-
Re: How does boxing compare to UFC
Quote:
Originally Posted by Punisher136
it wasn't me after that post "sad click courtesy" i announce all of mine
Again Bro you have the right to entertain yourself in any matter you choose.... its all subjective and up to the individual.. I just feel being a practitioner of it that I have an obligation to correct some wrong facts about it... I will never cram my belief in it down your throat... I know it suprises most people when I tell them about my knowledge of it, when they know what a huge and semi-knowledgeable ;D Boxing fan I am
-
Re: How does boxing compare to UFC
Quote:
Originally Posted by JT Rock
Quote:
Originally Posted by Punisher136
it wasn't me after that post "sad click courtesy" i announce all of mine
Again Bro you have the right to entertain yourself in any matter you choose.... its all subjective and up to the individual.. I just feel being a practitioner of it that I have an obligation to correct some wrong facts about it... I will never cram my belief in it down your throat... I know it suprises most people when I tell them about my knowledge of it, when they know what a huge and semi-knowledgeable ;D Boxing fan I am
This is just difused anger because me and my friend usually argue about it and it ends in me bringing up kurt kobains suicide and him making fun of ali's parkinson's disease. It becomes a very malicious argument indeed. So everytime i engage in a discussion about mma i go on the offensive because it's what im used to doing when discussing such a topic.
-
Re: How does boxing compare to UFC
Quote:
Originally Posted by Punisher136
Quote:
Originally Posted by JT Rock
Quote:
Originally Posted by Punisher136
it wasn't me after that post "sad click courtesy" i announce all of mine
Again Bro you have the right to entertain yourself in any matter you choose.... its all subjective and up to the individual.. I just feel being a practitioner of it that I have an obligation to correct some wrong facts about it... I will never cram my belief in it down your throat... I know it suprises most people when I tell them about my knowledge of it, when they know what a huge and semi-knowledgeable ;D Boxing fan I am
This is just difused anger because me and my friend usually argue about it and it ends in me bringing up kurt kobains suicide and him making fun of ali's parkinson's disease. It becomes a very malicious argument indeed. So everytime i engage in a discussion about mma i go on the offensive because it's what im used to doing when discussing such a topic.
No worries man if you were big on MMA you would be posting on an MMA forum... Just like if you go on an MMA forum they would be poo pooing Boxing... Just the nature of the beast unless your a fan of both like myself
-
Re: How does boxing compare to UFC
Quote:
Originally Posted by JT Rock
Quote:
Originally Posted by Punisher136
Quote:
Originally Posted by JT Rock
Quote:
Originally Posted by Punisher136
it wasn't me after that post "sad click courtesy" i announce all of mine
Again Bro you have the right to entertain yourself in any matter you choose.... its all subjective and up to the individual.. I just feel being a practitioner of it that I have an obligation to correct some wrong facts about it... I will never cram my belief in it down your throat... I know it suprises most people when I tell them about my knowledge of it, when they know what a huge and semi-knowledgeable ;D Boxing fan I am
This is just difused anger because me and my friend usually argue about it and it ends in me bringing up kurt kobains suicide and him making fun of ali's parkinson's disease. It becomes a very malicious argument indeed. So everytime i engage in a discussion about mma i go on the offensive because it's what im used to doing when discussing such a topic.
No worries man if you were big on MMA you would be posting on an MMA forum... Just like if you go on an MMA forum they would be poo pooing Boxing... Just the nature of the beast unless your a fan of both like myself
yeah thats how things work.
-
Re: How does boxing compare to UFC
....I think Mikkel Kessler is really an MMA fighter how else do you explain those horrible tatoos???
MMA is bullcrap I don't give a fuck who disagrees with me but you must realize I'm NEVER GOING TO LIKE IT so just let it go.
I don't like kicking, I don't like grappling, I don't like ground and pound....I think they are all bitch moves, pardon me for having some couth in my fighting. Mind you I don't go around picking fights with people and challenging people to duels and so I conduct myself as a gentleman while not fighting as well as while fighting....I have no issue with beating the piss out of someone and then going and buying a beer for them
-
Re: How does boxing compare to UFC
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lyle
....I think Mikkel Kessler is really an MMA fighter how else do you explain those horrible tatoos???
MMA is bullcrap I don't give a F*** who disagrees with me but you must realize I'm NEVER GOING TO LIKE IT so just let it go.
