Printable View
people in the MMA circles tell me that theres more skill to it
i think that can be disputed but whether there is or there isnt the bottom line is, more often than not, MMA is boring
they spend most of their time lieing down
the best MMA fights i have seen are when they spend more of the time on their feet throwing punches (when it is more like boxing)
Just to be objective hereQuote:
Originally Posted by erics44
#1 There is skill to MMA but there's not more skill in it than boxing, it's just different...there are a lot more raw undisciplined fighters in MMA than in boxing and this is obvious in the fact that the fighters usually get away with flaws that if a boxer showed they would be KO'd right away. These flaws include: dropping the jab after throwing it, moving back in a straight line instead of circling out, standing in front of your opponent after you've thrown a combination, sticking your chin up high, and throwing wide looping punches. Now not every MMA fighter does those things, but I see those a lot and eventually one MMA fighter will learn to counter those things.
#2 MMA fans appreciate wrestling, ju jitsu, etc....I can understand and respect those martial arts individually but coupled with any kind of striking martial art it creates a mess
#3 You're a boxing fan, of course you like it when people fight more like that.
I'm not a huge MMA fan as it goes against my morals as a gentleman, for example I do not agree with kicking and I do not agree with hitting someone while they are down...I think especially in the hitting someone while they are down sets a bad example.
Quote:
Originally Posted by erics44
LOL, this is a typical ignorant statement by someone who doesnt understand nor wants to appreciate the finer points of mixed martial arts.
At the end of the day everyone is entitled to their opinion, you clearly dont like MMA, hence your statement, but to ridicule a sport when you dont understand it seems ridiculous to me ;)
maybe i dont understand, i have watched it tho with the intent of enjoying it, and i dontQuote:
Originally Posted by Mattyhitman
they roll on the floor and after a few seconds i start to get irritated just like in a boxing fight when there is too much holding
each to their own tho as you say
lots of people like watching golf :-\
To be fair i used to be the same, never liked it when the fight went to the ground, but after doing abit of BJJ, then ya get to understand it and learn to appreciate it more.Quote:
Originally Posted by erics44maybe i dont understand, i have watched it tho with the intent of enjoying it, and i dontQuote:
Originally Posted by Mattyhitman
they roll on the floor and after a few seconds i start to get irritated just like in a boxing fight when there is too much holding
I like to watch golf ;)
admittedly i do watch golf if there is nothing else to doQuote:
Originally Posted by Mattyhitman
and i do watch MMA if the only other thing to do is watch golf :p
its not a threat at all.
its just like rugby, American football or soccer. similar but has their own set of fans.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mnmc10
you could be right, i keep on seeing lots of times on this forum comments like "no wonder mma is taking over", so i thought id ask why?
The only real threat it poses to boxing is basically, for about 150 years+ boxing has led the way as far as combat sports go, but these days with all the money involved in boxing the promoters and the fighters like to make more money than they can spend in a lifetime in one night therefore the cards are no longer stacked like they once were because they can't afford to make £20 million for each main event fighter and the same again for the promoter and then put big names on the undercard. MMA and in particular the UFC fighter are not on anything like the money that Boxers are (I think the record purse is $500,000 for Chuck Liddel) so they can afford to stack the cards much better than boxing has been doing recently and ultimately they are getting a lot of old boxing fans watching their events.
As far as who is more skilled?? Elite Boxers are far more polished at what they do and if for example someone from another sport wanted to become either a boxer or MMA fighter they would find MMA the easier sport to reach somewhere near the top of. I'm not bashing MMA here this is just my opinion.
For example you have Brock Lesnar, big dude, strong as an Ox and former amateur wrestler before going and doing the fake stuff for WWE. He was sick of people calling him a fake and wanted to prove he was a tough guy. Now he could have chosen to learn Boxing and earned 20 times what he does now per fight had he reached the top or he could go to MMA which he did and he became UFC world champ after I think it was 4 MMA fights. Now fair enough he already had the wrestling background so MMA would probably always be the easier route but other examples such as Kimbo Slice and Matt Mitrione etc they could have chosen Boxing but didn't because they knew their mistakes would be punished within seconds against an elite boxer whereas in MMA you can get away with a lot of big mistakes especially when your stood up and not be punished.
