo-vs-mcgregor

No surprises, 1.1 was the indication. And UFC 100 was in its own stratosphere.

I remember a year ago people were saying it'll do maybe 400k and break the FW record and that's about it. Laughing at him when he talked of 1m buys.

EagererBeaver

BOHtox wrote: »

I wonder on the rugby forum do they talk about
'who'd win at rugby, Ireland XV or the top XV male fighters in the UFC roster?'

Such an irrelevant argument

100% there are those on this forum will tell you that a team of Conor McGregors would win the All Ireland hurling, football, and camogie championships, as well as the Six Nations and probably the Ashes too. It's all any the mental preparation and precision. You need to educate yourself, bro.

Devastator

Dtp1979 wrote: »

Obviously Bruce lee would win

I'll see your Bruce Lee and raise you a Hong Kong Phooey

EagererBeaver wrote: »

100% there are those on this forum will tell you that a team of Conor McGregors would win the All Ireland hurling, football, and camogie championships, as well as the Six Nations and probably the Ashes too. It's all any the mental preparation and precision. You need to educate yourself, bro.

Ack stop your nonsense :rolleyes: As if a team of McGregor's would be needed to win those, the man himself could do it on his own!!! I'm sick of people constantly underestimating the man :mad:

Devastator

Appears as if news of Ireland's featherweight world champion and soon to be lightweight world champ and reached the Congo :eek::D




hehe