I don't like kicking, I don't like grappling, I don't like ground and pound....I think they are all bitch moves, pardon me for having some couth in my fighting. Mind you I don't go around picking fights with people and challenging people to duels and so I conduct myself as a gentleman while not fighting as well as while fighting....I have no issue with beating the piss out of someone and then going and buying a beer for them
YEA!!! Well you smell like poop.... ;D
-
Re: How does boxing compare to UFC
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lyle
....I think Mikkel Kessler is really an MMA fighter how else do you explain those horrible tatoos???
MMA is bullcrap I don't give a F*** who disagrees with me but you must realize I'm NEVER GOING TO LIKE IT so just let it go.
I don't like kicking, I don't like grappling, I don't like ground and pound....I think they are all bitch moves, pardon me for having some couth in my fighting. Mind you I don't go around picking fights with people and challenging people to duels and so I conduct myself as a gentleman while not fighting as well as while fighting....I have no issue with beating the piss out of someone and then going and buying a beer for them
That reminds me of a middle school fight i saw a few years ago. The one kid lost his contact lense they both looked for it and after they found it and set it aside they started beating the shit out of each other. Absolute classic. And really i think thats how it should be. Don't need guns and knives to finish things just keep punching the other guy in the face until he agrees or you forget what started it.
-
Re: How does boxing compare to UFC
are you ready?! are you ready?!! lets get it onnnn!!!!
this aint an MMA Forum but theres an MMA board in here
and boxing is one form of martial arts ;) its just a matter of
choice for die hard boxing fans if they wanna watch someone
in UFC. if you hate grappling, kicking.. then i say, watch a striker
-
Re: How does boxing compare to UFC
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lyle
....I think Mikkel Kessler is really an MMA fighter how else do you explain those horrible tatoos???
MMA is bullcrap I don't give a F*** who disagrees with me but you must realize I'm NEVER GOING TO LIKE IT so just let it go.
I don't like kicking, I don't like grappling, I don't like ground and pound....I think they are all bitch moves, pardon me for having some couth in my fighting. Mind you I don't go around picking fights with people and challenging people to duels and so I conduct myself as a gentleman while not fighting as well as while fighting....I have no issue with beating the piss out of someone and then going and buying a beer for them
Have you seen the film Red Dragon? I assume he had a very strict mother like the protagonist in that....
-
Re: How does boxing compare to UFC
....I think Red Dragon would have gotten knifed down by one Norman Bates!....I mean killing people and putting mirrors in their eyes is one thing killing people while pretending to be your mother and keeping your dead mother in state in the hotel where you kill people is another
-
Re: How does boxing compare to UFC
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hulk
Well I consider myself pretty well versed on UFC and Boxing, others may disagree but hey what can I say? ;D
I've actually followed UFC, since the very first UFC tournament,where there were NO rules. When a #10 ranked Cruiserweight fighter came into the ring with one boxing glove on his hand ready to KO somebody, and got choked out two minutes later by Royce Gracie. When you could punch a guy in the nuts 10-15 times, and not disqualified. I saw Royce Gracie win against Ken Shamrock. I've seen Tank Abbott get his a** kicked a thousand times, Mark "the Hammer" Coleman, and his protege, Kevin Randleman come and change the sport with their "ground and pound" tactics. I've seen the UFC go from separate martial arts competing against each other to MMA, where everybody is cross trained in everything. I've seen it all in the UFC really, and for the most part I've liked it. Its been brutal. Now, though it has changed, and its still pretty good, but all the freakin yuppies, and young punks are getting into it and thinking they know something about fighting. They know Liddell and Ortiz. They know S*** IMO. Anyway, point is, the pisshead Dana White, who apparently used to be a amatuer boxer, is making the UFC out to be a brand, he's taken it mainstream, and it has become almost like Pro Wrestling. No longer is it barred in most states, or an underground thing like it was. It's really become a traveling circus IMO. I still like it, but I don't love it like I do boxing. Boxing is great, because its on a lot more than UFC, and its just more of an art, more of a pure sport the way I see it. Anything can happen in boxing and has, and I love that. UFC has become a fad, and people will start to see that, the same fighters keep fighting one another way too often, and it will pass, least at the rate Dana White is going. Boxing however will never die.
*oh and for the record, grappling can be boring, but it is not that frequent anymore, and a good grappler will always beat a good strker, if that striker can't defend against the takedown or panics when he gets taken down, grapplers are very skilled, and there are tons of submissions out there.
