Contrary to popular belief, the statement of 90% of fights ending up on the ground did not have an MMA fight in mind!

They were actually talkin' about street fighting. And the reason why 90% of street fighting end up on the ground is because the majority of people involved in street fights can't fight for sh*t and they end up frolicking on the ground and the only thing they could be proud of is they tore the other guy's clothes off to pieces, lol.

Now, whenever someone uses the statement of 90% of fights end up on the ground as an argument on this site, it is meant to put the standup fighter down, as if, they're 2nd class citizens compared to BJJ/wrestlers.

Not true, 50-50 in my opinion. A fighter with only a wrestling background or a bjj background would have a very difficult time getting that needed takedown against a highly-skilled striker, be it a kickboxer or boxer(even w/o any wrestling takedown defense)

Now, if a grappler were to get a good takedown, then the odds will overwhelmingly be on his side.

The one thing about wrestlers or BJJ fighters, is they hate being struck to the face, unless they've had alot of experience of getting hit on the face.

Care to discuss.

dude, the **** that has just come out of your mouth is unreal! the reason fights go to the ground in mma is because world level wrestlers and bjj fighters take it there. bjj and wrestling is a art just like boxing! and fighting on the ground is PART OF MMA!

I completely disagree with the notion that a skilled wrestler would generally have a hard time taking down a boxer not trained in takedown defense. Against a kickboxer though they would have a harder time.

dude, the **** that has just come out of your mouth is unreal! the reason fights go to the ground in mma is because world level wrestlers and bjj fighters take it there. bjj and wrestling is a art just like boxing! and fighting on the ground is PART OF MMA!Dude, George St. Pierre's striking alone discouraged Hughes from attempting take downs.

That's one example of a terrific striker vs a great wrestler.

How often does Anderson Silva win on his feet w/o having to resort to sprawling or any other type of grappling takedown defense against wrestlers?

Liddell, known for his great sprawl, but, he often didn't have a need for his sprawl, because he pretty much controlled every f**Kin' wrestler through his striking ability, he controlled those wrestlers with boxing footwork and striking at angles wrestlers don't have a f**kin' clue what to do about it!

Cung Le for the most part controlled Ken Shamrock with kicks and keeping that distance. HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH SPRAWLING!

I completely disagree with the notion that a skilled wrestler would generally have a hard time taking down a boxer not trained in takedown defense. Against a kickboxer though they would have a harder time.No bro, take a pure-wrestler, that's never had any boxing training, has no clue on how to bob n' weave, parry, block punches, throw punches, how to cut-off the ring never received punches to the face from a world-class boxer.

And another thing, a wrestler is used to fighting from wrestling distance, a boxing distance will be a whole new world for him.

I think a wrestler would have that much of a difficult time, it's not impossible, but it's definitely an uphill battle for that wrestler to take a highly-skilled/highly talented boxer down!!

A highly skilled pure boxer vs. a highly skilled pure wrestler. It's not 50-50, it's more like 60-40 favoring the boxer, y'all ask how so?

Right off the bat, the boxer has the advantage, because all fights start, standing up.

Lets take a look at Chuck Lidell's career. Many fans don't see it, but the UFC did a brilliant job of matchmaking when it came to Lidell, he was often matched-up with wrestlers who had piss-poor striking, guess what, Chuck came out on top, almost all the time!!

When Chuck was matched-up with good MMA strikers, guess what happened, he either struggled, got ko'd or lost!

No bro, take a pure-wrestler, that's never had any boxing training, has no clue on how to bob n' weave, parry, block punches, throw punches, how to cut-off the ring never received punches to the face from a world-class boxer.

And another thing, a wrestler is used to fighting from wrestling distance, a boxing distance will be a whole new world for him.

I think a wrestler would have that much of a difficult time, it's not impossible, but it's definitely an uphill battle for that wrestler to take a highly-skilled/highly talented boxer down!!

A highly skilled pure boxer vs. a highly skilled pure wrestler. It's not 50-50, it's more like 60-40 favoring the boxer, y'all ask how so?

Right off the bat, the boxer has the advantage, because all fights start, standing up.

Lets take a look at Chuck Lidell's career. Many fans don't see it, but the UFC did a brilliant of matchmaking when it came to Lidell, he was often matched-up with wrestlers who had piss-poor striking, guess what, Chuck came out on top, almost all the time!!

When Chuck was matched-up with good MMA strikers, guess what happened, he either struggled, got ko'd or lost!
I completely disagree. When the boxer commits to a punch, the wrestler changes levels and takes him down.

Wrestlers start standing, but boxers never fight from there backs. It is not necessary for a wrestler to be schooled in boxing to take a boxer down. There would be no defending the take down by the boxer.

To be honest, to me this almost seems like common knowledge. A wrestler wins 9/10 simply by getting a takedown.

I completely disagree. When the boxer commits to a punch, the wrestler changes levels and takes him down.

Wrestlers start standing, but boxers never fight from there backs. It is not necessary for a wrestler to be schooled in boxing to take a boxer down. There would be no defending the take down by the boxer.

To be honest, to me this almost seems like common knowledge. A wrestler wins 9/10 simply by getting a takedown.

Have you ever heard of the word, feint? How often have you seen Chuck, Anderson, etc throw feints and the wrestlers hands go all over the place, once the striker forces the wrestler to commit a mistake, you've seen what happens time and time again.


And if the wrestler eats a f**kin' punch, what happens?

You and I know, that a wrestler's threshold for pain when it comes to taking punches are low. His aggression will be subdued from the punches he would be receiving!

And if the wrestler misses on his takedown, what happens? Do you have any idea how swift a world-class boxer would take advantage of that mistake.

You're saying that a wrestler will counter a punch by lowering his level.

Well, a boxer will counter that takedown with angles and shootin' punches from those angles and the wrestler will be in la-la land if that happens.

It goes both ways bro.


Like I said, if a boxer finds its mark, chances are, it's nighty-night

if a wrestler gets a hold of a leg or two, it's over for the boxer

if a wrestler gets a hold of a leg or two, it's over for the boxer

not necessarily, theres no way that the boxer is going to submit the wrestler right but what if the boxer isnt trying to wrestle with him once he gets taken down. on strength, flexability, and stamina alone id say he has a pretty good chance of breaking contact and getting back on his feet multiple times through out a fight.

I disagree, although the whole "90% of fights end up on the ground because the morons don't know how to fight" deal is pretty spot on. A good wrestler would have no problem taking down a pure striker. GSP, Liddell, Le are all accomplished wrestlers, which is why their striking is that much more devastating, it forces their opponent to deal with their superior striking. Anderson may not have the wrestling that they do, but he has the BJJ to back it up. So people are gonna hesitate to take him down because of the fear of his grappling skills. It's not that their stirking is so awesome it keeps people from taking them down, it's that they're grappling is on the level where guys hesitate to do it because of the high risk.

Have you ever heard of the word, feint? How often have you seen Chuck, Anderson, etc throw feints and the wrestlers hands go all over the place, once the striker forces the wrestler to commit a mistake, you've seen what happens time and time again.


And if the wrestler eats a f**kin' punch, what happens?

You and I know, that a wrestler's threshold for pain when it comes to taking punches are low. His aggression will be subdued from the punches he would be receiving!

And if the wrestler misses on his takedown, what happens? Do you have any idea how swift a world-class boxer would take advantage of that mistake.

You're saying that a wrestler will counter a punch by lowering his level.

Well, a boxer will counter that takedown with angles and shootin' punches from those angles and the wrestler will be in la-la land if that happens.

It goes both ways bro.


Like I said, if a boxer finds its mark, chances are, it's nighty-night

if a wrestler gets a hold of a leg or two, it's over for the boxer
I honestly consider it foolish to suggest that it is even close to 50/50.

I get the feeling we're not going to agree though.

I disagree, although the whole "90% of fights end up on the ground because the morons don't know how to fight" deal is pretty spot on. A good wrestler would have no problem taking down a pure striker. GSP, Liddell, Le are all accomplished wrestlers, which is why their striking is that much more devastating, it forces their opponent to deal with their superior striking. Anderson may not have the wrestling that they do, but he has the BJJ to back it up. So people are gonna hesitate to take him down because of the fear of his grappling skills. It's not that their stirking is so awesome it keeps people from taking them down, it's that they're grappling is on the level where guys hesitate to do it because of the high risk.
People don't often realize that Chuck Liddell wrestled all the way through college.

100% of fights start while standing up.

Stop. End this thread (or your life). Just stop. This is beneath Boxing Scene. Stop.

E

People don't often realize that Chuck Liddell wrestled all the way through college.Your statement alone proves my f**kin' point. You've totally threw all your points favoring the wrestler out the window by your statement.

Ya wanna why people even forget that Chuck wrestled in college. Because Chuck hardly had to resort to his wrestling because his striking took care of business!!

You say that if a boxer throws a punch all a wrestler has to do is change levels and shoot. Guess what, that's about the only counter they would know.

But you're forgetting, we're talkin' about world-class boxers here, there not gonna be reckless with their attack, they're gonna feint, in n out, side to side, before they even commit.

