Ahem.

Strange, this is for you.....

boxing vs mma tv ratings : http://www.mmanews.com/ufc/UFC-vs.-B...e-Popular.html

http://www.boxingscene.com/index.php?m=show&id=5329

http://www.tvweek.com/news/2007/08/u...omorrow_th.php

So, now what?

At the very least, you cannot claim...well...just about anything that you've claimed in this thread so far.

Fringe sport? More likely you are on the fringe. You are certainly ignorant of that which you speak. And even if you don't know that, most of us here certainly do.

I guess we are all guilty of national bias at times... but can I point out that the articles and figures you are quoting are all about the USA only?

Boxing is a world sport. It is massive in Mexico (for example) where MMA is not.

I agree with one point in one article - that MMA has a limited demographic, a point I already made and you have backed up and reinforced.

I said that MMA was only popular amongst American males 15-30... the article makes the point that actually it is white American makes 15-30 that make up nearly all of the audience of MMA.

Strange,

Debating this with you is pointless, so I don't really know why I bother, but I am simply pointing out the flaws in your logic.

You state that the Hatton Mayweather fight will be one for the ages (and you may be right; I know I'll be watching it. I enjoy both mma and boxing, and watch both religiously), but the stats posted above show that, while you may prefer one over the other, mma is certainly a force to be reckoned with as far a popularity goes. It is already outdoing boxing in PPV buys, and HBO PPV is worldwide, so don't give me any of this national bias crap. You will never hear any nationalist speak coming from me.

So your claim that mma is nowhere near boxing today is just without merit. If you don't follow a sport, your opinions on it are just that: opinions based on nothing other than personal bias.

Insulting the sport of mma certainly doesn't make your opinions any more viable.

The numbers speak for themselves. Boxing is in a lot of trouble and has been for a while. The heavyweight division has been non-existent since Lennox Lewis retired, and most of the major fighters in the lighter divisions are used up or ready for retirement themselves. The absence of DeLa Hoya will be huge, as he accounted for the biggest ppv draws in the division's history.

There are a few rising "stars" with potential, such as Cotto and Hatton, but the promoters are killing the sport, and have been for a long time. They will continue to do so as long as the sport is unregulated. The promotors actually control the entire sport of boxing, which is why it is so corrupt, and you don't see this in any other sport. All other professional sports compete off of ACTUAL RANKINGS. That is the whole point of having a LEAGUE. You wonder when boxing will wake up to this fact.

The alphabet ranking organizations, more often than not, award fights based off of money, not actual rankings. There are so many uncompetitive championship fights nowadays, and that is why the popularity of the sport has plummeted. That, and all of the scandals, indictments of the rankings organization officials, bad judge decisions, bribes, and so on and so forth.

This is all widely documented and very easy to find on the web.

You say that mma will never be what boxing is. Well, I say that mma may never be as large as boxing WAS, but, then again, I say neither will boxing.

But time will tell.

sports sites are light on mma content because they don't get a piece of it at the moment. only spike tv has a deal with ufc, and it must be exclusive, otherwise espn and fox and even yahoo for that matter would have bought in to it by now. fox is carrying some fringe mma leagues but the real torch carryer at the moment is ufc and they have a stranglehold on marketing, so the only coverage you'll see outside ppv and spike are little hi lite blurbs on sportscenter... there's no money in that so they don't cover it.

http://www.sportsnet.ca/

There you go Strange, a mainstream sports site with an mma link, and oddly enough, no boxing.

Most people I know have heard of De La Hoya. But I don't consider him to be particularly relevant. He's lost three of his last five fights and hasn't defeated a truly elite-level opponant since he beat Yory Boy Campas...and that was four and a half years ago.

I think that De La Hoya still gets big fights for two reasons:

1) He's a good fighter who looks really good when compared to the rest of the current boxing field.

2) He's still hugely popular with Mexican-Americans, so his fights bring in lots of money.

A lot of UFC fighters come from the US, Canada, Brazil, Japan, Russia, Holland, England, just to name a few countries and guess what, many of these fighters are world or Olympic champions in their sport. Yes that's right, it's a sport.

Besides the other idiocies you have posted in this thread I would just like you to know that the UFC has had, in recent months, two giant events in the UK and the arenas were sold out. Also, UFC 80 in January is likely to be held in Newcastle, England.

Also, I hope you don't think that most all of Asia is in the US because MMA is huge there.

also, Michael Bisping, from Lancashire, England, is a huge UFC fighter. He even trains in an MMA Academy, called the Wolfslair Academy, right smack in your country! Wow!

You are beyond ridiculous and you live in a fantasy world.

No reason to be an official jerk. Unless you like it or something.

StrangeFamous should go watch UFC when it comes to his island.

Another aside;

I'm a hockey fan in a hockey town. Last night, an "eternal rivals" game was played. Last night was also a big UFC night. My first sports bar of choice was full to capacity because they were showing UFC. My second pub of choice was also showing UFC and I couldn't even locate my friends for a while. We were eventually able to find a table that could see both the hockey game and the UFC matches. UFC is a real sport with a huge following in this neck of the woods. (Metro population 1,000,000+. I can't remember the last time I saw boxing. I used to work at pub and I am a frequent customer)

If a WWF/WWE show like Wrestlemania was in England it would sell out too.

UFC and Pro Wrestling have the same fanbase... kind of. When people grow out of wrestling because it is "too fake" they watch UFC instead.

I'll tell you aain.. there will NEVER be a Muhammad Ali of UFC.

The World Heavyweight champion is the Emporer of Masculinity (although with the alphabet soup of titles at the moment the word "champion" is cheapened, there is still a linear championship with runs all the way back to John L Sullivan). The Champion UFC/MMA/Cage Fight fighter is simply the most violent individual from last week's round of brawls.

I do not say this lightly, the holder of the linear heavyweight championship of the world is one of the greatest men of his time. Randy Coutre or whoever else is just a version of Hulk Hogan who is not fighting to a script.

You must be right. Good luck with that.

Uhhh..How do I dare bring this up?

More women than you know, strangefamous, are avid boxing fans,and in some cases very formidible opponents.

How are we basing the interest in this sport..ticket sales..etc

Just curious, been reading this thread and it brings up many good memories of fights I've seen over the years.

I am going to go whack some beer cans with my Samurai sword out in the backyard now for a spell....later.

I will leave you to your debate and stay out of the way.

Because opinions are fact....

also, is that better, Crompsin?

WWF has come to the UK, and has sold out arena's - fact not opinion.

Even articles that supporters of MMA have quoted have stated that the fanbase of MMA is young and male, the same fanbase as WWF - educated opinion.

Muhammad Ali is more well known than any MMA fighter is or ever will be - FACT

this was what my quote was meant for, and no that isn't a fact. Making broad assumptions of the future will more than likely bite you in the ass at some point.

Strange Famous has no idea what he is talking about on this subject - FACT.
See I can do it too, put the word 'FACT' behind it and it must be true.

And Strange, what about the check your mainstream sports site for an MMA link? I found one, has an MMA link and no boxing. I'll even put up a screenshot for you jusat in case you don't want to click the link:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v6.../sportsnet.jpg

Silent Jay,

They also list CFL before NFL.

What more can we say?