There were always rules. No small joint manipulation,No attack to the eyes and no fish-hooking,... oh and no biting,
-
Re: How does boxing compare to UFC
Quote:
Originally Posted by landmine950
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hulk
Well I consider myself pretty well versed on UFC and Boxing, others may disagree but hey what can I say? ;D
I've actually followed UFC, since the very first UFC tournament,where there were NO rules. When a #10 ranked Cruiserweight fighter came into the ring with one boxing glove on his hand ready to KO somebody, and got choked out two minutes later by Royce Gracie. When you could punch a guy in the nuts 10-15 times, and not disqualified. I saw Royce Gracie win against Ken Shamrock. I've seen Tank Abbott get his a** kicked a thousand times, Mark "the Hammer" Coleman, and his protege, Kevin Randleman come and change the sport with their "ground and pound" tactics. I've seen the UFC go from separate martial arts competing against each other to MMA, where everybody is cross trained in everything. I've seen it all in the UFC really, and for the most part I've liked it. Its been brutal. Now, though it has changed, and its still pretty good, but all the freakin yuppies, and young punks are getting into it and thinking they know something about fighting. They know Liddell and Ortiz. They know S*** IMO. Anyway, point is, the pisshead Dana White, who apparently used to be a amatuer boxer, is making the UFC out to be a brand, he's taken it mainstream, and it has become almost like Pro Wrestling. No longer is it barred in most states, or an underground thing like it was. It's really become a traveling circus IMO. I still like it, but I don't love it like I do boxing. Boxing is great, because its on a lot more than UFC, and its just more of an art, more of a pure sport the way I see it. Anything can happen in boxing and has, and I love that. UFC has become a fad, and people will start to see that, the same fighters keep fighting one another way too often, and it will pass, least at the rate Dana White is going. Boxing however will never die.
*oh and for the record, grappling can be boring, but it is not that frequent anymore, and a good grappler will always beat a good strker, if that striker can't defend against the takedown or panics when he gets taken down, grapplers are very skilled, and there are tons of submissions out there.
There were always rules. No small joint manipulation,No attack to the eyes and no fish-hooking,... oh and no biting,
Well yeah, there were those, who the fuk is gonna bite anyhow? But ya could punch a guy in the dick. So, thats still pretty brutal. Also Why the fuk did you say Chris Byrd was twice the boxer of prime Ali, as another poster has you sayin in his sig, why would you say something so stupid? Little off topic, but I just gotta ask.
-
Re: How does boxing compare to UFC
IMO, UFC is going slow down in a bit. It's being marketed as a brutal bloodsport, but as more and more of the top fighters in the world join the UFC, it's becoming a lot more technical and methodical. Joe Rogan and whoever he has in the booth do their best to try to conver a wrestling match as exciting but...we're getting a lot of boos now. And a lot of their big names are getting old, Lidell, Ortiz, Hughes, Shamrock, Franklin etc are getting old. It'll be interesting to see how Dana White adjust to this.
But the Ultimate Fighter is helping them A LOT. It's breathing new life and new names into the division, only problem is a lot of those guys will lose when they step up the competition. Diego Sanchez is the only guy who I think has potential to become a great champion, and he's not even that popular.
I don't know, but since Dana White bought the company 5 years ago, he has had astronomical sucess into turning it into a cashcow by marketing it as a all out bloodsport. But with all the rule changes for safety, and the greatest skilled fighters coming up with less and less stand up by the minute, it'll be interesting to see how White turns it from special attraction to legit sport.
One thing they do have on their side is that they have established superstars. They have names and names sell more then anything. However, names are getting old. And the TUF guys, Bonnar and Griffith both have lost. And now we have some of the Euros coming over looking to dominate. If they succeed, how do the fans react to what is right now a sport with mostly American fighters when he Euros and Brazilians take over?
-
Re: How does boxing compare to UFC
Quote from hulk "
"Also Why the fuk did you say Chris Byrd was twice the boxer of prime Ali, as another poster has you sayin in his sig, why would you say something so stupid? Little off topic, but I just gotta ask."
I just gotta answer.
I just feel that in general, modern athletes are WAY better than guys in the old days. People seem to look back and see Fighters as wayy.. better than they were. If some old fighter was so great then EVERYONE he fought must have been great too. Rocky Marciano fought 49 times. The guys he fought had 600 combined losses. THEY were bums!
Modern athletes are so much better it's not even funny. Ali was great in 1970. This is 2007. Chris Byrd would beat him easily, in my opinion.
Boxers today are FAR FAR better than old boxers.
