Mma Vs Boxing

[dragonei]

when you get Ko'ed your not intelligently defending yourself anymore, even if it was a flash KO in a span of .5 of a second your opponent will be all over you and you'll probably recover from the flash KO in about 1-2 seconds after but you've already received a significant amount of beating in order for the fight to be stopped, hindi kasi katulad ng boxing ang MMA na may 10 count, pag bagsak susundan ka talaga para tapusin kumbaga

 

like what you said, someone gets superman punched in the face, he gets stunned and he starts to fall to the ground, during that fraction of a second that he's stunned the other fighter is already laying a beat down on him even before he hits the canvas, thus the term not intelligently defending himself, this actually has a greater chance of saving the fighters from permanent damage

 

Well yan din siguro maganda sa MMA, mas mabibilis yung stopage. Sa boxing kasi medyo late na yung stoppage. Even if a fighter does not get KOed, continued repeated blows to the head will surely risk having brain damage. Ganun din dapat sa boxing. Kahit nakatayo pa pero kung di na kaya dumepensa at lagi na lang tinatamaan sa ulo, dapat tigil na yung laban. Like that Darchinyan and Arce fight. Di na dapat pinaabot pa ng round 11 yung laban. Hirap na huminga si Arce at wala ng pwersa mga suntok.

 

 

Buti na lang pala di natalo si Banal kay concepcion. If he won , he would then have to fight arce or darchinyan. SIguradong kakainin siya ng buhay ng kahit sino sa 2

[geneticfreak]

Its too young as a sport. Meaning no genunine teachnique has actually evolved to be the perfect arsenal in this sport. Fights are ended too early, and sometimes its out of one lucky punch. Sometimes its not even an issue of who is the more skilled fighter, its the issue of who can get the upperhand. When Brock Lesnar Beat Randy Coutoure I did not think that lesnar was the better fighter in that fight he got lucky. There are only a few champions in this sport that leave a legacy. Moreso, its easier to get a title shot, lesnar got his with only after 4 fights.

 

Nice thread you've got here. I would have injected my thoughts here already had I seen this thread a lot earlier.

 

Anyway let me just start by offering my thoughts on what you called 'the downside' in MMA.

 

Yes MMA is a relatively young sport compared to boxing but why is there a need for a perfect arsenal in MMA? the techniques in MMA outnumber the techniques in boxing rather greatly because of the number of martial arts being studied by it's practitioners and thus there are more than just one way to defeat someone in MMA and those in my opinion are all equally entertaining. A KO via bodyslam such as the one made by Tito Ortiz against Evan Tanner is just as exciting to me as a head kick KO by Gabriel Gonzaga on Mirko Crocop or a punch KO by Vitor Belfort. Apart from that don't you think an out of nowhere submission such as that heel hook Mir got on Brock Lesnar or that flying scissor leg takedown of Ryo Chonan on Anderson Silva is as entertaining as well? How about the masterful submissions of a Demian Meia and Rousimar Palhares? Perhaps to the untrained eye the way they fight and work their submissions are less action packed but to us and the growing number of people who show interest in Martial Arts it's as beautiful as a picasso painting.

 

So I say to you is there really need for a perfect arsenal in this sport? I mean given all the many different combinations of possible techniques that can be used. Fighters get to pick what techniques to integrate into their style and what to discard. There are people like Mirko Crocop or Demian Meia who are actually really good at just one aspect of MMA and exploit that to their advantage and there are people like a St. Pierre or BJ Penn who are complete fighters and excel in every area. What's important is that all of them are equally entertaining to watch.

 

A lucky KO can happen in either MMA or Boxing so why single MMA out? Even in MMA however a lucky KO is quite rare. A lot of times what appears to be a lucky KO is setup by a good gameplan. Take for example Chuck Lidell's last fight where he got KO'd by Rashad Evans. It may have appeared to have been nothing but a lucky KO but if you study it carefully you will see the strategy for the first round was to get Chuck to chase Rashad around and thus the KO was not a lucky one but a well planned one. In MMA strategies are a lot more complex than in boxing again this is due to the abundance of techniques available for use by the MMA fighter.

