New Fight Question

[Smasharoo]

You're so cynical, but you aren't helping your cause. Try to discuss this without making snide remarks and trying to avoid discussing points. I've already conceded that the world class boxer would be the better athlete, but you haven't responded to my comment that it wouldn't matter once he gets taken down or presented with a situation he doesn't know how to defend against.


Ok, let me respond. A world class boxer freed from any rules regarding kidney punching or rabbit punching or whatever is very likely to injure someone other than another world class boxer trying to get him on the ground sufficently that killig them would just be a tedious chore.

It's why they have rules in boxing. It's also why they have rules in UFC. See, for some bizarre reason you seem to be assuming that this would be fought under UFC rules. I'm not sure why, really, but anyway, knowing more about grappling doesn't do you much good when you're getting punched in vulnerable areas by a guy with better handspeed than you have, and certainly who is far more capable of hitting you and mopving out of the way faster than you can kick him in the leg.

The first UFCs had good boxers and martial artists up against a guy with a superior skill set with inferior athletic ability. This is pretty much exactly what we're arguing here and I have past data to back me up.


No, they had well below average boxers against world class martial artists, which is nothing like we're talking about here. That's the point. Taking failed boxers who competed in UFC because they litterally couldn't get a fight with a $5000 purse is hardly usefull data.


You have nothing supporting you except your own wild notion that boxers are so much faster and stronger than anyone else that to try to fight them would be suicide.

It's not a wild notion, it's simple economics. If the UFC guys had better reflexes and were stronger and faster, and as you say capable of learning complex physical skills...they'd be boxers, or something else. Because the largest UFC purse in history is way, way, less than boxers make for average non title fights.

[GiantBuddha]

[ QUOTE ]
Martial Artist = MMA

[/ QUOTE ]
And that's the reason this question is irrelevant/unanswerable. However, the best Ultimate Fighting Champion (trains for a sport) versus the best true martial artist (trains for practical application) is what the question was. There's no reason the martial artist can't crosstrain, is there? MMA is a term used to describe those who take a little of the best from different arts. I have never met a martial arts master who hasn't done this himself. So in the end, the question leads to a deadend. If you go back to my HORSE tournament question, and assume what DS assumes in that thread: none of the participants has ever played any of the other games, then yes, the UFC has a huge advantage assuming that somehow the best martial artist in the world only practices Kata and prearranged sparring. This very limited martial artist wouldn't have a chance. But that's not a master. An ideal martial artist would have an understanding of how to use every part of his body to maximum effect, and how to avoid any method of attack. There are plenty of guys like this. It is my belief that the best of these would beat the best UFC, but I'll admit that's nothing but conjecture.

[Smasharoo]

Not 9/10 times but probably 8/10. It's much easier to dodge a punch than it is to dodge a kick to the lower body. Are you really so confident that the MMA fighter would be unable to get a hold of just one leg of Ali's? Because once he gets a hold of that leg the fight is getting moved to the ground and now amount of agility and punching power will save him down there.

Right, Ali looses to, I don't know, Matt Hughes? He's about the same weight, no? Anyway, 8 times out of 10.

Got it. There's a new Rocky movie coming out, I wouldn't miss it if I were you.

[ARTYFISHALL]

Ali has already fought a so called MMA. He fought in Japan. At his peak Ali was unbeatable.

[GiantBuddha]

I think there's an interesting sub-question here:

Do the competitors know who the other guys are? For instance, if the boxer doesn't know that the UFC guy might go for the legs, he's in serious trouble, and may lose almost 10 of 10. However, if he is aware of the strategy of the UFC, he'll at the very least have a stronger chance.

If the UFC guy thinks he's fighting UFC rules, he'll be quite unpleasantly surprised when he gets kicked in the nuts, or gouged in the eyes. Even if he just thinks he's against a bunch of other MMAs, he might not use the optimal strategy. Kind of like playing too tight in a loose passive game.

[blackize]

[ QUOTE ]
It's why they have rules in boxing. It's also why they have rules in UFC. See, for some bizarre reason you seem to be assuming that this would be fought under UFC rules. I'm not sure why, really, but anyway, knowing more about grappling doesn't do you much good when you're getting punched in vulnerable areas by a guy with better handspeed than you have, and certainly who is far more capable of hitting you and mopving out of the way faster than you can kick him in the leg.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not assuming it is fought under UFC rules. I'm just assuming that the most effective way for an MMA fighter to win this fight would be to take it to the ground because admittedly he is at a disadvantage standing up against a boxer.