I remember when I was 21 years old (1980) I bench pressed 440 pounds . The world record for under 200 lb body weight was 497 and the Unlimited record was 612 held by Bill Kazmier. The record went to 661 then 705 then 750 then 805. now its over 900 lbs!!! BENCH PRESS!!!! Its the same for every sport. Football players now weigh 300 pounds and are faster than running backs from the 60's in the 40 and 60 yard dash . A big strong lineman was 250 pounds. Now O- linemen are 400!
Even College teams have 10 guys over 6'6" and 330 lbs, bigger than ANY player in the NFL in the 60's and those are just the guys who made the team! In the Olympic javelin throw they had to redesign the javelin because guys were throwing it into the stands!
Look up any athletic contest that has a long history of record let's try ....say the mile run.
History of the World Record for the Mile Run
Time Athlete Country Year Location
4:36.5 Richard Webster England 1865 England
4:29.0 William Chinnery England 1868 England
4:28.8 Walter Gibbs England 1868 England
4:26.0 Walter Slade England 1874 England
4:24.5 Walter Slade England 1875 London
4:23.2 Walter George England 1880 London
4:21.4 Walter George England 1882 London
4:18.4 Walter George England 1884 Birmingham, England
4:18.2 Fred Bacon Scotland 1894 Edinburgh, Scotland
4:17.0 Fred Bacon Scotland 1895 London
4:15.6 Thomas Conneff United States 1895 Travers Island, N.Y.
4:15.4 John Paul Jones United States 1911 Cambridge, Mass.
4:14.4 John Paul Jones United States 1913 Cambridge, Mass.
4:12.6 Norman Taber United States 1915 Cambridge, Mass.
4:10.4 Paavo Nurmi Finland 1923 Stockholm
4:09.2 Jules Ladoumegue France 1931 Paris
4:07.6 Jack Lovelock New Zealand 1933 Princeton, N.J.
4:06.8 Glenn Cunningham United States 1934 Princeton, N.J.
4:06.4 Sydney Wooderson England 1937 London
4:06.2 Gundar Hägg Sweden 1942 Goteborg, Sweden
4:06.2 Arne Andersson Sweden 1942 Stockholm
4:04.6 Gunder Hägg Sweden 1942 Stockholm
4:02.6 Arne Andersson Sweden 1943 Goteborg, Sweden
4:01.6 Arne Andersson Sweden 1944 Malmo, Sweden
4:01.4 Gunder Hägg Sweden 1945 Malmo, Sweden
3:59.4 Roger Bannister England 1954 Oxford, England
3:58.0 John Landy Australia 1954 Turku, Finland
3:57.2 Derek Ibbotson England 1957 London
3:54.5 Herb Elliott Australia 1958 Dublin
3:54.4 Peter Snell New Zealand 1962 Wanganui, N.Z.
3:54.1 Peter Snell New Zealand 1964 Auckland, N.Z.
3:53.6 Michel Jazy France 1965 Rennes, France
3:51.3 Jim Ryun United States 1966 Berkeley, Calif.
3:51.1 Jim Ryun United States 1967 Bakersfield, Calif.
3:51.0 Filbert Bayi Tanzania 1975 Kingston, Jamaica
3:49.4 John Walker New Zealand 1975 Goteborg, Sweden
3:49.0 Sebastian Coe England 1979 Oslo
3:48.8 Steve Ovett England 1980 Oslo
3:48.53 Sebastian Coe England 1981 Zurich, Switzerland
3:48.40 Steve Ovett England 1981 Koblenz, W. Ger.
3:47.33 Sebastian Coe England 1981 Brussels
3:46.31 Steve Cram England 1985 Oslo
3:44.39 Noureddine Morceli Algeria 1993 Rieti, Italy
3:43.13 Hicham El Guerrouj Morocco 1999 Rome, Italy
Its self evident isn't it?
Boxers benefit from the same kind of improvements In health ,nutrition,larger pool of athletes to draw from, training etc.etc.
I don't dislike old boxers. A gold medal in 1960 is a great thing but only a fool would say that the gold medalist in 1960 in the mile race or shot put or javelin or what ever was better than the 2004 gold medalist. You'd looklike an idiot. A track time from 1960 wouldn't get you a spot in a high school track team. (current high school mile record is 3:53:43 ! better than the world record from 1964! The year Ali beat Sonny Liston.) 1965 is a LONG time ago. The improvements athletes have made in every sport are obvious, Why would it be any different for boxing?
-
Re: How does boxing compare to UFC
-
Re: How does boxing compare to UFC
Quote:
Originally Posted by amat
....Wrong topic?
sorry i forgot to include his question re Ali vs Chris Byrd.