 

Lastly as for your insights on the Couture Lesnar fight I beg to differ with what you said that Lesnar got lucky. The straight right hand that Brock hit Randy with was not a lucky punch. If you are to go back to Lesnar's two previous fights he has landed that right hand consistently first during his fight with Mir and then during the opening bell of his fight against Heath Herring. Perhaps you are correct that skill wise Randy is a lot better but I do believe that during that fight Brock was the better fighter. Simply put in that fight we saw that if you have the same skill set (wrestling in this case) and almost the same level of skill in that skillset (Brock is a division I NCAA champ while Randy was twice an Olympic alternate) the advantage goes to the bigger and stronger fighter.

 

MMA has it's own set of champions some of whom have left a legacy. Royce Gracie made BJJ a well known sport after his entry into the UFC. Dan Severn and Mark Coleman introduced the strength of the takedown and what's known now as Ground and Pound. Wanderlei Silva during his championship run in PRIDE introduced the brutal power of muay thai. while other fighters like Anderson Silva, GSP and BJ Penn now highlight the emergence of what's being called 'the complete fighter'.

Edited February 12, 2009 by geneticfreak

[dragonei]

^^^

 

Perhaps with the likes of Anderson Silva, and Penn will sprung a generation of complete fighters good at every aspect of the game. The way I see it, MMA is still evolving. But hey boxing also had to evolve. In the early days boxing had no technique either, no special equipment, and not even a weight category. People can match up someone like Manny Pacquiao and Nikolai Valuev. Yes the Gracies pioneered BJJ in MMA, but MMA as of today has not yet found its Muhammad Ali.

 

Nonetheless I have faith that MMA will consistently evolve as the fighters will also evolve. It will have its muhammad ali in time. Perhaps in the next 10 years there will be more weight divisions, more sanctioning bodies (hence having true undisputed champs), and fighters will have to start at the bottom to get to the top. Perhaps the reason why guys like Lesnar get a title shot after a mere 3 fights, is because there isn't really much out there in the sport to beat. I do not mean there are not talented heavyweight fighters, I mean there aren't much MMA fighters as there are in boxing today. But hopefully in time there will be.

 

I remember Floyd Mayweather dissing out MMA fighters. he said that he could easily knock out any MMA fighters and they won't be able to grapple him in effect. Then Dana White said he would be willing to put up a match between him and sean sherk. But of course mayweather would never accept this challenge because he knew sherk would rip his head off.

[alpardpba]

i don't see boxing being overtaken by mma. in fact, i don't see mma, as it is right now, lasting for more than 10 years.

 

boxing was already targeted by government for stoppage, so the boxing authorities institued reforms and standardization to make it safer for boxers and less made up of shady people. mma faces the same problems -- government will probably step in to cut down on the brutality of the sport and institute reforms and make it safer for the players, which would k*ll its street cred.

 

also, everyone can get into boxing, it's great exercise. but mma? we're all just basically reduced into voyuers

[riceb0i]

i don't see boxing being overtaken by mma. in fact, i don't see mma, as it is right now, lasting for more than 10 years.

 

boxing was already targeted by government for stoppage, so the boxing authorities institued reforms and standardization to make it safer for boxers and less made up of shady people. mma faces the same problems -- government will probably step in to cut down on the brutality of the sport and institute reforms and make it safer for the players, which would k*ll its street cred.

 

also, everyone can get into boxing, it's great exercise. but mma? we're all just basically reduced into voyuers

i don't know about you chief, but hell give me about a year more of BJJ & add a couple more for MT then i'd be set to fight MMA of course training MMA for a good time before i fight as well...

 

not all people who watch the sport are keyboard jocks and just wishful thinkers bro, some of us here wants to experience this kind of sport as well because it hits a spot...

 

MMA is there to stay whether you like it or not, a lot of stuff ain't taboo anymore and violence isn't any longer...

