"CYBORG"

"CYBORG" any one who thinks any one on this list is better than "CYBORG" is crazy this is not a beauty contest ! "CYBORG" would knock out all of the ones on this list ! 

And where has all this knowledge gotten you Bill? Did your "panache" bring you any success in life? 

I'll just say no, so in the game of life the person I shall NOT be taking any advice from, is in fact Bill Burgess.---Messiah

Wait a minute.  Hold your horses.  You asked me a question and then you go answer it yourself.  But I want to answer it myself, if you don't mind.

Success is a relative term and its definition varies according to the individual.  Some define success like this.  "He who dies with the most toys, wins."  A material definition.  Others define it as how much money you have or make or inherit.  Or how famous you are.  Or how talented you are.  Or how good your artistic creations you left the world.  

All these things are fine and well but don't satisfy folks like me.  Money is important because you need a certain amount to get along and be comfortable.  But man does not live by bread alone.

I am not impressed by wealth, fame, talent, intelligence.  I am impressed with goodness.  How loving is your heart?  What is the quality of the goodwill you extend to others.

My definition of success is how much love can you generate.  How much help can you extend to others to help them on their way.  How much good will you leave behind.  How many lives did you assist, how many friends did you make feel better.

Mother Teresa didn't make much money but she helped thousands.  She was successful.  Albert Schweitzer was a Christian humanitarian/physician and medical missionary in Africa.  He didn't make money, either, but he helped save countless lives.  He was successful.  I try every day to see how much good I can get done.  I enjoy making lists and documenting lives.  I have many online projects that others have enjoyed.  Some of my projects have counters on them and have over 300,000 people who have viewed them.  I think that is a good thing.  Here is one such project. Over 368,000 people have viewed it.

http://www.baseball-fever.com/showthread.php?57538-Meet-The-Sports-Writers

Here is another project of vintage baseball photos.  318,000 people have viewed it.
http://www.baseball-fever.com/showthread.php?40306-Historical-Archival-Photographs

Still another project of rare, vintage baseball photos.  126,000 people have viewed it.
http://www.baseball-fever.com/showthread.php?75602-Bill-s-Rare-Photo-Finds

I earn my keep with my job during the day and then try to help the world with my projects at home. I am successful, despite what others think.

* Edited at 05.17.2013, 4:26 PM ET *

Not to poop on your accomplishments, But I'm pretty sure the views on the links you posted counts non-unique views, meaning opening it up and f5ing once is two views.

@Bill I agree with ya about the definition of success!

I know your not a big rap fan but here is a couple lines from one of my songs


Who is successful in your mind, the highest salary celebrity?
Hold up wait it shouldn't get defined by earnings this heavily

Success rests in all of us like a bear hibernating waiting to be woke yes you can still have it if your broke!

@Jay: I am not sure when Ronda did the ESPN cover, but its pretty insulting that someone would even insinuate that my interest in her was based on seeing more of her body than I normally would in one of her fights.

I met Ronda at a time when I was starting to get annoyed by all the press she was receiving and she was really cool. That was over a year ago. Aside from that, I was very vocal about my belief that Tate would beat Ronda and that Ronda didn't have the credentials for anyone to predict otherwise. When she proved me wrong she gained my respect big time. When she went on to thoroughly embarrass Kaufmann, who is one of my favorite female fighters, she gained even more of my respect.

When I saw that Ronda was upset by how exposed she was in the ESPN layout I decided not to look at it again. I have listened to her story, it resonates with me, I am emotionally involved in her story as a fighter and as a person in general. On top of that, Frank Mir and the Gracies are giving her props (which, I don't know, maybe just a little legitimizes her skills).

Now, while I am sure that it was not your intention to insult me personally, I am very much offended by your response to my comment. I have come to respect you as an MMA fan and as a forum poster so I was a bit surprised to find such an inflammatory post from you.

WOW! This thread has gotten really out of hand....

@Bill Burgess "Success is a relative term and its definition varies according to the individual."

Nothing is relative. Total ********.

"I am impressed with goodness."


You get a pass for the relativism ******** because of that Platonic line.

@MaDmike  The number of views is nice but not the most important thing.  I have received almost 20 emails of the families of the sports writers who I profiled, thanking me profusely for acknowledging that their relative left footprints and is remembered.

@ JudoRandori - You're one of the few that has actually given sound reasoning for being a fan of Ronda Rousey and having respect for her as a fighter. I think many people miss my point when I talk about her posing in ESPN Magazine. If it ever sounds like that discredit Rousey for her wins, her skill, as a person, or discredit her legitimate fans, then I apologize for coming as offensive or disrespectful, because that was not my intention at all.

As an MMA fighter, I actually do respect Rousey quite a bit. I mean come on, how can anybody not? She has won all of her fights thus far by 1st round armbar submission. No matter if she goes on to become the greatest women fighter of all time, or if she ends up having a career that fades into obscurity, her legacy is already written for having 9 1st round armbar submissions.

What gets me, is so many people giving her credit as being the best p4p WMMA fighter, for such stupid reasons as "she's hot", "did you see her layout for ESPN Magazine?", "she fights for the UFC", or "because Dana White says that she is best WMMA fighter in the world." Then people want to discredit Cyborg for such ******** reasons as, "she's ugly", "she looks like a man", "they should call her Guyborg", "she's a cheater", "she's not relevant to WMMA because she doesn't fight for the UFC", "Dana White she's not relevant to MMA, so I'm not going to give her any credit", or because she doesn't feel comfortable fighting at 135, which is the weight class that she doesn't fight at and hasn't fought at. 

So maybe I got a little heated and said some things that could be taken out of context, but trust me, I don't hate or discredit Rousey on anything, but I do think that she is the one that is afraid to fight Cyborg, and I do believe that Cyborg is the better fighter.