So? It's a Canadian site, probably a good reason to list CFL first. All this was about was a mainstream site with an MMA link and no boxing link, which really means nothing, but you put so much credibility in I figured I'd post the Sportsnet link.

I could find a site that was dedicated to crown green bowls that didnt list boxing on it... what would that prove?

I am not debating that MMA has a fan base... it has a fan base of similar size to pro wrestling.

Boxing, the sweet science, is a sport that can step outside of its hardcore fanbase (that can step outside of the group of people who know who Oleg Maskaev is)

MMA is an activity that is limited to its fans and has no outside appeal.

If you were to come in here and argue that more people know who Randy Coutre is than Clinton Woods I might believe you.

But Randy Coutre against Ali, against Rocky, against Joe Louis... thats joke

That nonsense has already been covered. MMA had and has a number of dominant fighters with an aura of invincibility.

Emperor of Masculinity? Why not have all the boxing champs step into the UFC octagon with the UFC champs? We'll see who is more "masculine".

And the titles for the UFC's weight classes aren't exchanged on a weekly basis. More like 4 -6 months between title fights for each respective champion.

MMA fighters aren't versions of Hulk Hogan any more than boxers are. Well...you may actually be right. Unlike boxing, most MMA and professional wrestling matches are at least entertaining.

And I can find a site that lists MMA ahead of boxing, something you put so much credibility into, yet now that it's been shown you slag it off, oh well I expected you to do that anyways.

Who the fuck is Oleg Maskaev, is he a guy who bites ears?

MMA has no outside appeal, that's why it's fanbase is growing, or are you just not noticing this.

No one has said more people know who Couture is over Ali, or any other punch drunk boxer who's name you put here.
I know what the joke here is, and Couture isn't it.....

How many people actually die from those elbow strikes? If that is an attempt to kill, it's a pretty fucking lame one.

All I know is if Strange though the Muay Thai guys we're 'hooligans' and 'thugs', it's a good thing he didn't watch Human Weapon on Friday when they were studying Pradal Serey/Bokator, those guys were hardcore, nothing but respect for those men.

That Bokator stuff was crazy. That was my second favorite episode, with Krav Maga being the first.

So who is gong to be your Joe Louis, your Jack Johnson, your Mike Tyson, your Muhammad Ali?

I keep repeating myself - the best MMA fighter will never be "the champ"

You keep repeating yourself on a lot of things, doesn't mean you're repeating the right things. I guess you figure if you repeat it enough it'll make it true or fact, or make you right, or make people listen to you?

Who knows who's going to be the Ali, or the Fraser, of the MMA world, the sport is still evolving, new talent is still being discovered, just because there hasn't been one yet, doesn't mean there never will Strange.
Krav Maga was my favourite as well, the whole series has been educational about the world of Martial Arts, but I agree Krav Maga and Bokator are my 2 favourites so far as well.

MMA has already had Royce Gracie, Matt Hughes, Wanderlei Silva, Chuck Liddell and Fedor. These guys were/are all ridiculously dominant in their prime (and Fedor is still in his prime, and Hughes and Silva quite possibly are, too). And there a lot of younger, up-and-coming fighters in MMA who look like they will be dominant in the near future: Georges St. Pierre, Jon Fitch, Diego Sanchez, Thiago Silva, Anderson Silva, Forrest Griffin, Machida, Shogun, Gomi...

Krav Maga is wicked. I've never seen a more brutal martial art when it comes to self-defense.

let me repeat one other thing then... the public will never support a "sport" where it is legal to strike a man when he is down. never, never, never.

The public is already supporting it. MMA is quickly growing in popularity and is being shown on a number of TV channels (even a local channel around here shows MMA fights on a regular basis, so it's not just cable). The PPVs are apparently bringing in quite a bit of money as well.

Are you serious? They're already supporting it, hell it's all over Canada, quite a few different organizations, so I have no idea what you're on about, but I suspect you don't know either.

I still like how you make a big deal about striking a man while he is down, yet you also said you'd use a weapon if you were in a fight yourself.

You seem to be confused about this Strange, either that or you just didn't do your homework before you started talking about this subject, it's quite obvious to most in this thread you're clueless about this topic and keep giving your opinion and trying to pawn it off as fact.

You seem to think you know what the public will and won't support, but the sport of MMA is already proving you wrong.
You're right Telluride, all those are already great fighters, mostof whom have dominated the sport of MMA, I wonder if Strange will discredit their accomplishments because he's never heard of them.

Jesus SF, MMA is huge and continues to grow. It is making inroads into all sorts of demographics and markets and all signs point to this not just being a fad. It has staying power and is here for good. There will be huge stars that will be known mainstream very soon. Several are close already - such as Randy Couture.

There are a couple of really storied families in MMA already, those being the Gracies and the Shamrocks. There are also a huge number of big stars that others have listed. Fedor is an overwhelming monster now and he has a long career ahead of him.

Your continued posts remind me of the politics forum. You have your fingers in your ears and are shouting over everyone 'LA LA LA LA boxing rules LA LA LA LA LA mma sucks LA LA LA LA you're all stupidheads LA LA LA LA LA '

Back up some of your claims instead of continuously repeating the same inane points.

All this talk about demographics and fan bases..

Umm, ok so let me explain demographics a little bit. Let's say that you are correct that UFC only holds a demographic of 15-30 yr old males. That would mean that the majority of boxing demographic is notably older correct? Ok.. so since UFC and MMA holds the younger demographic base, that would only mean that it's going to continue to grow as the demographic gets older as well as recruits new 15-30 yr old viewers. Meanwhile, the older demographic that is in love with this so called sweet science.. is now dead. Just like the sport you're trying to defend.

Here is a pretty good article about the growth of the sport. Excuse the length but I think it is relevant to the discussion.
http://www.twincities.com/ci_7487616...nclick_check=1

As noted in the article it took 40+ million dollars than boxing, and was only outdone in the ratings by the NFL. Also brining in 5 million viewers for bouts on cable is really impressive.

Oh and Strange Famous here is a special article just for you, an article about this dishonorable sport, backed by medical evidence stating how it is safer than your beloved boxing.

So I'm just watching Martial Arts Reality Superfighting from back in 1996, and oh how the sport has evolved. This is a tournament structure with superfights throughout the evening.

The differences in rules are tremendous, firstly, no gloves, bare knuckles, elbows to the back of the head are legal, head butts are as well, seems like punches, knees, kicks to the groin are as well. Not the greatest fights ever, but sure is nice to see how the sport has evolved.
http://www.sherdog.com/fightfinder/f...es&EventID=378

The branding some MMA promotions used to make themselves more profitable by highlighting how out of control, or rule-less, or barbaric they were have come back to bite them on the ass as they are now realizing that they turned off a lot of potential viewers by that. It's a (mostly) legitimate and regulated sport now.

But people will see what they choose to see, much like everything else.

this is a very vague statement to pick out to repeat one more time. what would constitute support? allowing it? check. ratings? check. sport? check. you got me on this one; i could use clarification.

the people will never follow a sport were a fallen man can be struck. The champion MMA fighter will NEVER be "da champ"

Dude, I wanna spar with you so bad I can taste it. :D

"sparring" by the Queensbury rules, or some kind of loutish brawl?