[Larry]

I was supposed to answer this:

 

The Downside

 

Its too young as a sport. Meaning no genunine teachnique has actually evolved to be the perfect arsenal in this sport. Fights are ended too early, and sometimes its out of one lucky punch. Sometimes its not even an issue of who is the more skilled fighter, its the issue of who can get the upperhand. When Brock Lesnar Beat Randy Coutoure I did not think that lesnar was the better fighter in that fight he got lucky. There are only a few champions in this sport that leave a legacy. Moreso, its easier to get a title shot, lesnar got his with only after 4 fights.

 

But geneticfreak already gave a very good and comprehensive response. so i'll stay my keyboard hand.

 

i'll respond to a few though

 

in fact, i don't see mma, as it is right now, lasting for more than 10 years.

 

that's what people said 18 years ago, and now MMA is stronger than ever. MMA products have invaded the mainstream, go to a Mall and count how many (fake) Tapout, Affliction, and Cage Fighter clothes you see. In countries where MMA is more developed like the US and Japan, major brands such as Ecko have been getting on the MMA bandwagon, as are major celebrities. People have been using MMA lingo in regular conversation, tap, choke out, arm bar, ground and pound, etc. event he WWE has incorporated MMA in it's programming. Canada's athlete of the year for 2008 was GSP. ESPN and Yahoo Sports have their own special MMA columns, a sport that no legitimate sports writer would touch 5 years ago. Even TMZ.com follows even 2nd tier MMA fighters around with their paparazzi crew

 

all this from a sport that was branded as a novelty 18 years ago, and was considered by John McCain as human cockfighting.

 

and looking at things now, it's only going to get stronger.

 

but MMA as of today has not yet found its Muhammad Ali.

 

ah but they have, 2 in fact, in Anderson Silva and Fedor Emelianenko. Fighters who have style and grace and mystique that makes them seem unbeatable. legends at the prime of their careers. Randy Couture is another, a fighter who has grown bigger than his sport.

 

mma faces the same problems -- government will probably step in to cut down on the brutality of the sport and institute reforms and make it safer for the players, which would k*ll its street cred.

 

this has already happened, more than 8 years ago. that's why you no longer see head butts, groin shots, shots to the back of the head, knees to the head of a downed opponent, etc.

 

the fertitas recognized this when they bought the UFC from the SEG group, and we have them to thank that MMA is now sanctioned in many states in the US, by legitimate sports sanctioning bodies, NSAC and CSAC to name a few.

 

and surprise, it didn't k*ll MMA.

 

-----

 

now to answer the question in the original post

 

NO MMA WILL NOT k*ll BOXING

 

different sport, different fans

 

there will always be people who will prefer one over the other.

 

it's like saying if basketball will k*ll football (soccer).

[dragonei]

The Downside and Upside of Quicker stopages

 

Undoubtedly, Stopage in MMA is quicker than it is in boxingl. If my memory serves me right, I think the quickest MMA knockout was less than 8 seconds? One superman punch and thats it.

 

The Downside.

 

In any competition, we always wanna see who is the athlete that has a better skill. Sometimes quick stoppages does not allow that. It cuts the action shorter. Imagine having to subscribe to PPV only to watch to fighters brawl for a mere 10 second.

 

In fact there are a lot of bad stoppages. Especially when a fighter is not given a chance to recover and defend himself, even it is clear that he still could.

 

The Upside.

 

As fans of any of the two sport, we always want to see the better fighter beat his opponents, but certainly not killing him in effect. If you ask me, categorically speaking boxing is more dangerous than MMA because stoppage comes too late sometimes. In boxing, even though a fighter is still on his feet, taking repeated blows to the head for 11 rounds could be fatal, not to mention its effects could be manifested after a long time. Its possible for a boxer to win a fight via lucky knockout but get himself in a coma hours later, because of the repeated power punches that was delivered smack on his frontal and temporal lobes.

 

MMA does not last 11 rounds, and no referee in MMA would allow a fighter to take blows to the head that long. Though fighters in this sport wear lighter gloves, no fighter gets to be smacked in the head repeatedly for over 10 minutes. When a fighter gets knocked down, his opponent is allowed to chase him and keep hitting him while he is flat on his back. Usually this just takes a couple of seconds then the referee stops the fight. This is usually less damaging than being allowed to get up on your feet so your opponent could hit you some more in the head for a few more rounds.