The boxer will be looking out for that takedown, that's why they're gonna be moving and feinting. Wrestlers on the other hand, will be kept at bay from a distance they're not use to and to cover that distance, they'll have to worry about getting punched, something they freak out about!!

From my own experience, I always wanted the wrestler to commit to a takedown, 'cause once they miss, I've already picked a spot where I want to be and I start sharp shootin'!

I've been successful and there have been times where I did get taken down.

Your statement alone proves my f**kin' point. You've totally threw all your points favoring the wrestler out the window by your statement.

Ya wanna why people even forget that Chuck wrestled in college. Because Chuck hardly had to resort to his wrestling because his striking took care of business!!

You say that if a boxer throws a punch all a wrestler has to do is change levels and shoot. Guess what, that's about the only counter they would know.

But you're forgetting, we're talkin' about world-class boxers here, there not gonna be reckless with their attack, they're gonna feint, in n out, side to side, before they even commit.

The boxer will be looking out for that takedown, that's why they're gonna be moving and feinting. Wrestlers on the other hand, will be kept at bay from a distance they're not use to and to cover that distance, they'll have to worry about getting punched, something they freak out about!!

From my own experience, I always wanted the wrestler to commit to a takedown, 'cause once they miss, I've already picked a spot where I want to be and I start sharp shootin'!

I've been successful and there have been times where I did get taken down.

Chuck Liddell actually relies heavily on his wrestling to stave off takedown attempts.

And my statement in know way proves your point in regards to the debate about pure striker vs pure grappler, as Chuck Liddell is neither, which was essentially my point.

In essence, this was the very premise of the original UFCs, matching strikers against grapplers. This debate is as old as can be, and common sense has always favored a pure wrestler over a pure boxer, as far as I can tell.

The thread starter is assuming that every boxer has one punch KO power in their hands. Every striker even, kickboxer and Muay Thai fighter alike. They all have one punch knockout power, right? Think about it, what you're saying is not true. You're proving a point that is completely opposite than what you believe. You're saying that Wrestlers don't like to get hit. So what do wrestlers do when something happens to them in a fight that they don't feel comfortable with? They come in wrestle you. The boxer doesn't want to get taken down just as much as the wrestler doesn't want to get hit. He's not going to throw a haymaker right off the bat and commit his entire body weight.

Watch Brock Lesnar's fights, he is a wrestler. In almost every match he's fought against more experienced strikers/fighters than him. And in almost every fight, he gets clocked in the head once, doesn't like the feeling, so he takes his opponent down and pounds on his head.

In short, not every wrestlers is glass-jawed and not every striker can knock someone out cold with a jab.

Chuck Liddell actually relies heavily on his wrestling to stave off takedown attempts.

And my statement in know way proves your point in regards to the debate about pure striker vs pure grappler, as Chuck Liddell is neither, which was essentially my point.

In essence, this was the very premise of the original UFCs, matching strikers against grapplers. This debate is as old as can be, and common sense has always favored a pure wrestler over a pure boxer, as far as I can tell.What you saw in the earlier UFC's were pure ground guys who were at the top of their sport going up against Joe Boxer!!

How many times have you seen Liddell ko wrestlers before they even attempt any type of wrestling manuever, be it lowering their level or simply shooting in? They could not even lay a finger on him and Chuck isn't even a pure striker!

What Chuck had was good stand-up spacing between him and his opponent. Do you not think someone as lightning quick and boxers that had great vision such as Floyd or RJJ could pull something off like Chuck in many of his fights, it's really not that complicated, bro.

Put up Matt Hughes in his prime against the RJJ that fought James Toney, seriously, Jones will f**k that hick up.

Put f**kin Mike Brown or Urijah Faber against the Floyd Mayweather that was just lightning quick at 135lbs. What?

What you saw in the earlier UFC's were pure ground guys who were at the top of their sport going up against Joe Boxer!!

How many times have you seen Liddell ko wrestlers before they even attempt any type of wrestling manuever, be it lowering their level or simply shooting in? They could not even lay a finger on him and Chuck isn't even a pure striker!

What Chuck had was good stand-up spacing between him and his opponent. Do you not think someone as lightning quick and boxers that had great vision such as Floyd or RJJ could pull something off like Chuck in many of his fights, it's really not that complicated, bro.

Put up Matt Hughes in his prime against the RJJ that fought James Toney, seriously, Jones will f**k that hick up.

Put f**kin Mike Brown or Urijah Faber against the Floyd Mayweather that was just lightning quick at 135lbs. What?
MMA striking is not kickboxing. This is what you're not seeing.

How the **** do you think Dan Henderson is able to knock people's heads off? The reason is that he sets up his striking with his wrestling, by and large.

You are plainly underestimating the dynamism of MMA striking, and the dynamism of Chuck Liddel's style to boot (for all his technical deficiencies).

MMA striking is not kickboxing. This is what you're not seeing.

How the **** do you think Dan Henderson is able to knock people's heads off? The reason is that he sets up his striking with his wrestling, by and large.

You are plainly underestimating the dynamism of MMA striking, and the dynamism of Chuck Liddel's style to boot (for all his technical deficiencies).See, now you're getting away from the original topic. We're talkin' about a pure wrestler vs a pure boxer.

First, give me an example where Dan Henderson sets up his striking with his wrestling? If anything, the f**ker telegraphs alot of times. He gets away with it, because he faces guys who have no f**kin' clue when they're on their feet, see Bisping.

Chuck Liddell's utilizing good stand-up spacing and throwing lazy jabs and his vaunted overhand right is MMA striking? LOL



My mythical matchup was, if you put a pure wrestler(no boxing or kickboxing training whatsoever) versus a pure boxer(no wrestling or bjj training at all) with equal skill level in their respective sports.

MMA striking is not kickboxing. This is what you're not seeing.

How the **** do you think Dan Henderson is able to knock people's heads off? The reason is that he sets up his striking with his wrestling, by and large.

You are plainly underestimating the dynamism of MMA striking, and the dynamism of Chuck Liddel's style to boot (for all his technical deficiencies).You're right, MMA striking means telegraphing punches, looping punches, wild punches, really bad footwork, and don't even get me started on the kicking.

The only thing I have to say to a pure striker, whether it's a boxer or kickboxer, is they have to adjust their fighting stance once they fight in the cage.

MMA striking, you mean throw a jab, jab, fake a straight punch and lower your level and go in for the shoot, it's like the most over-done combo in the f**kin' UFC.

Or what about the Diaz's fave combo, jab high-low-high, then go for the takedown, yeah, MMA striking, it's really cutting edge, lol.

See, now you're getting away from the original topic. We're talkin' about a pure wrestler vs a pure boxer.

First, give me an example where Dan Henderson sets up his striking with his wrestling? If anything, the f**ker telegraphs alot of times. He gets away with it, because he faces guys who have no f**kin' clue when they're on their feet, see Bisping.

Chuck Liddell's utilizing good stand-up spacing and throwing lazy jabs and his vaunted overhand right is MMA striking? LOL



My mythical matchup was, if you put a pure wrestler(no boxing or kickboxing training whatsoever) versus a pure boxer(no wrestling or bjj training at all) with equal skill level in their respective sports.
In that case, I've got the wrestler at least 9/10 by getting a takedown and grounding it out, as I've explained before.

Really though, the Henderson reference was to highlight the dynamism of MMA striking in order to qualify my points about Chuck Liddell. I certainly concede that Henderson is a vet, who has indeed developed a descent stand up game. However, he still incorporates wrestling, including fake shots, to set up his strikes.

Another example is Randy Couture. In Tim Sylvia's post fight interview, he made a statement to the effect of "when I thought he was going to strike he would shoot, when I thought he was going to shoot he'd strike." This said a lot to me about Couture's incorporation of his wrestling into his striking game, and vis-versa. This is simply a tactical matter, of course.

In that case, I've got the wrestler at least 9/10 by getting a takedown and grounding it out, as I've explained before.

Really though, the Henderson reference was to highlight the dynamism of MMA striking in order to qualify my points about Chuck Liddell. I certainly concede that Henderson is a vet, who has indeed developed a descent stand up game. However, he still incorporates wrestling, including fake shots, to set up his strikes.

Another example is Randy Couture. In his post fight interview, Sylvia made a statement to the effect of "when I thought he was going to strike he would shoot, when I thought he was going to shoot he'd strike." This said a lot to me about Couture's incorporation of his wrestling into his striking game, and vis-versa. This is simply a tactical matter, of course.Okay, so tell me how a pure wrestler is gonna try to cut that distance off, w/o even having a decent jab, no bobbin' n weavin', not knowing how to set-up his punches, and not being able to kick?

Remember, take Dan Henderson off. I'm talkin' an All-world wrestler from a prestigous wrestling program like Iowa State going up against a sharp shooter, Roy Jones jr type of fighter?

How about Roy JOnes jr vs Cael Anderson, what now?

You're right, MMA striking means telegraphing punches, looping punches, wild punches, really bad footwork, and don't even get me started on the kicking.