Dude, get over it already. It's already being followed. Chuck Liddell and Randy Couture are already celebrities, and more and more are going to be built. Continue to be as ignorant as you want, but stop sounding like a broken record. It's fucking annoying already sir.

Chuck Liddell is known to people who follow this sport.

Bernard Hopkins is The Champ

The fact you dont know the difference is kinda the point.

And when I said that the heavyweight champion of the world was the Emporer of Masculinity... it means a chain of the greatest men that runs back to John L Sullivan, to Jem Mace... to Tom Cribb and further (I mention him cos I was drinking in a pub named after him last weekend).

Chuck Liddell simply one a few brawls and was declared the best brawler of one brand of ultimate cage fighting. He is known by people who have grown out of WWF. Muhammad Ali is known by the entire globe.

WWF is exciting and good fun, even if it isnt a real sport. UFC/MMA carries the same excitement to a degree, without the results being fixed... but it is merely an empty spectacle... to be a Champion Boxer is to inherit and embody the history of masculinity.

I don't recognize a single name you've dropped, other than Muhammad Ali and Chuck Liddell. Isn't THAT kinda the point? I don't think that anyone here is saying that boxing doesn't have a storied history with legendary figures -- it does. On the other hand, things change, and it seem to me that MMA is growing in viewership, technique, and now, heritage. It's not inconceivable that it will have all of the history that boxing once did, and more viewers to boot. We may even be getting close to that point, at least for the second half of it.

The pageantry of boxing reminds me of WWF way more than the MMA community does.

Chuck Liddell makes it onto shows all around the world. His name is out there.

Personally, I think he is a tad bit over rated.

Boxing has history sir. That is why people hold a championship boxer in such a high regard. People who don't follow boxing at all know of Ali not because of his amazing boxing skills, but because of his charisma. let us not forget that he has been the running scapegoat for the brutality of the sport. Expect the first punch drunk mixed martial artist in the world to be the same.

What it all boils down to is this. You can sit there championing boxing, assuming that we know nothing of the sport, and being ignorant. Fact of the matter is that for the most part we are fans of the sport to. You are damning a sport that you have no knowledge of in it's young age. The same was done to boxing when it first became an accepted sport.

As for the social standards of masculinity. I find that you claim that to be a legitimate argument foolish.

Boxing has a history. MMA is still growing. Bottom Line.

You've never heard of John L Sullivan?

Well... I can tell you, I've never heard of Chuck Liddell other than through this thread.

I think anyone will agree that someone who is trained all their life in one set of rules would dominate someone who isnt schooled in that...

But if he went down into a cellar with no witnesses but the barkeep to open the door at the agreed signal... Chuck Liddell with a man like Sullivan, or a man like Dempsey, like Liston, like Foreman, like Tyson... NO ONE would have heard of Liddell other than his own mother.

The sweet science is a sport of exact skill, but if you want just take it down to "who would win in a fight" - I wouldnt back any of your boys against, say, Sonny Liston.



edit

And anyone who boasts of never having heard of Jem Mace, probably shouldnt be presenting themselves as a big fan of any kind of "martial art"

That's a really interesting point. I guess we can both be glad that I've never portrayed myself as anything other than a casual fan of any athletics.

And as a person who is not terribly invested in either side, I think you are vastly over-estimating the following and importance boxing has in the public mind.

The only one of the guys you mentioned in your latest point that I'd be truly terrified of is Tyson -- and it sure as hell isn't because of his "sweet science", "exacting skill", or gentlemanly deference to the rules. He's not much of a standard-bearer for boxing being the gentleman's sport.

Sweet science an exact skill, punch, duck, punch, repeat. I'd back most of the mma guys against Liston, doubt he'd be doing much from Paradise Memorial Gardens.

Anderson Silva > Floyd Mayweather

Good grief, Charlie Brown! I love boxing, boxed for years, but while perhaps in the UK MMA has not gotten really big yet (although guys like Michael Bisping may change that) MMA is monstrous in the Americas and Asia.

Guys like Liddell and Couture and Gracie have similar name recognition to Mayweather, Hopkins or Jones. Probably only Tyson and Holyfield of fightrs of recent vintage have greater cachet.

Sugar Ray Robinson > Any Martial Artists of any style in the last 200 years.

Are you psychic Strange? You can predict the results of fights for 200 years? Just because you don't like it and seem to have some strange measurement of masculinity associated with boxing doesn't mean other people won't follow it.

I mean for a guy who talks about masculinity and of the sweet science you sure were pretty quick to say you'd punch a man with keys in your hands, and believe me you do that to most people getting struck while you're on the ground will be the least of your worries.

well... people seem to make a big deal out of that comment I made.

I merely said, since I was being criticised by all these people saying "you dont know what a real fight is like", that if I was genuinely fighting to defend my life or safety then anything would be permissable to me (while it would not, certainly, be sporting.) In an honourable fight, I wouldnt hit a man who was down. If someone attacked me and was gonna rape my girl (just say as an example) I would do whatever it took to remove that threat absolutely... is that clearer? If it meant wrapping my keys round my fist and busting him, then breaking both his arms when he went down, or an ankle, or whatever, I would do that. If someone broke into my house and had a knife, I would use the 3 foot length of copper pipe I have by my bed in the appropriate manner. That isnt the same thing as I go out Friday night fighting in the streets with a length of copper pipe.

Ive never hit someone with my keys in my life, I havent been in a fight since I left college and I dont plan to be in one. If someone tried to mug me I might. use whatever I had available to deal with the situation If I was fighting over a matter of honour, I would fight like an English gentleman, and would not strike my opponent when they were down. Like I said, I dont know what goes in other places, I was raised to believe that English boys fight with fists.

And anyway, once you bust someone with a set of house keys wrapped round your fist, I dont think you need worry about what they are gonna do next, thats kind of the point. It is not a tactic to be used in a scuffle outside a kebab house over some shit, its something you pull out when anything goes - and when what comes later doesnt really matter because you are acting with maximum aggression to deal with a serious threat.

Sugar ray Robinson was proabably the best boxer ever I agree with you on that one. But to say that any martial artist over the past 200 years couldn't beat him?

Bruce Lee, Rickson Gracie, Ramon Dekkers, and Igor Yakimov all come to mind. All of them great champions in their combat style as well. To say that because Sugar Ray Robinson was the greatest boxer that no one from any martial art can beat him is almost retarded.

The "Sweet science" tag applies to any and all martial arts my brother. They all dedicate their lives to it. they all live, breathe, and sleep fighting.

I will go out on a limb saaying that you knowvirtually nothing about martial arts, and until you do learn something.... stop insulting Martial Artists... and while you're at it don't forget that Boxing is a martial art.

Yes. boxing if a martial art.

And for all of the stuff you read about one inch punches and so on... the most efficient and hardest strike known is a overhand punch.

Calling Sugar Ray the greatest is of course subjective. And it is also relative. In a Karate fight, Bruce Lee would have wiped the floor with him, but if all things were equalised... Sugar Ray was the greatest fighter (although not the greatest boxer in my opinion - that is Jack Johnson) that has lived in recent history.

If Bruce Lee and Sugar Ray had the same training, Sugar Ray would have whipped him. If they had both been raised as boxers, Bruce Lee couldnt have come close to him. If they had both been raised as Karate fighters, Sugar Ray would have been the greatest karate fighter the world has ever known.

