Thread: Why dont MMA fighter`s turn to boxing?

I agreed with Miles' sentiments until he brought up Calzaghe as a plus point for boxing which really lowers the credibility of the arguement but alas, mistakes are made and can be forgiven..

MMA fighters don't make the switch because they would be destroyed. While I accept that MMA is a more "complete" fighting art, the fighters themselves are more like Jacks of all trades and masters of none. Of course, they have their strengths..Brock was an NCAA wrestling champion but the skills of an elite boxer who has mastered his craft just cannot be found in MMA (Think Floyd, Marquez etc)

Sure MMA is a more functional way to fight on the street but that doesn't make it any fun to watch. At least not for me. I have tried watching certain fights when friends on my Facebook post about how exhilarating the fight last night was..10 out

10 out of 10 times I've found the fight to be boring, scrappy and unrefined. Not my thing. Give me the sweet science all day long and twice on Saturdays

Originally Posted by Althugz

I agreed with Miles' sentiments until he brought up Calzaghe as a plus point for boxing which really lowers the credibility of the arguement but alas, mistakes are made and can be forgiven..

MMA fighters don't make the switch because they would be destroyed. While I accept that MMA is a more "complete" fighting art, the fighters themselves are more like Jacks of all trades and masters of none. Of course, they have their strengths..Brock was an NCAA wrestling champion but the skills of an elite boxer who has mastered his craft just cannot be found in MMA (Think Floyd, Marquez etc)

Sure MMA is a more functional way to fight on the street but that doesn't make it any fun to watch. At least not for me. I have tried watching certain fights when friends on my Facebook post about how exhilarating the fight last night was..10 out

You really don't like him, do you.

Boxing has a wonderful thing called technique and I will agree with your two examples too. Floyd and Marquez have exceptional technique. Calzaghe less so, but for me his perfection lies within his imperfections. He could only ever be a boxer. He is an avante garde pugilist, whilst they are textbook.

Originally Posted by Gandalf

Originally Posted by Althugz

I agreed with Miles' sentiments until he brought up Calzaghe as a plus point for boxing which really lowers the credibility of the arguement but alas, mistakes are made and can be forgiven..

MMA fighters don't make the switch because they would be destroyed. While I accept that MMA is a more "complete" fighting art, the fighters themselves are more like Jacks of all trades and masters of none. Of course, they have their strengths..Brock was an NCAA wrestling champion but the skills of an elite boxer who has mastered his craft just cannot be found in MMA (Think Floyd, Marquez etc)

Sure MMA is a more functional way to fight on the street but that doesn't make it any fun to watch. At least not for me. I have tried watching certain fights when friends on my Facebook post about how exhilarating the fight last night was..10 out

You really don't like him, do you.

Boxing has a wonderful thing called technique and I will agree with your two examples too. Floyd and Marquez have exceptional technique. Calzaghe less so, but for me his perfection lies within his imperfections. He could only ever be a boxer. He is an avante garde pugilist, whilst they are textbook.

Well that was a totally sensible and rational response. I'm dissapointed that you've left me with no retort. Apart from yes, I am a self confessed Calzaghe hater!

Originally Posted by Althugz

Originally Posted by Gandalf

Originally Posted by Althugz

I agreed with Miles' sentiments until he brought up Calzaghe as a plus point for boxing which really lowers the credibility of the arguement but alas, mistakes are made and can be forgiven..

MMA fighters don't make the switch because they would be destroyed. While I accept that MMA is a more "complete" fighting art, the fighters themselves are more like Jacks of all trades and masters of none. Of course, they have their strengths..Brock was an NCAA wrestling champion but the skills of an elite boxer who has mastered his craft just cannot be found in MMA (Think Floyd, Marquez etc)

Sure MMA is a more functional way to fight on the street but that doesn't make it any fun to watch. At least not for me. I have tried watching certain fights when friends on my Facebook post about how exhilarating the fight last night was..10 out

You really don't like him, do you.