The only thing I have to say to a pure striker, whether it's a boxer or kickboxer, is they have to adjust their fighting stance once they fight in the cage.

MMA striking, you mean throw a jab, jab, fake a straight punch and lower your level and go in for the shoot, it's like the most over-done combo in the f**kin' UFC.

Or what about the Diaz's fave combo, jab high-low-high, then go for the takedown, yeah, MMA striking, it's really cutting edge, lol.

This post essentially just displays you as a biased poster.

Sure there are a number of sloppy strikers, i.e. Chris Leben, etc. But to say "MMA striking" is sloppy basically exposes you as someone who is unknowledgable and/or adversely biased about the sport.

Is Crocop sloppy?

How about Fedor? You may say yes about Fedor; however you would be discounting the reality that Fedor often throws slightly wide punches with the stated intention of getting around his opponent's guards. Keep in mind that MMA fighters do not wear big gloves with which to block punches. The fact is, Fedor is a great example of a uniquely MMA-oriented striker (and his mother styles are grappling ones, lets remember).

MMA is not boxing, and a fighter standing in MMA has no barring what so ever on boxing compared to MMA.

Okay, so tell me how a pure wrestler is gonna try to cut that distance off, w/o even having a decent jab, no bobbin' n weavin', not knowing how to set-up his punches, and not being able to kick?

Remember, take Dan Henderson off. I'm talkin' an All-world wrestler from a prestigous wrestling program like Iowa State going up against a sharp shooter, Roy Jones jr type of fighter?

How about Roy JOnes jr vs Cael Anderson, what now?

It's quite simple, a pure wrestler is not going to attempt to strike, whatsoever.

From the sounds of your posts, you would be very surprised at how quickly an elite wrestler would close distance, swoop the boxer up and slam him to the ground.

It's quite simple, a pure wrestler is not going to attempt to strike, whatsoever.

From the sounds of your posts, you would be very surprised at how quickly an elite wrestler would close distance, and promptly swoop up the boxer and slam him to the ground. I've watched olympic/college wrestling at its highest level. I see how some of those guys are so explosive when they shoot. But again, they did not have to fight from a boxer's distance, wrestling matches are usually in your face right away, they don't have to take a punch.

But, you still have not explained how that wrestler is gonna work his way in, against someone who is giving him angles that he has never seen before, a distance that he's not accustomed to.

- In order for the wrestler to get a good shoot, he's gonna need that proper distance, how is he gonna do that?


You've seen in it in the UFC. Wrestlers who have sh*t striking, get taken apart by the top strikers in the game(takedown defense not necessary).

I've watched olympic/college wrestling at its highest level. I see how some of those guys are so explosive when they shoot. But again, they did not have to fight from a boxer's distance, wrestling matches are usually in your face right away, they don't have to take a punch.

But, you still have not explained how that wrestler is gonna work his way in, against someone who is giving him angles that he has never seen before, a distance that he's not accustomed to.

- In order for the wrestler to get a good shoot, he's gonna need that proper distance, how is he gonna do that?


You've seen in it in the UFC. Wrestlers who have sh*t striking, get taken apart by the top strikers in the game(takedown defense not necessary).
The wrestler may simply run the boxer over, or he may keep distance and then swiftly shoot inand take the boxer's legs once he come towards him. Alternatively, he may create a clinch and execute a takedown or throw from there.

That's just a few examples, really.

The wrestler may simply run the boxer over, or he may keep distance and then swiftly shoot inand take the boxer's legs once he come towards him. Alternatively, he may create a clinch and execute a takedown or throw from there.

That's just a few examples, really.

Co-sign, happened to me when I was in the army. We had a close combat lesson and I was against a former Greco-Roman wrestler. We weren't allowed to strike but that didn't matter. Our distance was about 4 feet and I was totally surprised how quick he closed the gap, took my back and flipped me over my neck. I seriously had no time to react, let alone punch, just thought 'and the flight begins...'. That happened two times and during the second one my neck made some crunchy noise. Everything was fine and he asked if he did it too hard. I said 'no buddy, that's how it's supposed to do', and couldn't stop laughing about how easily I got owned. I had no wrestling experience, only some drunken sessions at the backyards.

the topic has been answered since the vale tudo and NHB days wherein most likely the fight will go down to ground no matter what

i think 90% is a gross over estamate.

We Want Floyd, you are basing all of your arguments with the assumption that a wrestler would be unable to eat a few punches to close the gap. This is what would likely happen in a real life situation, and as soon as it did, I would give even a highly skilled boxer little chance to adapt.


As far as the thread title.

I think that 90% of all fights go to the ground because it is on the ground that you can establish more of a dominant position, as far as controlling your opponent and ending a fight. Sure, you could knock a guy out standing up, but there is less of a chance of you yourself getting knocked down or out, if you are on the ground.

All the early UFC's were basically pure strikers vs. 1-2 pure grapplers...and we all know what happened there

We Want Floyd, you are basing all of your arguments with the assumption that a wrestler would be unable to eat a few punches to close the gap. This is what would likely happen in a real life situation, and as soon as it did, I would give even a highly skilled boxer little chance to adapt.


As far as the thread title.

I think that 90% of all fights go to the ground because it is on the ground that you can establish more of a dominant position, as far as controlling your opponent and ending a fight. Sure, you could knock a guy out standing up, but there is less of a chance of you yourself getting knocked down or out, if you are on the ground.And you're basing all of your arguments with the assumption that a boxer would be unable to avoid a takedown attempt by a wrestler!!

Sprawling is not the only take down defense out there, ya know! By simply moving away, that's one way of avoiding a takedown.

I mean, how many times have y'all seen Liddell take a guy out before the wrestler is even able to make a move?? That has nothin' to do with "MMA Striking"

Liddell sees timing from a puncher's pov and a wrestler's sees timing from a grappler's pov. It's two different worlds, yet both revolve around the same thing, distance & timing

Marquardt - Maia is a great example of what I've trying to get through your thick skulls.

We all know that Maia had 0 chance of beating Nate standing up. The fact that Maia's striking IQ is severely lackin' be it Muay Thai or boxing. Is what cost him the f**kin' fight.

It could very well have been a punch that Maia threw instead of a roundhouse kick, chances are Marquardt who is not a pure striker but has better skills and experience in the stand-up game, would've had an answer for any type of striking Maia would've attempted!!

It just goes to show y'all, that wrestling techniques of working their way in is not sufficient enough to takedown a boxer, it may work some of the time, but most of time against a highly-skilled boxer, I don't think so.

The biggest problem that wrestlers/bjj only fighters in the UFC is not only does their striking techniques suck, but their striking IQ is very low. That's why in alot UFC matches ie A. Silva, BJ Penn, Liddell, GSP can win matches on striking alone w/o having to resort to ground tactics.

Sometimes, when I get done flossing my teeth, I wad up the floss and eat it.

And you're basing all of your arguments with the assumption that a boxer would be unable to avoid a takedown attempt by a wrestler!!

Sprawling is not the only take down defense out there, ya know! By simply moving away, that's one way of avoiding a takedown.

I mean, how many times have y'all seen Liddell take a guy out before the wrestler is even able to make a move?? That has nothin' to do with "MMA Striking"

Liddell sees timing from a puncher's pov and a wrestler's sees timing from a grappler's pov. It's two different worlds, yet both revolve around the same thing, distance & timing

This is actually the same oversight you keep making. Yes, a boxer would be unable to avoid a takedown. Nothing which a boxer does would prepare them to stop a takedown. As soon as they were within the wrestler's grasp, they would invariably be going for a fall.

And Liddell is a horrible example, as I've illustrated above. Liddell is NOT a strict striker. He wrestled through college. He is a mixed martial artist.

To reiterate, YES A BOXER WOULD BE UNABLE STOP A WRESTLER'S TAKEDOWN.

Marquardt - Maia is a great example of what I've trying to get through your thick skulls.

We all know that Maia had 0 chance of beating Nate standing up. The fact that Maia's striking IQ is severely lackin' be it Muay Thai or boxing. Is what cost him the f**kin' fight.

It could very well have been a punch that Maia threw instead of a roundhouse kick, chances are Marquardt who is not a pure striker but has better skills and experience in the stand-up game, would've had an answer for any type of striking Maia would've attempted!!

It just goes to show y'all, that wrestling techniques of working their way in is not sufficient enough to takedown a boxer, it may work some of the time, but most of time against a highly-skilled boxer, I don't think so.

The biggest problem that wrestlers/bjj only fighters in the UFC is not only does their striking techniques suck, but their striking IQ is very low. That's why in alot UFC matches ie A. Silva, BJ Penn, Liddell, GSP can win matches on striking alone w/o having to resort to ground tactics.
Your repeated use of MMA examples in the attempt to illustrate your point is fooling nobody except yourself.

This is actually the same oversight you keep making. Yes, a boxer would be unable to avoid a takedown. Nothing which a boxer does would prepare them to stop a takedown. As soon as they were within the wrestler's grasp, they would invariably be going for a fall.

