Home News Current Champs WAIL! Encyclopedia
The Cyber Boxing Zone Message Board
+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 27 of 27

Thread: Rolling over

  1. #1
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Wyoming U.S.A.
    Posts
    340
    vCash
    500

    Rolling over

    I have read alot of opinions about Boxers getting into MMA fights. I agree they would have a hard time perfecting a ground game against someone that has been working on theirs for 20 or more years.
    The thing I havn't seen much of is people talking about MMA fighters taking on a boxer in a boxing ring.
    I think the same thing would happen. In my opinion, a top MMA fighter wouldnt hold a candle to a club fighter.
    It's just not the same skills.

    Randy

  2. #2
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    1,246
    vCash
    500

    Re: Rolling over

    "The thing I havn't seen much of is people talking about MMA fighters taking on a boxer in a boxing ring."

    Well, Andrei Arlovski, who's trained by Freddie Raocg, is considering a boxing career, and Anderson Silva has expressed the desire to fight Roy Jones, proving there are delusionary sorts in both disciplines.

    I would suspect that's because MMA fans don't feel compelled to compare their sport with boxing. Many of them aren't interested boxing--they don't think it's relevant. Most of them that are interested in boxing, like me, realize that comparing the two sports is like apples and oranges. Of course boxers are going to win the vast majority of boxing matches versus MMA fighters, and MMA fighters are going to win the vast majority of MMA matches versus boxers. The only place I see that question debated is on boxing forums. I guess I think the only question that has any merit whatsoever (and it has very little) is: if a top middleweight MMA fighter, say, went into a dark alley with a top middleweight boxer, which would prevail?

  3. #3
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Wyoming U.S.A.
    Posts
    340
    vCash
    500

    Re: Rolling over

    Tony,
    Thats the point I am trying to make. Boxing and MMA are two completely different sports.
    I guess I don't really see the comparison. They are both called "fights" but with different skill sets.
    Just my opinion

    Randy

  4. #4
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Incheon, South Korea
    Posts
    1,893
    vCash
    500

    Re: Rolling over

    A few decent kick boxers have made the attempt with less than Stellar results. Ray Sefo got a few wins under his belt then was koed in brutal fashion after about five fights. Rick Roufus had some success and of course Matt Skelton is doiing ok.

    In the end, boxers have to train completely differently for an MMA match. And as we are seeing, More and more MMA fighters are using boxing trainers and I just love it!

  5. #5
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    1,246
    vCash
    500

    Re: Rolling over

    It only makes sense for MMA fighters to use boxing trainers for their stand-up, but boxing trainers aren't equipped to train them in jujitsu or wrestling or Muay Thai or karate et al. Andre Arlovski has been training with Roach and his stand-up has improved, but in his last fight he was nearly submitted by Ray Nelson. He would up stopping Nelson on strikes, but only after the referee interfered, standing up the fighters with Nelson in a dominant position and going for a kimura. We'll have to see how that works out next weekend when Arlovski fights Fedor...

  6. #6
    Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    3,283
    vCash
    500

    Re: Rolling over

    Hello Wing,

    MMA fighters believe that their sport proves who would win a real fight--not just a boxing match or a wrestling match, etc. So they don't aspire to beat boxers under boxing rules, as boxing is a heavily rule-laden fighting sport which allows only punches--in MMA's view, boxing is extremely limited due to the barring of holds, clinches, kicks, elbows, knees, takedowns, and groundfighting. So, it would be a step backward for an MMA person, who wants to use all tools so as to have the greatest chance to win against any type of opponent, if he were to focus on beating only a boxer in a boxing match. With his skill set, an MMA man is well-equipped to beat a boxer in a street fight. Admittedly, he's not as well-equipped in a match focused on only boxing, but MMA fighters ARE training with boxing trainers to learn the boxing skills they need for MMA.

    This topic has been batted around on this site numerous times so I won't engage further in it here, only will agree with Dogman that this topic only seems to come up on boxing forums. MMA respects boxing, and MANY MMA people (fighters, fans) love boxing, but feel MMA is more able to win a real fight; whereas certain boxing fans feel boxers would beat MMA fighters 1) at BOXING (which would prove nothing to the MMA man) or 2) in a real fight, which virtually all MMA people feel would be rare, but which some/many boxing fans feel is so. Butterbean beating some MMA nobodies is typically cited as an example.