Anderson Silva is probably the best MMA fighter on the planet right now and certainly the best striker in MMA, but when he tried boxing he was soundly beaten by TKO against a journeyman called Osmar Teixera. He then had another boxing match against someone who was simply there to even the record out. He had never been in a boxing ring before and has never been in one since. Some MMA fans have denied it ever happened but I can assure you it did, I'm looking for the video now and if I can find it I will post it on here. I have seen it before though.
Here is Andersons Boxing record if you want to check it out. Anderson Da Silva - Boxer
We must remember they are different sports though and Anderson is not a boxer he is an MMA genius if i'm honest. Expecting Anderson to be a great boxer would be like expecting Pele to be great at tennis.
Just like most sports, you have to understand it to appreciate itQuote:
Originally Posted by erics44
anyone can appreciate boxing because we all know about fist fights,
but mma you need to know in a bit more detail to understand it eg. What positions are more favourable , because to the untrained eye yes it does look like 'rolling about on the floor' as some ignorant people put it
dude, i dont understand it, im not going to pretend i do but i have watched enough of it so as, i think, i should really start to enjoy itQuote:
Originally Posted by Poom
the "rolling around on the floor" is the problem, theres just too much of it, you get some fights where they spend all the time there in one place holding each other on the floor
perhaps you make a good point, perhaps it is the simplicity of boxing that makes it so entertaining
I made such a comment and my reason being is that at least in MMA, whether it be the now defunct Pride or UFC, they manage to appease their fanbase more than boxing, and I have to say that they do a much better and thorough job attracting new fans than boxing.Quote:
Originally Posted by erics44Quote:
Originally Posted by mnmc10
you could be right, i keep on seeing lots of times on this forum comments like "no wonder mma is taking over", so i thought id ask why?
In boxing you have 4+ champions in 17 weight divisions that don't fight the best half the time. Way too many divisions and way too many belts along with way too much bullshit politics. MMA doesn't have that problem, well except for Fedor not fighting the best, but he's the only 1 I can think of. Another thing I respect about MMA is at least if there is a shoddy decision, there's usually a rematch on the way like Machida-Shogun. In boxing 1 guy doesn't want a rematch and probably runs off fighting other guys or goes to another division. Then in boxing you have hyped up shitty fighters that picks and chooses their fights way too much and are manufactured, Amir Khan is a prime example.
And about attracting new fans. Boxing in the old days was on regular network tv like NBC, ABC, and CBS. It's completely disappear in today's time in the USA. Back then my dad watched a young Muhammad Ali rose up through the ranks and challenge Liston for the title, he saw a young Duran, Leonard, Hearns, Hagler rise up in the same way, hell as a little kid I still remember watching a young Pernell Whitaker, Holyfield, Taylor, rising up through regular network tv in the 80s. Nowadays to watch those young prospects you better have a subscription to premium cable channels like HBO or Showtime. IMO and it has been documented by boxing historians, that the move from regular network tv to premium cable has severely hurt boxing and limited their exposure to a whole new generation.
You guys know why the NFL, NBA, and MLB are so popular in the US? It's on free regular network tv including the playoffs. They don't limit their exposure. Sure the NFL can go to a PPV for the superbowl or moving their games to premium cable and it will make boatloads of cash, but in the long run it hurts the sport.
Boxing shot itself in the foot by these decisions. In the 80s boxing was still a mainstream sport in the USA, what happened? Moving to premium cable where an entire generation wasn't that exposed to it. sure in the internet age you can catch a stream or watch it on youtube, but limiting your exposure on free network tv hinders the sport from growing.
I still love boxing, and always will, but boxing has a lot of problems.
I think eventually MMA and Boxing can have a Bo Jackson/Deon Sanders type of two sport star....but to be honest I think it'll be a lot easier for that to happen if the guy is a boxer first and MMA fighter second because you're going from strict rules to not so strict rules.
I completely agree with this. I think Mercer is a prime example of this too. Don't get me wrong I know he'll never be UFC HW champ, but he showed that boxing has a serious chance in MMA when he KO'd the former UFC champ Tim Sylvia in 8 seconds in a cage. And that is a man who is something like 15-16 years younger than him.Quote:
Originally Posted by El Kabong
I truthfully think that the best way to stop a boxer isn't so much with wrestling and submissions because as long as a boxer can keep his hands free he can do damage, it's vs a kicker that takes away leg strength, the ability to sit down on punches, and reach.Quote:
Originally Posted by rjj tszyu
Look at Carwin-Lesnar and tell me had a power punching heavyweight in boxing landed on Brock he couldn't have starched him out....I wouldn't want someone that had snap on their punches to land ANYTHING on my face or body with 4 oz gloves.
