Lampley MMA comments following De La Hoya/Mayweather.
"Mixed martial arts is entertaining, but the kind of skill level you saw in the ring tonight - there's nothing in mixed martial arts which is within light years of what Mayweather and De La Hoya are able to do with their hands." MAAANNN let me say this mean-spirited and petty pot-shot made boxing look bad. But what the hell was his point? What did he say that no one knew previously? He essentially just said boxers are better at boxing. Thus he means to say MMA is a different sport, so why all the MMA hate, and it being an "inferior sport" talk from the boxing world? Did he not just prove what MMA has been saying all along? I have NEVER heard an MMAist claim he would win a boxing match with a legit boxer. This whole debate is ludicrous and should die. I firmly believe the two sports should and could co-exist, what do you think.
Re: Lampley MMA comments following De La Hoya/Mayweather.
Absolutely they can co-exist. I'm a long time (mid 1950's) fan and a serious fan. I also happen to like things like MMA, wrestling (real), judo, kickboxing, etc. I respect all disciplines and the people who have the courage to step into the ring. That being said I agree that comparing MMA to boxing is like comparing apples to oranges. If it's just a boxing match between a boxer and an MMA fighter, my money is going to be on the boxer. If you throw in takedowns, grappling and submissions I'd have to go with the MMA fighter. Just my humble opinion.
Re: Lampley MMA comments following De La Hoya/Mayweather.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canvasback
Absolutely they can co-exist. I'm a long time (mid 1950's) fan and a serious fan. I also happen to like things like MMA, wrestling (real), judo, kickboxing, etc. I respect all disciplines and the people who have the courage to step into the ring. That being said I agree that comparing MMA to boxing is like comparing apples to oranges. If it's just a boxing match between a boxer and an MMA fighter, my money is going to be on the boxer. If you throw in takedowns, grappling and submissions I'd have to go with the MMA fighter. Just my humble opinion.
Exactly. There is simply no fair way to guage which sport is "superior". If you ask a boxer to step into the octagon, he is no longer a boxer as he must find a way to at least attempt to defend the clinch or takedown (theoretically, even if the whole fight is standing and the "boxer" wins by KO, he is still an MMAist as there was the possibility of a takedown). If you ask a MMAist to step into a ring with a boxer, he is no longer a MMAist, as he would only be utilizing his boxing. It is an amazingly simple thing to get. However I keep hearing the same blind nuthuggery from BOTH sides. There is no way to compare the two sports. No way. Lets just enjoy both.
