Quote:
Originally Posted by Tony Starks
When I say "Old Kerr" and "Drugged out Kerr", I am referancing how he was as a fighter, yes he took drugs throughout his career, but he was dominant early in his career, that is the "old Kerr". The druggie Kerr, is the guy that almost fell asleep on Heath Herring before the ref stood it up and Herring Kneed Kerr's head into the 10th row. I don't know how much clearer I can be, if you don't understand what I am saying than there is no sense in arguing with you.
|
Its clear now. But you had stated two entirely different things in this thread. Are we supposed to read your mind? You said you weren't talking about the drugged up Kerr in your initial response to fullonshred, just the one that tore up the WVC, UFC, and Pride. When they were one and the same as you now fully admit.
And this is no argument, its a debate which you always claim to want.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tony Starks
It is not relevent because I am talking about the Mark Kerr that we have seen fight, to say that if he didn't do drugs, he would not have been good is pure speculation.
|
Likewise, to say he would have been just as good without the drugs is also pure speculation
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tony Starks
The fact is that in the late 90's there wasn't the talent pool that we have today, The best HW's back then were Kerr, Coleman, Shamrock, Frye, Severn and Goodridge. MMA math doesn't mean much to me, stylisticly, Kerr would give Fedor problems in a NHB rules fight, due to his wrestling ability and his use of headbutts. In a Unified or PRIDE rules, fight I will go with Fedor.
|
I agree, which works firmly against your argument as to how good Kerr was. If the guys you mentioned were the best of the heavyweights and Kerr never even fought one of them, what does that say to the level of opponent that he beat? Let's take a look at his opponents up until his first loss against Fujita in the Pride 2000 GP that you mentioned as the beginning of the end. In his 12 wins, he faced just 5 men with winning records in professional MMA. The best opponent was probably journeyman Dan Bobish or the undersized Enson Inoue. Now look at the same initial 12 wins of Fedor's record and there are 7 men with winning records, but some of those victories were over Big Nog, Heath Herring, the giant Semmy Schilt, and the two undersized Ricardo Arona and Babalu. This is not playing MMA Math. Its an examination of the level of their opponents They are nowhere near the level of Fedor's generation of heavyweights. Fedor has fought guys easily as powerful as Kerr in Kevin Randleman, Mark Coleman, Kaz Fujita, and Mark Hunt. He's battled K-1 strikers in Hunt, Schilt, and Crocop. His domination has been just as impressive as Kerr with much better opponents of all styles.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tony Starks
I was more or less talking about pills like vikes, percs, and Oxycodones. He abused these drugs as well and OD'd on I believe Vikes. You say that he was getting injections that don't have side effects, I'm not doubting it, but I was mainly talking about the drugs that I know he was taking. It would not put you at an advantage if you were high on Vikes for a fight.
|
The reason I brought up the painkillers was you said he wasn't taking anything before his fights, something that was completely false, as Kerr himself has admitted to. Then you tried to downplay their effectiveness in a fight, something that is also false.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tony Starks
But I am talking about Mark Kerr for his fights, not about the drugs he took.
Like I said I never disputed that Kerr took drugs or if they helped him, I am saying that the Mark Kerr that fought in early Pride, UFC and WVC would have beaten Fedor.
So the Kerr I am talking about was obviously on drugs.
|
Kerr was a very good wrestler as I have stated. I saw him live many times and always loved watching him compete. I was and am a big Mark Kerr fan. Yet you are too easily discrediting Fedor's skill set.