And this, of course, is my subjective opinion.

I say that Sugar Ray was the greatest fighter ever, but not the greatest boxer - because I believe that he had more versatility. Jack Johnson had a cleverness and skill that was suited to boxing. He was not really a warrior and did not have a real killer instinct, and wouldnt have been AS good in a more "no holds barred" martial art - but within the sweet science, there was no one close to the domination he held within his era... he was literally almost impossible to hit in a boxing ring.

___

As for your Roycie Gracie's... again it is all subjective. If he and a 22 year old Mike Tyson went into a cellar, I know who I would bet my house on coming back out on his feet. Every one else can only make their judgment.

But what if Bruce Lee and Sugar Ray were both raised as cyborg ninjas from the future? Who would have won in a fight then?

Strange, your debating tactics remind me of those of George W. Bush. Your flaws in logic and reality have repeatedly been laid out for you, in great detail, and you simply keep plodding on, determined to "stay the course."

This entire thread appears to be about you, Strange, having a chip on your shoulder. You keep insulting MMA and, by association, those who practice or follow it closely. Which is the only reason anyone keeps responding. Because we can't fathom what your problem is. It is absolutely preposterous, the things you've said in this thread.

It is absolutely clear to me that you are not educated enough on the subject matter of this thread to even be a part of it. Your ignorance on the matter of MMA is vast, making your statements all the more offensive. You come off as pompous and demeaning, as do most people who argue their points without having done their research.

MMA has fighters just as wicked and ferocious as Mike Tyson in his prime. MMA is just so much more challenging than boxing that one single fighter doesn't stand out like tyson did. There aren't a bunch of shitty fighters for someone like a Tyson to just plow through in MMA. And, now, since the tv coverage is growing at such an alarming rate, even you, Strange, will begin to hear of them.

But never mind. Keep beating on that ignorance drum of yours. Your very own little one man band.

Is my point not clear enough yet?

I DESPISE MMA/UFC/Cage fighting because it is my opinion that it is unmanly to strike an opponent who is down.

I do not need to know the whole history of MMA to know that striking a fallen opponent is abhorent to me, and the general public.

I do not need to quote Pay For View figures to state that no hooligan who is celebrated in a "sport" - which allows a cowardly attack on an opponent who had been put down - will ever gain the respect of the people.

I do not need, I hope, to over-explain the legacy of the sweet science to you. The heavyweight champion of the world is the carrier of a historic torch, the emporer of masculinity, the holder of the same title that belong to Jem Mace. This is the history of our sport. The MMA champion cannot even be decided upon by MMA fans, but whoever he is - he is simply the last man standing rom the most recent brawl.

And if you want to start crowing that you have no idea who Jem Mace is... go ahead. He is the guy who revolutionised your "sport" as much as he revolutionised boxing.

I respect MMA fighters as tough and skilled in the art of street fighting. I do not compare them to champions of manliness.

There are TWO key points here

The argument about the merits of the sport is, to a degree, subjective.

The argument about popularity is objective. I can tell you - honestly - that a lot of people I work with are talking about Mayweather - Hatton. No one I work with knows who roycie gracie is. I GUARANTEE this.

Now... MMA may have more HARDCORE fans, people that buy PPV's, than boxing... I admit this. But boxing has a far greater infrastructural fanbase, simply put far more people know about boxing than a street fight in a cage. More people know who Mike Tyson is than know who Anderson Silva is. And this will ALWAYS be the case, whoever you swap the names with.

The history of martial arts is long and deep... but boxing, western boxing, is the agreed ultimate martial art of the world. "Da Champ" is agreed to be the kind of his weight. If the MMA fighters you talk of were really champions, they would fight in the ultimate arena. Instead, they chose to be big fish in a small pond. I expect this makes them rich men.

Quit talking for the public and the people, two things you know nothing about, people respect MMA fighters, striking a downed opponent is abhorrent to you, the public enjoys it judging by the amount of money MMA shows make, you are speaking for yourself and no one else.

Hooligans? You keep insulting things you are clueless about, just because you are clueless and ignorant about a sport is no need to insult the people who dedicate their lives to training and participating in their chosen sport, don't insult a sport you don't have the balls to try yourself.

Go watch you 'sweet science' and 'fight like a 'proper English gentleman', but don't belittle a sport you're ignorant about.

That's what any champion is, they generally don't give titles to the pussy who gets dropped in the first round, doesn't matter the sport, MMA or boxing, the champ is the last man standing.

First off, let's not make this debate personal. Then I'd have to post in orange text.

Strange, the thing that I can't understand is why you never address this issue accurately. In MMA fights, striking a fallen man isn't necessarily cowardly. In fact, in many instances it is FOOLHARDY. An accomplished fighter isn't defenseless on his back. Many of them are more dangerous there than on their feet. This is basic and intrinsic to a sport that has grappling as a major element.

The fact that MMA fights are often won by submission or tap out rather than sheer bludgeoning (which is how your sweet science looks) would seem to me to be an indication that MMA is actually the sport that values finesse, technique, and strategy over sheer brutality.

Can you prove how this will ALWAYS be the case please? You keep saying these things as being gospel, so please back it up. No running around, show us all how it will ALWAYS be the case.

Another thing, does typing it in capital letter make it fact or something? Doesn't work that way, now show us how this will ALWAYS be the case.

Guess this is what happens when you fight like 'an English gentleman' during 'the sweet science', fuckin hooligans.
http://www.tfproject.org/tfp/showthread.php?t=127808

Mike Tyson is well known because he had a Nintendo game named after him and then bit a guy's ear off.

Until MMA gets an uncivilized, quasi-sane animal/rapist as champion, Tyson may well be the most notorious.

Ears bitten off, people dying in the ring, sure wish I could fight like a proper English gentleman.

I am getting a lot of comebacks at once.

Let me sum up the situation:

A "sport" that allows a fighter to strike a man who is down is cowardly, unmanly, and craven. The general public will never accept this. MMA may have a fanbase of 18-35 white Americans. There may be more PPV buys on a celebrated brawl between two MMA fighters than a genuine championship match.

There are no Nintendo games named after MMA fighters.

People have accused me of trolling, have basically called me a prick and a fool... let me tell you that I speak honestly when I say I love boxing, I love sports, I love watching two men go toe to toe in an honest fight. I HATE and feel SICK to see a man who is put down hit on the floor. This genuiely disgusts me. I am not lying to you or playing a game or just trolling for negative comments. I REALLY hate this MMA for this reason. It REALLY sickens me to see a man who is down be hit. I dont like to watch.

I accept in a street fight anything goes.

I have NO respect for anyone who, for sport, takes part in a spectacle when a man who is down can be hit. They may be good thugs, but they are not men.