 

Most of all lets admit it, We hate it when the conclusion of the fight is left to the hands of the judges. Decisions create more controversy especially in close fights. Quick finishes are also spectacular to watch especially if it is well timed and accurately delivered. Kinda like when Rashad Evans knocked out Chuck Lidell with one hook right at the jaw. Lidell drops face first unconscious. Now tell me that is not entertaining.

[aragorn_09]

hindi cguro, boxing is more popular than mma, mas maraming mahlig pa rin sa boxing, lalo na sa pinas..

[Larry]

Though fighters in this sport wear lighter gloves, no fighter gets to be smacked in the head repeatedly for over 10 minutes.

 

first off, are you saying that lighter gloves will hit softer? and watch the TakayamaXFrye slugfest, that sh1t was over 10 minutes.

 

In any competition, we always wanna see who is the athlete that has a better skill. Sometimes quick stoppages does not allow that. It cuts the action shorter. Imagine having to subscribe to PPV only to watch to fighters brawl for a mere 10 second.

 

In fact there are a lot of bad stoppages. Especially when a fighter is not given a chance to recover and defend himself, even it is clear that he still could.

 

the quick stoppages in MMA happen because of the higher chances of greater damage and potentially long term effect on the fighter (concussions, internal bleeding, broken bones, shins, collar bones, etc.) in MMA.

 

Fighter safety will always come first, if it doesn't then it's no longer a sport and we would have moved 18 years backward to the time that it really was just a spectacle. The strict rules are there to make sure that nobody goes overboard and k*ll someone, simply because MMA is potentially more dangerous than boxing.

 

again different strokes, some people just want to see other people get knocked out, others who are "students of the game" want to see technique, grace, skill, etc.

 

Both sports offer both though, to say that one is more technical than the other is a simply a sign of ignorance of the technique and discipline required of each sport. Ignorant MMA fans will say that boxing is boring it's just pushing forward and hugging, and jabs to the death, totally ignoring the angles, trapping, and footwork evident in all great boxers. Ignorant Boxing Fans will say MMA is just a toughman competition where people just pummel other people to death, and rarely see the timing, strategy, and slick jiu-jitsu/wrestling that many fighters do.

[dragonei]

first off, are you saying that lighter gloves will hit softer? and watch the TakayamaXFrye slugfest, that sh1t was over 10 minutes.

 

Of course not, Im saying quite the opposite actually. Boxing gloves have more pading and are bigger, hence it can be used to cushion blows delivered to you by an opponent. MMA gloves on the other hand don't do much but protect your knuckles.

 

 

the quick stoppages in MMA happen because of the higher chances of greater damage and potentially long term effect on the fighter (concussions, internal bleeding, broken bones, shins, collar bones, etc.) in MMA.

 

Fighter safety will always come first, if it doesn't then it's no longer a sport and we would have moved 18 years backward to the time that it really was just a spectacle. The strict rules are there to make sure that nobody goes overboard and k*ll someone, simply because MMA is potentially more dangerous than boxing.

 

Exactly my point. Its always better to pummel a guy while his down on the ground so the referee could stop the fight in 10 seconds, than actually allowing him to beat the 10 count, get back on his feet so he can keep accepting punches on the forehead and temple for 10 more rounds. So in this context the former to me is safer.

 

Also Id rather have a broken arm or leg, than a bruised parietal lobe.

 

 

again different strokes, some people just want to see other people get knocked out, others who are "students of the game" want to see technique, grace, skill, etc.

 

Both sports offer both though, to say that one is more technical than the other is a simply a sign of ignorance of the technique and discipline required of each sport. Ignorant MMA fans will say that boxing is boring it's just pushing forward and hugging, and jabs to the death, totally ignoring the angles, trapping, and footwork evident in all great boxers. Ignorant Boxing Fans will say MMA is just a toughman competition where people just pummel other people to death, and rarely see the timing, strategy, and slick jiu-jitsu/wrestling that many fighters do.

