MMA Thread

[ThunderHorse]

lol @ Mayweather running around like a little girl. It sounds like you're the one that doesn't know boxing. Mayweather is one of the most technically sound fighters in the sport.

No,

James Toney is an example of one of the most technically sound fighters in the sport.

Mayweather is a perfect, and I mean clean cut PERFECT example of a boxer, but he isn't a fighter, which is why you never see him willfully trade throws.

Toney is a fighter, he boxes but its the old school type of boxing, where they actually fight, Mayweather picked up the new age run and jab which in large part was started by Ali, perfected by guys like Ray Leonard, and taken to the extreme with guys like Mayweather.

Don't misunderstand what I'm saying, Mayweather is a great, GREAT boxer, but he isn't a fighter.

 

[Bigpapa42]

Okay, for one, you mention the fight going to ground. Now, I don't claim to be an expert on boxing as you seem to consider yourself, but I'm pretty sure the rules in professional boxing don't allow takedowns. Which means you are either talking about an MMA fight or an "open rules" fight, which is a whole lot closer to an MMA match than a boxing match. I'm sorry, but I attempted to use logic to read one of your posts. If that isn't how they are intended to be read, please let me know.

You quite clearly stated that the MMA fighter would have once chance to win - go to ground - and that it was very difficult to do. As not only would the boxer punch him three or four times when he shoots in, but also simply be able to sidestep. So again, please clarify how you are not saying the boxer would dominate with the statement I quoted.

It seems that most logical fans look at it this way - a boxer has a much better chance against an MMA fighter in a boxing match because there is only discipline involved and the boxer is almost certain to be better at it. In an MMA fight, there are multiple disciplines involved, and the boxer is only going to have training in one, which doesn't translate directly. Whereas the MMA fighter is going to have multiple approaches with which to attack the boxer. Thereby having a significant advantage over the boxer in an MMA, even if the MMA fighter is not truly top-level in the other disciplines.

 

[ThunderHorse]

Okay, for one, you mention the fight going to ground. Now, I don't claim to be an expert on boxing as you seem to consider yourself, but I'm pretty sure the rules in professional boxing don't allow takedowns. Which means you are either talking about an MMA fight or an "open rules" fight, which is a whole lot closer to an MMA match than a boxing match. I'm sorry, but I attempted to use logic to read one of your posts. If that isn't how they are intended to be read, please let me know.

You quite clearly stated that the MMA fighter would have once chance to win - go to ground - and that it was very difficult to do. As not only would the boxer punch him three or four times when he shoots in, but also simply be able to sidestep. So again, please clarify how you are not saying the boxer would dominate with the statement I quoted.

It seems that most logical fans look at it this way - a boxer has a much better chance against an MMA fighter in a boxing match because there is only discipline involved and the boxer is almost certain to be better at it. In an MMA fight, there are multiple disciplines involved, and the boxer is only going to have training in one, which doesn't translate directly. Whereas the MMA fighter is going to have multiple approaches with which to attack the boxer. Thereby having a significant advantage over the boxer in an MMA, even if the MMA fighter is not truly top-level in the other disciplines.

I seriously don't even understand what your trying to prove...

I've already said more often then not an MMA guy is going to win in a street fight, I simply said its naive to think that a boxer is completely defenseless if in some fucked up way a street fight was to occur between the two.

am I wrong for thinking that an MMA boxer doesn't win a street fight every time?

 

[ThunderHorse]

Again, this is all speculation... its not like you could prove it if you wanted to.

 

[BigBiss]

As I understand it, it was suppose to be a fix but Ali got scared and it was a shoot, hence the fact that absolutely nothing happened besides Inoki kicking him.

If Inoki fell back on his kicks that would fall in line with other shoots he has been in.

 

[Bigpapa42]

I seriously don't even understand what your trying to prove...

I've already said more often then not an MMA guy is going to win in a street fight, I simply said its naive to think that a boxer is completely defenseless if in some fucked up way a street fight was to occur between the two.

am I wrong for thinking that an MMA boxer doesn't win a street fight every time?

Well, you made a statement about the advantages a boxer would have over an MMA fighter in an MMA fight or a "street fight". Myself and several others disagreed with those points. You said you never made such a statement, at which point I quoted and asked for clarification. Now you're saying that you think the MMA fighter would have the advantage, which seems to be a direct contradiction to the statement I quoted. To be perfectly honest, I'm not entirely sure where you've been trying to go with all of this. My point was initially to contradict your "the only chance an MMA guy would have is getting buddy on the ground" statement, but now you're saying that's not what you said...

You're free to believe whatever you want. But when you make a post in the MMA thread stating that the only chance an MMA fighter would have against a boxer is to take it to ground and that any takedown attempts would be easy to avoid because of a boxer's footwork, don't be surprised when you are asked to justify those statements. But again, I'm not sure how I'm supposed to read the "the only chance an MMA guy would have is getting buddy on the ground" post and get that you're trying to say that the boxer has a fighting chance.