Alright I'll try your method, the general public IS accepting MMA, you know nothing of the general public as you have your own deluded definition of 'cowardly', and 'manly'.MMA has a broader fanbase than 18-35 white Americans, you know nothing of the subject so why keep faking it?
Oh no? Once again you prove you know nothing about the topic at hand.
http://mmamania.com/2007/07/12/video...-ps3-and-xbox/
I don't think you're a troll, ignorant about the topic, obviously, but a troll no. No one has called you a prick, the word has been used often, but not prick. It can sicken you all you want, doesn't mean you speak for the public, and by trying to you show you don't know anything about MMA, you say it has no fan base when it does, you say the 'general public' won't accept it when it obviously does. People have used a number of means to prove you wrong and when presented with this proof you bury you head in the sand and call the MMA professional 'hooligans' and 'thugs' call them 'cowardly' and insult them. If you don't like to watch, great you're more than welcome not to turn the telly to MMA fights, but don't insult the fighters when you have no idea what you're on about, you have a deluded sense of what is manly and seem to think boxing is the epitome of manliness.
Once again you insult something you're clueless about, you are more than welcome to your opinion that they are not men, but who are you to decide what is manly and what is not?

Just thought I'd add, Matt Hughes is on the cover of Men's Fitness this month as well, once again proving mainstream people and the general public support MMA.

Here's a pretty story about your beloved "sport"

http://observer.guardian.co.uk/osm/s...467973,00.html

Shit, Strange - more people have died in the boxing ring than in the octagon. Do you want a list of dead boxers? Guys who were hit when they could no longer defend themselves, guys who were mismatched, hit after the bell?

Here's a partial list of some of the higher profile instances from the BBC:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/87290.stm

1998

Zambian boxer Felix Bwalya died nine days after being knocked down three times in the final rounds of a Commonwealth title clash with Britain's Paul Burke.

1997

Chris Henry collapsed during a fight against Dominic Negus for the Southern Area Cruiserweight title. He is recovering after surgery.

Carl Wright underwent surgery after losing the fight for the British light-welterweight title against Mark Winters. He is still recovering.

1995

American Gerald McClellan fell into a coma after being knocked down by Nigel Benn in a WBC super-middleweight title fight in London. He was hospitalised for two months and has now lost his sight.

Colombian Jimmy Garcia died of a blood clot on the brain, 13 days after his challenge for the WBC super-featherweight title held by Gabriel Ruelas in Las Vegas.

James Murray died after the British bantamweight title fight against Drew Docherty in Glasgow. Fight fans brawled as medics tried to treat Murray.

1994

Londoner Bradley Stone died after an unsuccessful British super-bantamweight title fight with Richie Wenton.

American Michael Bentt collapsed after losing the WBO heavyweight title to Herbie Hide and was found to be suffering a brain injury. He has recovered.

Former Olympic welterweight gold medallist Wangila Napunyi of Kenya died after being stopped by American David Gonzalez.

1992

American Ramon Gomez, 19, died of a blood clot 18 hours after his first amateur fight was stopped by a referee.

1991

Middleweight Michael Watson needed brain surgery after being halted by fellow Briton Chris Eubank. Watson, who is confined to a wheelchair, is suing the British Boxing Board of Control for negligence.

1989

David Thio died in Lyon 10 days after being knocked out by American Terrence Alli.

Rod Douglas needed brain surgery to remove a blood clot after being stopped by Herol Graham in a British middleweight title fight. He has fully recovered.

1988

South African featherweight Daniel Thetele died on leaving the ring after losing to Aaron Williams in Johannesburg.

Brian Baronet died after being knocked out by American welterweight Kenny Vice in Durban.

1987

French bantamweight Jean-Claude Vinci died after being outpointed by Lionel Jean in Evreux.

1986

Scotland's Steve Watt died after a match against Rocky Kelly in London.

1985

American Shawn Thomas died of head injuries suffered in a junior lightweight bout in Indiana against compatriot Chris Calvin.

Gerardo Derbes died of head injuries after a Mexican welterweight title bout against Jorge Vaca.

South African Jacob Morake died after a junior lightweight bout against South African Champion Brian Mitchell in Sun City.

1983

Mexican Kiko Bejines died after being knocked out during a challenge to Albert Davila for the world bantamweight title in Los Angeles.

Isidro "Gino" Perez, 24, of New York, died six days after being knocked out by Juan Ramon Cruz in a lightweight bout in New York.

1982

Barry McGuigan, a future world champion, knocked out Young Ali in the sixth round of his 12th fight in London and the Nigerian later died.

Flyweight Andy Balaba, 28, of the Philippines, died of injuries suffered in a fight against Shin Hee Sup.

Duk Koo Kim, 23, a lightweight from South Korea, died after being knocked out by Ray "Boom Boom" Mancini in Las Vegas.

1980

Welshman Johnny Owen died after being knocked out in a challenge to Lupe Pintor for the world bantamweight title in Los Angeles

American Charles W Newell, 26, died after being knocked out in the seventh round of a welterweight contest in Hartford, Connecticut.

Cleveland Denny died in Montreal 16 days after being knocked out by Canadian lightweight champion Gaetan Hart.

1969

J Ulrich Regis died after a points defeat in Shoreditch, London.

1979

Italian middleweight Angelo Jacopucci died after being knocked out by Britain's Alan Minter. The ringside doctor was later found guilty of manslaughter.

Puerto Rican middleweight Willie Claasen died after he lost to American Wilfred Scypion in New York.

1963

Davey Moore died after being knocked out by Sugar Ray Ramos for the featherweight title at Madison Square Garden.

1962

World welterweight champion Benny Paret, of Cuba, died after a 12th round stoppage against Emile Griffith in New York.

Yes, there have been tragedies in boxing.

But an unconscious man allowed by the ref to be struck 14 times when he is down and out and cannot defend himself? Not so much.

I think you know that's an anomaly. Strikes to the back of the head aren't even allowed in UFC. Tragedies happen in all sports, not just boxing.

I'm still waiting for you to acknowledge post 158.

Death in boxing is allowed, death in MMA, oh my fuck what a hooligan, fuckin thug. Strange, this is pointless, you don't seem to read anything and just close your ears like a kid and yell 'lalalalalalalalalala'.

Hell even you have a thread here talking about some thug boxer who killed another man inside the ring http://www.tfproject.org/tfp/showthread.php?t=127808
but I guess that's alright because you think boxing is 'manly' in your own deluded definition of 'manly'. Then again you don't exactly have any facts to back any of your arguments up, just your opinion that you try to pawn off as fact.
Wonder why this quote doesn't fit for MMA, guess it isn't combat enough Strange won't acknowledge your posts, he'll just throw another one of his 'facts' about MMA. I've been trying to get him to prove things he's said for ages in this thread, kind of turned into a game now.

I hope you might actually read this, Strange.

There have been, according to this report, 900 deaths in the ring since the 1920s. Note how this fighter - a guy fighting for a world title - took over 2 dozen shots when he could evidently no longer defend himself. Pretty sad, huh?

_______________________________________________________________
Fighter's death renews abolition call

By John Mehaffey in London
September 25, 2005
The Sun-Herald


The death of American Leavander Johnson on Thursday after brain surgery has reignited the debate over professional boxing just two months after Mexican Martin Sanchez also died in a Las Vegas hospital.

Johnson, 35, had been in a critical condition since losing his IBF lightweight title to Mexican Jesus Chavez in Las Vegas last weekend.

An editorial in The Spokesman-Review of Spokane, Washington, after the fight said nearly 900 boxers had died as a result of injuries in the ring since 1920.

