ufc question--where does ken shamrock stand among the all time greats?

**VictorCharlie** · 04-22-2006 05:18 AM

Originally Posted by rush_381

Well if you guys wanna go with todays rules in the Shamrock vs. Gracie 2 fight...they never would have fought seeing as how Royce is a welterweight and Ken a light heavyweight, even heavyweight. And also by todays rules, the ref would have stood them up alot more because all Ken did was lay and pray. He scored a takedown, and did nothing. He wouldn't have won the decision today, because that fight would never take place like that. And also there are no longer 30 min superfights. So Ken did absolutely nothing to prove he was better than Royce, yesteday or today.

I disagree that Ken just layed and prayed...and in current rules with the standups Ken's superior striking and shooting would have helped. At the end of the second fight Ken looked fine and royce was busted up...plus if all ken did was lay and pray than all royce did was lay on his back and hope for the bell. Ken was doing more striking albeit to the body but Royce wasn't attempting to improve his position either. Outside of going for an ezekiel over and over. He didn't attempt to work a trianlge or an arm bar. Todays rules would arguably work against Royce. Without the 30 min to 1 hr fights he wouldn't have the ability to just wait out another fighter plus his style of fighting rarely wins decisions. These two guys are some of the pillars of the sport and no one will argue that Royce is one of the finest submission fighters ever but to say that they are anything else other than equals is absurd.

**rush_381** · 04-23-2006 11:42 PM

Royce said himself, when I guy like Ken has such a weight advantage and cant finish him in 30 minutes, that proves nothing. They're both exceptional grapplers, but if they were the same weight, Royce would destroy Ken. And we can say they're not equals just by the records because Royce's record against Ken is 1-0-1 while ken's is 0-1-1.

**VictorCharlie** · 04-24-2006 12:16 AM

yeah no one ever gets a bad decision and by your rational Mcbride is better that Tyson b/c he beat him once...don't throw records out there like that makes it cut and dry and if you've seen the fights then you know Ken was viable in both fights and was pounding Gracie into the ground in the second.

**rush_381** · 04-24-2006 07:42 AM

Originally Posted by VanChilds

yeah no one ever gets a bad decision and by your rational Mcbride is better that Tyson b/c he beat him once...don't throw records out there like that makes it cut and dry and if you've seen the fights then you know Ken was viable in both fights and was pounding Gracie into the ground in the second.

Which decision are you speaking of? Gracie tapped Ken out in the first fight and the second was a draw. Ken losing that first fight had nothing to do with a bad decision. And if by "pounding into the ground" you mean landed one good punch and tossed a few muffins, then I guess I agree. If Ken is as good as Royce, with that weight advantage theres no excuse for not finishing him except...wait, he's not as good.