Islam Makhachev Claims Victory at UFC 302, Dana White Disputes His Pound-for-Pound Rank

https://icaro.icaromediagroup.com/system/images/photos/16239409/original/open-uri20240602-56-an2g1k?1717347694
ICARO Media Group
News
02/06/2024 16h46

In a thrilling fight at UFC 302, Islam Makhachev emerged victorious after successfully defending his lightweight title against Dustin Poirier. However, the post-fight press conference took an unexpected turn when UFC President Dana White disputed Makhachev's rank as the best pound-for-pound fighter in the UFC.

White acknowledged Makhachev's skills and referred to him as "one of the greatest of all time." However, he asserted that the number one spot in the pound-for-pound rankings belonged to Jon Jones. White praised Jones' unbeaten streak, his victories against tough opponents, and his recent move up to heavyweight, where he defeated a formidable opponent.

Makhachev, who has publicly expressed his desire to be at the top of the pound-for-pound rankings, did not take kindly to White's remarks. During the post-fight press conference, Makhachev stated that he believed he saved the event and the fans from boredom, considering the string of decisions leading up to his fight. He also mentioned that White had awarded him two bonuses, further emphasizing his performance.

Jones himself took to social media to respond to the situation. He expressed his satisfaction at receiving recognition from White but also criticized Makhachev's performance, questioning whether a last-minute submission in an unpleasant fight was justification for being considered the best.

It is worth noting that Makhachev earned an extra $100,000 for his victory over Poirier, receiving Performance of the Night and Fight of the Night bonuses.

As the debate surrounding the best pound-for-pound fighter in the UFC continues, fans eagerly await future matchups and rankings updates to see if Makhachev can solidify his claim or if Jones will regain his position at the top.

The views expressed in this article do not reflect the opinion of ICARO, or any of its affiliates.

Related