the UFC thread

[Shea]

hmmmm 13 seconds? first punch KO? bit embarrassing for the sport tbh. I do wonder how professional the sport is. I dont doubt its entertainment value. But after watching this fight. Then the Paige Vanzant fight...who was awful btw. Plus the Rousey ass kicking by a decent ex BOXER! I kind of think the UFC is a bit amateur night.

I'm sorry but that's a ridiculous comment

Firstly Holly Holm's skills against Rousey showcased way more of her kickboxing technique than boxing, and her take down defense showed how much wrestling she had learned if she were only skilled in boxing she would have been dealt with like James Toney

How does a quick knock out in any way suggest it is an amateur sport? There have been plenty of quick boxing finishes too


It's fine to prefer boxing but to say such silly things and give such reasoning just makes you sound ignorant

 

[teok]

Don't feed the trolls.

 

[Hoops]

I'm sorry but that's a ridiculous comment

Firstly Holly Holm's skills against Rousey showcased way more of her kickboxing technique than boxing, and her take down defense showed how much wrestling she had learned if she were only skilled in boxing she would have been dealt with like James Toney

How does a quick knock out in any way suggest it is an amateur sport? There have been plenty of quick boxing finishes too


It's fine to prefer boxing but to say such silly things and give such reasoning just makes you sound ignorant

Calm down. The boxing comparison was just a wind up. I like both. But clearly, boxing is more professional at this stage of UFC's development.

 

[Shea]

Calm down. The boxing comparison was just a wind up. I like both. But clearly, boxing is more professional at this stage of UFC's development.

how is that clear?

I like both, I probably prefer boxing if anything but your statement sounded ridiculous and ignorant

 

[Led's Zeppelin]

I'm sorry but that's a ridiculous comment

Firstly Holly Holm's skills against Rousey showcased way more of her kickboxing technique than boxing, and her take down defense showed how much wrestling she had learned if she were only skilled in boxing she would have been dealt with like James Toney

How does a quick knock out in any way suggest it is an amateur sport? There have been plenty of quick boxing finishes too


It's fine to prefer boxing but to say such silly things and give such reasoning just makes you sound ignorant

All of this is true, but at the same time, the whole approach to the sport including the instant KO does look a bit watery compared with boxing don't you think?

I know that's just my personal preference based on nothing material, but it comes across to me as a lower-level activity for people who can't quite make it in the boxing ring. (I expect I'm wrong.) And a weak-looking KO like this just reinforces what I accept is just a sort of prejudice against a hybrid sport like this.

 

[Hoops]

All of this is true, but at the same time, the whole approach to the sport including the instant KO does look a bit watery compared with boxing don't you think?

I know that's just my personal preference based on nothing material, but it comes across to me as a lower-level activity for people who can't quite make it in the boxing ring. (I expect I'm wrong.) And a weak-looking KO like this just reinforces what I accept is just a sort of prejudice against a hybrid sport like this.

I would ask the question is UFC a bit like heptathlete. Good at everything but great at nothing?

But of course, standards usually depend on the payday. If a boxer can make 20m for a fight. The best fighters will box, rather than take 250k in UFC.

 

[Shea]

All of this is true, but at the same time, the whole approach to the sport including the instant KO does look a bit watery compared with boxing don't you think?

I know that's just my personal preference based on nothing material, but it comes across to me as a lower-level activity for people who can't quite make it in the boxing ring. (I expect I'm wrong.) And a weak-looking KO like this just reinforces what I accept is just a sort of prejudice against a hybrid sport like this.

No, I don't think

This can happen in boxing, look at the video I posted

It certainly wasn't a weak looking KO, it was a very well placed left hook to the chin while the opponent had all his weight moving forward and was in the process of throwing his own punch

The shot snapped his head on his shoulders and you can see how it would have put him down and separated him from his senses for a few seconds

The only difference in boxing would be that he would have been given a 10 count to recover and potentially made it through the round still (e.g. without the count and ground strikes being allowed Frotch would never have had the chance to get up again after Groves knocked him down)

I also don't agree at all with the whole concept of people being in MMA simply because they're not good enough to box - these people have trained in different martial arts disciplines probably since young. It's like saying people would only play rugby because they're too shit to play football - it simply isn't true

 

[Shea]

I would ask the question is UFC a bit like heptathlete. Good at everything but great at nothing?

But of course, standards usually depend on the payday. If a boxer can make 20m for a fight. The best fighters will box, rather than take 250k in UFC.