And Liddell is a horrible example, as I've illustrated above. Liddell is NOT a strict striker. He wrestled through college. He is a mixed martial artist.

To reiterate, YES A BOXER WOULD BE UNABLE STOP A WRESTLER'S TAKEDOWN.Hahaha, that's absolute bullsh*t. A simple "move out of the f**kin' way" of the oncoming wrestler might do the job, don't ya think.

imagine if I said, there's no way a wrestler can avoid getting punched(you'd be laughing if I said that, right), now, he may not evade a punch from a traditional boxing sense ie slippin'/bobbin'/parrying. But, as you pointed out, lowering his level.

same thing with a f**kin' boxer, he may not know how to sprawl, but, clearly, a world-class boxer's reflexes would be more than capable of getting out of range from a wrestler's grasp.

Especially the way a wrestler is squared up, ooh, can you see it now. There are also certain movements that a wrestler does that's just asking for a k.o and vice-versa for a boxer too, that I see a wrestler can take advantage.

Your repeated use of MMA examples in the attempt to illustrate your point is fooling nobody except yourself.How so, what's wrong with those examples?

Those examples worked, because your f**kin' almighty wrestlers/bjj did not have a f**kin clue what they were doin' that's why they got caught up in that mess.

Again, tell me how those examples are crap?

How so, what's wrong with those examples?

Those examples worked, because your f**kin' almighty wrestlers/bjj did not have a f**kin clue what they were doin' that's why they got caught up in that mess.

Again, tell me how those examples are crap?
Well, for one thing most of Marquardt's victories are via submission. Using him as an example of a striker is ridiculous.

The main thing though which you don't understand is this is MMA. A guy striking in MMA says nothing about kickboxing or boxing.

Nothing which a boxer does would prepare them to stop a takedown. As soon as they were within the wrestler's grasp, they would invariably be going for a fall.

this really depends on the boxer i think some one like wlad that does everything he possiably can to avoid actually having to fight with the other person would be able to avoid a boxers attempt at take down wlad would never even enter the wrestlers grasp.

more so to the point, have you ever herd of side stepping?

Well, for one thing most of Marquardt's victories are via submission. Using him as an example of a striker is ridiculous.

The main thing though which you don't understand is this is MMA. A guy striking in MMA says nothing about kickboxing or boxing.You're losing it. If that's the f**kin' case, then why the f**k do alot of these MMA cats go half-way across the world to receive Muay Thai training. Why do these MMA cats seek out the tutelage of someone of Freddie Roach's stature.

There's no such thing as MMA striking, MMA striking means Muay Thai and boxing incorporated into MMA. The difference is in the rules, dirty boxing in MMA is legal, a stand-up fighter will have to change his stance when he gets into that cage.

We're not talking about Nate's past fights, I could careless how Nate won before. The fact is in that f**kin' vid against Maia.

That's a great example of a pure BJJ w/ no f**kin' clue how to work his way in, gets f**ked up by not even a great striker, just an experienced one!!

this really depends on the boxer i think some one like wlad that does everything he possiably can to avoid actually having to fight with the other person would be able to avoid a boxers attempt at take down wlad would never even enter the wrestlers grasp.

more so to the point, have you ever herd of side stepping?
Saying that a boxer with no wrestling training could stop a wrestler's takedown is about like saying a wrestler with no boxing training could knock out a boxer.

You're losing it. If that's the f**kin' case, then why the f**k do alot of these MMA cats go half-way across the world to receive Muay Thai training. Why do these MMA cats seek out the tutelage of someone of Freddie Roach's stature.

There's no such thing as MMA striking, MMA striking means Muay Thai and boxing incorporated into MMA. The difference is in the rules, dirty boxing in MMA is legal, a stand-up fighter will have to change his stance when he gets into that cage.

We're not talking about Nate's past fights, I could careless how Nate won before. The fact is in that f**kin' vid against Maia.

That's a great example of a pure BJJ w/ no f**kin' clue how to work his way in, gets f**ked up by not even a great striker, just an experienced one!!
I've already talked about how MMA fighters use grappling to set up strikes, as well as strikes to set up grappling.

If you want to make a case for Cheik Kongo as an example of a kickboxer in MMA then fine, but he is more of an anomaly now a days, and even saying that would be a stretch.

easy guys... it all depends on how well trained is the striker/boxer in takedown defences. If a PURE boxer with ZERO experience and ZERO training in defencing takedowns, 95% if the time he WILL get taken down. We all seen GSP taking down TRAINED fighters easily.

easy guys... it all depends on how well trained is the striker/boxer in takedown defences. If a PURE boxer with ZERO experience and ZERO training in defencing takedowns, 95% if the time he WILL get taken down. We all seen GSP taking down TRAINED fighters easily.

That's what we're talking about.

Saying that a boxer with no wrestling training could stop a wrestler's takedown is about like saying a wrestler with no boxing training could knock out a boxer.

Im not saying that a boxer could stop a take down once the wrestler has a leg the guys going down.

Im saying that a boxer could avoid this whole situation more then once with side steps. assuming hes a good boxer he could avoid this situation all night long with side steps, back pedaling, and well placed/timed shots while back pedaling and side stepping.

If a PURE boxer with ZERO experience and ZERO training in defencing takedowns, 95% if the time he WILL get taken down. We all seen GSP taking down TRAINED fighters easily.

so how many boxers has gsp fought? or are you just talking about people that try to stand with him because there not as good on the ground but in reality there not boxers at all there wrestlers just like gsp but they know they have a better chance of ko then submission so we call them trained fighters.

Im not saying that a boxer could stop a take down once the wrestler has a leg the guys going down.

Im saying that a boxer could avoid this whole situation more then once with side steps. assuming hes a good boxer he could avoid this situation all night long with side steps, back pedaling, and well placed/timed shots while back pedaling and side stepping.
I personally think you're underestimating the wrestler.

You're losing it. If that's the f**kin' case, then why the f**k do alot of these MMA cats go half-way across the world to receive Muay Thai training. Why do these MMA cats seek out the tutelage of someone of Freddie Roach's stature.

There's no such thing as MMA striking, MMA striking means Muay Thai and boxing incorporated into MMA. The difference is in the rules, dirty boxing in MMA is legal, a stand-up fighter will have to change his stance when he gets into that cage.

We're not talking about Nate's past fights, I could careless how Nate won before. The fact is in that f**kin' vid against Maia.

That's a great example of a pure BJJ w/ no f**kin' clue how to work his way in, gets f**ked up by not even a great striker, just an experienced one!!

Why do strikers go half way around the world to find out how to grapple? looooool

I personally think you're underestimating the wrestler.I personally think you're underestimating the boxer.

Since you're the one that thinks that a pure wrestler will get that takedown 9/10 against a pure boxer.

Why do strikers go half way around the world to find out how to grapple? loooooolHey, go tell that to Organik.

I am the one that thinks it's 50/50 whether the wrestler gets that needed takedown and whether the boxer will able to succeed with his striking.

See man, all our arguing just goes to show that Boxers or Muay Thai guys, simply cannot just rely on their striking skills alone if they wanna fight in the cage.


And, BJJ/Wrestlers cannot solely rely on their grappling ability alone if they wanna fight in the cage and be successful.

I personally think you're underestimating the boxer.

Since you're the one that thinks that a pure wrestler will get that takedown 9/10 against a pure boxer.

You must've missed this about 6 posts ago:

easy guys... it all depends on how well trained is the striker/boxer in takedown defences. If a PURE boxer with ZERO experience and ZERO training in defencing takedowns, 95% if the time he WILL get taken down. We all seen GSP taking down TRAINED fighters easily.

Btw, I'm a fan of boxing and have competed at the amateur level in both sports (though much more extensively in wrestling, I had one sanctioned bout in boxing). I'm really just calling it how I see it.

Hey, go tell that to Organik.

I am the one that thinks it's 50/50 whether the wrestler gets that needed takedown and whether the boxer will able to succeed with his striking.

See man, all our arguing just goes to show that Boxers or Muay Thai guys, simply cannot just rely on their striking skills alone if they wanna fight in the cage.


And, BJJ/Wrestlers cannot solely rely on their grappling ability alone if they wanna fight in the cage and be successful.

I've essentially been tiptoeing around this point the entire time.

I've essentially been tiptoeing around this point the entire time.No, you haven't. Your bottom line was a pure wrestler will get his takedown 9/10 against a pure boxer!!

Well sh*t, with that success rate, why would the wrestler need to develop a strike game. LOL.

So, basically you're implying,there would be no need for that pure wrestler to do anything else, because he's successful 99% of the time with his wrestling alone.


But, on the other hand, a boxer would fail 9/10. So, basically what that says, is he'll need to work on other aspects besides boxing.

I stand on 50/50, hence, to be succesful in MMA, you need to be a Silva, a Machida, a St. Pierre, and the overrated Liddell

I personally think you're underestimating the wrestler.

Could be. i think ill also go with 50/50 that a wrestler has just as good of a chance of taking some one down as a boxer has of avoiding it. as well as the wrestler has just as much of a chance of submitting a boxer as the boxer has of breaking contact and getting back on his feet.

the out come is only a matter of who trains harder in my opinion.