    The UFC, at its start in 1993, was NOT mixed martial arts (MMA), but instead sought to match experts from various fighting sports/martial arts in order to see which singular fighting system was best. Boxers fought jiu-jitzu men, wrestling fought karate, kickboxing fought submissions experts, etc. Jiu-jitzu won 3 of the first 4 UFCs, and if not for an injury to the jiu-jitzu guy (Royce Gracie) in the last fight he won in that 4th tournament, which prevented him from entering the final match that night, he would have won that UFC, too. Wrestling won several more UFCs after that, and jiu-jitzu some more. It was also found that grapplers (wrestling, jiu-jitzu, submissions, etc.) pretty much always beat strikers (boxing, karate, kickboxing, etc.) at that time.

    Don Frye and Mark Coleman, highly-decorated amateur wrestlers, in the mid-1990s brought in dangerous striking (by grapplers), with Frye a trained boxer who not only softened up people with strikes, but won his UFC matches with strikes and KOs. And Coleman did "ground and pound" after taking people to the floor--lots of punches and elbows thrown on the floor, rather than attempting a submission hold.

    Then, kickboxing world champ Maurice Smith--a pure striker who prepared for the UFC by doing some training in grappling and submissions-- defeated UFC champ Coleman in a very long, overtime match, with strikes (mostly kicks). It was after this match that the UFC saw much cross-training of fighters, each wanting to absorb as many new skills across all martial arts as they could.

    Hence the evolution of the UFC, which initially sought simply to identify the most potent martial art, into mixed martial arts (MMA) just a few years later.
    Last edited by Michael Frank; 01-19-2009 at 10:18 PM.

  7. #7
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Incheon, South Korea
    Posts
    1,893
    vCash
    500

    Re: Rolling over

    You are indeed correct Mr Frank. However, the original tournament was set up by the Gracies with many fighters entering the tournament not even knowing what to expect. Damn it Tank Abbot of all people was a wrecking machine in it's early days!

    Gracie pulled out due to an injury suffered at the hands of a Tae Kwon Do practitioner and the only reason he won was buy pulling the guys hair for dear life. A win yes, but kind of cheap. Gracie also convenienlt quit the Octagon whem Marco Ruas came along.

    At the same time, when has a boxer at the top of his game taken the time to train seriously and fight MMA? I've said it before, I am a big fan of K1, UFC, Elite and boxing. I've watched the UFC from the very beginning. The Octagon gives a decided advantage to grapplers as well.

    I'm not debating the fact that if a boxer walks into the ring and never worked on a ground game, that they would have success, what I am saying is that a good prime boxer would have a lot of sucess, given the right training.

    At the same time, I love the fact that the boxing in MMA is steadily inproving. As far as striking. I believe it is most practical and probabally second only to Mua Thai, because of the elbows knees, and most importantly, the low kicks.

    The thing is, once strikers had time to figure out what was going on in the new sport, they had a lot of sucess. Now it is a combination of strikers and grapplers which is what makes it so interesting.

    Still one thing we can agree on is that to compete in MMA, you need to be able to strike and roll.

    In the end, I prefer the striker.

  8. #8
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Incheon, South Korea
    Posts
    1,893
    vCash
    500

    Re: Rolling over

    You are indeed correct Mr Frank. However, the original tournament was set up by the Gracies with many fighters entering the tournament not even knowing what to expect. Damn it Tank Abbot of all people was a wrecking machine in it's early days!

    Gracie pulled out due to an injury suffered at the hands of a Tae Kwon Do practitioner and the only reason he won was buy pulling the guys hair for dear life. A win yes, but kind of cheap. Gracie also convenienlt quit the Octagon whem Marco Ruas came along.

    At the same time, when has a boxer at the top of his game taken the time to train seriously and fight MMA? I've said it before, I am a big fan of K1, UFC, Elite and boxing. I've watched the UFC from the very beginning. The Octagon gives a decided advantage to grapplers as well.

    I'm not debating the fact that if a boxer walks into the ring and never worked on a ground game, that they would have success, what I am saying is that a good prime boxer would have a lot of sucess, given the right training.

    At the same time, I love the fact that the boxing in MMA is steadily inproving. As far as striking. I believe it is most practical and probabally second only to Mua Thai, because of the elbows knees, and most importantly, the low kicks.

    The thing is, once strikers had time to figure out what was going on in the new sport, they had a lot of sucess. Now it is a combination of strikers and grapplers which is what makes it so interesting.

    Still one thing we can agree on is that to compete in MMA, you need to be able to strike and roll.