-
Re: How does boxing compare to UFC
Quote:
Originally Posted by landmine950
Quote from hulk "
"Also Why the fuk did you say Chris Byrd was twice the boxer of prime Ali, as another poster has you sayin in his sig, why would you say something so stupid? Little off topic, but I just gotta ask."
I just gotta answer.
I just feel that in general, modern athletes are WAY better than guys in the old days. People seem to look back and see Fighters as wayy.. better than they were. If some old fighter was so great then EVERYONE he fought must have been great too. Rocky Marciano fought 49 times. The guys he fought had 600 combined losses. THEY were bums!
Modern athletes are so much better it's not even funny. Ali was great in 1970. This is 2007. Chris Byrd would beat him easily, in my opinion.
Boxers today are FAR FAR better than old boxers.
I remember when I was 21 years old (1980) I bench pressed 440 pounds . The world record for under 200 lb body weight was 497 and the Unlimited record was 612 held by Bill Kazmier. The record went to 661 then 705 then 750 then 805. now its over 900 lbs!!! BENCH PRESS!!!! Its the same for every sport. Football players now weigh 300 pounds and are faster than running backs from the 60's in the 40 and 60 yard dash . A big strong lineman was 250 pounds. Now O- linemen are 400!
Even College teams have 10 guys over 6'6" and 330 lbs, bigger than ANY player in the NFL in the 60's and those are just the guys who made the team! In the Olympic javelin throw they had to redesign the javelin because guys were throwing it into the stands!
Look up any athletic contest that has a long history of record let's try ....say the mile run.
History of the World Record for the Mile Run
Time Athlete Country Year Location
4:36.5 Richard Webster England 1865 England
4:29.0 William Chinnery England 1868 England
4:28.8 Walter Gibbs England 1868 England
4:26.0 Walter Slade England 1874 England
4:24.5 Walter Slade England 1875 London
4:23.2 Walter George England 1880 London
4:21.4 Walter George England 1882 London
4:18.4 Walter George England 1884 Birmingham, England
4:18.2 Fred Bacon Scotland 1894 Edinburgh, Scotland
4:17.0 Fred Bacon Scotland 1895 London
4:15.6 Thomas Conneff United States 1895 Travers Island, N.Y.
4:15.4 John Paul Jones United States 1911 Cambridge, Mass.
4:14.4 John Paul Jones United States 1913 Cambridge, Mass.
4:12.6 Norman Taber United States 1915 Cambridge, Mass.
4:10.4 Paavo Nurmi Finland 1923 Stockholm
4:09.2 Jules Ladoumegue France 1931 Paris
4:07.6 Jack Lovelock New Zealand 1933 Princeton, N.J.
4:06.8 Glenn Cunningham United States 1934 Princeton, N.J.
4:06.4 Sydney Wooderson England 1937 London
4:06.2 Gundar Hägg Sweden 1942 Goteborg, Sweden
4:06.2 Arne Andersson Sweden 1942 Stockholm
4:04.6 Gunder Hägg Sweden 1942 Stockholm
4:02.6 Arne Andersson Sweden 1943 Goteborg, Sweden
4:01.6 Arne Andersson Sweden 1944 Malmo, Sweden
4:01.4 Gunder Hägg Sweden 1945 Malmo, Sweden
3:59.4 Roger Bannister England 1954 Oxford, England
3:58.0 John Landy Australia 1954 Turku, Finland
3:57.2 Derek Ibbotson England 1957 London
3:54.5 Herb Elliott Australia 1958 Dublin
3:54.4 Peter Snell New Zealand 1962 Wanganui, N.Z.
3:54.1 Peter Snell New Zealand 1964 Auckland, N.Z.
3:53.6 Michel Jazy France 1965 Rennes, France
3:51.3 Jim Ryun United States 1966 Berkeley, Calif.
3:51.1 Jim Ryun United States 1967 Bakersfield, Calif.
3:51.0 Filbert Bayi Tanzania 1975 Kingston, Jamaica
3:49.4 John Walker New Zealand 1975 Goteborg, Sweden
3:49.0 Sebastian Coe England 1979 Oslo
3:48.8 Steve Ovett England 1980 Oslo
3:48.53 Sebastian Coe England 1981 Zurich, Switzerland
3:48.40 Steve Ovett England 1981 Koblenz, W. Ger.
