MMA has a fringe following in the US.
It is not a world "sport"
Of course, I understand that some of you Americans dont see the second part, or dont really get the difference.
Muhammad Ali was not the most dominant as a boxer... he was one of the best, but not the best and lost to Norton and Frazier in his prime and was badly beaten by Foreman... the point is that there will never be an MMA brawler who has 1/10th of the impact on the culture of this world that Ali did.
The greatest boxer ever was probably Sugar Ray Robinson or Jack Johnson... both would - in an equal situation - whip any man in a ring, under any rules.
MMA is a "sport" for cowards. Only a coward, one who is not a full man, would attack a fallen opponent in anything less than a fight to the death.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by docbungle
Other than Strange Famous not knowing what he is talking about, what is this thread about?
Of course a UFC fighter couldn't hang with a championship boxer in the boxing ring. But niether could a boxer hang with an mma fighter in the octagon. They are two different sports, and comparing them is like comparing apples and oranges.
Strange: just because you don't "get" something doesn't make it any less viable. UFC is THE fastest growing sport in the world right now. It is huge, and not remotely close to being a "minority sport," as you call it.
Just because you don't know about the rules doesn't mean they aren't there.
And once mma has been around, on television, for as long as boxing has, then your comparisons will make at least a little bit of sense.
Statements like: "There will never be a Muhammad of mma..." etc...etc...are meaningless, obviously. Especially coming from someone with such an obviously biased viewpoint. If you followed the sport even remotely, you'd know that it already has a few "Muhammedesqe" figures, who have dominated their divisions for long periods of time.
|