"It is time to halt that tabulation," the newspaper said. "It is time to ban boxing, a sport in which death is the predictable outcome of athletic proficiency ... it is surprising that more boxers don't die.

"Even among prizefighters who walk away, the American Association of Neurological Surgeons estimates 15-40 per cent of ex-boxers have some form of chronic brain injury and most professional fighters - whether they have apparent symptoms or not - have some degree of brain damage."
AdvertisementAdvertisement

World Boxing Council president Jose Sulaiman has promised an investigation into the death of Sanchez on July 2, the day after he was knocked out in the ninth round of a super-lightweight fight against Rustam Nugaev of Russia. Sulaiman also pledged to improve safety conditions in Indonesia, where he said five boxers had died in the past year.

Johnson, who absorbed at least two dozen unanswered punches to the head and body, collapsed in his dressing room after the referee stopped the fight in the 11th round. He did not regain consciousness after emergency brain surgery and doctors eventually decided to remove him from a life support machine when his kidneys failed and his heart stopped beating.

"I don't think there's anyone to blame here other than the circumstances," said promoter Lou DiBella. "He's a victim of his own courage."

William Smith, who performed the surgery, said boxers sustaining injuries similar to Johnson's had less than a 25 per cent chance of survival. "He suffered a very severe injury," Smith said. "The problem was that the injury was to the brain itself. In some cases the punishment is absorbed by the skull but in this young man's case the brain itself absorbed the punishment."
_______________________________________________________________

I also wish to call to attention the case of Duk Koo Kim, perhaps the event most Americans are most familiar with. Kim came over to fight Ray "Boom Boom" Mancini in 1982. He was a fighter with limited international experience who had never fought anyone of Mancini's calibre, talent or power.

Mancini stopped Kim in the 14th round and Kim died shortly thereafter.

4 months later, Kim's wife committed suicide.

2 months after that, the referee in charge of the fight, Richard Green, also committed suicide.

Mancini is haunted by Kim's death to this day.

Nice aftermath ...

I'd also like to point out, Strange, something you are obscuring. The rules of boxing have evolved over time, just as the rules in MMA continue to evolve. Kim's death brought about changes in fights, such as the elimination of 15 round fights, the implementation in all jurisdictions of the standing 8 count to allow a fighter a chance to recover and to allow a referee to determine whether the fighter could continue, and proper pre-fight medicals.

When you call upon the "great" fighters of yester-year (John L Sullivan, Jem Mace, Jack Johnson, etc) - you must be doing it tongue in cheek. Up until the 1920s and the time of the Dempsey-Tunney fights, fighters were permitted (and did so) to hit a man as he staggered to his feet after a knockdown. It was only in the 20s that fighters were forced to move to a neutral corner, and the ability to hit a defenceless man was eliminated, at least in part.

agreed.

ROFL

I completely agree, the skillset required to compete in todays MMA is huge.

it's amazing how fiercely you are defending your ignorance and intolerance. i can tell you're an older gent, and i can tell you're a brit, but there's absolutely no reason not to keep an open mind and at least acknowledge if not respond to the many points being made to you that have to do with your cherry-picking anomalies and "summing up of the situation."

1) regardless of history and terminology,the fundamental goal of boxing is to pummel someone repeatedly in the head. this results in more tragedies in the ring and it also results in more adverse long term effects on a fighters mental state. your sweet scientists end up with scrambled eggs for brains.

entertainment-wise, boxing is checkers to MMA's chess. there's just so many more ways to win and so many more ways a match can go. regardless of your antiquated views on MMA being barbaric, you have to be able to see the appeal to fight fans, whether they come in droves from WWF or from boxing, which, make no mistake, they are.



this is the most honest and straightforward you've been; i'd say you're on the right track. the one thing you have to do is own this and acknowledge that no matter how "right" you feel, that the rest of the world doesn't follow along with your views even if you think it should. speak for yourself and we can all communicate a lot more effectively. try to avoid summing up how the general public thinks, or what they'll think in the future.... even you have to admit that's an assinine thing to do in a forum.

you're repeating yourself. you JUST said this. ok, we get it. man down getting hit = not men fighting in your eyes. just please, acknowledge that its an opinion, not a fact.... accept that theres other viewpoints out there, and the world might change enough so that you're in the minority... in fact it already has if you ask a lot of folks. if you can't respond to us, just admit that, don't ignore the valid points we're putting in front of you.

i'll add one more thing here. i happened to see both live fights this past saturday. mayweather/hatton was a great fight i thought, but each and every fight on the undercard was a complete snore fest.

the ufc fights on the other hand, from top to bottom had an intriguing mix of good matchups style-wise and absolutely awesome endings.

just going into saturday as a fan of both sports, entering it objectively in the hopes of witnessing exciting matches..... boxing fell way short. if i have to wait through 4 boring snore-fest fights to get one exciting one, why do that when ufc has about 3 times the return when it comes to time well spent viewing.

1 - I'm 29.

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.

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 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.

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.

Re: 2 - Strange, that's cultural not an issue of the sport per se. People chanting "kill him"? Ever been to a bloody football match in the 70s and 80s in England? Maybe you're too young to remember. It still happens in other parts of the world, wars have been started over football matches.

Equally, people have certainly chanted "kill him" at boxing matches. I know, I've been there and seen it. Man, I saw a fight in Mexico that would have made you puke - a defenseless fighter, obviously unable to defend himself, staying upright only because he was draped over the ropes, getting pummeled while the crowd screamed for blood. God knows, I might have even participated (not at that fight but at others). People probably yelled it at me while I fought in the ring while racking up a pretty decent amateur record.

Equally, referees have made poor decisions in boxing as in MMA - those decisions have allowed people to get hurt in the ring, and have resulted in deaths. I'd bet next year's pay that more will have died in the boxing ring over the course of 100 years than will ever die in MMA over a similar period. Due entirely to the way you win a MMA fight - i.e., submissions are as or more important than strikes. I would bet the same paycheque that more boxers will suffer long term health effects - whether the brain damage that many have incurred or detached retinas, like Sugar Ray Leonard (whose speech has also gone downhill) - than MMA fighters will suffer. You might get more rotator cuff injuries in MMA, but that's about it.

3 - As to this, you don't know what you're talking about and honestly, I'm a little angry at your wilful disregard for the opinions and expertise of many people posting here who know a great deal more about both subjects than you do. A man who has been stunned is in no position to protect himself as he staggers to his feet. That's why that rule about the neutral corner came into effect, as even people of the 1920s realized that hitting a man in that position is savage. It is savage to hit a man in that position, but all the boxing greats you have brought up did it. I (and anyone else who has fought) will tell you - an MMA fighter, like a Gracie, is in an immenely better position to defend himself on the ground than a hurt boxer is getting to his feet, largely because guys like Gracie deliberately go to ground knowing their ability to defend and attack from that position.

I think this is the core of the disagreement.

Being on the ground is not necessarily the same as defenseless or incapacitated. A referee in an MMA match is expected to stop the fight when a fighter is incapacitated. However, this doesn't happen so often, as MMA is a sport of multiple strategies rather than sheer bludgeoning. The vast majority of the time a fighter goes down to the ground, he is still conscious and able to fight. That's why the fights continue on, sometimes for several minutes.