That analogy has some merit - for those who have always trained mma. They certainly must be well rounded and less specialised

Where I suggest the analogy falls apart is that as a heptathlete the sports combined are not really one over all entity, they're just different forms of athletics combined where as for a mixed martial artists the combined skill set is all directly involved in the art of fighting

The debate would continue as to whether an expert in one discipline will beat a more well rounded fighter and am sure results would vary fighter to fighter on an individual basis rather there being a general rule of boxing beats mma or vice versa

As for the money factor - this is the age old argument that anti mma people trot out - yes I'm sure some times a young talented athlete chooses boxing due to the money involved but it's not as simple as saying because there's more money involved they would only go to mma if they weren't good enough to box

They may have been training muay thai, BJJ, wrestling for years, have a real passion for it and want to compete it in because it's the sport they love.

Do rugby players only play rugby because they are not good enough at football to earn EPL wages? does that in some way make rugby less professional or deserving of respect than football - because footballers make more money and therefore all the best athletes would go there and rugby only get the shit left over?

I hate these kinds of comments - reminds me of that prick Lou DiBella

 

[Hoops]

That analogy has some merit - for those who have always trained mma. They certainly must be well rounded and less specialised

Where I suggest the analogy falls apart is that as a heptathlete the sports combined are not really one over all entity, they're just different forms of athletics combined where as for a mixed martial artists the combined skill set is all directly involved in the art of fighting

The debate would continue as to whether an expert in one discipline will beat a more well rounded fighter and am sure results would vary fighter to fighter on an individual basis rather there being a general rule of boxing beats mma or vice versa

As for the money factor - this is the age old argument that anti mma people trot out - yes I'm sure some times a young talented athlete chooses boxing due to the money involved but it's not as simple as saying because there's more money involved they would only go to mma if they weren't good enough to box

They may have been training muay thai, BJJ, wrestling for years, have a real passion for it and want to compete it in because it's the sport they love.

Do rugby players only play rugby because they are not good enough at football to earn EPL wages? does that in some way make rugby less professional or deserving of respect than football - because footballers make more money and therefore all the best athletes would go there and rugby only get the shit left over?

I hate these kinds of comments - reminds me of that prick Lou DiBella

Fair comment. Im a firm believer that the man makes the belt in boxing. So you could extrapolate that to its the fighter not the sport. But...UFC seems a tad amateursh. Thats my opinion. Doesnt mean I dont enjoy UFC because I do.

I would also question where all the money goes? Probably Dana Whites pocket. The fighters deserve better salaries than what they are getting.

 

[Mullers]

All of this is true, but at the same time, the whole approach to the sport including the instant KO does look a bit watery compared with boxing don't you think?

I know that's just my personal preference based on nothing material, but it comes across to me as a lower-level activity for people who can't quite make it in the boxing ring. (I expect I'm wrong.) And a weak-looking KO like this just reinforces what I accept is just a sort of prejudice against a hybrid sport like this.

I would say boxing with 4 champions in a weight class a lot of the time, is far more watery.

 

[Led's Zeppelin]

No, I don't think

This can happen in boxing, look at the video I posted

It certainly wasn't a weak looking KO, it was a very well placed left hook to the chin while the opponent had all his weight moving forward and was in the process of throwing his own punch

The shot snapped his head on his shoulders and you can see how it would have put him down and separated him from his senses for a few seconds

The only difference in boxing would be that he would have been given a 10 count to recover and potentially made it through the round still (e.g. without the count and ground strikes being allowed Frotch would never have had the chance to get up again after Groves knocked him down)

I also don't agree at all with the whole concept of people being in MMA simply because they're not good enough to box - these people have trained in different martial arts disciplines probably since young. It's like saying people would only play rugby because they're too shit to play football - it simply isn't true

You've done that thing where you argue with what you think people are saying rather than what they are saying. My fault for not being clear enough.

However, I did say I was probably wrong in terms of the reality, (so need need for a long argument there) but you're missing the point that a few people are making, which is that the impression that this sport creates is of a lower-level activity than boxing.

Also, I think Hoops has a point: the best sportsmen are generally the specialists, not the generalists, although people like Ennis-Hill are very honourable exceptions. The best are the ones who are supreme at the most refined level of skill (and all the other sporting qualities). UFC seems to withhold that opportunity: the best boxers will always become boxers, so what else are we looking for in UFC? Someone who can compensate for lower-level boxing ability with a few other skills. Fine, but never likely to be the best...

Sport is all about working within artificial constraints; that is the essence of sport, and why sport has to have rules which are arbitrary in nature but refined over the years, and why sport is not real-life. UFC seems to loosen the constraints of boxing, which is the pinnacle of personal combat sport in my opinion, and inevitably there's a cost involved.

 

[Rocksuperstar]

Calm down. The boxing comparison was just a wind up. I like both. But clearly, boxing is more professional at this stage of UFC's development.