 

Well you said it yourself different strokes. Boxing a long time ago was a also a toughguy sport. They did not weight classes, no gloves and very minimal mechanics and rules. Early boxers did not know how to utilize foot work in a fight, or how to deflect blows by rolling your shoulders, or how to properly use head movements. But it has evolved into what it is today.

 

MMA is a young sport that is still at the process of evolution, while many believe that MMA right now is just a fad I on the other hand think that MMA is a sport that is here to stay. Techniuqes and styles in MMA are evolving faster than it did in boxing, it is gaining more enthusiasts, more MMA celebrities are reaching mainstream. And as techniques continue to evolve in MMA, there will be more better fighters than current hall of famers today.

 

So in the end, both sport will have it upsides and downsides. In fact every sport does have an upside and downside. Golf can be boring for a person who does not understand finesse, baseball can be boring for someone who does not appreciate hand to eye coordination and so fort. Fighters in either sport will only excell in their respective rings..... well of course someday I could be proven wrong

 

Take for instance Floyd Mayweather VS. Sean Sherk matchup. If sherk fought mayweather in a boxing match, mayweather would blow sherk away like his fists were stinger missiles. But if mayweather fought sherk in the octagon, sherk would rip mayweathers head off.

Edited February 17, 2009 by dragonei

[SevenZeroFive]

The first thing that popped to my mind when I saw this thread was an interview that was conducted a couple of weeks ago with Jim Lampley of HBO Boxing. Yes, the same Jim Lampley who, along with fellow HBO Boxing commentator Larry Merchant, was openly and consistently criticized MMA because of its seemingly imminent threat to the sport of boxing. When I saw that post on BloodyElbow and Bad Left Hook I was thinking to myself, "Oh boy, Lampley's gonna sound like an idiot bashing MMA again". To my surprise, in Lampley's interview with Toro Magazine (http://toromagazine.com/?q=node/1224), he gave a pretty good insight, and a very surprising one at that considering that he has consistently bashed MMA for the longest time, about the "rivalry" between MMA and boxing.

 

Q: I’ve always been a boxing fan – but quite frankly, I have no idea which organizations are running the show today – I don’t really know who the heavyweight champion of the world is. But I know a hell of a lot about MMA fighters of every stripe. Is this a question of MMA marketing their product better, or novelty, or a genuine passing of the guard when it comes to pugilistic sports?

A: Let me answer your question first with a question. So I can be sure of something. Do you know a lot about MMA fighters of every stripe, or do you know a lot about UFC fighters, and mostly exclusively UFC fighters?

 

Q: Very good point. Of course, mostly UFC fighters.

A: I think that what’s perceived as the giant success of MMA is actually the big success of the UFC. Because there are several other MMA organizations which have gone bankrupt or are struggling now. So it’s really only UFC which has achieved this cachet that people keep talking about. And if you think about it, it’s a little like saying that if a boxing organization, like the WBA or the WBC or the IBF could concentrate so much power and promotional credibility they would eliminate attention paid to the others, and their people would be seen as the people and they would have a marketing niche that proceeds through kind of star identities that sell. And one of the things that bothers you about boxing, and bothers most people about it, is that there might be four champions in any given division at any given time. They’re called champions because they have belts from governing bodies with no hierarchy to tell them that one of them is more important or more prominent than the others.

 

People who watch MMA, a lot of them pay attention only to UFC. Now what does that mean? UFC hires their own announcers – they don’t deal with a Larry Merchant and a Jim Lampley picking them apart from a perspective of legitimate honesty and saying whatever they want to say. We’re talking about an organization where the promoter has hired the commentators. Now that’s an entirely different kind of broadcast than what we do or what anybody in boxing does. That’s really a lot more like pro wrestling. Because then they tell the story that they want to tell.

