Notable Info

A software fix was implemented which will correct under-penalization of fighters in very specific circumstances.  This will mainly affect fighters who lose multiple close decisions in a short time period to opponents close to, or below their own rating.  The current ratings show the result of this change and it will be propagated to the historical and all-time rankings within the next few weeks.

By popular demand, we expanded our men’s pound-for-pound ranking to Top 15 instead of Top 10.

Men’s Pound-for-Pound Top 15

Check it out, and be on the lookout for more expansion and updates coming soon!

As promised, here’s our first attempt at a traditional pound-for-pound ranking of top MMA fighters.  Take a look and let us know what you think!

Men’s Pound-for-Pound Top 10

Women’s Pound-for-Pound Top 10

For years, we’ve featured the Division Dominance rankings for Men and Women.  Although similar to “pound-for-pound” rankings, these were not and are not the same thing.

Even though the posted definition at the top of the pages clearly states this, it seems many of our viewers cannot understand this or refuse to read it.  As some of you know, these rankings are very mathematical in nature and only reflect the proportional point differences that top fighters possess over fighters considered to be their divisional peers.  Throughout time, we added some conditional logic to eliminate outliers, but these lists continue to be mathematically specific and straightforward.

Within the next two weeks, we plan on launching “pound-for-pound” ranking lists for both genders.  These lists will feature separate point ratings that are calculated side-by-side, chronologically, alongside the typical ratings you see on our site.  However, the goal in mind is to make the rating points value the same factors that the fan and media lists do — but to do so consistently, accurately and timely.  Eventually, we will expand this to our Generated Ranking Sets to allow for a “lookback” in time.