3:47.33 Sebastian Coe England 1981 Brussels
3:46.31 Steve Cram England 1985 Oslo
3:44.39 Noureddine Morceli Algeria 1993 Rieti, Italy
3:43.13 Hicham El Guerrouj Morocco 1999 Rome, Italy
Its self evident isn't it?
Boxers benefit from the same kind of improvements In health ,nutrition,larger pool of athletes to draw from, training etc.etc.
I don't dislike old boxers. A gold medal in 1960 is a great thing but only a fool would say that the gold medalist in 1960 in the mile race or shot put or javelin or what ever was better than the 2004 gold medalist. You'd looklike an idiot. A track time from 1960 wouldn't get you a spot in a high school track team. (current high school mile record is 3:53:43 ! better than the world record from 1964! The year Ali beat Sonny Liston.) 1965 is a LONG time ago. The improvements athletes have made in every sport are obvious, Why would it be any different for boxing?
Damn you're 46 now! ;D
But seriously now, you cannot compare running to boxing. Running, and times are pretty straight forward, boxing does is not so simple. Boxers are unique athletes, in a complex sport, where many differnt variables play out. But no matter what, Ali would KO Byrd, there's no doubt bout it. So does that mean that Wladimir Klit would KO Ali and George Foreman, and Fraizer and Liston too??? Cmon man, Gimme a break!! And you were benching 440, I find that hard to believe man. Did YOU weigh under 200lbs as well? That is an extradordianary amount of weight to bench press.
-
Re: How does boxing compare to UFC
Damn you're 46 now! ;D
But seriously now, you cannot compare running to boxing. Running, and times are pretty straight forward, boxing does is not so simple. Boxers are unique athletes, in a complex sport, where many differnt variables play out. But no matter what, Ali would KO Byrd, there's no doubt bout it. So does that mean that Wladimir Klit would KO Ali and George Foreman, and Fraizer and Liston too??? Cmon man, Gimme a break!! And you were benching 440, I find that hard to believe man. Did YOU weigh under 200lbs as well? That is an extradordianary amount of weight to bench press.
I weighed about 227 at that time and have weighed up to 277
Personal bench press best is 455 for a single. A 400 pound bench nowadays is nothing,what with all the steroids today. Im 6'4" and had a 54" chest.
have done 375 X4, 315 X 8, And 275 x17 I was a strength coach for U of A football in late 80's They had a competition in the Canadian Football league.
It was the most reps at 275. I did 17 A Edmonton Eskimo player John Manderich (older brother of Tony) did 27 reps and some guy from the montreal alouettes did 53!!!
LOL you should see one of my kids! he's 11 years old and weighs 237 lbs!
his chest is 50+" and his legs are 30" at the thigh!! I hope he will break the Canadian Bench press record! (575)
I wasn't really built for bench with a wide chest and long arms.
That old record was held by Franco Columbo.
In response to your question. I think that the logic applies to boxing the same as any other sport,maybe more so with the huge developments in technique and training and the effects on conditioning. Yes I think most any boxer in the top 10 today would beat ANY fighter in the 60's. Pick one..say Rahman? he'd DESTROY foreman,liston,ali etc..IT WOULDN"T EVEN BE A CONTEST. Maybe you should go to the 2007 Daytona 500 in the car that won the race in 1960?? how do you think you would do? PICK ANY SPORT or athletic event where you can measure the peformance, the greats were great in their day. This isn't it.
P.S. my day is gone too. This is what i USED to look like.
I'd send pics of me now but im afraid wacko and bilbo would use them as wankin' material!
-
Re: How does boxing compare to UFC
Prepared to get SC'd bigtime here ;D
UFC and MMA in general is soon going to overtake boxing. There I said it.
Wanna know why? Anyone interested in fighting in general are massively put off by boxing. Its corrupt, noone fights each other, far too much inactivity, who the hells the actual champion ect...
Anyone just coming into these is immediately put off, many of my friends watch UFC/PRIDE instead of boxing because its much more accesible and all the big names fight each other. Its actually much more like real fighting with far less rules; you can kick, punch grapple, submission by various means ect. Sure they watch the odd boxing match now its on ITV, but I'm the one who has to explain to them how good who fighting who is, whats the significance of the fight ect.
Plus the more you think about it boxing aint all that useful in real life - unless you can knock the guy out in one hit they are gonna get a hold of you at which point judo or jai-jitsu is a whole lot more useful as its all about using the weight of your opponent against them.
-
Re: How does boxing compare to UFC
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1-hit Wonder
Prepared to get SC'd bigtime here ;D
UFC and MMA in general is soon going to overtake boxing. There I said it.
