“Being ranked number 2 pound for pound at 37 years old, I’m happy with that,” Jon Jones wrote on X, reflecting on his position fresh off his dominant title defense against Stipe Miocic at UFC 309. While Jones seems content with being ranked behind lightweight champion Islam Makhachev, the debate rages on. But here’s the catch, Jones and Makhachev belong to vastly different weight classes, making their skill set inherently distinct.

Can dominance at lightweight truly be compared to mastery in the heavyweight division? What makes a fighter truly pound-for-pound the best? Is it their accolades, skill set, or dominance over opponents? The debate is riddled with grey areas, making it impossible to reach a definitive answer. Amid the ongoing discussion, Chael Sonnen is challenging fans to reconsider their perspective on the Jon Jones vs. Islam Makhachev debate. Instead of crunching numbers or listing achievements, Sonnen proposes a thought experiment that cuts through the noise, a “litmus test” that no fan can dodge.

In explaining his analogy, ‘The American Gangster’ asked us to imagine this, “Your son is just about to walk into the cage. But, you have a magic wand where you can give your son the skills of Jon Jones or the skills of Islam. Whichever one you give your son the skills, he’s going to get in the cage and he’s gonna fight the other one. And if you begin to answer that question honestly, you will at the minimum have an objective, personalized list got [who is the] GOAT.”

But how fair is this test when considering the stark weight class difference? Jon Jones‘ dominance in the heavyweight division relies on size and power combined with technical brilliance, while Makhachev’s lightweight mastery hinges on speed, agility and precision. Is it realistic to pit them against each other considering skill sets and attributes tend to vary across divisions? Sonnen’s thought experiment is intriguing, but it raises just as many questions as it answers.

The system fueling the Jon-Jones-Islam Makhachev debate

This thought experiment bypasses traditional metrics and forces us to grapple with a deeper question. Who’s the better fighter at their core? As Sonnen elaborated, “We take titles and championships off of guys all the time, if they are not active. So how come we bestow a title upon somebody who’s not active. It was a fair debate.“, alluding to Jones fighting only twice in four years. Answering Chael Sonnen’s litmus test might simplify things for fans, but it also raises a question about the UFC itself – how does such a major promotion stumble with its ranking system?

Leaving aside Sonnen’s magic wand scenario, the actual UFC rankings are determined by a voting panel of media members. Fighters are evaluated based on their performances across weight classes, but they must be active to qualify. However, only champions are ranked in the pound-for-pound list.

This system has drawn criticism for its subjectivity. While Bones’ legacy 12 title defenses in two weight classes, Islam Makhachev has yet to test himself beyond lightweight. This disparity has sparked outrage among Jones’ fans, and even UFC CEO Dana White, who fumed, “I have to get rid of these CLOWNS!! Zuck, let’s get this AI deal done ASAP!!!!!“. His frustration underscores how divisive the P4P rankings remain, especially when factoring in the traditional metrics.

Does Jon Jones’ experience and versatility outshine Islam Makhachev‘s precision and discipline? Which skill set would you trust if the stakes were personal? Who do you pick, Jon Jones or Islam Makhachev? Let us know in the comments below!