No, you haven't. Your bottom line was a pure wrestler will get his takedown 9/10 against a pure boxer!!

Well sh*t, with that success rate, why would the wrestler need to develop a strike game. LOL.

So, basically you're implying,there would be no need for that pure wrestler to do anything else, because he's successful 99% of the time with his wrestling alone.


But, on the other hand, a boxer would fail 9/10. So, basically what that says, is he'll need to work on other aspects besides boxing.

I stand on 50/50, hence, to be succesful in MMA, you need to be a Silva, a Machida, a St. Pierre, and the overrated Liddell

There are 2 separate points here.

The first is the hypothetical case of a pure boxer vs a pure wrestler.

The second is the case of an MMA fighter, who relies on both striking and grappling.

I have repeatedly drawn this distinction, whereas you have repeatedly failed to do so.

There are 2 separate points here.

The first is the hypothetical case of a pure boxer vs a pure wrestler.

The second is the case of an MMA fighter, who relies on both striking and grappling.

I have repeatedly drawn this distinction, whereas you have repeatedly failed to do so.I have, but you brought Kongo's name into the f**kin' discussion.

Anyway, the point I was trying to make by bringing up the Machida's and GSP's, is that, these guys have basically proven, that if you're heavily reliant on one area of fighting, then you're basically at a big disadvantage.

But, obviously, you don't think so, because your beloved wrestlers would get the takedown 9 times out 10, so who the hell needs Muay Thai and boxing, when you can get the take down 99% of the time, haha

I have, but you brought Kongo's name into the f**kin' discussion.

Anyway, the point I was trying to make by bringing up the Machida's and GSP's, is that, these guys have basically proven, that if you're heavily reliant on one area of fighting, then you're basically at a big disadvantage.

But, obviously, you don't think so, because your beloved wrestlers would get the takedown 9 times out 10, so who the hell needs Muay Thai and boxing, when you can get the take down 99% of the time, haha

You obviously have misread my posts. That, or you've had no idea what I've been talking about.

Also, did you miss where I said that I've boxed in the amateurs?

I have, but you brought Kongo's name into the f**kin' discussion.

Anyway, the point I was trying to make by bringing up the Machida's and GSP's, is that, these guys have basically proven, that if you're heavily reliant on one area of fighting, then you're basically at a big disadvantage.

But, obviously, you don't think so, because your beloved wrestlers would get the takedown 9 times out 10, so who the hell needs Muay Thai and boxing, when you can get the take down 99% of the time, haha

you keep completely missing the point and it's getting really irritating.

what organik is saying is that a PURE wrestler (no longer exists in high level mma) gets the takedown 9 times out of 10 vs a PURE striker (also doen't exist in high level mma).

but in mma you need both skills to make it, otherwise you will come undone against somone who does have both skills.

but this is such a basic point. everyone in the mma community knows that modern mma requires well rounded skills. and every successful fighter trains with this in mind. this thread is pointless and annoying.

I have, but you brought Kongo's name into the f**kin' discussion.

Anyway, the point I was trying to make by bringing up the Machida's and GSP's, is that, these guys have basically proven, that if you're heavily reliant on one area of fighting, then you're basically at a big disadvantage.

But, obviously, you don't think so, because your beloved wrestlers would get the takedown 9 times out 10, so who the hell needs Muay Thai and boxing, when you can get the take down 99% of the time, haha

thats is if your opponent is not trained in MMA

you keep completely missing the point and it's getting really irritating.

what organik is saying is that a PURE wrestler (no longer exists in high level mma) gets the takedown 9 times out of 10 vs a PURE striker (also doen't exist in high level mma).

but in mma you need both skills to make it, otherwise you will come undone against somone who does have both skills.

but this is such a basic point. everyone in the mma community knows that modern mma requires well rounded skills. and every successful fighter trains with this in mind. this thread is pointless and annoying.
Very well said.

you keep completely missing the point and it's getting really irritating.

what organik is saying is that a PURE wrestler (no longer exists in high level mma) gets the takedown 9 times out of 10 vs a PURE striker (also doen't exist in high level mma).



this is completely incorrect. multiple times have i made money off this bet while in arguments about this same thing.

i bet that i can break contact and get back on my feet 9 times out of 10....i offer to start on the ground/on knees so that they dont have to worry about the take down.....50% of the time they call me a pu**y and say why not start on their feet what am i afraid of their take downs....9 times out of 10 they fail at even taking me down..... and i make 20$.

perhaps more boxers should take tai chi for the enhanced rooting and balance...

as far as starting on the ground and trying to get away from the person well thats a diffrent story and a matter of flexibility strength and endrance not wrestling experience...a matter of who trains harder

(these are pure wrestlers people i know that wrestled in middle/high school that i run into at bars and at partys)

this is completely incorrect. multiple times have i made money off this bet while in arguments about this same thing.

i bet that i can break contact and get back on my feet 9 times out of 10....i offer to start on the ground/on knees so that they dont have to worry about the take down.....50% of the time they call me a pu**y and say why not start on their feet what am i afraid of their take downs....9 times out of 10 they fail at even taking me down..... and i make 20$.

perhaps more boxers should take tai chi for the enhanced rooting and balance...

as far as starting on the ground and trying to get away from the person well thats a diffrent story and a matter of flexibility strength and endrance not wrestling experience...a matter of who trains harder

(these are pure wrestlers people i know that wrestled in middle/high school that i run into at bars and at partys)
We're talking about elite athletes, not gym scenarios or backyard bouts. Big difference.

im sorry my bad....i was just talking about a pure striker vs a pure wrestler....in a situation where some one who spent 6+ years of their life training to wrestle and take people down is failing to take me down whos spent less then a year on striking and isn't even doing that.....im just avoiding the person.

i guess that would be different if we had a ref and i was more elite?

im sorry my bad....i was just talking about a pure striker vs a pure wrestler....in a situation where some one who spent 6+ years of their life training to wrestle and take people down is failing to take me down whos spent less then a year on striking and isn't even doing that.....im just avoiding the person.

i guess that would be different if we had a ref and i was more elite?

maybe you are just a naturally talented wrestler. the first time i went to train in wrestling i found that through natural athletism, strength training and just using my brain and instincts, i was on a similar level to some guys who had been training for a couple of years. but i stood no chance against higher level guys.

i'm not saying that a pure wrestler takes down a pure grappler 10 times out of 10. i'm saying 9/10 (not as a precise figure of course but just to illustrate the point). with that 1/10 to make allowances for scenarios such as the stiker just being far more naturally gifted than the wrestler. although i think if someone had the wrestling credentials to get them into a top mma organisation, they shouldn't have difficulty taking down a guy who has never trained his takedown defense. especially if it was in a cage.

im sorry my bad....i was just talking about a pure striker vs a pure wrestler....in a situation where some one who spent 6+ years of their life training to wrestle and take people down is failing to take me down whos spent less then a year on striking and isn't even doing that.....im just avoiding the person.

i guess that would be different if we had a ref and i was more elite?

wow.......:theyareon

you keep completely missing the point and it's getting really irritating.

what organik is saying is that a PURE wrestler (no longer exists in high level mma) gets the takedown 9 times out of 10 vs a PURE striker (also doen't exist in high level mma).

but in mma you need both skills to make it, otherwise you will come undone against somone who does have both skills.

but this is such a basic point. everyone in the mma community knows that modern mma requires well rounded skills. and every successful fighter trains with this in mind. this thread is pointless and annoying.Are you and Organik dumb and dumber or a y'all just on crack thinking y'all are great at spinnin' things.

I'm the one that started this thread. There was no discussion about MMA until he started bringin' up fighters names to prove his point.

The reason I used the Maia(who is a pure bjj, I don't care who he trained with for his stand-up, obviously it's non-existent) vs Marquardt(an experienced striker) fight to prove my point that a grappler simply cannot solely rely on his grappling skills against a striker.

Maia, although failed miserably in his attempt at trying to strike Marquardt. Proves my point that a pure grappler like Damian had enough awareness that his bjj alone would not get the job done against a striker.

So, how can Organik say that a pure grappler can get the takedown 9/10 w/o having any striking ability against a pure striker, the Maia vs Marquardt fight disproves his point, now it's only one example. But it's safe to say that grapplers do not have a 99% winning percentage over strikers.

9 times out of 10, are you f**kin' kiddin' me. Organik claims to have wrestled and boxed, are you sure, man. C'mon, quit f**kin' lyin'.

Are you and Organik dumb and dumber or a y'all just on crack thinking y'all are great at spinnin' things.

I'm the one that started this thread. There was no discussion about MMA until he started bringin' up fighters names to prove his point.

They aren't dumb, imo both of them have made good statements as far as I've been on this forum.

If you didn't even mention MMA, why did you start this thread in MMA section instead of the Lounge? There would be much more discussion from a streetfighting point of view.