This is something I can totally agree with you on Lyle.Quote:
Originally Posted by El KabongI truthfully think that the best way to stop a boxer isn't so much with wrestling and submissions because as long as a boxer can keep his hands free he can do damage, it's vs a kicker that takes away leg strength, the ability to sit down on punches, and reach.Quote:
Originally Posted by rjj tszyu
Look at Carwin-Lesnar and tell me had a power punching heavyweight in boxing landed on Brock he couldn't have starched him out....I wouldn't want someone that had snap on their punches to land ANYTHING on my face or body with 4 oz gloves.
...well I'm glad we found something to agree onQuote:
Originally Posted by rjj tszyuThis is something I can totally agree with you on Lyle.Quote:
Originally Posted by El KabongI truthfully think that the best way to stop a boxer isn't so much with wrestling and submissions because as long as a boxer can keep his hands free he can do damage, it's vs a kicker that takes away leg strength, the ability to sit down on punches, and reach.Quote:
Originally Posted by rjj tszyu
Look at Carwin-Lesnar and tell me had a power punching heavyweight in boxing landed on Brock he couldn't have starched him out....I wouldn't want someone that had snap on their punches to land ANYTHING on my face or body with 4 oz gloves.
i havnt read anything but the thread title but its defo a thread, i mean i had never watched a mma fight a few yrs ago, now i watch more than boxing. because no fkin boxing on british tv so hell yeah its a threat
Just out of curiosity, is boxing still on regular network tv in the UK? For boxing has completely disappear from regular network tv in the USA since the late 80s.
There's no question in my mind that the reason why boxing is now a niche sport in the USA (for most of the 80s it was still a mainstream sport in the US) is because of it's disappearance from regular network tv.
I catch the odd UFC on, there is a bit about, but most the stuff I see is old.
I was saying the other day how I think Chuck could have knocked a few people out in his day, no doubting he hit hard and he'd be hard as fuck to knock out.
They'd probably struggle to a true boxer in terms of style, a puncher they could brawl with, but a dodger with good feet would frustrate them.
I think if a boxer went to MMA they would be too vunerable to submissions, just through lack of knowledge. Certain MMA fighters prob could box and would find it easy to take punches and stalk down opponents, but I still think they'd struggle unless they could turn it into a brawl.
I'm suprised Lesnar hasn't done it, he's done just about everything else. I'm sure he'd take a few heavyweights!
I don't think so, Chuck Liddell would have been found out early in boxing. You CANNOT just drop your jab by your side like that and live to tell the tale vs guys who know what they are doing. He would be a dangerous puncher, but he would have been sparked early and often given how he threw his punches and what he did after throwing a punchQuote:
Originally Posted by 0james0
Lesnar is just a wrestler....he can't box. The style that he has success with is wrestling and getting opponents on the ground...you can't do either of those in boxing. Shane Carwin can punch, but I HIGHLY doubt he'd be a decent heavyweight even given the state of the division right now.
I think the guy that would have done the best in boxing is Arlovski before his chin went.
Unfortunately boxing has pretty much gone from terrestrial tv in the UK, Sky now have the majority of all bouts being televised, so if ya dont subscribe then ya knackered. ITV and BBC did have a go at it a few years back but didnt really do a good enough job and now it's fell on it's arse. It's a shame as back in the 80's ITV was the home of big time boxing !Quote:
Originally Posted by generalbulldog
On another note, Arlovski would have done well as his base was kickboxing, so yea he has a good base to start with, whereas, like ya say, the wrestlers would prefer the takedown and then ground and pound.
Apparently Arlovski is going to be giving boxing a go soon. Golden Boy have signed him up.Quote:
Originally Posted by El KabongI don't think so, Chuck Liddell would have been found out early in boxing. You CANNOT just drop your jab by your side like that and live to tell the tale vs guys who know what they are doing. He would be a dangerous puncher, but he would have been sparked early and often given how he threw his punches and what he did after throwing a punchQuote:
Originally Posted by 0james0
Lesnar is just a wrestler....he can't box. The style that he has success with is wrestling and getting opponents on the ground...you can't do either of those in boxing. Shane Carwin can punch, but I HIGHLY doubt he'd be a decent heavyweight even given the state of the division right now.