    In the end, I prefer the striker.

  9. #9
    Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    3,283
    vCash
    500

    Re: Rolling over

    OTR, I'd agree with you further that if top strikers (boxers or whatever else, such as karate men) took the time to learn submissions, wrestling, and jiu-jitzu, they, too, might be champions in MMA. Maurice Smith is a good example of a great striker who learned some of the above and did quite well in the UFC.

    I have found three claims that seem incredible-- notions of some boxing fans that 1) boxing alone would, in an MMA contest, defeat an MMA fighter trained in numerous skills including boxing; 2) boxing is a superior one-skill discipline to all of the other 1-skill disciplines that already defeated it time and again in the past (notably jiu-jitzu); and 3) boxers would beat MMA guys at BOXING . . . which to me is boxing fans grasping at straws. Duh, yes, of course, boxers should win boxing matches against non-boxers, I wholeheartedly agree.

    As to point #3, I would ask those who seriously raise that question: Who, anywhere in the world, has ever said that some other martial artist will beat a boxer at boxing?

    Actually, I'm not sure if I can agree with your last point. The Gracies stated that they left the UFC when it moved significantly away from "no-holds-barred" fighting. They felt their advantage was in keeping a fight on the floor indefinitely, and fighting off their backs if necessary. Also, head butts, strikes on the floor, and stamina. With the rules changes, and new rules, brought about by 2000, such as the creation of rounds, no head butts, no knees, stomps, or elbows to the head of a downed fighter, etc., it became more of a sport but less of a real fight, and they felt their skills would not play well under the new limitations.

    Given their fine track record worldwide in no-holds-barred bouts for decades, I'm not so sure that I don't take their word for it. They certainly proved themselves in the first 4 UFCs--championships won essentially 4 times for 4 attempts; Gracie would have easily beaten Harold Howard had he not been injured for the final match.

    As to Tank Abbott, he usually won his matches until he met champions, at which point he lost. While not skilled in a particular martial art, I think he was one helluva tough guy, and I feel sorry for any boxer facing him who doesn't land hard shots to the chin in the first few seconds of the fight. Because Tank will subsequently take the guy down, and then I favor Tank.
    Last edited by Michael Frank; 01-20-2009 at 09:48 AM.

  10. #10
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Incheon, South Korea
    Posts
    1,893
    vCash
    500

    Re: Rolling over

    "Gracie would have easily beaten Harold Howard had he not been injured for the final match."

    They actually won the first three and threw in the towel. Which is a loss in my books. Steve Jennum won UFC three I believe.

    Would have and did are two different things though. He had his ass handed to him by Kimo and would have gotten beat had he not had a pony tail to bail him out.

    While your point about time limits may be correct, many people argue that the arrival of the big boys was the reason Royce didn't enter. When the Russians brought their sambo and other skills, many people feel that they knew it was going to be too tough on the smaller Gracies.

    And didn't Gracie and Shamrock fight to a draw that night?

    Well it was long ago, anyhow, I don't think you can accuse me of any of those three points you mentioned. I feel that boxing is the skill that many MMA fighters realise they are missing and also, that a lot of strikers have done well in the mma. With the increase of boxing skill in MMA, it become a lot more skillful. I just watched Harold Howard vs Jennum while typing this and man, was it ever sloppy!

  11. #11
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    84
    vCash
    500

    Re: Rolling over

    David Haye Dismisses Enzo Maccarinelli's Talk Of Going Into MMA After Boxing

    by James Slater

    "A very interesting article appeared in Today's issue of The Sun newspaper, in which heavyweight contender David Haye responded quite angrily to a quote made by his former foe Enzo Maccarinelli. Apparently, Enzo said recently that he wouldn't mind going into MMA one day, and that he would "fancy knocking out" Michael Bisping, the UK's top UFC fighter..

    Haye, who in the past has had experience in mixed martial arts, Jiu Jitsu and kickboxing - practicing these arts for around six years - said the man he stopped in 2-rounds this past March would have no chance against guys like Bisping.

    "Believing you can be a star in the UFC just because you are good with your fists is like a cricketer expecting to win Wimbledon just because he's good at hitting a ball with a bat," Haye said. "Boxing and mixed martial arts are two completely different disciplines and it would be foolish to expect to switch between the two and dominate.

