What Powerscalers Get Wrong and What it Reveals About Combat Sports

There are entire online communities dedicated to comparing the strengths, feats, and abilities of fictional characters. These comparisons may be drawn between characters within the same story or shared universe, as well as across different mediums and other stories. For instance, one may match the attributes of SpongeBob SquarePants against Goku from Dragon Ball Z. The powerscaler may then declare that one character is superior to the other or would win in a fight based on these characters’ stats.

Some powerscalers approach it like a science, feverishly recounting every feat, win and loss. I’ve witnessed online powerscaling debates so intense that they escalated into personal attacks and ended in death threats. So powerscalers can be a passionate bunch, particularly when their favourite characters are in the crosshairs.

However, their logic in why one character would defeat another tends to be too simplistic and ultimately flawed. I see the same heuristics applied by casual MMA and boxing fans.

Fights unfold like calculus; they don’t add up like arithmetic

Most powerscalers use transitive inference (if A > B and C > A, then C > A) to determine or assert why one character would like beat another. For instance, if Character A beat Character B but lost to Character C, then Character C would logically beat Character B. Nice, simple, and straightforward. However, nothing in life is ever that simple.

We’ve seen transitive inference repeatedly fail in combat sports. One of the most famous examples is Muhammad Ali vs. Joe Frazier vs. George Foreman. Frazier beats Ali in 1971 (“Fight of the Century”), then goes on to lose to Foreman in 1973. If transitive inference was a reliable way to predict the outcome of fights, Foreman would have destroyed Ali in the Rumble in the Jungle. Instead, Ali handed Foreman his first loss by knockout in the eighth round.

That old cliché

If you’ve been watching combat sports long enough, you’re bound to encounter the term: “styles make fights”. Ali vs Foreman was a classic example of a pressure fighter going against and losing to a counter-puncher. We’ve seen this happen with Floyd Mayweather vs. Ricky Hatton (2007) and Gene Tunney vs. Jack Dempsey (1926, 1927). So raw power and past feats aren’t a good way to measure the superiority of one fighter (or a fictional character) over another.

However, while counterpunchers tend to have an edge over pressure fighters, there have been plenty of cases where pressure fighters beat counterpunchers. Famously, Marvin Hagler vs. Thomas Hearns (1985) and Roberto Durán vs. Ken Buchanan (1972). Power, precision and how effectively you apply your style matter too.

A successful counterpunching strategy requires the fighter employing it to be disciplined, maintain composure and punish reckless entries. But if the pressure fighter can cut distance without swallowing clean counters, they can find a way to win.

The fallibility of man

Fight predictions, even educated ones, are surprisingly unreliable. While analysts, betting markets, and AI models outperform random guessing, they still miss outcomes often enough to underscore the unpredictability of combat sports.

Accuracy hovers around 60–65% for expert analyst predictions in MMA and boxing. This means roughly 1 in 3 predictions is wrong, even when backed by deep stylistic breakdowns. Favourites win about 65–70% of the time in betting markets, but upsets occur frequently enough to keep betting risky. Odds reflect public sentiment as much as fighter skill.

Even AI predictions falter. According to UFC datasets, benchmarked accuracy ranges 62–68%. Even “high confidence” predictions (70–80%) still miss about 1 in 3 times.

All of this is a reminder of how fallible and inconsistent people are – those who make the predictions and those the predictions are based on. Even experts can’t account for all the variables that go into a fight – never mind casual observers.

Training camp injuries, weight cuts, or mental state are hard to factor into models. While pre-fight interviews can help gain insight into each fighter’s preparedness and mental state, they’re not foolproof. Things can change swiftly on the day of the fight. Family tragedy or unexpected bad news can destabilise a fighter’s mental state.

Fights are chaotic. A slip, sudden injury, errant punch, or kick, etc. can flip outcomes instantly. Fighters also age, evolve, improve, or regress. Future predictions largely hinge on past performances.

Bringing chaos to order

Powercaling and death battle debates are essentially a sport unto themselves. They satisfy deep psychological, biological, and social needs by providing identity and belonging, and offer a safe arena for competition, drama, and emotional release.

Some powerscalers and death battle enthusiasts aren’t completely unaware of how volatile athletic performance is. Hence, they’ll often try to put the contestants of a fantasy matchup on even ground.

Terms of combat would be something like: “Who would win between character A and B if both characters were at their peak and in possession of all their gear?” They may even dictate a venue or location for the meeting.

Under these circumstances, you can control most of the variables. The mistake happens when powerscalers attempt to take this principle and apply it to actual real-life matches. You can never assume that both fighters are at their peak at any given time.

Stories frequently rely on tropes to attract intrigue. One of the most overused is Underdogs Never Lose, which is closely connected to the concept of plot armour. These storytelling devices can dictate who wins in a fictional fight – not the supposed skills or power levels of the fighters. It would also be boring to see fights in fiction progress linearly. A protagonist that wins through ingenuity, wit and great is more appealing than one who triumphs through sheer power – at least to me.

While it’s tempting to view real-life combat through the same lens, it isn’t wise…

Conclusion: Separating fact from fiction

There aren’t many actual heroes and villains in combat sports, despite what wrestling would have us believe. This is one of the many reasons why it’s not a good idea to bring comic book, anime, or movie sensibilities into your assessment of sports, especially if you’re engaging in sports betting.

All gambling should be approached with a sober mind. You need to conduct as much research as you can, ignore transitive logic that many powerscalers lean on so heavily, look for odds where the risk/reward balance makes sense and track your bets closely. Remember to set a budget and gamble responsibly.

So what do you think? Am I being too harsh on powerscalers? Am I actually missing the point and overintellectualising it? Leave a comment below.