Tony Starks

precisely, like all drug abuse the positive effects go away and are overcome by negative effects. Tony Starks in no way condones drug abuse. Thats not the point though. In his prime Kerr was better than Fedor.

Gygax

That is the point. You said you don't care what he was on when he was a beast, but you don't condone drug use. Sounds like a contradiction right there. Part of the reason he was so dominant was due to the drug use that you don't condone.

__________________

Tony Starks

The reason he was a beast was because he is a world class wrestler, he was big and strong and had a well versed sub game.

He wasn't eating pills before fights, that would put him at a disadvantage, he might not feel as much pain, but his timing and reflexes would have been way off, he took them after fights to mask the pain. Take a pecaset or a vike then try to do something active, You will still feel a punch in the face from a 250 lb guy believe me, but it will be pretty hard to stay awake.

As far as roids, there are many fighters who have fought in PRIDE and various other international orgs who took roids, not just Kerr.

The point isn't wether Kerr's drug problems made him a beast it was "In Kerr's heyday he would have beaten Fedor" wether he ate pills and took roids or not.

Gygax

Thanks for letting me know he was a world class wrestler, but its not necessary. I watched Mark wrestle for Syracuse in the early 90's as he was in the same conference as my team. He weighed in at 190lbs back then. He then went on to win US Nationals at 220lbs, but never accomplished much on the international stage. After hitting the juice, Kerr ballooned up to 255lbs. Now he's up to a very flabby 279lbs, which is what he weighed in last week at the doomed WCO event.
Where should I start? Guys who use painkillers for games and fights are not stupid enough to use meds like Percocet and Vicodin which may cause drowsiness. Instead, they'll shoot for orals like Ultram which may or may not cause drowsiness. More likely for a hardcore guy like Kerr, he went for injectables like Toradol. They rarely cause drowsiness and when used in a cocktail, are extremely effective in blocking a bunch of pain receptors. It was medications like this that NFL players used for years to get through games, before the crackdown occurred in the 80's. Thus painkiller like this absolutely can and has been used by people to mask pain during athletic competition without fear of drowsiness, reflex compromise, or timing issues.
The fact that Kerr realized he might not be as dominant in the states since this country was starting to crackdown on steroid use is the only reason to bring this up. In fact, it supports the argument that without the juice, Kerr would never have been so dominant.
Its my contention that without being pharmaceutically enhanced, the Kerr you are promoting as a beast would have been a different fighter. A fighter who would have had a much tougher time defeating Fedor without the help of steroids.

__________________

fullonshred

Fedor would have beaten Mark Kerr, same as he has beaten most everyone else he has faced. He has strength, speed, quickness, skill, power, technique, heart, brains and ability. Not to mention he seems to be unflappable in the ring. Kerr has admitted using pain killers during fights. Look it up, Tony. But since you "know who Mark Kerr is", you should already know this.

__________________
It's better to Shred, than to be Shred dead!

mammoth91

Nice match up..This would have been a violent fight for sure, bloody and long. I say Fedor late by tap.


BTW, TS, when do you find the time to type ? Your hand must be very busy, seeing how much you love yourself and all....

__________________
Lau Kune Do

Tony Starks

But he was on roids, ant that is the Kerr I am referring to because the "Old Kerr" was a druggie, but he was a Tough SOB druggie.

Without naming names or pointing fingers, there were lots of guys in Pride who also took performance enhancing drugs as well, yet we still talk about how great they are and we judge them by the fights that we have seen, which were enhanced by drugs. We don't have any "drug free" Kerr fights to speak of from that era, so your point is moot.

Maybe you should start another thread saying, "If Mark Kerr didn't do drugs would he have been so dominant??" Because that is what you are arguing, Kerrs drug use has nothing to do with this thread.

Gygax

When someone brought up the fact that he used performance enhancers during that time, you said you were not talking about the old drugged up Kerr.
Yet now you are saying "he was on roids, ant that is the Kerr I am referring to because the 'Old Kerr" was a druggie". Which is it?
True, there were plenty of guys participating in organizations all over the world who used during that era, including the UFC, Pride, Pancrase, Shooto, etc. But how does that make the point moot. Which guys did he maul who were obvious steroid abusers? The topic of drug use is still relevant.

On the topic of his opponents, which of them would you say is his greatest victory? An undersized Enson Inoue? The lumbering Paul Varelans? Let's face it, Kerr faced a very underwhelming talent pool even for that era. Many of the biggest names of that era never ended up on his fight card. Would he have been so dominant facing real competition, especially without the enhancement of steroids and painkillers?