I think the guy that would have done the best in boxing is Arlovski before his chin went.
As for Liddell, I totally agree again. Could you imagine him trying the "Superman Punch" against a top class boxer?? He would seriously be risking losing his head trying that shit out.
Look how Rampage stopped Chuck....that's boxing 101 right there!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AL43pn99oiI
That Left hook never came back to the guard position and like every other MMA fighter his chin was up in the air unprotected.
I think Rampage could have done ok in boxing had he trained in it his whole life. Apparently Freddy Roach had been training Arlovski.
I think against the right fighters, Rampage and Chuck could have won a few fights before being found out.
Would Chuck had been KO'd though with bigger gloves and a rule to stop you smashing his face in when he's on the floor?
What do they weigh out of interest?
Plain and simple, we watch sports because we crave excitement. When kickboxing emerged and I m not talking the Thai version which has been around almost forever with a little exaggeration of course, Someone once said that those of us that crave violent sports invented another one. I really give a rat's ass about yuppies that did not have the stomach to watch a man's sport so they started by canceling a high rated show on cable network USA. Let';s face it, there are those of us that are squeamish and there are those of us that can't get enough. We are fans. while those hypocrites trying to abolish boxing and focus their attention on our sport. MMA was stepping up to the plate, raw and unorganized. Boxing has been around and taken a beating from people outside the boundaries of fans like us. MMA has rules that I can't abide by and when yopu are on the floor and get hit behind the head while you are down, where's the sport in that you might ask. All I can say is to each his own and if the MMA makes you happy then more power to you. I have been practicing martial arts in dojos and not in a ring and I boxed amateur but now remember this, Boxing has risen again but those promoters and those wannabe executives that never broke a sweat in their lives are the real threat to boxing. I usually find one more quality in all the gyms I frequent, there are more gentlemen in boxing than in other sports and I mean the fighters.
I haven't read through the thread because I'm a bit drunk and more than a bit lazy, but MMA is a threat to boxing because it's well-organized, appealing to the casual fan, and because the best fighters are constantly matched up against one another. There is only one major body (UFC) and *gasp* the best fighters actually fight each other without any prima donna bullshit because a) the fights are easier to make thanks to the absolute control exercised by UFC and b) because losses are acceptable and don't seem to derail careers the way they do in boxing. MMA learned from everything that boxing has done wrong over the last 30 years and has created a sport that casual fans actually care about. Divisional champions are easy to identify and stacked cards with the best fighters actually fighting one another occur on a regular basis. The incestuous, fractured, and often overtly corrupt nature of boxing is a joke compared with the way MMA (in the form of UFC) is run.
In my mind boxing is a far superior sport, but it's organized and run in such an inept way that it is slowly killing itself.
They would both be cruiserweights 205 is light heavyweight in UFCQuote:
Originally Posted by 0james0
Yes Chuck would have been KO'd because unlike MMA you HAVE to get up by 10 and then come to scratch...if he got up, he'd still be shakey and easy to pick off.
good post for a piss head;DQuote:
Originally Posted by CFH
the cards are stacked for sure, there hasnt been a good big fight with a decent undercard for a long time in boxing?
sky are probably at the worst point ever not even the super six fights are on:confused::confused:Quote:
Originally Posted by MattyhitmanUnfortunately boxing has pretty much gone from terrestrial tv in the UK, Sky now have the majority of all bouts being televised, so if ya dont subscribe then ya knackered. ITV and BBC did have a go at it a few years back but didnt really do a good enough job and now it's fell on it's arse. It's a shame as back in the 80's ITV was the home of big time boxing !Quote:
Originally Posted by generalbulldog
On another note, Arlovski would have done well as his base was kickboxing, so yea he has a good base to start with, whereas, like ya say, the wrestlers would prefer the takedown and then ground and pound.
itv show a little usually british cards
espn show friday night fights & rerun old tyson fights constantly:rolleyes:
bbc have given up all together except amatuer boxing:mad: & a few big fights on bbc radio (thanks alot are we still in ther fkin 1930's):mad:
setanta sports was the best thing that happened to boxing in the uk, they really made an effort, but they fell on there arse:mad:
UFC can & i believe will take over boxing in the UK unless terrestrial tv gets involved
Actually most MMA organizations, well any recognized and sanctioned organizations do not allow hitting in the back of the head at all.Quote:
Originally Posted by johnsebastianmiran
MMA has rules, as does boxing... The rules are just very different as they are two very different sports. The ground game is an integral part of MMA. The only time you can hit someone when they are on the ground is when they have the ability to intelligently defend themselves.