 

[ThunderHorse]

Well, you made a statement about the advantages a boxer would have over an MMA fighter in an MMA fight or a "street fight". Myself and several others disagreed with those points. You said you never made such a statement, at which point I quoted and asked for clarification. Now you're saying that you think the MMA fighter would have the advantage, which seems to be a direct contradiction to the statement I quoted. To be perfectly honest, I'm not entirely sure where you've been trying to go with all of this. My point was initially to contradict your "the only chance an MMA guy would have is getting buddy on the ground" statement, but now you're saying that's not what you said...

You're free to believe whatever you want. But when you make a post in the MMA thread stating that the only chance an MMA fighter would have against a boxer is to take it to ground and that any takedown attempts would be easy to avoid because of a boxer's footwork, don't be surprised when you are asked to justify those statements.

Seems to be, but like you've admitted yourself, you didn't bother to read the entire argument.

as I also clearly stated, it was to show that a boxer isn't purely defenseless if an MMA guy decided he wanted to try and tackle him, I see you enjoy going to prior points and pointing them out as if I've never clarified them, but we both know I've done this, which should also mean that the conversation on that particular part of the argument probably should cease, seeing as I can only assume we both see it the same way, or we both don't.

And it is the only chance an MMA guy has, just like the only chance a boxer has is if he manages to stay on his feet. you honestly believe that an MMA fighter can hang with a boxer standing up?

I figured that was conventional wisdom, would I be wrong in doing so?

But again, I'm not sure how I'm supposed to read the "the only chance an MMA guy would have is getting buddy on the ground" post and get that you're trying to say that the boxer has a fighting chance

Easy, read the entire argument before you jump in with assumptions.

 

[Liquidrob]

you know how easy it is to get a clinch in boxing without taking much damage?

gettng a tie up is easy, some of the best boxers cant stop a guy from getting a tie up over and over again, jounreymen can make a fight go to a decision by just grabbing holding the whole fight

hopkins can throw a overhand, lead with his head and tie you up over and over

the percentages are just not in the boxers favor of landing a clean shot when someone wants to shoot a takedown or just grab, without proper training, its almost a done deal

 

[ThunderHorse]

you know how easy it is to get a clinch in boxing without taking much damage?

gettng a tie up is easy, some of the best boxers cant stop a guy from getting a tie up over and over again, jounreymen can make a fight go to a decision by just grabbing holding the whole fight

hopkins can throw a overhand, lead with his head and tie you up over and over

the percentages are just not in the boxers favor of landing a clean shot when someone wants to shoot a takedown or just grab, without proper training, its almost a done deal

Tell me where I can find MMA fighters exclusively fighting Boxers and I'll believe you...

that way you'd actually have factual evidence...

but so far, the only thing your putting up is speculation... which is fine, but don't shoot me down for speculating and then do it yourself.

 

[Bigpapa42]

Given that the statement I've quoted is the initial argument you've made, I'd say its a relatively notable one to focus on. Regardless...

I would not agree that the MMA fighter has no chance standing in your "street fight" scenario. In MMA, there are these things called kicks. Low kicks, high kicks, body kicks... So even if the MMA fighter has to keep it standing, he can use those things called kicks to keep the boxer out of striking distance so the boxer can't use those killer jabs you've talked about. A couple of unchecked leg kicks could hurt the boxers legs to the point where it messes up his footwork and reduces his punching power. It also makes a takedown easier. See, that's why many people feel that MMA fighter has the advantage in an MMA or open fight against a boxer - because there are multiple ways to attack the boxer. The boxer is limited.

And you are absolutely correct on it being speculation. Way to disprove other arguments and nullify your own at the same time.

 

[Liquidrob]

Tell me where I can find MMA fighters exclusively fighting Boxers and I'll believe you...

that way you'd actually have factual evidence...

but so far, the only thing your putting up is speculation... which is fine, but don't shoot me down for speculating and then do it yourself.

almost every 'boxer' who has tried MMA gets abused badly

but you will just say they are not good, or washed up, or whatever

when Kimbo Slice can choke out Ray Mercer with a year of training, thats sad

when a 155 lbs Genki Sudo can sub Buetterbean with ease, its sad

art jimmerson got taken down by royce who is awful at takedomws

Milton Bowen got subbed by a cop/part time MA guy, its sad

 

[ThunderHorse]

Given that the statement I've quoted is the initial argument you've made, I'd say its a relatively notable one to focus on. Regardless...

