Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Strange Famous
2 - There is no dispute that there have been, and will be again, death's resulting from any martial art. However, I would struggle to find an instance in boxing were an unconscious man was pounded 14 times in the back of the neck as the crowd cheered and chanted for his death.
|
This is cherry-picking. and as a fan of both sports all i have to do is point you to the ol' Rumble in the Jungle.... neither of us needs a translation of "Ali, BoomBye Yae!!!" however it's spelled.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Strange Famous
3 - I know that a boxer was only forced to go to the neutral corner after a knockdown in recent history, I think most people with some knowledge of the sport know about Dempsey's "Long count". But it is always the case that a man who was down could not be hit. You could hit as he got back to his feet, but not while he was sprawled on the floor and vulnerable - only when he was ready to rise and to some degree protect himself.
I do not have some fetish about people only being allowed to fight while upright, the point is that the core of MMA, the part that the element which thinks boxing is "not xtreme enough" adores, is when a man is knocked down and then pounded when he is vulnerable and unable to defend himself.
|
This displays your ignorance about mma quite clearly. though the fight does go to the ground, and i know you have an abhorrent reaction to that, there is a ref in place to make sure that at all times, each opponent is able to intelligently defend themself. this is written into the core rules of ufc and all the other leagues imitating it, and it's a big part of the success story that turned ufc from a bar-brawl into the sanctioned sport it is today.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Strange Famous
THIS is unmanly, this is an act of pure cowardice. I seem to have to keep repeating myself because some people dont seem to grasp what to me seems a quite simple principle. A sport that allows a man to be struck when he is down, when he is unable to defend himself - is overly brutal and unmanly.
This is why a man like John L Sullivan - drunkard, bare knuckle fighter sometimes - that he was can correctly be defined as a king of manliness, a heroic figure, an example to the youth and the men who follow his great legacy. And Roycie Gracey, or whoever else is simply a street fighter who is allowed to street fight in a ring. He may be talented, he may not be - Ive never seen him brawl - but I would not say he was 100% of a man.
|
I actually love that you picked royce gracie's name out of your mma hat here.... not only was gracie 10 times more dangerous on his back than standing.... he also spent about 15 years of winning fights hardly throwing a punch or a kick! his signature fighting style involves him draping himself over you like a cheap suit and getting you to expend all your energy getting him off until he could catch you in a submission. none of what he does actually endangers a man's brain like boxing does.... none of what gracie does affects the entire personality of his opponent if he succeeds.
which brings me again to my point that your beloved boxing's entire goal is to repeatedly pummel the skull of your opponent. it's checkers compared to mma's chess, and i'd love to hear you rationalize this instead of your continued practice of ignoring it.... boxing= scrambled eggs for brains.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Strange Famous
Anyone who is skilled in combat (as a top UFC brawler must be) would have the opportunity to box, to fight in the supreme test of masculinity under the Queensbury Rules. To fight in a sport that does not allow an attack on a defenceless opponent.
Instead, he chooses to fight in UFC and punch a man in the head when he is down on the floor and not able to defend himself or even see the blow coming. Maybe his motive that he is not really skilled enough to be a boxing champion, but he is a good wrestler so he can make more money in UFC... its his choice, and he has to live with the reflection it casts on his character.
|
these 2 paragraphs are kind of confusing to read... all i can tell you is that first of all, mma fighters are not "brawlers". it used to be that you could get away with being a specialist... like gracie was a grappling specialist and tank abbot was a striker... but now that just won't fly. you have to have an all-around game. the striking of a sugar ray, the grappling of a gracie, and the endurance of a lance armstrong. in short, you have to be one of the most conditioned athletes in the world.
in terms of character, i'd have to say that although YOU are 29, most of the people who think like you are about 30 years elder and that in about 15 or 20 years no mma fighter is going to have to worry about what others think of his "character", because everyone who thinks in these antiquated ways will be dead.