Tons of fights are won by fighters who are on their back.
I'm a fan of both sports, I think they're both great for their own reasons. The main reason why MMA is a threat to boxing is the UFC and their marketing machine. As someone already mentioned they have studied boxing's structure and are capitalizing on their mistakes.
Also I noticed that here in Toronto atleast, they've been able to really capture the younger audiences.. some of who still enjoy boxing (but that seems to be the more mature ones). When I talk to younger guys it seems like that whole 'cage fighting' and the illusion of raw, no rules, anything can happen stuff is what appeals to them most.
I personally think that boxing and mma will co-exist. But boxing needs to take a few lessons from the ufc as the ufc took lessons from boxing and become aggressive with their marketing and promo. The MMA is constantly growing not because it's a superior sport but because the guys behind it have a more long term vision and a better business model, imo.
the average age of a boxing fan is alot older than the average age of mma fan, there lies the foundation for mma to overtake boxing.
plus its easier for a boxing fan to get into mma than vice versa what with boxing having 17 weight catagories & multiple titles!
I've been getting more and more into MMA over the last three or so years. I used to be a hater but now I get more pumped for a UFC card than I do for all but the biggest boxing fights.
I'm not sure how the OP can say MMA is boring, for the most part it's far more entertaining than boxing imo. Better matchups, far more variety in fights, stacked fightcards, less predictable, more upsets, more brutal, it's a great, great sport imo.
Compare the recent UFC cards with the supposedly 'stacked' Marquez Diaz 2 boxing card. That was supposed to be one of the best boxing cards top to bottom and the undercard was mostly dull dull dull. I found the Linares Juarez and Casamayor Gurerro fights painful to watch. It did liven up a lot when Daniel Jacobs got knocked out and the main event was pretty good, but I found the UFC far more entertaining, the Nelson Dos Santos fight was great, Matt Hughes won in impressive style, Clay Guida is always entertaining and the main event for me was epic with Anderson Silva getting a 4 round beat down before saving himself from disaster in the last round.
There's hardly ever a boxing event that can compare top to bottom like that and the UFC does it pretty much routinely now. It's not just them either Showtimes Strikeforce shows have had some great fights too, and unlike woman's boxing which is sleep inducing, the girls in MMA can really kick ass and put on some epic slugfests.
MMA is a great sport, it's still in its infancy but its establishing itself as a major rival to boxing right now.
Guys like Randy Couture, Chuck Liddell and Rampage Jackson are bigger household names than most boxers now as evidenced by the fact that both Jackson and Couture (and even Bob Sapp) have made the transition to films.
It's just got a much younger, cooler image and is eaiser to understand and more viscarally appealing to the casual fan.
Those same people that like the "younger cooler image" of UFC also like Jersey Shore.....so no thank you.
ha I know what you're saying but imo fighting is supposed to be a raw sport, yet boxing's image is tuxedo's and bow ties, whereas UFC's is baseball caps, affliction clothing and tatoos. You can mock it, but that more appeals to the mentality of most who enjoy watching fights.Quote:
Originally Posted by El Kabong
Boxing in order to gain credibility over the years has tried to civilise combat, turning into pugilism with the Queensbury rules, a respectible sport. MMA has aimed for those who like explosions, big action movies and rap music. They have embraced things like Twitter and actively associate themselves with younger interests. It's simply more hip. The purists can look down on it, the same way we might look down on the Twilight films. But it wont stop angst ridden teens flocking to the cinema in their tens of thousands to catch a glimpse of Edward Cullen....
I'm more than willing to wear a tux...I wouldn't be caught dead in an Affliction t-shirt.
There's "classy" and then there's "classless" and I prefer boxing to be classy.