As long as you base your dislike for MMA on the "cowardice of striking a fallen opponent" and, at the same time, willfully ignore the way the sport's rules and strategies are structured, there isn't much basis for discussion. Until you start to structure your criticism with more understanding, you'll be talking about things that are simply incorrect.

I would like to take a minute to go a bit further than SF and claim that boxing itself is for unmanly cowards, because as everyone knows, violence is the coward's way out.

Real men would engage in a spirited discussion over a cup of tea until one man convinced the other of the folly of his ways.

I find this statement funny, so the supreme test of masculinity is to bite an opponents ear? You don't seem to acknowledge the faults of people within your own sport and their tendencies to act like hooligans and thugs both inside and outside the ring.

Why is boxing the supreme test of masculinity, and who decided this? Why does the supreme test of masculinity have to involve fighting, why can't it be about who's the best underwater basket weaver?

MMA doesn't allow attacks on defenceless opponents, at least watch the sport before badmouthing it.

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.

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.

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.

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.

One thing I do take exception to is this idea that MMA requires so much more skill.

I think the very "unpredictable" nature of MMA proves the exact opposite, that it is basically a bit of a lottery between two competent fighters. The skill, strength and courage you need to box is vastly superior to the skill needed to roll around the floor trying to twist someone's arm or leg the wrong way.

The defensive skills of a master like Mayweather, like Sugar Ray Leanord, compared to trying to roll up in a ball and protect all of your joints from being twisted and wait for the bell to save you.

I can accept that MMA has a niche of loyal followers in the old Yugoslavia and nearby area's and northern America. But it will it stand the test of time like boxing? I very much doubt so.

None of u shave a crystal ball... but today we can have a conversation about (for example) John L Sullivan. In 100 years time, do you think it will be possible for two non-experts to discuss Royce Gracie.

I looked up Gracie, his record is apparently 14-3-3

To be honest, a boxer with that win ratio wouldnt be considered a contender for a European belt on that record. records can be deceiving - but this tells me two things - there are less fights in MMA and less depth, and the level of competition is also higher, ie - is more equalized.

This may be part of the attraction for the MMA crowd - the fights are unpredictable, anyone can win, and its just a good old fashioned tear up between two willing scrappers.

The boxing fan, I guess we all enjoy a tear up sometimes too, but really its more about the sweet science, the application of manliness governed by gentlemanly and honourable rules; to test yourself against another man in a sporting contest of toughness, strength, skill, courage, daring... MMA is simply a fight with a few things you are not allowed to do.

I saw an MMA fight when I was in the states, when one fighter was trying to throw or hold his man from behind, and the opponent repeatedly tried to stamp on his feet! I give my word this is true... and if this is the kind of "sport" some people prefer, they are welcome to it.

Boxing wont die out. My feeling is that MMA, like cage fighting in the early 90's, will fade out too.

__

My God, and in the article I read it says that women take part in these MMA exhibitions. Surely, in the name of all that is decent, nobody here approves of THIS?

I laughed so hard when I read this. How many real MMA fights have you seen? Be honest. Are you taking wild stabs in the dark on what you imagine happening or have you seen more than 1 or 2 silly fights?

There is quite a bit of skill when it comes to defending against a grappler just as the grappler requires a huge amount of skill to put you into a submission. It is much much more than simply rolling into a ball and protecting yourself. If a fighter rolls into a ball and doesn't do anything.. he's not defending himself according to the rules and the fight will be stopped.

I'm still confused as to how boxing can be considered a "sweet science". How scientific is it to either punch the face or the body? To be backed against the ropes or stay in the middle? The fact here is that while boxing has a definate amount of skill, you still refuse to see MMA for what it is and you are trying to break it down to a simplistic form to enhance your argument. Any sport is stupid when you break it down to it's most simple of forms. How hard is it to put a ball into the back of a goal that is so wide? How hard is it to hit a little ball or to catch that little ball? See.. you have to see the sport for it's beauty and for how it really is. While you may enjoy boxing better, that doesn't mean that MMA is pure barbarism with no skill.

Check out the next UFC pay-per-view. You'll have UFC's most popular fighter in Liddell vs Wanderlei one of the greatest MMA fighters of all time (IMO). Then St. Pierre vs Matt Hughes. Those two fights may just show you that there is more than just rolling around and mindless punching. You might even see there is strategy and skill.

What's wrong with girls taking part in MMA matches or watching them?? That's kind of a turn on if you ask me.

I found this amusing, have you ever seen these women? I wouldn't want to be the one to tell them they can't participate because they're women. They'd punch our teeth down our fuckin throats.

Again, Strange, you simply don't know what you're talking about.

And again. And again. and again.

You keep displaying the characteristics of what they call a "fanboy." You know what that is, don't you? Not a single argument you've posted has any factual basis. It's just your emotions talking. And every single post refuting your position has been ignored.

In every single post you refer to MMA in a derisive manner, which really diminishes everything you have to say about it, as it is obvious to everyone here that you are unable to see things objectively, even when presented with hard data.

We've all shown a lot of patience with you here, but it's like talking to a brick wall. We've tried to explain a few things to you. But to no avail. You keep insisting on framing the entire discussion within the manner in which you imagine MMA to be. But since you have no clue, the entire discussion is meaningless.

It's like when Miss Teen USA was asked about why 20% of americans couldn't find the USA on a map, and she replied: "I personally believe that U.S. Americans are unable to do so because, uh, some people out there in our nation don’t have maps, and, uh, I believe that our education like such as in South Africa and, uh, the Iraq everywhere like, such as and I believe that they should, our education over here in the U.S. should help the U.S., er, should help South Africa and should help the Iraq and the Asian countries, so we will be able to build up our future for our children."

That is what you sound like here.

You don't know anything about MMA, therefore your derogatory opinions are meaningless to those of us who do. The fact that you are unable to enjoy such a sport is meaningless to those of us all around the world who can. And the simple fact that you insist on comparing MMA to boxing just underlines your ignorance of the sport, as boxing has lost a lot of its luster and MMA is flourishing.

And your continued WWF comments are inane. Who looks more like a clown entering the ring, Roy Jones / Pretty Boy Floyd or Matt Hughes / George St. Pierre? The answer is obvious.

Convenient how you ignored my previous post about the state of boxing today.

And again. And again. And again.

So these are the only places that follow MMA? Have you even read past posts that have refuted this or just passed them over?
Pretty much proves you have no understanding of the ground game in MMA
Aren't all fights supposed to be unpredictable? Isn't anyone supposed to win against any given opponent? If not then why bother watching the fight if the outcome is already decided? Ever hear of a punchers chance?
You mean like boxing?

I like may other here find it amusing you don't even bother to try and refute the facts we post to claim your opinions wrong, like I said before, it's the the kid putting his hands over his ears and screaming lalalalalalalala when they don't want to hear something.

Well, Im not going to change the minds of dedicated fans of the sport - of which this thread suggests there are 8 or 9 in the TFP group.

I have nothing against checking out a UFC event to see if my mind can be changed... but I am doubtful I will.

And Wanderlei Silva - one of the best in UFC/MMA:

21 wins
7 defeats
1 no contest

Again, kind of backs up my point.

One of the great champions of this sport is able to win about 75% of the time.

What is the explanation that the fans give for this?