I would suggest that by "more professional" you mean "more suitable for TV revenue". Last night, you think that if Joshua & Whyte had wanted that fight over inside three rounds, it wouldn't have been? Boxing has become entrenched in promotion, it's saturated with demand, hence my comment in the boxing thread how hard it must be for Box Office to push a fighter that's never given them more than 15 minutes of action.

MMA fights between heavies can drag on as well, but in MMA you don't have big arse gloves to concuss, you go for the gap and put your man down, or you see the missed grip and stretch out their limb - you don't need to pound their brain into a disco ball to win the fight. I prefer the more natural way an MMA fight pans out, it's vastly less predictable and slow paced than boxing has become, for the most part (though some of the lightweights are looking sharp last couple of years).

 

[Shea]

Fair comment. Im a firm believer that the man makes the belt in boxing. So you could extrapolate that to its the fighter not the sport. But...UFC seems a tad amateursh. Thats my opinion. Doesnt mean I dont enjoy UFC because I do.

I would also question where all the money goes? Probably Dana Whites pocket. The fighters deserve better salaries than what they are getting.

Pros and cons to the UFC model

The fighters have central contracts and there is only one belt in each division - this leads to bigger better fights with the best fighting the best (pro obviously) but from a fighters point of view they can't negotiate the same types of money a top boxer can

That said I think on the whole the disparity in pay is exaggerated - pay per view figures are never quoted only the fighters turn up and win bonus salaries and I am certain the top guys receive percentages of the pay per view money

I had actually gone off boxing and was way more in to K1 and then MMA for years due to the way so many boxing fights didn't happen and people avoided one another. To his credit I think Eddie Hearns has done a great job of bringing boxing back to the forefront of British sport. In part helped to the development of a lot of competitive British boxers but he deserves credit for starting with the 3 round prize fighter tournaments and then his exclusive match room deal with sky

Starting to put on some good shows and I for one am very in to boxing again for the first time in quite some time, by contrast I haven't been watching as much UFC and paid little to no attention to Glory kickboxing since the break up of k1

 

[Hoops]

Pros and cons to the UFC model

The fighters have central contracts and there is only one belt in each division - this leads to bigger better fights with the best fighting the best (pro obviously) but from a fighters point of view they can't negotiate the same types of money a top boxer can

That said I think on the whole the disparity in pay is exaggerated - pay per view figures are never quoted only the fighters turn up and win bonus salaries and I am certain the top guys receive percentages of the pay per view money

I had actually gone off boxing and was way more in to K1 and then MMA for years due to the way so many boxing fights didn't happen and people avoided one another. To his credit I think Eddie Hearns has done a great job of bringing boxing back to the forefront of British sport. In part helped to the development of a lot of competitive British boxers but he deserves credit for starting with the 3 round prize fighter tournaments and then his exclusive match room deal with sky

Starting to put on some good shows and I for one am very in to boxing again for the first time in quite some time, by contrast I haven't been watching as much UFC and paid little to no attention to Glory kickboxing since the break up of k1

Agree. Boxing is toxic in regards to the best not fighting the best and WBC not forcing fights such as Cenelo v GGG. On the pay thing, its not the descrepancy between the fighters, but more the central contracts. White effectively has a monopoly so can pay what he wants. Good for the fans though.

 

[Shea]

You've done that thing where you argue with what you think people are saying rather than what they are saying. My fault for not being clear enough.

However, I did say I was probably wrong in terms of the reality, (so need need for a long argument there) but you're missing the point that a few people are making, which is that the impression that this sport creates is of a lower-level activity than boxing.

Also, I think Hoops has a point: the best sportsmen are generally the specialists, not the generalists, although people like Ennis-Hill are very honourable exceptions. The best are the ones who are supreme at the most refined level of skill (and all the other sporting qualities). UFC seems to withhold that opportunity: the best boxers will always become boxers, so what else are we looking for in UFC? Someone who can compensate for lower-level boxing ability with a few other skills. Fine, but never likely to be the best...

Sport is all about working within artificial constraints; that is the essence of sport, and why sport has to have rules which are arbitrary in nature but refined over the years, and why sport is not real-life. UFC seems to loosen the constraints of boxing, which is the pinnacle of personal combat sport in my opinion, and inevitably there's a cost involved.

Well I don't really feel I am missing the point - how can I argue with your opinion of the impression it gives you? I can only say I don't agree with the sport giving off that impression and explain why I think not (which is what I did)

And as I already said to Hoops - I think the difference and problem with the athletics analogy is that unlike a heptathlon all the acquired skills a mixed martial artist adds to his arsenal are directly applicable to one overall act i.e. having a fight and it can be argued that it makes them more effective over all at fighting i.e. if there were no rules

But as I also said - I think there would be no definitive rule of thumb for this in reality and I think it would depend on the fighters themselves rather than trying to apply a rule of mma star beats boxer or boxer knocks out mma fighter in a street fight etc

 

[Shea]

Agree. Boxing is toxic in regards to the best not fighting the best and WBC not forcing fights such as Cenelo v GGG. On the pay thing, its not the descrepancy between the fighters, but more the central contracts. White effectively has a monopoly so can pay what he wants. Good for the fans though.

