New Fight Question

[Jamma]

wow.. just wow

UFC fighters train to fight hand to hand as a full time job. NO ONE in the military has the time to do that, or you would end up with someone who's only trained for UFC, not military duty.

And you're even suggesting there's an entire branch of the army that beats the UFC fighters... So when do these poor guys get to learn about fighting in a war?

[Smasharoo]

Anyone who does not think the UFC/Mixed Martial Arts fighter will win easily, does NOT know ANYTHING about fighting.

Right, that's why they make so much more money than boxers. Oh wait.

Here's something you might not have known about the UFC, it was originally going to be named the GWH, but they decided fans who wanted to see white guys win at *some* sort of fighting contest wouldn't get it.

[Yo_Respek]

1.UFC CHAMP Capable of fighting in all ways but has a disadvantage to the Navy Seal and Boxer in endurance
2.Navy Seal Trained heavily in all types of fighting but would struggle with the entire skill set of techniques
3.Martial Arts Specilist Not usually trained in gritty fighting
4.Boxer He is not trained in bare handed fighting or leg attacks
5.Real Street Fighter He's not trained in leg attacks or defending them

[MuresanForMVP]

[ QUOTE ]
1.UFC CHAMP Capable of fighting in all ways but has a disadvantage to the Navy Seal and Boxer in endurance
2.Navy Seal Trained heavily in all types of fighting but would struggle with the entire skill set of techniques
3.Martial Arts Specilist Not usually trained in gritty fighting
4.Boxer He is not trained in bare handed fighting or leg attacks
5.Real Street Fighter He's not trained in leg attacks or defending them

[/ QUOTE ]

BTW, this is the correct order

[jackaaron]

Best in the world only.

So, take whatever skills you know from each set, and amplify it to it’s highest power (since that person is the best IN THE WORLD).

Also, for our purposes here, I will assume that the best in each has had at least 80-100 fights (including any while training or at an amateur level). I will also assume same ages roughly, and no long standing injuries.

So, let’s go down the list.

Worlds best boxer.

Can’t handle someone diving at his legs, and taking him down. Once he’s down, then what? If he lands a punch square on any of these opponents, they’re done. But, that’s really his only hope.

Worlds best karate and or other Asian martial arts.

Can use more parts of his body than a boxer (feet, knees, head), and is more comfortable in close quarters. Knows how to use his opponents body weight against him, and can throw his opponent. Possibly can’t punch as hard as a boxer. Knows more defense than the boxer.

Navy Seal.

We’re talking about the best in the world. If so, the closest he’s gotten to his enemy has involved him sneaking up on his targets, and making silent kills with weapons, or possibly using weapons to make distance kills. If a Seal is in hand to hand combat, normally something has gone wrong. He certainly trains for this situation, but if we’re talking the best Seal in the world, then we’re talking about one that hasn’t had to be in too many hand to hand combat situations. We probably shouldn’t have included a SEAL. Not because they’re not bad ass but because of the context of the situation.

Streetfighter.

He will bite. Kick. Scratch. Spit. Pull. Gouge. Anything it takes, and there is no predicting his behavior because even HE doesn’t know what the heck he is going to do. But, this is the best, and he’s been in MANY fights, so he’s seen it all. My only concern would be his competition. If he’s the best, though, he’s pretty much beat them all, and he’s done it any way he could think of. It’s highly likely, however, he’s never faced a professional boxer on the streets, nor has he faced the best martial artist on the street. They would be much too technical for him, and although his survival would work for a while, they would eventually take him because of their patience and discipline.

UFC’s best.

First off, this guy has generally already been through the streets. But, he has added technical elements to his game that the streetfighter cannot beat. He has boxed, and learned how to beat a boxer. He has martial arts in his repertoire, and learned how to beat the martial artist. In effect, he takes the best of the boxer, the martial artist, and the street fighter, and combines them all. He is the most all around, and complete. He can grapple if needed, he can put submission holds on anyone, he can box, he can kick, he can defend, he can throw, and he’s athletic. To me, he would beat any of the other opponents because he would always have an effective counter strategy.

UFC’s best.
Martial Artist
Boxer
Street Fighter
SEAL (shouldn’t have been included).

[Smasharoo]

He has boxed, and

and been so bad at it that he had to find a much more dangerous way to make less money.

Looking at this question as equal physical specimens with different skillets is silly, and not the intent of the question in my mind. Obviously in a situation where everyone has dead equal reflexes, strength/lb of body mass, endurance, etc, it's going to be so close as to not matter at all and you're just arguing over abstract disciplines being better than one another.