BTW, didn't you claim he would never take painkillers before a match as it would hamper his timing, reflexes, and make his drowsy. What happened to that argument?

Thanks for the advice as to what belongs in a thread and what doesn't, but just as you so thoughtfully place your opinion out there for debate, so can I and other members. His past drug use has plenty to do with this thread. In your opinion, he was an unbeatable beast. In the opinion of at least two members, he would not have been that unbeatable beast without the help of steroids and painkillers. Thus, that usage is fair game.

__________________

Tony Starks

when I say the "drugged up Kerr" I am referring to him looking like he just walked out of a methodone clinic in his fights with Igor V, Herring, Yammomoto, Whitehead. The "Prime Kerr", notice I used the word "Prime" in the thread title that I am referring to is all of his fights prior to the 2000 GP. I am not talking about the ups and downs in his life, but his "fighting career".

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.

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.

Let me make it clear for you.....

The Mark Kerr that fought before the 2000GP, with steriods and painkillers would have beaten Fedor Today. I don't know if he would have beaten him without, but I am talking about the pre 2000GP Kerr as he was.

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 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.


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.



1-2-3NHB!!!!!

twigz

Fedor by groin stomps! or sub...

LABJJ

It would be a battle, but Fedor by strikes. Fedor has a great TD defense and is not an amateur on the ground either. The painkillers would have given Kerr a great advantage. Depending on the strength of them, their could have been times where he felt no pain, But I think that Fedor has an overall better skill set even with NHB.

The argument can also be made, as it is against Fedor at times lately, Kerr never fought against great competition, so to say that Fedor would get dominated as this topic is speculation at best.

__________________
I’m not so enthused with people coming up patting me on the back saying you’re the best. I don’t need people to do that to me. If I win its only because I wanted to be the best one time in my life.

SmashingMachine

Rules make fighters, and in the NHB realm Mark was one of the best. In the world of NHB, I find it hard to believe Fedor would have the better skill set. The only thing Fedor would have an advantage at is striking. I like how everybody tries to discredit Mark, that he was a lesser or more of a fighter when he used pain killers. Fact is Mark Kerr, in his prime, was Olympic class material. The only reason Kurt Angle even won the gold when he did was because Mark tore his knee up in the trials...Angle didn't have to wrestle him. Kerr holds lifetime advantage on Angle. That said, on top of his wrestling skills, his subs are amongst the best in the world. Check his Abu Dhabi record...he's had wins over top notch guys...and since his coming clean. He's also only lost once in Abu Dhabi, to Arona, the only guy with a better win/loss than Mark. Go watch some of Mark's Vale Tudo matches. Fedor's paper skin would've let him a bloody pulp against Mark. Vale Tudo's a whole different game...and those guys he fought...could fight. Fedor's only chance would be to catch Mark striking. He might fend off a couple of Mark's takedown's but Mark would get him down.

__________________

Tony Starks

Great post

In a fight under unified or Pride rules the advantage goes to Fedor, but in NHB/Vale Tudo Kerr would win. Vale Tudo favors dominant wrestlers like Kerr because he can sit in his opponents gaurd and work headbutts, elbows and punches. He can also utilize the old chin to the eye trick. The Vale Tudo ring is even smaller than the pride ring so scoring the TD is easier.

The one chink in Fedors armor is that he cuts very easily, a few headbutts from Kerr and Fedor's face would look like Cherry Cobbler.

Gygax

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.
Likewise, to say he would have been just as good without the drugs is also pure speculation
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.
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.
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.

__________________

Tony Starks

Fedor's skillset is top-notch, but like TheSmashing Machine said, rules make fights and under NHB rules Kerr was the best. Kerrs most devastating moves were ones that were illegal in Pride.

Styles make fights, I think you will agree with me on that. Kerr's style under NHB rules would be a bad matchup for Fedor. Kerr has excellent sub defense and brutal GnP, coupled with his wrestling credentials and the fact that Fedor cuts very easily. That all equals a bad matchup for Fedor. If Coleman can take Fedor down, than I think Kerr could as well.

Who is the better fighter - Fedor
Who would win in a Vale Tudo fight - Kerr


You are an exellent debater Gygax,
*Tony Starks Bows to Gygax as a sign of respect*

BTW, where did u see Kerr fight live?