I meant the discrepancy between the pay of top boxers vs mma fighters

I think some of the brightest mma stars earn more than is disclosed due to them having a piece of the pay per view action when we only really see the figures relating to the turn up and win bonus fees

Because each boxing fight is an individual promotion of its own the salaries are negotiated and announced for us to see the full money they pocket fight to fight (for the most part)

Still far from the money the likes of Mayweather earn - but not as wide a gap as people generally think. The likes of GSP, BRock Lesnar, Rousey and now Connor are/were earning big money from their pay per view cut once they become a big draw and this reflects more what happens in boxing I think (just like mma only the big pay per view guys make the large sums)

 

[Led's Zeppelin]

Well I don't really feel I am missing the point - how can I argue with your opinion of the impression it gives you? I can only say I don't agree with the sport giving off that impression and explain why I think not (which is what I did).……

……etc

Fair enough, but I think it is possible to talk about the impressions that a sport creates, since sport is a branch of the entertainment industry and depends on its existence at the pro level on nothing but the way it appeals, and therefore appears to people.

i don't know enough about the way it's promoted at participant level but I do know that a lot of people don't take it as seriously as some more established and respected sports like boxing. Whether this is justified or simply the result of ignorance, it would still be in the interests of the sport to look carefully at the impression it creates.

Anyway, I know too little about it to contribute further. Or even this far, to be honest!

 

[teok]

All of this is true, but at the same time, the whole approach to the sport including the instant KO does look a bit watery compared with boxing don't you think?

How many mma fights have you watched?

Look at these gloves

compared to these gloves

Too start with it's far easier to knock some one out with smaller gloves. You also can't use a traditional boxing guard because you might be kicked, elbowed or taken down. Also you can't block peoples punches with smaller gloves.

Conor caught jose flush coming in with all his weight on his front foot. Nothing "watery" about it at all. Perfectly timed.

 

[Shea]

Fair enough, but I think it is possible to talk about the impressions that a sport creates, since sport is a branch of the entertainment industry and depends on its existence at the pro level on nothing but the way it appeals, and therefore appears to people.

i don't know enough about the way it's promoted at participant level but I do know that a lot of people don't take it as seriously as some more established and respected sports like boxing. Whether this is justified or simply the result of ignorance, it would still be in the interests of the sport to look carefully at the impression it creates.

Anyway, I know too little about it to contribute further. Or even this far, to be honest!

Well, I think that's very variable depending on your circles and age range etc

Now days - maybe less so now since the Frotch/Groves fight and the emergence of AJ - but mma and the UFC in particular seemed to be over taking boxing from a media promotion point of view from as far as I could see

People were taking it too seriously if anything and dismissing boxing as a result - look at the talk of mma women being able to beat Mayweather

I know plenty of peolple who know lots about UFC and next to nothing about boxing, especially younger people. I think the fact EA sports decided to focus on the new UFC game instead of making another boxing/fight night game was testament to that

Older people tend to know little about mma because they've grown up on boxing and never really taken the time to watch mma, I often hear people still labeling it with the old tags of early pre zuffa mma days. "human cock fighting" and people like Tank Abbot being the type of fighter/athlete they associate with the UFC i,e big tough brawler with limted skills

I think over here in the UK this is especially the case because mma has still to really break in to the main stream here, it of course has much more than it used to but without a successful British mma fighter to draw such attention it's difficult (especially now we're having a real boom in UK boxing world champions)

I think in younger generations and around the world mma, specifically the UFC is becoming very well established and respected, I have cousins in Rome who love it as do all their friends, I see how popular it is in American now (as I visit frequently) and I see how popular it is becoming with younger people here

As I say though - from my observation - for older people who have not really watched the sport or not watched a lot of it, I think the original reservations of it still exist and people think it is too brutal and as I said before do not realise how it has evolved from the Tank Abbot days

Edit - I should also add the Irish example. I'm sure from my username you can tell I have Irish family. Last time I was there I was speaking to some distant cousins and uncles about boxing, they hadn't even heard of Andy Lee yet were obsessed with Connor McGreggor and everything UFC

If we had a similar UFC star here the balance would probably shift somewhat that way - but AJ is creating a further swing boxings way (as did the Frotch groves fight, even Fury got the british public talking boxing now)

It's the fighters themselves that make the difference currently I feel

 

[Hoops]

Where is Hayes shaft masseuse? Im surprised he hasnt waded in with Haye would ko Aldo and McGregor at the same time.