[RetractedMonkey]

Quote: Originally Posted by aholbert32

I look at it as “is this fighter drastically worse/better than others in his weight class”. Thats what I do. The only difference is I use their performances as one of the guidelines. Not just stats. Not just my opinion of the fighter. All of those things combined. Thats how I determine if someone is better or worse than someone else in the division. When I talk about beating someone in the "top 10" thats just short hand for the forums. I look at Yancy Medieros' two KO's over Alex Olivieria and Erick Silva and those two finishes rank higher to me than Burns' KO's over Saggo and Moret. Now I watched all of those fights live. I was impressed by Burns' power but I will disagree with anyone who thinks those KO's were over better competition than Medieros'. I have no idea if Medieros' comp was ranked at the time. I just have seen them fight and I know how tough they are. So if you ask me RIGHT NOW who should be rated higher in power based on their UFC fights, its Medieros. So thats the thought process. Its not purely using stats (stats weigh more in my mind for things like TDD and accuracy) or where someone is ranked. Its a combination of a lot of things.

But, that quote highlighted isn't how you do the stats. The operative word is "drastically". I feel you have a more nitpick style (which is fine), whereas I am perfectly okay with making wide changes even if they aren't as close to accurate as humanly possible. For the sake of gameplay and in my view that the top 10 in any given division is not that much better than your average unranked UFC prospect.

I believe we've already come to the conclusion that we just have a difference of opinion in the way stats should be done. I GET why you do it the way you do. I just think the gameplay and replayability suffers with your way.