    "If Enzo Maccarinelli and Michael Bisping were to meet in The Octagon it would be a no contest - Bisping would beat Maccarinelli ten times out of ten. Michael knows the MMA game inside out, whereas Enzo would be completely new to it. On the flipside, if Enzo and Michael met under boxing rules, Maccarinelli would be the one with his arm raised at the end. As a pure puncher, Enzo is by far the better of the two. After all, his job is punching people in the face. The problem Enzo would have in the UFC is that MMA rules incorporate various other skills aside from just punching.

    "Would Enzo be able to defend Bisping's knees? Would he be able to stuff Michael's takedowns? Would Enzo even know how to react to being put on his back? Would his footwork be as sharp fighting barefoot? The answer would probably be no to all those questions."

    It does seem as though "The Hayemaker" is more than just a curios fan of MMA. Appearing to know his stuff, Haye has gone on record as saying he would like to go into MMA after his own boxing career is over. The 28-year-old has clearly done far more research and homework than has Enzo.

    "I've rolled around with MMA guys in the past - and even use British mixed martial artist James Zikic for sparring - and I know how hard it is to fight these guys," Haye said. "They are very physically strong and very dangerous in the clinch and on the ground. Those are two positions that pro boxers are not used to. Also, despite always starting on my feet with these guys, I was finding myself taken to the mat eight out of ten times. That gives me a two in ten chance of landing a punch and knocking my MMA opponent out.

    "If Enzo can't land that bingo shot right away, he's likely to get kneed to hell and back or submitted in the blink of an eye. It really is apples and oranges."

    It seems Enzo Maccarinelli, judging by what Haye says, anyway, should definitely stick to boxing!"

    From: Link

  12. #12
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    84
    vCash
    500

    Re: Rolling over

    David Haye Dismisses Enzo Maccarinelli's Talk Of Going Into MMA After Boxing

    by James Slater

    "A very interesting article appeared in Today's issue of The Sun newspaper, in which heavyweight contender David Haye responded quite angrily to a quote made by his former foe Enzo Maccarinelli. Apparently, Enzo said recently that he wouldn't mind going into MMA one day, and that he would "fancy knocking out" Michael Bisping, the UK's top UFC fighter..

    Haye, who in the past has had experience in mixed martial arts, Jiu Jitsu and kickboxing - practicing these arts for around six years - said the man he stopped in 2-rounds this past March would have no chance against guys like Bisping.

    "Believing you can be a star in the UFC just because you are good with your fists is like a cricketer expecting to win Wimbledon just because he's good at hitting a ball with a bat," Haye said. "Boxing and mixed martial arts are two completely different disciplines and it would be foolish to expect to switch between the two and dominate.

    "If Enzo Maccarinelli and Michael Bisping were to meet in The Octagon it would be a no contest - Bisping would beat Maccarinelli ten times out of ten. Michael knows the MMA game inside out, whereas Enzo would be completely new to it. On the flipside, if Enzo and Michael met under boxing rules, Maccarinelli would be the one with his arm raised at the end. As a pure puncher, Enzo is by far the better of the two. After all, his job is punching people in the face. The problem Enzo would have in the UFC is that MMA rules incorporate various other skills aside from just punching.

    "Would Enzo be able to defend Bisping's knees? Would he be able to stuff Michael's takedowns? Would Enzo even know how to react to being put on his back? Would his footwork be as sharp fighting barefoot? The answer would probably be no to all those questions."

    It does seem as though "The Hayemaker" is more than just a curios fan of MMA. Appearing to know his stuff, Haye has gone on record as saying he would like to go into MMA after his own boxing career is over. The 28-year-old has clearly done far more research and homework than has Enzo.

    "I've rolled around with MMA guys in the past - and even use British mixed martial artist James Zikic for sparring - and I know how hard it is to fight these guys," Haye said. "They are very physically strong and very dangerous in the clinch and on the ground. Those are two positions that pro boxers are not used to. Also, despite always starting on my feet with these guys, I was finding myself taken to the mat eight out of ten times. That gives me a two in ten chance of landing a punch and knocking my MMA opponent out.

    "If Enzo can't land that bingo shot right away, he's likely to get kneed to hell and back or submitted in the blink of an eye. It really is apples and oranges."

    It seems Enzo Maccarinelli, judging by what Haye says, anyway, should definitely stick to boxing!"

    From: Link

  13. #13
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Incheon, South Korea
    Posts
    1,893
    vCash
    500

    Re: Rolling over

    Nice read. Thanks!