Maia, although failed miserably in his attempt at trying to strike Marquardt. Proves my point that a pure grappler like Damian had enough awareness that his bjj alone would not get the job done against a striker.

So, how can Organik say that a pure grappler can get the takedown 9/10 w/o having any striking ability against a pure striker, the Maia vs Marquardt fight disproves his point, now it's only one example. But it's safe to say that grapplers do not have a 99% winning percentage over strikers.


Quote from natemarquardt.com:
-
Background

Marquardt began his training in the martial arts as a teenager, studying the disciplines of Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu, kickboxing, Wing Chun, and Kenpo under instructor Alistair McNiven. Additionally, he took lessons in wrestling, and eventually began training under Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu instructor Ricardo Murgel at age 18.
-

Marquardt is far from a pure striker, in fact he's a BJJ blackbelt under Ricardo Murgel. Maia did not have such a big advantage in this sector, Nate was very capable of backing himself up on the ground.

im a striker a boxer for many years, not a mma guy but worked in john lewis's gym in vegas. back when he had chuck liddel and when he was on top of the mma world in the u.s. so needless to say quite a few world class grapplers have trained in the same gym i worked, now mind you i always cool with everybody but im a warrior and have put much blood sweat and tears in my art, so i always had my swagger and my pride when those mma guys would find out i was the striking coach and some mma fighters would think i was limited and that if they would shoot on me they could submit me or ground and pound me. and even before i started rolling and working on my sprawl i chalenged and had been chalenged by more then a few world class grapplers to see if they could shoot and take me down. none could do it because of my style of fighting, i was blessed with fast hands and fast feet. but also when i did that i knew i had to improve my take down defence so i started to roll. so it really depends on the fighter because a few other boxers couldnt avoid being taken down most of the time. no one could take down skipper kelp either

im a striker a boxer for many years, not a mma guy but worked in john lewis's gym in vegas. back when he had chuck liddel and when he was on top of the mma world in the u.s. so needless to say quite a few world class grapplers have trained in the same gym i worked, now mind you i always cool with everybody but im a warrior and have put much blood sweat and tears in my art, so i always had my swagger and my pride when those mma guys would find out i was the striking coach and some mma fighters would think i was limited and that if they would shoot on me they could submit me or ground and pound me. and even before i started rolling and working on my sprawl i chalenged and had been chalenged by more then a few world class grapplers to see if they could shoot and take me down. none could do it because of my style of fighting, i was blessed with fast hands and fast feet. but also when i did that i knew i had to improve my take down defence so i started to roll. so it really depends on the fighter because a few other boxers couldnt avoid being taken down most of the time. no one could take down skipper kelp eitherthank you..............................

im a striker a boxer for many years, not a mma guy but worked in john lewis's gym in vegas. back when he had chuck liddel and when he was on top of the mma world in the u.s. so needless to say quite a few world class grapplers have trained in the same gym i worked, now mind you i always cool with everybody but im a warrior and have put much blood sweat and tears in my art, so i always had my swagger and my pride when those mma guys would find out i was the striking coach and some mma fighters would think i was limited and that if they would shoot on me they could submit me or ground and pound me. and even before i started rolling and working on my sprawl i chalenged and had been chalenged by more then a few world class grapplers to see if they could shoot and take me down. none could do it because of my style of fighting, i was blessed with fast hands and fast feet. but also when i did that i knew i had to improve my take down defence so i started to roll. so it really depends on the fighter because a few other boxers couldnt avoid being taken down most of the time. no one could take down skipper kelp either

Great post, as usual.

I think what you said which I can relate to the most is that it depends on the fighter. Hence, this is indeed a somewhat of an off-debate.

You did open my mind to some new perspectives though. As I've said, I have competed in amateur boxing, however I would never actually call myself a boxer. I sort of did it for training, and also because I was sort of obsessed with boxing at the time. I've competed at a much higher level in wrestling and judo, so perhaps I am a bit biased.

Of course, boxing is still the **** and I still try to keep sharp. Just don't go to the gym anymore.

Great post, as usual.

I think what you said which I can relate to the most is that it depends on the fighter. Hence, this is indeed a somewhat of an off-debate.

You did open my mind to some new perspectives though. As I've said, I have competed in amateur boxing, however I would never actually call myself a boxer. I sort of did it for training, and also because I was sort of obsessed with boxing at the time. I've competed at a much higher level in wrestling and judo, so perhaps I am a bit biased.Finally, we got it out of you, haha.

Nah man. This where you come off contradictory, how can you say that 9/10 a wrestler gets the take down, yet agree with DChampishere?

Since it all depends on the fighters involve, I guess you just decided that 9 of those wrestlers were "the right wrestler" to do the job, lol

Great post, as usual.

I think what you said which I can relate to the most is that it depends on the fighter. Hence, this is indeed a somewhat of an off-debate.

You did open my mind to some new perspectives though. As I've said, I have competed in amateur boxing, however I would never actually call myself a boxer. I sort of did it for training, and also because I was sort of obsessed with boxing at the time. I've competed at a much higher level in wrestling and judo, so perhaps I am a bit biased.
thank you my friend, your always a gentleman like a true warrior should be

Finally, we got it out of you, haha.

Nah man. This where you come off contradictory, how can you say that 9/10 a wrestler gets the take down, yet agree with DChampishere?

Since it all depends on the fighters involve, I guess you just decided that 9 of those wrestlers were "the right wrestler" to do the job, lol

I'm just trying to have a discussion here, bro. So now I am not allowed to modify my views in light of information? It's called intellectualism.

Anyways, you misread my post again, as usual. I said that I could relate to the statement that it depends on the fighter, which is why this is an off-debate. In other words, this is a somewhat pointless topic and thread. Go ahead and mince my words some more though, as I'm sure you will continue to do.

And I respect DChampishere's views a great deal. He always has very good first-hand knowledge to contribute.

I'm just trying to have a discussion here, bro. So now I am not allowed to modify my views in light of information? It's called intellectualism.

Anyways, you misread my post again, as usual. I said that I could relate to the statement that it depends on the fighter, which is why this is an off-debate. In other words, this is a pointless topic and a pointless thread. Go ahead and mince my words some more though, as I'm sure you will continue to do.

And I respect DChampishere's views a great deal. He always has very good first-hand knowledge to contribute.Modify your views? What DC had said is what I've been trying to get through to your thick skull.

Again, who was it that said that 9/10 a wrestler was gonna get the takedown? Hmm, who was it? In case you forgot "Mr. I'm an Intellect", it was you.

Now, since DC had shared his experiences with goin' up against some top MMA pros in sparring sessions, where it was basically a boxer vs grappler, he basically told you, it ain't that easy.

Prior to DC postin' on this topic, you were all up in arms about the idea of itbeing a 50/50. I've laid out numerous examples as to why it ain't that easy, it's not intellectuallism, it's called your thick-headed skull full of f**kin' ego.

But I'm glad that, with your god-given intellect, it finally sunked in, hehe.

Modify your views? What DC had said is what I've been trying to get through to your thick skull.

Again, who was it that said that 9/10 a wrestler was gonna get the takedown? Hmm, who was it? In case you forgot "Mr. I'm an Intellect", it was you.

Now, since DC had shared his experiences with goin' up against some top MMA pros in sparring sessions, where it was basically a boxer vs grappler, he basically told you, it ain't that easy.

Prior to DC postin' on this topic, you were all up in arms about the idea of itbeing a 50/50. I've laid out numerous examples as to why it ain't that easy, it's not intellectuallism, it's called your thick-headed skull full of f**kin' ego.

But I'm glad that, with your god-given intellect, it finally sunked in, hehe.
I'm going to Tokyo for graduate school on a full scholarship at the end of this month. What have you done lately?

How about we just leave the personal **** out, especially being that you do not have the slightest clue who it is you are talking to.

DC is an actual boxer who trains MMA fighters. Of course his opinions will hold weight.

Basically it's a stupid topic, and you have yourself displayed considerable bias along the way.

I'm going to Tokyo for graduate school on a full scholarship at the end of this month. What have you done lately?

How about we just leave the personal **** out, especially being that you do not have the slightest clue who it is you are talking to.

DC is an actual boxer who trains MMA fighters. Of course his opinions will hold weight.

Basically it's a stupid topic, and you have yourself displayed considerable bias along the way.You know what, the "fighting part of your intellect" is sorely lacking in logic. I mean, 9 times out of 10! WTF. You obviously had picked out Matt Hughes and envisioned him in 9 of those bouts against a boxer of your caliber, hehe

DC has a ton more experience than me, yes, and apparently his experience ain't too different from mine when it comes to dealing with grapplers. Lets forget about who has more experience, how about, plain basic common sense, Mr. Ripley.

When I used those fights to illustrate to you my points, ya still didn't get it. It took some random ex-boxer, really, it's all hearsay, but I guess some people are sold on talk more than what's laid out in front of them.

I guess, the old saying "To see is to believe" don't hold any weight with you.

And you've been talkin about taking off for Tokyo for 6 months now, hehe. Go, go man, share your intellect with the Japanese, enlighten them with your martial arts knowledge, I'm sure the Japanese have alot to learn from you about martial arts.

