That could not be more wrong. If anything, the tactical side of boxing is what turns people off of the sport and onto things like UFC.
There are about 10 tactics in boxing and about 100 in MMA.... hence the general lack of rules in MMA.
This argument could go on and on, different strokes for different folks. As of right now it looks like boxing is losing its appeal and MMA is taking over, but who knows maybe MMA is some kind of fad and will soon disappear.
i chose neither, it will always be PRIDE FIGHTING CHAMPIONSHIP. BOxing has way too many weightclasses. i cant name who the wbo, wbc, ibo, ifb , sob, opp, cia champs are. plus there are too many shady shyt going on in boxing.
I can point out three things profoundly wrong with this sentence. Suffice it to say, your lack of knowledge of the sweet science is obvious.
Uh, PRIDE fighting is basically bankrupt and on its last legs, one of the reasons why is because it's supposedly owned by Yakuza.
i know that. i just hope the ufc guys dont **** everything up by getting rid of the ring and not allowing head stomps. i hate the damn cage
Boxing seems to be the harder skill to master. Most UFC fights look like the crap that takes place in the alley behind a bar. IMHO I think that a pro boxer could learn to be competitive in UFC far faster and to a more successful extent than a UFC fighter could learn to be competitive in boxing. Call me a traditionalist, but I like boxing... although I think both are pretty dumb.
Thats my point. Taping your hands allows you to punch harder because there isn't any fear of breaking your hands. Its like the helmets in the NFL. On one side, it protects the players, on the other, the players use them as weapons. BTW. Boxing gloves are designed to protect the boxers hands, not to protect the person getting hit.
Just pushing buttons with the last remark. I enjoy boxing, and it is certainly a lot more interesting to watch a match with a boxer in the room explaining everything the commentators don't.... BUT.... don't mix up the mastery of one very focused set of tactics (boxing) with the general mastery of many tactics (MMA). The best MMA fighters are very skilled, although it may or may not be in boxing.
Well you can argue that boxing is a very focused set of tactics - but that doesn't mean there is an almost insane variation of skills and tactics to learn. If there were only 10 tactics to learn in boxing the sport would have stalled in its development 150 years ago. Boxing is a sport, it has rules. Arguing that since it has fewer options it is ineferior and easier is like saying basketball would be better if there were 4 basketball goals instead of two. Making something more complicated doesn't necessarily make something better, nor does it make the people who do it better. The thing that I think happens a lot with MMA is that since there is too much stuff to train, there is a lot more room for error and guys make more mistakes, so you get unknown guys knocking out superstars more often (Cro Cop's UFC debut, or him getting knocked out by a punch from a wrestler like Randleman did in the last Pride HWGP, or Shogun getting kicked out by a virtually unknown opponent in a squash match.) Boxing meanwhile has a lot of participants, a huge amateur system, and 100's of years of refinement. Accordingly the gaps at the highest levels are a lot more delineated and the chances of somebody making a mistake are a lot lower. The thing taht I have noticed a lot with MMA though is that if you take a good puncher, give him some low kick defense (not hard to train), and teach him how to sprawl and a rudimentry ground game, and the sky is the limit. It's how Mark Hunt went from a night club bouncer/back alley brawler to a K-1 Champion to one of the best HW's in the world (he nearly beat Fedor in one his first few MMA bouts). It's how Chuck Liddell ruled his division for years (though I wouldn't even call him a good puncher as far as the textbook goes, his looping hooks leave him wide open as Rampage showed). Heck it's how Randy Couture (a wrestler, for christ's sake) beat Tim Sylvia, by out boxing him using basic boxing techniques even though Sylvia had a huge reach advantage.
or take a wrestler and give him sum boxing training. example, Gomi was basically a wrestler when he started then he became this huge puncher.
<object width="425" height="350"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/7jJgg3XHLhs"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/7jJgg3XHLhs" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350"></embed></object>
that 'debate' was awful - dibella missed a lot of obvious points. Put Max Kellerman in there and it would have been a fair fight.
The only thing boxing has going for it right now is better athletes and better marketing, but I think that will change in the future. One of these days MMA will be able to pay enough to get the best athletes and MMA will rule over boxing.
Are you crazy? Boxing's marketing has been terrible for the last 50 years. Actually it's been awful since maybe the post war era. and by that I mean WWI MMA has a lot of ground to make up, globally, and I am simply not sure if it can transcend 18-35 year old males who inhabit the internet demographic (which it undoubtedly does a lot better in). For MMA to dislodge boxing in its current hotbeds (Mexico, Cuba, PR, Phillipines, Former USSR, Germany, UK) is going to take quite a bit.