Boxing has a wonderful thing called technique and I will agree with your two examples too. Floyd and Marquez have exceptional technique. Calzaghe less so, but for me his perfection lies within his imperfections. He could only ever be a boxer. He is an avante garde pugilist, whilst they are textbook.

Well that was a totally sensible and rational response. I'm dissapointed that you've left me with no retort. Apart from yes, I am a self confessed Calzaghe hater!

Have you ever boxed yourself.?

There is so much fail in this thread its laughable

Originally Posted by Dia bando

Originally Posted by Althugz

Originally Posted by Gandalf

Originally Posted by Althugz

I agreed with Miles' sentiments until he brought up Calzaghe as a plus point for boxing which really lowers the credibility of the arguement but alas, mistakes are made and can be forgiven..

MMA fighters don't make the switch because they would be destroyed. While I accept that MMA is a more "complete" fighting art, the fighters themselves are more like Jacks of all trades and masters of none. Of course, they have their strengths..Brock was an NCAA wrestling champion but the skills of an elite boxer who has mastered his craft just cannot be found in MMA (Think Floyd, Marquez etc)

Sure MMA is a more functional way to fight on the street but that doesn't make it any fun to watch. At least not for me. I have tried watching certain fights when friends on my Facebook post about how exhilarating the fight last night was..10 out

You really don't like him, do you.

Boxing has a wonderful thing called technique and I will agree with your two examples too. Floyd and Marquez have exceptional technique. Calzaghe less so, but for me his perfection lies within his imperfections. He could only ever be a boxer. He is an avante garde pugilist, whilst they are textbook.

Well that was a totally sensible and rational response. I'm dissapointed that you've left me with no retort. Apart from yes, I am a self confessed Calzaghe hater!

Have you ever boxed yourself.?

Yes, I was awful..but I could throw a better shot than Joe Calzaghe on my first day.

Originally Posted by Althugz

I agreed with Miles' sentiments until he brought up Calzaghe as a plus point for boxing which really lowers the credibility of the arguement but alas, mistakes are made and can be forgiven..

MMA fighters don't make the switch because they would be destroyed. While I accept that MMA is a more "complete" fighting art, the fighters themselves are more like Jacks of all trades and masters of none. Of course, they have their strengths..Brock was an NCAA wrestling champion but the skills of an elite boxer who has mastered his craft just cannot be found in MMA (Think Floyd, Marquez etc)

Sure MMA is a more functional way to fight on the street but that doesn't make it any fun to watch. At least not for me. I have tried watching certain fights when friends on my Facebook post about how exhilarating the fight last night was..10 out

I agree that a top MMA fighter would not have much of a chance against a top boxer. But a top boxer would not have much of a chance against a top MMA fighter. There are simply too many dangers for a boxer to avoid. If they get into a clinch, the fight would be over. I have not seen many boxing fights that end before a single clinch. Put your head down, turn your back.
Same with a UFC fighter in boxing. He will have no where near as much boxing knowledge. He will be a much sloppier boxer. Less power with bigger gloves. Not the same upper body movement a boxer needs to learn. Less ahnd speed, etc.
Now with time, either pesron from either sport could learn the other discipline and be just as good. It all depends on the person and not the fact they trained in another sport.
I know I will never get equal ground here as im on a boxing forum. But I have seen so many top fighters from other sports come to UFC and get found out. They only improve and stand a chance when they learn the full array of MMA.
The fact that you think a boxer has a better chance of doing well in UFC than the other way round shows ignorance of the other sport. If you took your time and watched UFC and the range of skills you need in the Octagon to survive, you would understand that a boxers chance with just the boxing discipline would not last very long at all.

Originally Posted by Leighton

Originally Posted by Althugz

I agreed with Miles' sentiments until he brought up Calzaghe as a plus point for boxing which really lowers the credibility of the arguement but alas, mistakes are made and can be forgiven..