  14. #14
    Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    3,283
    vCash
    500

    Re: Rolling over

    MSM, I couldn't agree more with Haye's arguments from your article. Enzo's is the type of trash talk from boxing that I find so amusing . . . "I'll just go in and KO a guy who has many more skills than I do, as if he can't duck under a punch, take me down, and have me in a position I've no training in. But it doesn't matter, I'll KO him anyway, because I'm a boxer."

  15. #15
    Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    3,283
    vCash
    500

    Re: Rolling over

    OTR, I wasn't referring to you in those three points I mentioned.

    As to Kimo, Gracie, and Howard, I'd remind you that Gracie beat Kimo and he didn't cheat. He arm-locked him less than 5 minutes into the fight. And Howard was one of the weakest finalists ever, and I feel quite comfortable stating that Gracie, a great fighter with a proven fighting system, would have beaten him every day of the week, and in an easy fight.

    Howard's conqueror, Jennum, was a good fighter but nowhere close to Gracie. He lost rather badly to Tank Abbott not long after . . . though as I've said, Tank was a tough hombre, and not just anybody can beat him.

    Gracie beat Shamrock in UFC #1 and fought to a draw only in a "superfight", their rematch; not the night of UFC 3, but in UFC 5.

    As to your comments about Gracie leaving due to the bigger fighters coming along . . . well, 180-pound Gracie beat: 250-pound Kimo, 260-pound Severn, 205-pound Shamrock, 225-pound Pat Smith, Remco Pardouel (~230 pounds), 190-pound Jason DeLucia, 215-pound Gerard Gordeau, 196-pound Art Jimmerson, Keith Hackney (~200 pounds). The point is that I really think Gracie proved himself (and Gracie jiu-jitzu), repeatedly, as the best fighter at the time against MUCH bigger men. Way too many times to say he was scared of bigger men.

    And supposing he didn't want to continually spot 40-80 pounds to opponents going forward? What 180-pound boxer EVER does that? In this comparison of boxing and MMA, it seems MMA is being held to a much higher standard.

    P.S. - Howard vs. Jennum was one of the sloppiest UFC fights ever; not representative of the UFC even then. This was due pretty much solely to Howard's style--and like boxers, he was a striker.

  16. #16
    Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    3,283
    vCash
    500

    Re: Rolling over

    Quote Originally Posted by Off The River
    "Gracie would have easily beaten Harold Howard had he not been injured for the final match."

    They actually won the first three and threw in the towel. Which is a loss in my books. Steve Jennum won UFC three I believe.

    Would have and did are two different things though. He had his ass handed to him by Kimo and would have gotten beat had he not had a pony tail to bail him out.
    OTR,

    Why is it my "would have" is problematical to you, but you use it a moment later for your own point?!

    I'd add that my projecting Gracie over Howard is a view shared by probably 99%-100% of UFC watchers. Whereas your projecting Kimo over Gracie, who DID beat him, is not so easy a prediction, I feel.

  17. #17
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Incheon, South Korea
    Posts
    1,893
    vCash
    500

    Re: Rolling over

    I was simply using a similar logic. Pure speculation. If he would have won, he would have fought. So, he technically lost a tournament that he created and was designed with the best chances for him to win.

  18. #18
    Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    3,283
    vCash
    500

    Re: Rolling over

    Quote Originally Posted by Off The River
    I was simply using a similar logic. Pure speculation. If he would have won, he would have fought. So, he technically lost a tournament that he created and was designed with the best chances for him to win.
    Well, then, let's tell the whole story.

    Gracie won the elimination UFC tournament 3 out of 4 times, and the time he didn't win it, he got hurt in his last match (which he won) and couldn't fight further in that one tourney.

    What is your point? That Gracie is a bad fighter? A mediocre fighter? Or something less than a great fighter? All the expert commentators there thought he was an incomparable talent. His brother Rixon, the star of the entire clan, didn't bother to fight in the UFC, or perhaps he would have done better than Royce, if that was possible.

    The tournament was designed with virtually no rules. That meant it was designed for whoever can fight with almost any fighting tools at their disposal. I don't see how Gracie can be accused of setting it up for himself, as his opponents were allowed to do virtually anything, too.

    It was only to his advantage in that he adopted jiu-jitzu, in which he was the 175-pound world champion, to "no-holds-barred," and most of his UFC opponents were not used to no-holds-barred. I don't see how that means the tournament was designed for him to win it.

    It was designed to do what it in fact did: demonstrate which was the most effective fighting system in a virtually no-rules bout.

