Boxer Bernard Hopkins says MMA is gay porno, not a sport

i was being a bit generous for argument's sake. I actually think the boxer would win a couple more but that's splitting hairs really.

 

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/PRmRkWi7U-A&color1=0xb1b1b1&color2=0xcfcfcf&hl=en&feature=player_embedded&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowScriptAccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/PRmRkWi7U-A&color1=0xb1b1b1&color2=0xcfcfcf&hl=en&feature=player_embedded&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" allowScriptAccess="always" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>



Boxing PPV numbers 1 million (mayweather vs marquez)

http://sports.espn.go.com/sports/boxing/news/story?id=4502922


Ufc 103 ppv numbers 400k

http://mmapayout.com/2009/09/ufc-103-400000-buys-meltzer/



I really wanted to see Brock vs Fedor,but Dana White could not make it happen.

 

You keep bringing up "athleticism". What exactly are you pointing to to indicate boxers, as a whole, are better athletes than, say, MMA fighters? Is there some subtle insinuation that I'm missing?

 

for most organizations it is no groin shots, no eye gouging, no small joint manipulation (aka finger breaking), no knees or kicks to the head of a downed (1 knee on the ground) opponent

 

what does that even mean? what do you mean by skill? are you saying guys who have black belts in multiple martial arts are unskilled? are you saying champion wrestlers are unskilled? and what do you mean by athleticism? do you want to see stromile swift out there?

 

A top level boxer will make wayyyyyyyyy more than any mma fighter. So if you had the talent to box and do mma why chose mma?

I like mma becuase there tend be KOs, but there is no one in MMA close to a talent of a Roy Jones.

For example take a guy like Forrest griffin,a guy you can root for, but a guy like him would have hard time being a champ in boxing.

 

even though you mention talent, your argument doesn't really defend your position.

usain bolt could make more money in a different sport... does that mean he isn't as talented? michael phelps?


p.s. I've never liked forrest griffin, i've never thought he was especially good. great chin/can take a beating, but not much else there.
p.p.s. itt, fans of a greatly diminished giant, lashing out at its decreasing significance.

 

Which sports?

 

By skill I mean the ability to throw punches like boxers can. That skill cannot be developed without the athleticism that boxers have and MMA guys don't. MMA guys are certainly skilled but hey are not on the same planet as boxers. The difference is no matter how much they train they cannot develop the hand speed, accuracy or power that boxers have.

You can take a boxer and turn him into an MMA guy with much more success than you can take an MMA guy and turn him into a boxer. Boxers tend to be faster and they definitely have superior speed, accuracy and power in their punches. Not to mention their ability to move their heads and anticipate punches. Yes, much of that is taught but without great athleticism all the training in the world won't help much.

When we see an MMA guy throw punches like Floyd Mayweather or even the current Grandpa version of Roy Jones then we can start talking about the athleticism/skill of the strikers in each sport. The problem, however, is we won't see that because anyone with the athleticism to do what Floyd and Roy goes to where the money is and that ain't the UFC.

 

tiger woods is the highest paid athlete, right? so, i'll say golf. my point stands, feel free to quibble.

 

and my post was in response to you getting mad about "people talking trash" about your MMA guys and then making up ridiculous fights so you can prove boxers can't beat everyone in other fight disciplines.

 

I think what most people mean is that MMA seems to be an easier transition for former Athletes as opposed to Pro Boxing. There seems to be quite a few guys training for MMA late in their career like Brock, who only had 5 fights and he's already champion of the world. If Brock tried Pro Boxing after WWE, the results would be completely different. What helped Brock and other guys like Brock is that MMA doesn't focus solely on one aspect. So these guys can get away with average striking as long as they have a good ground game. In boxing, you don't see many guys coming in late and having lots of success.

Question for the MMAers, why do many pro/former athletes crossover to MMA?

 

Maybe I'm missing something, but doesn't your first paragraph answer your question? (I'm in agreement, that it is easier to transition into mma.)

kung fu films?

 

Yeah that is what I think but I want to know what an MMA fan thinks what the reason would be.

 

I've wrestled before and it's very technical and while it does take some strength.. it focuses more on using the other person's force against them. I know the MMA consists of other fighting styles too.

That being said, if a Mike Tyson prime fought a Randy Couture prime, I guarantee Couture would go for the takedown first and foremost. If a takedown is properly excuted it takes about 1-2 seconds to have your head next to their hip and apply force to tilt them one way. A Mike Tyson jab is faster than a second. While going for the takedown, a jab to the upper head would end the fight, because a Tyson jab is like like a Liddell hook to the face, maybe a little bit stronger.

Now there's other variables that can take play into the fight like condition, weight, lateral quickness etc but I'll say that 80% of the time, A boxer would win a match by K'O.

Do I think the MMA is gay porno? no. I do however believe that boxing is a harder sport to succeed in.

 

roy jones on boxing v mma

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/FN028__l2lc&hl=en&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/FN028__l2lc&hl=en&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

 

Yeah, the young Mike Tyson would probably curb stomp pretty much everyone in the ufc right now. Guy was a monster*. (confession, I never beat him on the nes.)

But, he went to prison 17 years ago; he hasn't been a fighter of any relevance for a very very long time.

Quit living in the past. No one cares about the current boxers, why else would everyone repeatedly bring up Roy Jones Jr. and Mike Tyson?

Harder to succeed in boxing than mma? Sure, I'll agree again. There is a much smaller skillset for boxing. There are less avenues to overcome any weaknesses. (I'm thinking of the last Klitschko fight where he jabbed and retreated for a victory... I watched 4 rounds of that. Exciting stuff )

MMA fighters need to spend just as much time training, but they must cover a much greater variety of techniques and positions.

One slip up against someone who has been completely dominating you in every facet of the fight and you're dislocating their elbow or winning by tap. (Both have a chance for random knock out, see B. Douglas.)


It doesn't mean the mma fighters overall* won't win the majority of the fights w/ leg kicks and ground & pound.

As an aside, you could probably join in with some Greco-Roman wrestler fan club to make fun of the UFC as well. They most likely regurgitate similar comments.

 

Roy still fights.

 

You're acting like the boxer won't bother to learn how to defend against the takedown or leg kick. It's not that hard for a world class athlete to learn how to defend against those things. If Maurice Smith and Cung Le can do it, I'm sure Roy Jones Jr or Mike Tyson can do it too.

 

Pretty funny comments.

Sucks that Hopkins would get torn apart by a good MMA fighter.