Grappling will be especially effective against a boxer because once the MMA fighter closes the distance the boxer loses his punching power and is subject to knees to the torso and groin as well as being taken to the ground at which point his lack of knowledge and skill will make him practically defenseless.

[ QUOTE ]
they had well below average boxers against world class martial artists

[/ QUOTE ]

While they are world class martial artists, Brazilian Ju Jitsu is not a striking art and Royce Gracie has little to know skill in striking no is he a world class athlete.

Today MMA fighters are world class athletes with moderate-good boxing/striking skills and are world class BJJ practitioners. So while the boxers that took part in the old UFCs were much worse than the champion boxer you are talking about here, Royce Gracie is much worse than the current MMA champions. In fact it was just a few months ago that Royce Gracie was handily defeated by Matt Hughes. What I'm trying to say is that the comparison I made still holds true.

[ QUOTE ]
It's not a wild notion, it's simple economics. If the UFC guys had better reflexes and were stronger and faster, and as you say capable of learning complex physical skills...they'd be boxers, or something else. Because the largest UFC purse in history is way, way, less than boxers make for average non title fights.

[/ QUOTE ]

There is a lot more involved in deciding to be a UFC fighter or MMA fighter than just money. The UFC is a fledgling sport in the United States. In other countries MMA fighting is much bigger and more profitable than it is here. A lot of these guys started as streetfighters or wrestlers with no boxing training. It would be very hard for these guys to make that transition while they could instead grow upon what they already know and move into MMA fighting.

You'd be hard pressed to argue that boxing requires superior reflexes and agility than wrestling. A lot of the UFC guys started as excellent wrestlers and have excellent reflexes and agility. The biggest difference they have when fighting the boxer is the lower handspeed, but this can be negated by taking the fight to the ground or getting in close to decrease the boxer's punching power.

[blackize]

[ QUOTE ]
o the competitors know who the other guys are? For instance, if the boxer doesn't know that the UFC guy might go for the legs, he's in serious trouble, and may lose almost 10 of 10. However, if he is aware of the strategy of the UFC, he'll at the very least have a stronger chance.

If the UFC guy thinks he's fighting UFC rules, he'll be quite unpleasantly surprised when he gets kicked in the nuts, or gouged in the eyes. Even if he just thinks he's against a bunch of other MMAs, he might not use the optimal strategy. Kind of like playing too tight in a loose passive game.


[/ QUOTE ]

Some very good points here which I don't think we can answer in the context of the question.

[kdotsky]

[ QUOTE ]

No, there's hard evidence that hand to hand combat is an efficent market and unsecessfull skill sets will die out fairly quickly.

[/ QUOTE ]

Are you kidding? Are you seriously not being a troll? Martial arts aren't used for fighting most of the time. The best marketed ones and best looking (movies) ones have survived. Boxing hasn't survived because it works in fights, it's survived because people like to watch it and that's worth a lot of money. Money drives the efficient market genius, not fighting ability.

[ QUOTE ]

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.

[/ QUOTE ]

This comment is just embarrassing for you. It doesn't even justify a response. Go be a Ninja then.

[ QUOTE ]
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.

[/ QUOTE ]

Listen carefully. In boxing, everyone uses the same techniques. In UFC, everyone uses the same techniques. When that happens, size, athleticism, etc become more important, and weight classes are created. The first 4 UFC didn't have weight classes and virtually no rules. One technique from a small, unathletic guy dominated.


[ QUOTE ]

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

[/ QUOTE ]

If they're using the same techniques, yes.



[ QUOTE ]

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

[/ QUOTE ]

Pure ignorance. Michael Jordan would get taken down in less than 5 seconds by a high school wrestler, and I'd say he's a pretty good athlete. He sure was good at baseball too, huh?

What happens to boxing if you don't allow torso strikes. The stance, footwork, defense... everything changes. What happens when you instead allow kicks, takedowns, chokeholds, etc. It's not boxing. He has no idea, and has never trained, to defend a takedown. Oh and here's a hint: you can't do it with punches anyway.

[ QUOTE ]

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.

[/ QUOTE ]

Really?

[/ QUOTE ]

Not at all. You fail to understand on many levels. If you can't understand what I'm saying, it's hopeless to argue.

[glass_onion]

UFC, marine, boxer, martial art, streetfighter

[blackize]

Muhammad Ali against a pro wrestler in Japan

http://www.mutantfrog.com/2006/11/15...antonio-inoki/

Ali was completely ineffective at damaging the wrestler and the wrestler had him on the ground once and Ali was covering his head cowering like a girl. It only got stood up because of an elbow to the face. GG smasharoo.