I can see it now, Organik walking around Harajaku spittin' knowledge on martial arts, hehe

You know what, the "fighting part of your intellect" is sorely lacking in logic. I mean, 9 times out of 10! WTF. You obviously had picked out Matt Hughes and envisioned him in 9 of those bouts against a boxer of your caliber, hehe

DC has a ton more experience than me, yes, and apparently his experience ain't too different from mine when it comes to dealing with grapplers. Lets forget about who has more experience, how about, plain basic common sense, Mr. Ripley.

When I used those fights to illustrate to you my points, ya still didn't get it. It took some random ex-boxer, really, it's all hearsay, but I guess some people are sold on talk more than what's laid out in front of them.

I guess, the old saying "To see is to believe" don't hold any weight with you.

And you've been talkin about taking off for Tokyo for 6 months now, hehe. Go, go man, share your intellect with the Japanese, enlighten them with your martial arts knowledge, I'm sure the Japanese have alot to learn from you about martial arts.

I can see it now, Organik walking around Harajaku spittin' knowledge on martial arts, hehe
What the **** are you talking about, man? I'm not going to share, but to enhance my intellect. And my going has nothing whatsoever to do with martial arts.

Do you train world-class MMA fighters? No? Shut the **** up then. DC has way more grounds for his remarks, and it shows in the contents of his comment.

9/10? Hell, I stand by it to the extent that it is a simplification, although I would potentially modify it in the boxer's favor.. although I really don't think you can actually put a number on such a thing. And this presupposes that you can essentially get 100 boxers and 100 wrestlers of equal talent (which is impossible to gauge), match them at random and then have them fight to the death (also a no-go).

And really, the bottom line is that it depends on the fighter, not the style.

I'm sure you will carry on this meaningless bickering now
:stooges:

What the **** are you talking about, man? I'm not going to share, but to enhance my intellect. And my going has nothing whatsoever to do with martial arts.

Do you train world-class MMA fighters? No? Shut the **** up then. DC has way more grounds for his remarks, and it shows in the contents of his comment.

9/10? Hell, I stand by it to the extent that it is a simplification, although I would potentially modify it in the boxer's favor.. although I really don't think you can actually put a number on such a thing. And this presupposes that you can essentially get 100 boxers and 100 wrestlers of equal talent (which is impossible to gauge), match them at random and then have them fight to the death (also a no-go).

And really, the bottom line is that it depends on the fighter, not the style.

I'm sure you will carry on this meaningless bickering now
:stooges:A-f**kin' men, that's what I've been trying to get through to ya, my Jap lovin' brother.

And I also told ya, that's it's 50/50 because........... guess what I'm gonna say?

It depends on the fighter!!!

I've never trained world-class fighters, but I've trained alongside them. Apparently, a pro like DC does not have much of a different experience than a former local amateur fighter .

At the end of the day, whether it's a novice fighting a novice or a world-class fighter fighting a world-class fighter in a stand-up affair, it boils down to distance and timing!!!

And, distance and timing being displayed at a world-class level, hands down, the stand-up guy is ahead of that f**kin' wrestler!!

You know why Organik? Because the wrestler usually is not accustomed to having to cover the kind of range a boxer or Muay Thai fighter is fighting from.

However, the boxer's fighting range would generally be the lesser of two-evils for the wrestler to deal with, obviously.

Check out Ramon Dekker getting taking down with relative ease by Genki Sudo

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/D-QYl02-eBQ&hl=en&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/D-QYl02-eBQ&hl=en&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

I know he was pretty past it...but Ramon Dekker is a world class striker and one of the best Muay-thai fighters ever. A person who has no experience with takedowns will most likely get taken down by even a decent wrestler/judo practioner...like dchampishere said it also depends on the fighters in the ring. But c'mon, you honestly think if you put in RJJ in the ring with, GSP, Dan Henderson or Josh Koscheck, that he won't be taken down???

A-f**kin' men, that's what I've been trying to get through to ya, my Jap lovin' brother.

And I also told ya, that's it's 50/50 because........... guess what I'm gonna say?

It depends on the fighter!!!

I've never trained world-class fighters, but I've trained alongside them. Apparently, a pro like DC does not have much of a different experience than a former local amateur fighter .

At the end of the day, whether it's a novice fighting a novice or a world-class fighter fighting a world-class fighter in a stand-up affair, it boils down to distance and timing!!!

And, distance and timing being displayed at a world-class level, hands down, the stand-up guy is ahead of that f**kin' wrestler!!

You know why Organik? Because the wrestler usually is not accustomed to having to cover the kind of range a boxer or Muay Thai fighter is fighting from.

However, the boxer's fighting range would generally be the lesser of two-evils for the wrestler to deal with, obviously.
You are a ****ing dumb****, you know that?

There are reasons why I respect some posters, i.e. DC, and do not respect posters such as you.

And "Jap" is a racist term.

You are a ****ing dumb****, you know that?

There are reasons why I respect some posters, i.e. DC, and do not respect posters such as you.

And "Jap" is a racist term.Not when another Jap is saying it, hehe

Check out Ramon Dekker getting taking down with relative ease by Genki Sudo

<object width="425" height="344">


<embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/D-QYl02-eBQ&hl=en&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></object>

I know he was pretty past it...but Ramon Dekker is a world class striker and one of the best Muay-thai fighters ever. A person who has no experience with takedowns will most likely get taken down by even a decent wrestler/judo practioner...like dchampishere said it also depends on the fighters in the ring. But c'mon, you honestly think if you put in RJJ in the ring with, GSP, Dan Henderson or Josh Koscheck, that he won't be taken down???The most important thing in any fighting form. Is to have sharp reflexes, 'cause guess what. You can have all the technical know how, all the experience in the world. But, if your a hair trigger short of pickin' up your guard to block a kick or get away from an oncoming attack, your a dead man!

Again, I'm not the one who is saying that a stand-up fighter can never get taken down, in fact, I'm not even saying that a stand-up fighter will win that battle, you've mistaken me for Organik.

All I'm sayin' is, it ain't that easy, ask Chuck Liddell's victims who have walked into that counter-over hand right of his!!

Ask Matt Hughes, why his attempts at shootin' on GSP went down, it wasn't because GSP was using grappling techniques, but he was winning the distance game, a stand-up fighter's distance game!! And those kicks to the thighs do hurt, hehe

Not when another Jap is saying it, hehe

That isn't true.

That isn't true.Hey, get the f**k out of my thread q*eer.





Who are you to tell me, you Japanese wanna-be, hehe

Hey, get the f**k out of my thread q*eer.





Who are you to tell me, you Japanese wanna-be, hehe
I'm no Japanese wanna-be, believe me. Hell, Japanese society is probably as ****ed up as American society, with the exception that the government actually looks after their people to a certain extent.

It's called opportunity. Now, hows abouts you stop pretending you know me.

Check out Ramon Dekker getting taking down with relative ease by Genki Sudo

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/D-QYl02-eBQ&hl=en&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/D-QYl02-eBQ&hl=en&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

I know he was pretty past it...but Ramon Dekker is a world class striker and one of the best Muay-thai fighters ever. A person who has no experience with takedowns will most likely get taken down by even a decent wrestler/judo practioner...like dchampishere said it also depends on the fighters in the ring. But c'mon, you honestly think if you put in RJJ in the ring with, GSP, Dan Henderson or Josh Koscheck, that he won't be taken down???

Genki Sudo > :crucified

I'm no Japanese wanna-be, believe me. Hell, Japanese society is probably as ****ed up as the American society, with the exception that the government actually looks after their people to a certain extent.

It's called opportunity. Now, hows abouts you stop pretending you know me.I didn't know it was so easy to rattle Mr. Post-Graduate, hehe

Perhaps, you should master in calming the nerves when you've been f**ked with by some random internet blogger.

D*mn man, all that intellect of yours goes out the window just by pushing some buttons, lol

I didn't know it was so easy to rattle Mr. Post-Graduate, hehe

Perhaps, you should master in calming the nerves when you've been f**ked with by some random internet blogger.

D*mn man, all that intellect of yours goes out the window just by pushing some buttons, lol
It's funny how you think that I'm pissed off.

Did it happen to occur to you that perhaps I know how to write?

It's funny how you think that I'm pissed off.

Did it happen to occur to you that perhaps I know how to write?There you go again, lettin' the world know how much intellect you have, how much knowledge you have, how high your IQ is.


Yet, you've resorted to fighting over wang size, hehe. It went from an MMA discussion to a wang battle, the wit of this guy, I'm tellin' ya.

Is wang talk allowed in post-graduate school, Mr. Ripley, hehe

Well, having f**ked with you for a good 2-3 days now, this much I've gathered, that you know nothin' about Martial Arts and now you have been diminished to Wang talk.

I'd say 9/10, you like Wang in your anus, hehe.

I bet you don't mind getting taken down by Japanese wang 9 times out of 10, huh

There you go again, lettin' the world know how much intellect you have, how much knowledge you have, how high your IQ is.