  19. #19
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Incheon, South Korea
    Posts
    1,893
    vCash
    500

    Re: Rolling over

    All true to a degree and we are really splitting hairs, becuase I am not dissacreeing with the fact that Gracie is a great fighter. On;y that the gracies made the tournament prepared for it and had every advantage.

    One was the use of a Gi which essentially was a weapon another was the octagon, the final was in the first one, now I did read this some time ago was the fact that fighters really had no idea what was going on at that time as it was an "open event" A lot of those guys really did not know what to expect.

    At the end of the day however, you are right, Royce Gracie proved himself the best man in the tournament and the man who introduced BJJ to the world by winning three, not four straight tournaments. He did technically win the in UFC 4fight, but he could not continue, threw in the towel and lost.

    Harold Howard on the oter hand was a striker, he defeated all of his opponents and was forced to face a fresh guy who never even had a fight underneath his belt. Sinc we are using "would have" in this discussion, I can say with a great degree of confidence, that from the right hand that shook Steve Jennum early on, he would have lost to Harold Howard had he take two fights that night.

    This all brings me to my whole point. Watching that fight, I saw a pretty sloppy grappler beat a pretty sloppy striker. Harold Howard is not world class and neither is Steve Jennum, yet they still made it to the finals.

    The UFC has never seen a world class boxer in it,and has only more recently seen world class strikers. Wich is why it is gettng better and growing so quickly. Guys like Tank Abbot popularised the sport as much as Gracie, and I will argue that his skills leave a lot to be desired.

  20. #20
    Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    3,283
    vCash
    500

    Re: Rolling over

    Well, we are likely agreeing much more than disagreeing, OTR.

    As to strikers, the prevailing thought in the mid-1990s was that strikers could not win in the UFC, they really never did win except for karate man Keith Hackney beating the 600-pound sumo man, Emmanuel Yarborough.

    What world-class boxer would have fared well--knowing only boxing? I think that a boxer using only boxing cannot beat even a decent MMA man. A boxer doing cross-training may do very well in MMA, but few have attempted it.

    The top boxing man in the late 1980s, Mike Tyson, in his prime was offered a fight with Rorian Gracie, no holds barred. Winner take all. The so-called "baddest man on the planet" declined it.

    Might we assume, if assuming is o.k., that if boxers (Jimmerson, Bowen) have lost when they entered the UFC, and other boxers declined to enter, that maybe these guys are not the most qualified to beat someone who is world class at jiu-jitzu or wrestling, also world-class or near-world class in submissions, and pretty darned good at everything else?

    I'd LOVE for Mayweather, BHOP, Klitschko, or whomever to step up and say he can beat an MMA man in a street fight. They'd be welcomed by Dana White with open arms. But they're not stepping up. Risk/reward is a problem for them.

    I disagree with you that Tank popularized the sport as much as Gracie. Shamrock, Severn, and Pat Smith did at the beginning, then Marco Ruas, then Don Frye injected a bunch of excitement. Followed quickly by Mark Coleman, then Mo Smith briefly, then the very exciting KO artist and jiu-jitzu great, Vitor Belfort, then Randy Couture. Frank Shamrock joined up about this time. Tank was a fine "opponent" early on, but IMO people didn't come to see him win or to take the sport to the next level. They came to see the guys I just named. Even Kimo Leopoldo, a good fighter, was not a factor in the sport's growth or popularity, but he made an exciting opponent. Same with Harold Howard, Hackney, Jennum, and many others.

    P.S. - All contestants from the outset of the UFC were allowed gi's, and Remco Pardouel showed up at each UFC he was in, in a gi. He wore one in every fight.

  21. #21
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Incheon, South Korea
    Posts
    1,893
    vCash
    500

    Re: Rolling over

    But the Gi is a decided advantage and not something one would usualluy be walking around the street in.

    Again, my point is. nor never has been that a boxer would win an MMA contest. It is simply that no quality boxer has really entered the Octagon, which I still contend gives another advantage to the grappler. And being a design of the Gracies, I am sure ther were much more comfortable and knew it's advantages and disadvantages early o. Whereas, there was and had to be a learning curve for the others who never fought in that environment.

    You bring up an interesting, point regarding Tyson, but it really has no basis. Why would he when he was making an infinite more amout of money. It is similar to the great New Zealand All Blacks winger Jonah Lomu who was offered millions of dollars to show up at the Dallas Cowboys trainngn camp. He delined, because he was a rugby player. Two similar, but different sports.

