Quote Originally Posted by bcollins
Quote Originally Posted by Punisher136
i used to believe that but the more mma fights i watch with the boxing knowledge i possess the more inclined i am to say that it is easier for a boxer in mma than it is for an mma guy to box. There's a bunch of technical flaws i see in almost every mma fighter that a good boxer could capitalize on.
That's probably true, but most boxers have ZERO ground game, either. An MMA fighter might have a lot of technical flaws in his boxing technique, but so do a lot of professional boxers! But, if you get a boxer on the mat, without training, they won't last. Period. There's easily as much technique to grappling/wrestling as there is to boxing, and it takes a long time to learn even the basics.

I agree, though - the sports are fundamentally different.
lol nobody's perfect. I'm saying it would take a high caliber boxer. Bum vs. Bum the mma guy probably wins.

[quote=JMK ]
Quote Originally Posted by Punisher136
Quote Originally Posted by JMK
MMA sucked and was completely one-sided throughout the 90's because of ideas like this.
The emphasis isn't on the decade, it's on because of ideas like this.

MMA (which was still in it's NHB/style vs. style phase) sucked in that moment in time because it was predictable and one sided. Boxers (and virtually all other stand-up stylists) were easily taken down, kept there, and submitted. The sport evolved because of the incorporation of elements previously not practiced in any given one style. Up until that time, BJJ practitioners dominated the scene because the practitioners of other styles, wrestlers included, didn't understand submissions, and would inevitably get caught in one.

just because you can prove something doesn't mean its true. Given enough time and resources i could "prove" that you killed someone to the extent that the case would hold up in court. You have ample proof for YOU to feel confident about your viewpoint.
"Just because you can prove something doesn't mean it's true."

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

Know what I'm hearing when I see your "logic" in action? This: http://mama.indstate.edu/users/nizrael/midis/bigtop.mid



thats a very enlightened quote if you think about it. Real proof of something doesn't need to be shown because it's obvious.