 

So the bottom line is, they have a tremendous advantage, UFC does, over what goes on in boxing. Is that because boxing people are dumb and UFC people are smart? To a certain degree, yeah. No question about it. They have done a better job of organizing and promoting the product to make an impact on the marketplace over the course of the past 12, 15 years. Does it mean that UFC, or MMA, is as legitimate and important and resonant a cultural experience as boxing? Not in a million years. Not even close. Boxing is a sport with a 120-year history, and extremely deep penetration in various cultures around the globe – most particularly American culture where it has produced some of the most prominent socio-political figures to be found in all of sport, most notably, Joe Louis and Muhammad Ali. No Joe Louis, no Muhammad Ali, no Barack Obama.

 

And so I think you have to be careful about judging something purely on the basis of a market penetration as opposed to looking at the institution as a whole. One thing we try to do at HBO Boxing is what you talked about earlier: it’s to look at the institution as a whole and present in an unvarnished fashion.

 

Q: Do you think MMA will, in the end, fade, survive or supersede boxing?

A: I think it’s here to stay. I think it’s here to keep existing. I think in a hundred years from now it will be interesting to see how variegated their experience is. But I believe there’s room for both, and that both are going to continue to exist and both are going to produce stars. And you know, I used to think of this in terms of “I like boxing because it’s better.” But now I think of it in terms of “I like boxing because it’s boxing” – and some people like MMA because it’s MMA. It’s no better and no worse, it is what it is. And I think there’s room in the cultural marketplace for both.

 

Thoughts, peeps?

[Palakol]

excellent post above.

 

Both sports offer both though, to say that one is more technical than the other is a simply a sign of ignorance of the technique and discipline required of each sport. Ignorant MMA fans will say that boxing is boring it's just pushing forward and hugging, and jabs to the death, totally ignoring the angles, trapping, and footwork evident in all great boxers. Ignorant Boxing Fans will say MMA is just a toughman competition where people just pummel other people to death, and rarely see the timing, strategy, and slick jiu-jitsu/wrestling that many fighters do.

damn right.

 

as far as the safety thing is concerned, they say boxing is actually more dangerous than mma, since the only way to win is to basically knock your opponent's head off. also, the quick stoppages by very careful referees prevent a fighter from taking repeated blows to the head for a prolonged amount of time while standing. yes, a standing barrage is more dangerous than a ground and pound when it comes to brain damage, since it's the whiplash effect that causes concussions. i haven't seen a lot of g&p knockouts as much as i have seen standing ones. a barely gloved hand will also produce a tremendous amount of force, making one-punch knockouts more common in mma. a one-punch knockout is actually a lot safer than repeated blows to the head for 12 rounds. yes, mma matches produce a lot of huge cuts, bruises, fractures, and blood everywhere. but that s@%t won't k*ll you. boxing, on the other hand, shakes your brain so hard that fighters with 20 or more fights have shown considerable brain damage. that's probably why there have been more deaths in boxing than there have been in mma for the last 16 years.

 

that's what i've read anyway. but here's what i know. boxing hurts a hell of a lot more than mma.

[dragonei]

How about this guys

 

Floyd Mayweather Jr. said that any skilled boxer could be a champ in MMA. he said mixed martial artist could not grapple boxers like him, because theyd be knocked out easily.

 

Agree or disagree?

[skitz]

^^ I agree... that Floyd Mayweather Jr. is an idiot.

 

No way can a boxer fight an MMA fighter without resorting to some grappling techniques. At the very least a striker must possess some counter-measure against the takedown (like Chuck Lidell). I was taught boxing (by Pedro Adigue). No where in his lessons did he teach me how to punch when lying flat on my back... or even when I am sprawled on top of an opponent (ground and pound). Walang leverage. Dun ang power ng boxers. Boxer pa ba ang tawag kung mixed na ang training?

 

However, if we read his contention in another way, that the best athletes are still in boxing, then I'd have to agree. Nasa boxing pa kasi ang pera. And where the money is, the best of the best will go. Hey, if Chuck Lidell can make 15M USD per fight in boxing, do you think he would stick it out in MMA? Who would?

[dragonei]

Hmmmm

 

You guys have any idea what is the highest pay check and MMA fighter got? Or at least say someone like anderson silva or GSP, magkano ba nakukuha nila kada laban?