That's not the reality, however. The reality is that world class boxers are simply in better condition than world class MMAs, have better reflexes, etc. If the argument is really about the disciplines, it completely pointless. There is no "best" discipline. Hand to hand combat isn't really very complex at all, and any of 1000 styles of practicing it is going to be as close to equally effective as another as makes no difference.

[kdotsky]

[ QUOTE ]

The reality is that world class boxers are simply in better condition than world class MMAs, have better reflexes, etc. If the argument is really about the disciplines, it completely pointless. There is no "best" discipline. Hand to hand combat isn't really very complex at all, and any of 1000 styles of practicing it is going to be as close to equally effective as another as makes no difference.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is so, so uninformed. Hand to hand combat at this level is extremely complex, the untrained eye doesn't see it. In addition, you don't notice the effectiveness of the techniques in televised UFC matches because they all train in the same (most effective) techniques, so it becomes who is the better athlete or who is bigger or whatever. But if you saw the difference in effectiveness of techniques (watch UFC I-IV), you would realize that the technique is far, far more important. Fighting on the ground is even far more complex that on feet. Some techniques have been shown to be vastly superior to other. There's hard evidence of this; it's pretty indisputable.

It's way off to just say the boxer has better reflexes/ability/whatever. He will get taken down by his legs with complete ease, and will have no idea how to defend himself on the ground. It's nothing even close to "he knows how to box, the other guy knows some other fighting techniques, so I guess the better athlete wins". Grappling is the fundamentals of fighting, and the boxer has absolutely no experience in this.

[blackize]

[ QUOTE ]
The reality is that world class boxers are simply in better condition than world class MMAs, have better reflexes, etc. If the argument is really about the disciplines, it completely pointless. There is no "best" discipline. Hand to hand combat isn't really very complex at all, and any of 1000 styles of practicing it is going to be as close to equally effective as another as makes no difference.

[/ QUOTE ]

So untrue. If I'm fighting a boxer I'm going to take advantage of the weaknesses in his style. I'm going to be rocking his knees with kicks while staying out of his range. I'm not even going to go in for a takedown until this boxer can barely stand anymore. So how exactly is it that a boxing style isn't inferior? He can't defend 50% of his body and if I hurt his legs he loses his punching power.

[Smasharoo]

This is so, so uninformed. Hand to hand combat at this level is extremely complex, the untrained eye doesn't see it. In addition, you don't notice the effectiveness of the techniques in televised UFC matches because they all train in the same (most effective) techniques, so it becomes who is the better athlete or who is bigger or whatever. But if you saw the difference in effectiveness of techniques (watch UFC I-IV), you would realize that the technique is far, far more important. Fighting on the ground is even far more complex that on feet. Some techniques have been shown to be vastly superior to other. There's hard evidence of this; it's pretty indisputable.


No, there's hard evidence that hand to hand combat is an efficent market and unsecessfull skill sets will die out fairly quickly. All of the efficent disciplines will be roughtly equivlent. It's rediculous to say that Jujitsu will have a large advantage over Akido or whatever other efficent skillset you want to name. Also technique is clearly the least important thing when compared to physical attributes. This is why weight classes exist. Were it true that technique was more important there would be no need for them.

The stronger, faster, better conditioned person is much more likely to win than the more profficent person.



It's way off to just say the boxer has better reflexes/ability/whatever. He will get taken down by his legs with complete ease, and will have no idea how to defend himself on the ground. It's nothing even close to "he knows how to box, the other guy knows some other fighting techniques, so I guess the better athlete wins". Grappling is the fundamentals of fighting, and the boxer has absolutely no experience in this.

The idea that a world class boxer with world class reflexes is somehow going to stand there and be tackled is preposterous.

Your argument essentially says this: The best UFC fighters can learn extremely complex fighting skills, equally complex to learning to box, and have equal physical charactersitcs to world class boxers, but *just weren't good at boxing*.

Is that really your argument? They have all the tools to succeed in boxing, reflexes, endurance, stregnth, but they just for some reason couldn't figure out a right cross so they decided to make vastly less money, and take far more physical damage.

Really?

[Smasharoo]

So untrue. If I'm fighting a boxer I'm going to take advantage of the weaknesses in his style. I'm going to be rocking his knees with kicks while staying out of his range.

I'd like to see you demonstrate that. You're going to kick his legs, while staying out of his range. Intresting. Maybe you can use your special combo by pressing B up and A at the same time first to soften him up, too.