Why bother with explanations, we just won't acknowledge them much like you've been doing for 5 pages now.

I'm guessing there are more than 8or9 MMA fans on TFP, just because they didn't respond to this thread, doesn't mean ther aren't there, they probably figured it was pointless to post after reading some of your claims.

3 of those losses are HWs in open weight grand prix, who outweight his 199 frame by anywhere between 30 and 80 lbs. 1 was a cut stoppage. 2 were decisions. He's only been finished by someone in his weight class twice. I'm sick of you disrespecting fighters and styles you don't know about.

Try watch the sport and stop opening up a wiki and copying and pasting records.

Just for comedy sake there was always Kimbo Slice against Ray Mercer this past summer for the boxer vs. MMA fighter debate.

Not to mention Kimbo Slice just started training BJJ

Merciless Ray Mercer was a great boxer. I have no doubt though, that someone schooled in the gentlemanly art would find it difficult and probably lose badly if they are in a cage and put into a fight with elbows and kicks and common grappling.

I once saw a boxer vs MMA fight too... I think it was Trevor Berbick against a Japanese guy... Berbick was sent to the ring wearing normal boxing gloves (so he COULD NOT grabble) and was not even informed of the rules... the Japanese kicked him several times in the legs, and when Berbick complained he was being struck below the belt, the ref did nothing to protect him... so he walked out

An utter farce, a ridiculous spectacle, and an embarassment for everyone involved.

Put Kimbo Slice in a boxing ring, and you would see him painfully be given a lesson in the sweet science. Put a boxer into a cage in an anything goes fight, and yes - of course most times they'll simply get taken down have their arm twisted behind their back and have to quit.

You may as well ask a badminton player to play a tennis player.

The only real test for an alternative combat sport vs boxing - which is fair - is for two men to go down into the beer cellar and one to come back.

A boxer wasn't put in a cage in an anything goes fight, there are rules, please learn about the sport before saying there are no rules.

The difference between the Kimbo-Mercer fight and the Berbick fight you saw was the Mercer knew the rules, knew grappling was involved, knew leg kicks are allowed, and still got his ass handed to him

You remind me of an ostrich, presented with facts that shoot down your argument and you just bury your head and keep right on going.

Also, not really sure why the the Ref allowed Kimbo Slice to twice knee his opponent in the groin.

I was told this was against the "rules" - but maybe this is a good indication of how seriously the rules are applied in MMA

groin shots are disallowed, one of the targets that people will go for though is the inner thigh area. It may look like its a groin shot but it actually isn't.

Ray Mercer was crap - losing to anyone with a degree of talent or determination - including an over-the-hill Larry Holmes, Jesse Ferguson, and a past-his-sell date Evander Holyfield.

Maybe a boxer against a Muay Thai fighter would better convince SF.

"knee to the inner thigh" - well thats a euphenism I havent heard before.

Lets be honest, this MMA fight represents basically the following:

Timbo comes out punching wildly and inaccurately, trying to shake Mercer up

Mercer covers up, pops out a few jabs, biding his time

Timbo knee's Mercer in the groin

Timbo trips the winded Mercer down

Timbo twists one of his joints, Mercer taps out

The ref tells Timbo to release the hold, but he refuses for a few seconds, then releases

Mercer tries to complain to the ref

The ref shoves Mercer flat on the floor

___

To be honest, the whole exhibition didnt strike me as a contest of manliness, but as seedy, cheap, bush league.

As for Timbo not released the grip when the ref told him to for a couple of seconds... just classless. Do things like that happen in boxing? Of course - emotions runs high... but when you strike someone in the groin, the fight should have been paused, the ref deducted a point and given a final warning to Timbo, and Mercer given 5 minutes to recover from the cheap shot.

But in MMA its considered fair game, and the fans tell us it was the "inner thigh" that was struck!

Excuse after excuse after excuse.....

Well, actually I am merely saying that the rules of MMA were not enforced in that fight.

Mercer was obviously set up to go in and get beat to delight all of these people who think MMA is better than boxing.

He probably got paid a lot and knew the score anyway.

and the excuses keep going, he was supposed to lose, he had a cold, he had a raging hard on, his mom died, the rules aren't enforced, his wife wouldn't blow him before the fight, any other excuse you care to add, or can we just agree the boxing guy got his ass handed to him?

You remind me of GWB a little bit, just in the way you don't believe the facts when they are presented.

I think the fight sums up MMA pretty well.

A heavyweight fighter at least 8 years past his prime against a guy simply fighting in a different style & under different rules.

It isn't a sporting contest, its a circus act.

It is literally the stuff of college boys sitting round asking "who would win, Superman or Hulk, Bruce Lee or Mike Tyson, a Boxer or a Wrestler"... the fans claim to see "unpredictable fights", I see clumsy mis-matches and farcical fights... the point is a wrestler will probably win a wrestling match and a boxer will probably win a boxing bout - MMA *wants* to be some kind of free-for-all WWF without scripts, super-violent kind of sport. But without the chair shots and all the fake finishing moves, wrestling is basically just two guys rolling round trying to get a hold on each other... it might require strength and bravery - but once you learn all the basic holds and counters - very little skill (hence even the fighters that are called legends in MMA only win 75% of fights, because the result if pretty much down to luck as much as skill)

Cheap shots, the majority of the fight spent watching the fighters roll around trying to twist each others arms, the ref even taking a cheap shot at one of the fighters... it sums up the whole experience - classless and boring.

Perhaps some people who have a technical appreciation of different ways you can twist an arm or a knee might enjoy watching minute after minute of two men rolling round each trying to twist the other guys arm... for me utterly boring.

And from the fights Ive seen - knee's in the groin, stamping on feet, refusing to let go of a submission hold... shows an ugly character to go with the boring action.

Do I claim that all boxers are angelic and no rules are ever broken in boxing? Of course not... but in a major televised bout at least there is an attempt to keep to the rules. In this fight the knee to the groin (which is illegal) was not even noted by the ref... he seemed more intent on getting into a fight with someone himself than actually refereeing the fight.

Ray Mercer held a version of the heavyweight title, he has a place in history.

Whether Timbo Slice twisted his arm and made him quit in a circus ring when he was 40 years old makes no difference to anyone, and while Ray Mercer's name will still shine in the record books of the sweet science, no one will remember who Timbo Slice even was in 20 years time.

It's Kimbo, not Timbo by the way.

I'm going to give up as this is like banging my head against a brick wall. You get presented with facts and just change your course of excuse, now it doesn't matter because Mercer was too old, next thing you know it's going to be that he had a Hemorrhoid or something. You can keep you narrow view of MMA and keep thinking boxing proves the ultimate man, it's been made quite apparent here that you don't have the knowledge of MMA to bad mouth the athletes.

on the cheap shots.... i'll literally switch sides of the arguement with you if you show me one mma fight where someone used their TEETH. don't worry; i won't hold my breath.

on the boring part.... well, thats all subjective so i won't argue with your opinion about it. but i find it an ironic that you call it boring after the snore-fest that was the undercard for the mayweather fight last week.

over the last couple year, i'd have to say that only one in about 4 or 5 bouts of boxing does something interesting happen... the rest is a bunch of clinching, then it goes to the cards and the loser complains about head-butting.