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.