I would not agree that the MMA fighter has no chance standing in your "street fight" scenario. In MMA, there are these things called kicks. Low kicks, high kicks, body kicks... So even if the MMA fighter has to keep it standing, he can use those things called kicks to keep the boxer out of striking distance so the boxer can't use those killer jabs you've talked about. A couple of unchecked leg kicks could hurt the boxers legs to the point where it messes up his footwork and reduces his punching power. It also makes a takedown easier. See, that's why many people feel that MMA fighter has the advantage in an MMA or open fight against a boxer - because there are multiple ways to attack the boxer. The boxer is limited.

And you are absolutely correct on it being speculation. Way to disprove other arguments and nullify your own at the same time.

ha,

ok, MMA fighters win because they can kick.

you win.

 

[Bigpapa42]

ha,

ok, MMA fighters win because they can kick.

you win.

Fantastic counter-point. You completely convinced me that the option to kick someone who has never had any training on throwing or defending kicks would not at all be a factor in any theoretical MMA-versus-boxer fight.

 

[ThunderHorse]

almost every 'boxer' who has tried MMA gets abused badly

but you will just say they are not good, or washed up, or whatever

when Kimbo Slice can choke out Ray Mercer with a year of training, thats sad

when a 155 lbs Genki Sudo can sub Buetterbean with ease, its sad

art jimmerson got taken down by royce who is awful at takedomws

Milton Bowen got subbed by a cop/part time MA guy, its sad

come on...

everyone knows Ray Mercer was washed up, he was washed up in boxing long before he decided to take that MMA fight.

Butterbean is a pitiful example, The guy made his career off of no names, and never beat anyone of real value and made anything of it. where did butterbean get championship wise? at least Ray Mercer won the heavyweight championship and arguably beat Lennox Lewis in his 1996 attempt, lets not also forget the fact that the man is also nearly 50 years old, which really shits on that theory.

Butterbean lost to an old Larry Holmes, and never won anything other then lower super heavyweight titles, he was never considered a top boxer, and never won the WBC, WBO, or even IBF heavyweight championships.

Jimmerson's record at the end of his career was 33-18, not to mention, he lost to one of the best MMA fighters ever, and he only fought in MMA once. he wasn't a great boxer, he was average to somewhat good. even with his 5 losses going into that fight, 5 loss guys sometimes have to many losses to get legitimate title shots.

and I honestly have no idea who Milton Bowen is, the fact that when I type his name in Google I get absolutely nothing resembling likeness to a boxer, shows me that he can't have been much of a boxer.

I'd tell you to pick boxers that are actually considered good at what they do, but we both know that those guys are making way to much $ to even day dream about playing around in the octagon. the list you just posted is honestly pitiful.

 

[Liquidrob]

Sorry, his name is Melton Bowen, misspelled it

Boxing record of 35-9

Lost to freakin Steve Jennum, I guy who reps Ninjitsu, lol

 

[Liquidrob]

Jimmerson's record at the end of his career was 33-18, not to mention, he lost to one of the best MMA fighters ever, and he only fought in MMA once. he wasn't a great boxer, he was average to somewhat good. even with his 5 losses going into that fight, 5 loss guys sometimes have to many losses to get legitimate title shots.

the point is, royce has some of the worst takedowns, he is old school gracie jiu jitsu and he took down a 'somewhat good' boxer like nothing, royce basically throws a couple low kicks and charges with his arms at you, lol

its just sad, really it is

 

[ThunderHorse]

I just looked through his record...

he got destroyed by one of the worst boxers, but arguably the most powerful boxer, in Shannon Briggs.

although he is a much better example, he wasn't very good, all of his wins were against very weak opposition and anyone with a decent record beat him.

he only beat 3 guys with winning records.

I wouldn't exactly label him as a good boxer by any means.

 

[ThunderHorse]

the point is, royce has some of the worst takedowns, he is old school gracie jiu jitsu and he took down a 'somewhat good' boxer like nothing, royce basically throws a couple low kicks and charges with his arms at you, lol

its just sad, really it is

a boxer that is somewhat good will never win any type of championship above a local one or at a stretch, and I mean, a serious stretch, possibly a national title.

I thought we were talking about world championship caliber fighters.

 

[Liquidrob]

I just looked through his record...

he got destroyed by one of the worst boxers, but arguably the most powerful boxer, in Shannon Briggs.

although he is a much better example, he wasn't very good, all of his wins were against very weak opposition and anyone with a decent record beat him.

he only beat 3 guys with winning records.

I wouldn't exactly label him as a good boxer by any means.

you are still not getting it, a pro boxer, lost to a cop/part time fucking ninja! LMAO

a guy who is a 'pro' boxer cant beat a part time ninja? cant even stop it from going to the ground?

this is UFC 4 shit like 15 years ago, lololololol

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/J6QhmMUGVyo&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/J6QhmMUGVyo&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

now just stop

 

[Liquidrob]

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/erjh4hPAl6o&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/erjh4hPAl6o&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

behold the power of royce gracie takedowns!

woooo!