MMA fighters don't make the switch because they would be destroyed. While I accept that MMA is a more "complete" fighting art, the fighters themselves are more like Jacks of all trades and masters of none. Of course, they have their strengths..Brock was an NCAA wrestling champion but the skills of an elite boxer who has mastered his craft just cannot be found in MMA (Think Floyd, Marquez etc)

Sure MMA is a more functional way to fight on the street but that doesn't make it any fun to watch. At least not for me. I have tried watching certain fights when friends on my Facebook post about how exhilarating the fight last night was..10 out

I agree that a top MMA fighter would not have much of a chance against a top boxer. But a top boxer would not have much of a chance against a top MMA fighter. There are simply too many dangers for a boxer to avoid. If they get into a clinch, the fight would be over. I have not seen many boxing fights that end before a single clinch. Put your head down, turn your back.
Same with a UFC fighter in boxing. He will have no where near as much boxing knowledge. He will be a much sloppier boxer. Less power with bigger gloves. Not the same upper body movement a boxer needs to learn. Less ahnd speed, etc.
Now with time, either pesron from either sport could learn the other discipline and be just as good. It all depends on the person and not the fact they trained in another sport.
I know I will never get equal ground here as im on a boxing forum. But I have seen so many top fighters from other sports come to UFC and get found out. They only improve and stand a chance when they learn the full array of MMA.
The fact that you think a boxer has a better chance of doing well in UFC than the other way round shows ignorance of the other sport. If you took your time and watched UFC and the range of skills you need in the Octagon to survive, you would understand that a boxers chance with just the boxing discipline would not last very long at all.

The fact that you understood my post to say "Boxers would do better in a cage than MMA fighters would do in a ring" befuddles me...did you even read my post before quoting it?

I said that I acknowledged MMA was a more complete fighting style. Strange how you misinterpreted that.

I've tried both and I found boxing more difficult of the two. In my opinion and experience the sweet science is alot more difficult to master than grappling and take downs.

Originally Posted by Althugz

Originally Posted by Leighton

Originally Posted by Althugz

I agreed with Miles' sentiments until he brought up Calzaghe as a plus point for boxing which really lowers the credibility of the arguement but alas, mistakes are made and can be forgiven..

MMA fighters don't make the switch because they would be destroyed. While I accept that MMA is a more "complete" fighting art, the fighters themselves are more like Jacks of all trades and masters of none. Of course, they have their strengths..Brock was an NCAA wrestling champion but the skills of an elite boxer who has mastered his craft just cannot be found in MMA (Think Floyd, Marquez etc)

Sure MMA is a more functional way to fight on the street but that doesn't make it any fun to watch. At least not for me. I have tried watching certain fights when friends on my Facebook post about how exhilarating the fight last night was..10 out

I agree that a top MMA fighter would not have much of a chance against a top boxer. But a top boxer would not have much of a chance against a top MMA fighter. There are simply too many dangers for a boxer to avoid. If they get into a clinch, the fight would be over. I have not seen many boxing fights that end before a single clinch. Put your head down, turn your back.
Same with a UFC fighter in boxing. He will have no where near as much boxing knowledge. He will be a much sloppier boxer. Less power with bigger gloves. Not the same upper body movement a boxer needs to learn. Less ahnd speed, etc.
Now with time, either pesron from either sport could learn the other discipline and be just as good. It all depends on the person and not the fact they trained in another sport.
I know I will never get equal ground here as im on a boxing forum. But I have seen so many top fighters from other sports come to UFC and get found out. They only improve and stand a chance when they learn the full array of MMA.
The fact that you think a boxer has a better chance of doing well in UFC than the other way round shows ignorance of the other sport. If you took your time and watched UFC and the range of skills you need in the Octagon to survive, you would understand that a boxers chance with just the boxing discipline would not last very long at all.

The fact that you understood my post to say "Boxers would do better in a cage than MMA fighters would do in a ring" befuddles me...did you even read my post before quoting it?

I said that I acknowledged MMA was a more complete fighting style. Strange how you misinterpreted that.