Wanna know why? Anyone interested in fighting in general are massively put off by boxing. Its corrupt, noone fights each other, far too much inactivity, who the hells the actual champion ect...
Anyone just coming into these is immediately put off, many of my friends watch UFC/PRIDE instead of boxing because its much more accesible and all the big names fight each other. Its actually much more like real fighting with far less rules; you can kick, punch grapple, submission by various means ect. Sure they watch the odd boxing match now its on ITV, but I'm the one who has to explain to them how good who fighting who is, whats the significance of the fight ect.
Plus the more you think about it boxing aint all that useful in real life - unless you can knock the guy out in one hit they are gonna get a hold of you at which point judo or jai-jitsu is a whole lot more useful as its all about using the weight of your opponent against them.
I agree with the first part.
BUT the only names that fight are the names provided by the ufc. They present fighters that they have on contact.which is a very small segment of the mma fighters available. They use their show on TV to create interest in the fighters.MANY fighters are better or more deserving that the ufc guys but ufc doesnt OWN them and therefor has no interest in showcasing them. Its kinda like a Don King Promoted fight .or Its like saying the wba is the ONLY boxing that counts.They have done a great job of promoting teh sport and FOR SURE its the favorite of younger guys.
As for figting on the street. I would pick boxing skill over anything else although mma fighters are good strikers too. Very seldom does a bar fight end up on the ground where mma technique can be used. People break it up first. In the bar ,a boxer rules. Quick one ,two and the guys out.
-
Re: How does boxing compare to UFC
Quote:
Originally Posted by landmine950
Damn you're 46 now! ;D
But seriously now, you cannot compare running to boxing. Running, and times are pretty straight forward, boxing does is not so simple. Boxers are unique athletes, in a complex sport, where many differnt variables play out. But no matter what, Ali would KO Byrd, there's no doubt bout it. So does that mean that Wladimir Klit would KO Ali and George Foreman, and Fraizer and Liston too??? Cmon man, Gimme a break!! And you were benching 440, I find that hard to believe man. Did YOU weigh under 200lbs as well? That is an extradordianary amount of weight to bench press.
I weighed about 227 at that time and have weighed up to 277
Personal bench press best is 455 for a single. A 400 pound bench nowadays is nothing,what with all the steroids today. Im 6'4" and had a 54" chest.
have done 375 X4, 315 X 8, And 275 x17 I was a strength coach for U of A football in late 80's They had a competition in the Canadian Football league.
It was the most reps at 275. I did 17 A Edmonton Eskimo player John Manderich (older brother of Tony) did 27 reps and some guy from the montreal alouettes did 53!!!
LOL you should see one of my kids! he's 11 years old and weighs 237 lbs!
his chest is 50+" and his legs are 30" at the thigh!! I hope he will break the Canadian Bench press record! (575)
I wasn't really built for bench with a wide chest and long arms.
That old record was held by Franco Columbo.
In response to your question. I think that the logic applies to boxing the same as any other sport,maybe more so with the huge developments in technique and training and the effects on conditioning. Yes I think most any boxer in the top 10 today would beat ANY fighter in the 60's. Pick one..say Rahman? he'd DESTROY foreman,liston,ali etc..IT WOULDN"T EVEN BE A CONTEST. Maybe you should go to the 2007 Daytona 500 in the car that won the race in 1960?? how do you think you would do? PICK ANY SPORT or athletic event where you can measure the peformance, the greats were great in their day. This isn't it.
P.S. my day is gone too. This is what i USED to look like.
I'd send pics of me now but im afraid wacko and bilbo would use them as wankin' material!
1 hit wonder I ain't gonna sad click ya, your post makes some sense. Landmine, I ain't gonna sad click you either, that wacko and bilbo comment was funny shat, but DAMN what are you SMOKIN??? Hasim Rahman would Destroy Sonny Liston, "Big" George Foreman and Ali? No way. He would be stopped by all of them. Liston would take him outta there in about 3 rounds tops, Foreman bout 2 rounds, and he might last 6-8 rounds with Ali. How can you honestly believe this? Weightliftin and Daytona racing are totally differnt from the fine art of boxing.
-
Re: How does boxing compare to UFC
Yeah about the "Rahman would beat Foreman Liston ect... in their primes" is a bit duboius. I mean Foreman came back and won a world title at 45 or so. Way way past his prime
-
Re: How does boxing compare to UFC
Quote:
Originally Posted by bilbo
Whilst I'd hardly consider myself a fan I do download the odd event or two to watch.
