Van, a good post. MT is a good choice. However, imo, id still go with boxing because their hands are beter than a mt'er bUT, you can always pick up leg kicks, elbows and the my clich later. i feel that those things are easier to learn after the fact than a boxer's precision and ability to elude. but still being a boxer myself, i still have a lot of respect of mt guys and especially kickboxers like roufus, williams, etc. they can't outbox hw boxers, but admittedly their kicking is the difference in an open event

Entragian, it's the classic arguement against boxers. people assume they'd go down like little girls. yes, it might go down, but getting them there is far easier said than done... here's why.... it's far easier to teach an effecive sprawl with leverage and strength than it is to teach boxing perfection. how many good hard shots woulfd a mma'er eat trying to get inside? tons. in am mma even, the bjj guy might win via tapout half the time, but he'd likely take the worst of the punishment ALL the time.

Lyle, amen. a few guys are good at it, relatively speaking, ant they've excelled.... mirko crocop, chuck, nick diaz, who's showing to be a prety good puncher himself considering he's a bjj expert, jens pulver, tim sylvia.... etc. but We've still yet to see a truly great boxer make the transition. whn it hapens, we'll surely see how effective they are at hitting and not being hit. Jens pulver, who is really nobody in the whole grand scheme of boxing, and even though he might get tapped out, still picks guys apart like nothing and usually takes the least of the punishment. just imagine a guy like jermaine taylor at 170... scary.

the only guys imo, that have the best chance to take boxers down, are world class wrestlers.... the real olympians. but again, tome come iside, easier said than done.