My apologies. I was reading and qouting as a continuation of a series of posts from other posters that proseed this conversation. When you said..... MMA fighters don't make the switch because they would be destroyed I thought you were siding with the poster who earlier said a boxer would be able to win an MMA fight but an MMA fighter would not be able to win a boxing match.
I am simply saying that whoever switch from one sport to the other would not stand much of a chance untill they learnt the full game of the other sport.
At the end of the day I think it is down to the fighter and not his origonal preference in sport.
You say an elite fighter could not be found in MMA. I would say that people like Anderson Silva and now Jhon Bones Jones are there or close to being there. They have mixed the knowledge of all fighting styles to counter any other single style that can be used in MMA.
I would say that boxers have over all mastered the skill of boxing more than MMA fighters have mastered the skill of MMA because MMA is a relitivly new sport compared to boxing. Not to mention the money pumped into boxing which always improves the quality of opponents in a sport.

Originally Posted by Manos de Piedra

I've tried both and I found boxing more difficult of the two. In my opinion and experience the sweet science is alot more difficult to master than grappling and take downs.

That probably means you are more naturaly gifted at MMA than you are at boxing. Also the level of opposition you fought in either sport.
Its nice to find someone who has done both sports. How did you find the ground game in MMA. Did it come easy to you or did you find people would be able to manouver there way around to always get the advantage. And when you go back into boxing do you find it hard not to try and throw a knee every time you get a fighter that puts his head down to avoid punches.

Originally Posted by PUGWARRIOR

Why is it that MMA fighter`s never leave the cage to box while boxers seem to gravite to cage fighting? You would think it would be the other way around seeing theres so much more money to make in boxing(at the higher levels) but im sure if anderson silva would do ok and use his name to make the big bucks. MMA seems a lot harder than boxing(i box and have never tried cage fighting) the rounds are longer and they have so much more to deal with ,wrestling and so forth.

Go back 10 years ago and there may be some substance to this but now, I have to say "WTF"

UFC is nothing more than glorified strikers. Chuck Ruled the LHW being nothing more than a tough SOB who could foil a take down.

There has never a UFC fighter who could match a boxer. The most stupid question I have seen!

Yes money is better in boxing, but pick one UFC fighter who could accomplish something in boxing?

Originally Posted by El Kabong

MMA fighters don't choose boxing for plenty of reasons, its just like why they didn't choose any other single martial art. As talented as guys like Anderson Silva et al are they don't throw punches like boxers or have defense like boxers. Plus going from 4 oz gloves up to boxing gloves you've got to feel that extra weight.

MMA is what it is...I don't like it for many of the reasons miles stated AND that the boxing knowledge is so poor from the fighters.

A lot of them are champions of a particular type of martail art. You get champion wrestlers. Judo specailists. Champions of Muay Thai which is a popular sport on its own. Kickboxing champions.
So many of the people who are the best in other particular sports move to MMA.
You prbably dont get a lot of top quality boxers move over to MMA because they earn much more money from boxing.
I suppose the reason why they move to UFC is because the sport they are in just does not pay enough or give as much fame as UFC.
I can understand a top UFC fighter or a boxer not wanting to switch sport. They have learnt a particular set of skills and a particular set of rules that the change would be difficult and would put them to begin with when they enter the sport at a dissadvantage.
There boxing knowledge obviosly wont be as good as a boxers as they have plenty of other training to do. Training that you can not avoid doing if you want to be competitive in a UFC fight.

Originally Posted by Preme

Originally Posted by PUGWARRIOR

Why is it that MMA fighter`s never leave the cage to box while boxers seem to gravite to cage fighting? You would think it would be the other way around seeing theres so much more money to make in boxing(at the higher levels) but im sure if anderson silva would do ok and use his name to make the big bucks. MMA seems a lot harder than boxing(i box and have never tried cage fighting) the rounds are longer and they have so much more to deal with ,wrestling and so forth.

Go back 10 years ago and there may be some substance to this but now, I have to say "WTF"

UFC is nothing more than glorified strikers. Chuck Ruled the LHW being nothing more than a tough SOB who could foil a take down.

There has never a UFC fighter who could match a boxer. The most stupid question I have seen!

Yes money is better in boxing, but pick one UFC fighter who could accomplish something in boxing?

Pick a boxer who could accomplish something in the UFC.