I watched the entire PPV broadcast of Pride's American debut a couple months back and as an event it was highly entertaining.
Some of the fights were over far too quickly and I got a little uncomfortable when a couple of the men assumed 69 position's on the floor and carried out what appeared to my untrained eyes to be sex acts on one another but the whole razzmataz if thats a word was definitely there.
There was this crazy ass woman fight announcer who I could only describe as having a videogame type voice, just amazing the sounds she managed to produce and loads of strobe lighting and effects.
The fights, even though I hadn't barely heard of any of them were still easy to get involved with thanks to brief pre fight interviews with the two protaganists, in which invariably one of them would come across as a complete and utter prick so I'd be rooting for the other guy to kick his face in.
And I have to say there is something rather satisfying about a sport that allows a fighter to literally do that! I saw people get knocked out by flying knees to the face, by having their ankles snapped, or being elbowed on the nose whilst being pinned down on the floor unable to move, its the kind of brutality you sometimes wish you could inject in a boxing fight.
Who wouldn't have liked to have seen Kosta Tyszu lay a prostrate Zab Judah on the ground, then sit astride his chest and headbutt him repeatedly on his nose until his face was a bloody mess?
Overall whilst I don't think it compares to boxing as a serious sport I would have to say that it can be very entertaining to watch at times and I would consider going to an event if they ever staged one near me.
To me its kind of like the difference between Formula One racing and Nascar. Whilst purists, journalists and serious race fans would not even consider Nascar to be a serious sport like Formula One, a huge swathe of hicks, rednecks and children watch it avidly to see the crashes.
Overall I would say it complements boxing rather than competes against it. Fight fans have more than one related sport to get excited about which is hardly a bad thing.
Cool click you're spot on with that. Especially the last paragraph. I watched the re-run of UFC 66 last night and i have to admit it was more exciting as an event then most boxing cards i have seen over the last 12 months.
-
Re: How does boxing compare to UFC
That is why I only watch Lidell and Sylvia fights the hate the graplin crap and go straight to fight.
And the fact that they all want to fight each other makes it great. Lately at boxing the all hate each other. That is why all those big paydays have to dissapear and stick to a max of 3 millions or something like that
-
Re: How does boxing compare to UFC
Quote:
Originally Posted by landmine950
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1-hit Wonder
Prepared to get SC'd bigtime here ;D
UFC and MMA in general is soon going to overtake boxing. There I said it.
Wanna know why? Anyone interested in fighting in general are massively put off by boxing. Its corrupt, noone fights each other, far too much inactivity, who the hells the actual champion ect...
Anyone just coming into these is immediately put off, many of my friends watch UFC/PRIDE instead of boxing because its much more accesible and all the big names fight each other. Its actually much more like real fighting with far less rules; you can kick, punch grapple, submission by various means ect. Sure they watch the odd boxing match now its on ITV, but I'm the one who has to explain to them how good who fighting who is, whats the significance of the fight ect.
Plus the more you think about it boxing aint all that useful in real life - unless you can knock the guy out in one hit they are gonna get a hold of you at which point judo or jai-jitsu is a whole lot more useful as its all about using the weight of your opponent against them.
I agree with the first part.
BUT the only names that fight are the names provided by the ufc. They present fighters that they have on contact.which is a very small segment of the mma fighters available. They use their show on TV to create interest in the fighters.MANY fighters are better or more deserving that the ufc guys but ufc doesnt OWN them and therefor has no interest in showcasing them. Its kinda like a Don King Promoted fight .or Its like saying the wba is the ONLY boxing that counts.They have done a great job of promoting teh sport and FOR SURE its the favorite of younger guys.
As for figting on the street. I would pick boxing skill over anything else although mma fighters are good strikers too. Very seldom does a bar fight end up on the ground where mma technique can be used. People break it up first. In the bar ,a boxer rules. Quick one ,two and the guys out.
I completely agree with you. Anyone who thinks boxers avoid each other but MMA stars don't is deluded. The UFC is just one organistation amongst mixed martial arts.
To be an accurate comparison to boxing each of the world ranking organisations, WBA WBC IBF and WBO would have to all be totally independent of each other with their own fighters, kind of like Rugby Union and Rugby League or Darts.
At least all of the governing boxing bodies are part of a much bigger boxing scene worldwide.
I know the UFC and Pride etc are taking steps to bring MMA stars from different organisations together but it is a long way away from the kind of global organisation of boxing.