Understood, man. Personally I discredit Santos mainly because we have no idea how she fights without steroids. And I credit Ronda because she gives all her opponents her playbook and they still can't even make it out of the 1st round with her. Seriously, name one other fighter that has such a dominant will. It can't be done.

So, you work hard all day, get home, and to unwind, you go to tapology, and to recreate, you go rogue, and feel the need to get down and dirty, get mean-spirited, use your worst, most 'honest' language, and insult anyone who disagrees with you?

If that is a a good reason to go rogue and ridicule, demean, belittle, taunt, bait, and insult, I'd rather you feel uncomfortably dishonest and feign good manners and fake diplomacy.  

Fake good manners until you learned the knack of having it feel natural.  Everyone else did.  And if you do it right, it works.  What's best for the good of the group is best for the individual.

@ Judo - So far from what I've seen in the difference between Rousey and Cyborg is that I think Cyborg is the more well-rounded fighter everywhere the fight takes place, she's more dangerous on the feet, and just as relentless in going for the finish as Rousey is, if not more. Her last fight, she didn't get popped for roids, so there might be an indication of how she fights without roids, but then again it just might mean she's learned how to get around the drug screens. Either way, if Rousey and Cyborg were to fight now, and judging by there most recent fights, it seems to me that Rousey doesn't really care for the stand-up, and she definitely doesn't like getting hit. Cyborg hits with a lot of power, swings with everything that she's got on every punch and kick. Basically, Cyborg throws with bad intentions. Rousey has a good submission game, but if she were to turn her back on Cyborg like she did against Carmouche, Cyborg would've finished the choke, or would've beat into submission, or until the referee pulled her off. Once Cyborg smells blood, she is absolutely relentless, and thus far unstoppable.

For Rousey all she has the armbar, but in her defense, that armbar has come out of nowhere, and I fully agree. Everyone who has faced Rousey, knows her ace in the hole, and yet there's nothing they can do to stop it, but I do think that Cyborg could stop it. Cyborg's grappling and submission defense keeps improving with each passing day. You look at her fight  with Carano, and her fights since, she's improved greatly all the way around. Rousey still needs to develop her stand-up game, and against a fighter like Cyborg, Rousey can't just be content to rely on her armbar.

I propose a toast to jaykool, the king of the Rousey/Cyborg analyzers.  

Seems to me that Rousey is in a similar position to Royce Gracie.  Gracie too won despite his opponents knew what was coming.  But the opponents lost because in that early stage of MMA, there were no true MMA fighters trained like we know of today.  

Women's MMA is in a similar position to men's MMA was in 1993-96.  When the sport evolved, it bypassed Gracie.  He never learned a standup.  So, Rousey is being gifted wins by the sport due to its lack of evolution.  Whe women's MMA evolves more, those without a standup will be bypassed.  

It's why everyone wants to see this fight. So many questions.
1) Can Rousey take down Cyborg?
2) How good is Rousey's chin?
3) How will Rousey do against a fighter with top level BJJ?

I'd say #3 is Ronda's biggest concern. A bronze medal in judo means she can take down anyone, and Rousey is great at getting inside and initiating the clinch. But Cyborg is legit on the ground and definitely has a better ground game than anyone Ronda has faced, including Tate.

@ amp112 - Great post. Had to give you thumbs up on that one.

@ Bill Burgess - I raise my glass to you sir. Cheers!!!!

I really believe Ronda's success is due to a lack of women with elite BJJ.

I love Ronda, but we've seen several fighters with a huge advantage on the ground unable to submit an opponent with a lesser pedigree. Demian Maia for example. He was unable to submit Kendall Grove, Mario Miranda, Dan Miller, and Jorge Santiago when he had them in danger, even though his BJJ is clearly better than theirs. All those fighters have BJJ black belts, but not on Maia's level.

So what happens when Ronda fights someone who is good enough to avoid her armbars and get back up?

* Edited at 05.19.2013, 6:58 AM ET *

*Note ignore my list. 

That is why I truly think Zingano will test her. Zingano has some sick JJ. By far the best Ronda has been up against.

By far? Bit of a stretch...

Mike's an idiot.

so we'll see how Ronda does against a BJJ black belt . someone who has won tournaments , someone like Edaine Gomes.  oh waiiiiit........

* Edited at 05.19.2013, 12:40 PM ET *

The reason Ronda Rousey is able to win her fights so far is that woman's MMA is still in its embryonic stage of existence.  Women's MMA today is where Men's MMA was in 2001.  Why do I say that?

Because UFC 12 was the first UFC event that separated fighters into weight classes.  Before UFC 12, on February 7, 1997, all UFC fighters were lumped into one class, but as of February 7, 1997, UFC 12 was the first UFC event to feature weight classes; heavyweights (200 lb and over) and lightweights (199 lb and under) battled in two separate mini tournaments, each consisting of two semifinal bouts and a finals match.

So, woman's MMA today is where men's MMA was in 2001.  The women do not even have enough people to form more than a single weight division.  If the UFC wanted, they could import them and form those divisions, but as of today, they are not choosing to do so.

When Zuffa bought the rights to the UFC brand name in January, 2001, their very first priority was to get the sport sanctioned, to become legitimate.  The New Jersey State Athletic Commission, working with the California State Athletic Commission sanctioned the UFC, thereby opening the doors back to cable PPV, and legalizing the sport across the US.  The price of sanctioning was the complete rebranding of the sport, with weight divisions, rounds, in-cage rules, restrictions on moves, etc.

All these developments led to greater advertsing, corporate sponsorships, and general acceptance in the public perception of what the sport was all about.

So, today, woman's MMA is roughly where men's MMA was around 2001.  

* Edited at 05.19.2013, 2:48 PM ET *