    And, one of the Gracies offered a million dollars to Roy Jones for a fight. Jones responded by asking him outside to the parking lot for free. The Gracies declined.

    Again, my point is not to contend who, or what is better. I train in Tae Kwon Do which is not very practical in MMA, but it keeps me fit and limber for a 38 year old man. I simply say that the most talented strikers have not really gone itno the sport yet. Where are the Thai Boxers in the lower weights? Where are the boxers? They are doing their own thing and will continue to do so for some time to come.

  22. #22
    Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    3,283
    vCash
    500

    Re: Rolling over

    Quote Originally Posted by Off The River
    But the Gi is a decided advantage and not something one would usualluy be walking around the street in. ONE DOESN'T WALK THE STREETS WITHOUT A TOP ON, EITHER, YET THAT'S HOW BOXERS AND MMA FIGHTERS APPEAR IN THE RING. WHAT DOES WHAT ONE WEARS "WALKING THE STREET" HAVE TO DO WITH ANYTHING? THE Gi IS NOT A "DECIDED ADVANTAGE"; IT IS AN ADVANTAGE ONLY TO THOSE WHO CARE TO USE IT TO ADVANTAGE AND KNOW HOW. IT CAN BE PULLED OVER ITS WEARER'S HEAD AND BECOME A "DECIDED" DISADVANTAGE, EASILY.

    Again, my point is. nor never has been that a boxer would win an MMA contest. It is simply that no quality boxer has really entered the Octagon, which I still contend gives another advantage to the grappler. And being a design of the Gracies, I am sure ther were much more comfortable and knew it's advantages and disadvantages early o. Whereas, there was and had to be a learning curve for the others who never fought in that environment. - THE GRACIES USUALLY FOUGHT IN RINGS WITH ROPES PRIOR TO THE UFC.

    You bring up an interesting, point regarding Tyson, but it really has no basis. IT HAS A TOTAL "BASIS;" IT HAPPENED, FOR GOD'S SAKE. Why would he when he was making an infinite more amout of money. It is similar to the great New Zealand All Blacks winger Jonah Lomu who was offered millions of dollars to show up at the Dallas Cowboys trainngn camp. He delined, because he was a rugby player. Two similar, but different sports. TYSON WAS OFFERED A NO HOLDS BARRED FIGHT, NOT TO COMPETE IN A "SPORT" LIKE BOXING, RUGBY, FOOTBALL, OR EVEN MMA. A NO-RULES FIGHT, WHERE BOTH PARTIES HAVE AREAS OF WEAKNESS. THE BEST OVERALL FIGHTER WINS, AND NEITHER IS COMPETING IN HIS OWN DISCIPLINE (JIU-JITZU OR BOXING) BUT MAY USE AS MUCH OF IT OR AS LITTLE AS HE WANTS.

    And, one of the Gracies offered a million dollars to Roy Jones for a fight. Jones responded by asking him outside to the parking lot for free. The Gracies declined. WHY DO YOU EVEN BRING THIS UP, TO ARGUE IN CIRCLES? IF YOU JUST AGREED WITH TYSON, WHY DO YOU THEN DISAGREE WITH THE GRACIE WHO DECLINED TO FIGHT JONES FOR FREE. THERE IS NO LOGIC HERE.

    FURTHER, THE "LET'S FIGHT HERE FOR FREE" IS TALK, BUT IT HELPS NO ONE. JONES CARES ABOUT MONEY AS MUCH AS OR MORE THAN ANYBODY, AND IF HE TRULY WANTED TO FIGHT A GRACIE, HE INDEED WOULD HAVE AGREED TO A FIGHT FOR MONEY . . . NOT A FIGHT IN THE PARKING LOT, WHICH HE COULD CHANGE HIS MIND ABOUT IN A MINUTE. COMMIT TO A STAGED EVENT, AND ALL PARTIES WILL SHOW UP, PLUS ALL PARTIES WILL GET PAID. THE PARKING LOT MAKES GOOD TALK, BUT THERE ARE NO DOCTORS, NO INSURANCE, NO TITLE ON THE LINE . . . OR ANY REAL INTENTION ON THE PART OF JONES.

