When Matt Serra dropped Georges St-Pierre to capture the UFC Welterweight title, very few people in the MMA community would have thrown the veteran fighter into their Pound-for-Pound discussions or considered him the best welterweight in the world.
So what makes Brian Bowles any different at this very moment?
Not to diminish his victory or take away from the accomplishment of handing Miguel Torres just his second career defeat, but since when does one win make you the best fighter in a division and an instant addition to the Top 10 Pound-for-Pound fighters in the world?
I ask this question based on the Bantamweight and Pound-for-Pound rankings of Fanhouse's Michael David Smith, both of which have come out following Bowles' shocking upset of Torres.
One knock against Serra that certainly doesn't apply to Bowles is a journeyman career and a record checkered by losses. While Bowles is unblemished and earned his shot at the belt by working his way up the ranks, Serra got there by winning TUF 4, a season designed at giving falling fighters a second chance.
But both made the most of their opportunity, regardless of how they got there, so why the drastically different views?
We've seen time and again that almost anyone can be beaten with a well-timed, well-placed punch; champion or challenger, contender or pretender.
Bowles caught Torres like Serra caught GSP, and both had their hand raised and a title belt wrapped around their waist.
While Serra was immediately viewed as a very weak champion, Bowles is being elevated to illustrious status by Smith when just 48 hours ago I would wager he wasn't in the Pound-for-Pound Top 20.
For me, being the best in a division and one of the Pound-for-Pound best in the world is a cumulative thing, not something that changes with one fight.
17 Comments
Loading more comments...
This comment and all replies have been deleted This comment has been deleted Undo delete