You should ask the same thing about that first post.
You are correct about the similarities in our statements, Rauno, but it is their conclusions that set our ideas apart.
When I say Tex winstreak is even longer than Jones full record, I am merely highlighting Tex is a contender to Jones and never that he'll right away dethrone him. You, in the other hand, say he is fighting for way longer time and concludes "he probably will never achieve" what Jones has already did. Out of the blue.
Both records are pretty much close in effectiveness. If only Tex were losing...but he was not.
Are you comparing being close to a number one contender to being one of the best, if not the best LHW of all time?
Of course I am comparing them. If we are not suppose to compare a contender with a champion, so what is the point there will be a fight for the title anyway?
Record wise both are very similar. Jones is the undisputed UFC LHW Champion now, but if he faces Tex and loses(real possibility - history backs me up), what you'll make of that?
The finish was impressive but he was getting worked for the most part by Ryan Bader standing before that. I like Tex but the more I see of him the more it becomes clear he is the Kampmann of LHW. Good to really good in every area but also very vulnerable at the highest level because of poor striking defense and wrestling that is solid but not overwhelming. He is lucky that the division is kind of mediocre right now with so many of the top guys aging poorly and no super talented young guys outside of Bones and Gus.
Come on, now, man. First Matt Brown (not you) and now Martin Kampmann? Are you comparing Tex, a guy who was KO only one time, in his very first fight a decade ago, with Kampmann and his irregular record, who was KO 5 times in a way lighter division? How come?
I say not every man gets hit by a fresh Ryan Bader and remains standing. Not mentioning magnificently reverting the situation.