    LARRY HOLMES MADE THE SAME COMMENT TO EDDIE MUSTAFA MUHAMMAD, WHO WANTED A HEAVYWEIGHT TITLE SHOT. HE OFFERED EDDIE A FREE FIGHT AT LARRY'S GYM. PROBLEM WAS, THAT DOESN'T GET EDDIE THE TITLE, SHOULD HE WIN, NOR THE MONEY HE WANTED, WHICH HOLMES WOULD HAVE SHARED IN. HOLMES CLEARLY DIDN'T WANT TO MAKE A FIGHT WITH EDDIE, THAT'S ALL THAT RESPONSE SHOWS. (YET HE LIKELY WOULD HAVE WON WITH EASE HAD THEY FOUGHT. BUT MAYBE HE DIDN'T WANT TO RISK LOSING TO A LIGHT-HEAVY, WHICH HAPPENED TO HIM A FEW YEARS LATER.)

    Again, my point is not to contend who, or what is better. I train in Tae Kwon Do which is not very practical in MMA, but it keeps me fit and limber for a 38 year old man. I simply say that the most talented strikers have not really gone itno the sport yet. Where are the Thai Boxers in the lower weights? Where are the boxers? They are doing their own thing and will continue to do so for some time to come. HOW DOES ALL OF THIS PROVE A BOXER WILL BEAT AN MMA PERSON? AND IF YOU ARE NOT TRYING TO PROVE OR IMPLY THAT, THEN WHY KEEP REPEATING THAT "THE BEST BOXERS HAVEN'T ENTERED MMA"... WE GET IT ALREADY. BUT WHAT IS THE POINT THAT YOU'RE TRYING TO MAKE????
    My responses in all-CAPS above.

  23. #23
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Wyoming U.S.A.
    Posts
    340
    vCash
    500

    Re: Rolling over

    Why doesn't anybody talk about these guys meeting in a boxing ring under boxing rules? Every time I hear these comparisons its under mma rules.

    How do you think they would fare in a boxing ring.

    Wing master

  24. #24
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Incheon, South Korea
    Posts
    1,893
    vCash
    500

    Re: Rolling over

    My responses in all-CAPS above.
    You seem quite angry.

    Wing Master. As I stated earlier. A few accomplished kick boxers have gone on to box and once they stepped up i competition, tey were defeated. Some did have decent success. Rick Roufus I believe did quite well. Grapplers would get beaten badly.

  25. #25
    Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    3,283
    vCash
    500

    Re: Rolling over

    Quote Originally Posted by Wing master
    Why doesn't anybody talk about these guys meeting in a boxing ring under boxing rules? Every time I hear these comparisons its under mma rules.

    How do you think they would fare in a boxing ring.

    Wing master
    Randy, of course a trained boxer should beat a trained MMA person in boxing. Does that need asking? Has anyone ever said an MMA person will beat a boxer at boxing?? A trained boxer should beat any non-boxer, at boxing. Or else he's not much of a boxer.

    The reason the comparisons are under MMA rules is because some boxing fans feel boxing is the superior form of self defense in a real fight. The MMA people usually feel MMA, or for that matter, several other martial arts individually, are superior to boxing for self defense. As other posts have explained, that is how the UFC came about, to determine which fighting system would win in a fight with virtually no rules.

    Jiu-jitzu and wrestling were dominant in those first years, before fighters decided to cross-train in various disciplines and become "mixed martial artists." The two boxers who entered the UFC at that time lost their opening matches, so they were eliminated.

    The UFC has evolved to "mixed martial arts," wherein all competitors are trained at many major forms of self-defense, including boxing.

    If boxers choose to enter an MMA contest and feel that boxing is superior, and alone will win, they are free to do so, but they choose not to fight in the UFC at all. Apparently, in some lower-level MMA tournaments, Butterbean and perhaps a couple of other boxers have won matches.

  26. #26
    Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    3,283
    vCash
    500

    Re: Rolling over

    Quote Originally Posted by Off The River
    You seem quite angry.
    I wasn't angry about a thing. I used all-CAPS so as to differentiate my words from yours.

    I observe that you didn't address anything written in reply to your post. Ok, end of discussion.

  27. #27
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Incheon, South Korea
    Posts
    1,893
    vCash
    500

    Re: Rolling over

    LOL! ok.

+ Reply to Thread

Similar Threads

  1. Rolling Stone Magazine: Cover to Cover
    By BoxofDaylight in forum Music
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 12-31-2007, 06:14 PM
  2. Replies: 5
    Last Post: 11-18-2006, 03:41 PM
  3. Replies: 2
    Last Post: 03-25-2006, 08:43 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
News Current Champs WAIL! Encyclopedia Links Home