Yet, you've resorted to fighting over wang size, hehe. It went from an MMA discussion to a wang battle, the wit of this guy, I'm tellin' ya.

Is wang talk allowed in post-graduate school, Mr. Ripley, hehe

Well, having f**ked with you for a good 2-3 days now, this much I've gathered, that you know nothin' about Martial Arts and now you have been diminished to Wang talk.

I'd say 9/10, you like Wang in your anus, hehe.

I bet you don't mind getting taken down by Japanese wang 9 times out of 10, huh

Lol, you brought up the wang talk, not me. And just because I'm going to grad school doesn't mean I can't engage in a little wang debate.

As for your first comment, I write how I think. I know you are a typical stereotype-fed American who merely sees the world in black and white (though you claim Japanese heritage), but the fact of the matter is you do not even have the ability to comprehended my discourse, which has been made obvious by your repeated gross misunderstandings of my posts.

And you degrading my knowledge of martial arts is laughable, particularly given the fact that I have not once claimed to be an authority on any martial art (with the exception of wrestling perhaps, if you consider it a martial art as I do).

I speak my mind, and am willing to change my opinion in the light of new information.

You are essentially revealing yourself as a troll with little to contribute, and it would seem to me that most of your insults, such as calling me an egoist, are better directed at yourself.

Oh no, here I go again all pissed off, right? No, I just know how to communicate my views in writing, a dying art in this country by the way.

Now, go **** off for a bit. Oh wait, I'm sure you'll reply with more nonsense, so never mind.

Lol, you brought up the wang talk, not me. And just because I'm going to grad school doesn't mean I can't engage in a little wang debate.

As for your first comment, I write how I think. I know you are a typical stereotype-fed American who merely sees the world in black and white (though you claim Japanese heritage), but the fact of the matter is you do not even have the ability to comprehended my discourse, which has been made obvious by your repeated gross misunderstandings of my posts.

And you degrading my knowledge of martial arts is laughable, particularly given the fact that I have not once claimed to be an authority on any martial art (with the exception of wrestling perhaps, if you consider it a martial art as I do).

I speak my mind, and am willing to change my opinion in the light of new information.

You are essentially revealing yourself as a troll with little to contribute, and it would seem to me that most of your insults, such as calling me an egoist, are better directed at yourself.

Oh no, here I go again all pissed off, right? No, I just know how to communicate my views in writing, a dying art in this country by the way.

Now, go **** off for a bit. Oh wait, I'm sure you'll reply with more nonsense, so never mind.What is there to misunderstand. you've made it clear to everyone that you absolutely thought that a wrestler wins the war 9 times out f**kin' 10 point blank, no ifs and or buts.

I'm not misunderstanding at all, it is your lack of experience and as you admitted, bias, that made you initially see it that way. Until, a person who wasn't antagonizing you explained it to you, btw, I pointed out the same things DC pointed out , but you weren't having it for as long as I was the one pointing things out. who was the egoist?

But, like I said, I'm glad "the light bulb" turned on in that post-graduate brain of yours, you weak liberal, hehe







Enjoy the wang in Japan.

What is there to misunderstand. you've made it clear to everyone that you absolutely thought that a wrestler wins the war 9 times out f**kin' 10 point blank, no ifs and or buts.

I'm not misunderstanding at all, it is your lack of experience and as you admitted, bias, that made you initially see it that way. Until, a person who wasn't antagonizing you explained it to you, btw, I pointed out the same things DC pointed out , but you weren't having it for as long as I was the one pointing things out. who was the egoist?

But, like I said, I'm glad "the light bulb" turned on in that post-graduate brain of yours, you weak liberal, hehe







Enjoy the wang in Japan.

Thank you for highlighting a few of your misunderstandings.

And you couldn't touch DC with a ten-foot pole as a poster.

Now, if you were not so dense, I would suggest that you reread at least some of the thread, and attempt to approach my comments with a more open mind.

However, it's clear that you are as dense as can be, so I would suggest that you not waste your time.

Thank you for highlighting a few of your misunderstandings.

And you couldn't touch DC with a ten-foot pole as a poster.

Now, if you were not so dense, I would suggest that you reread at least some of the thread, and attempt to approach my comments with a more open mind.

However, it's clear that you are as dense as can be, so I would suggest that you not waste your time.Actually, DC didn't really explain a helluva lot.

All he basically did was tell a story of his experiences as a boxer sparring against grapplers in an open style session. He never really explained it in detail as to why grapplers found it difficult to get "what should've been easy" against a boxer like him.

In a nutshell, DC said, "they thought it was gonna be easy but I'm a fighter and blah,blah" c'mon man, admit it. You simply weren't gonna back down from me, your ego got involved.

But I'm glad, your liberal mind woke up.

Actually, DC didn't really explain a helluva lot.

All he basically did was tell a story of his experiences as a boxer sparring against grapplers in an open style session. He never really explained it in detail as to why grapplers found it difficult to get "what should've been easy" against a boxer like him.

In a nutshell, DC said, "they thought it was gonna be easy but I'm a fighter and blah,blah" c'mon man, admit it. You simply weren't gonna back down from me, your ego got involved.

But I'm glad, your liberal mind woke up.
Wow, are you full of yourself.

DC is a true fighter with actual experience in the business side of mixed martial arts, and at the highest level. Of you, I suspect the same could not be said.

Floyd fan, have you yet been paid to train a professional mixed martial arts fighter?

What the **** are you talking about, man? I'm not going to share, but to enhance my intellect. And my going has nothing whatsoever to do with martial arts.

Do you train world-class MMA fighters? No? Shut the **** up then. DC has way more grounds for his remarks, and it shows in the contents of his comment.

9/10? Hell, I stand by it to the extent that it is a simplification, although I would potentially modify it in the boxer's favor.. although I really don't think you can actually put a number on such a thing. And this presupposes that you can essentially get 100 boxers and 100 wrestlers of equal talent (which is impossible to gauge), match them at random and then have them fight to the death (also a no-go).

And really, the bottom line is that it depends on the fighter, not the style.

I'm sure you will carry on this meaningless bickering now
:stooges:Hey, in case you forgot , it takes two to carry on a meaningless bickering. Mr. Pseudointellect, hehe

Hey I can write, Hey I'm going to post-graduate, hey I'm gay. F**k, this is a boxing site, take your crap to Oxford.

I'm sure you'll stand out there, you'll be the only smart one.

Hey, in case you forgot , it takes two to carry on a meaningless bickering. Mr. Pseudointellect, hehe

Hey I can write, Hey I'm going to post-graduate, hey I'm gay. F**k, this is a boxing site, take your crap to Oxford

It's nice that you would come out, however I hardly see the logic of revealing this on a boxing board.

See, I can stoop to your level too.

Now grow up, and stop disrespecting your Japanese heritage with racist remarks. Or don't, it's up to you.

It's nice that you would come out, however I hardly see the logic of revealing this on a boxing board.

See, I can stoop to your level too.

Now grow up, and stop disrespecting your Japanese heritage with racist remarks. Or don't, it's up to you.I see that Mr. Post-Graduate has worked his way up to Kindergarten.

I see that Mr. Post-Graduate has worked his way up to Kindergarten.
Of course, you feel that you must have the last word. Go right ahead and continue to make a fool of yourself.

Lol, you brought up the wang talk, not me. And just because I'm going to grad school doesn't mean I can't engage in a little wang debate.

As for your first comment, I write how I think. I know you are a typical stereotype-fed American who merely sees the world in black and white (though you claim Japanese heritage), but the fact of the matter is you do not even have the ability to comprehended my discourse, which has been made obvious by your repeated gross misunderstandings of my posts.

And you degrading my knowledge of martial arts is laughable, particularly given the fact that I have not once claimed to be an authority on any martial art (with the exception of wrestling perhaps, if you consider it a martial art as I do).

I speak my mind, and am willing to change my opinion in the light of new information.

You are essentially revealing yourself as a troll with little to contribute, and it would seem to me that most of your insults, such as calling me an egoist, are better directed at yourself.

Oh no, here I go again all pissed off, right? No, I just know how to communicate my views in writing, a dying art in this country by the way.

Now, go **** off for a bit. Oh wait, I'm sure you'll reply with more nonsense, so never mind.BTW, in case you've been living under a rock. The entire human race are fed with stereotypes the moment they get introduced to this world. The Japanese are no exception, especially the Japanese, you f**kin' Gaijin.

You did open my mind to some new perspectives though.

Vs.

I see that Mr. Post-Graduate has worked his way up to Kindergarten.

seriously now We want Floyd you won the argument you have nothing to say stop talking.

The most important thing in any fighting form. Is to have sharp reflexes, 'cause guess what. You can have all the technical know how, all the experience in the world. But, if your a hair trigger short of pickin' up your guard to block a kick or get away from an oncoming attack, your a dead man!

Again, I'm not the one who is saying that a stand-up fighter can never get taken down, in fact, I'm not even saying that a stand-up fighter will win that battle, you've mistaken me for Organik.

All I'm sayin' is, it ain't that easy, ask Chuck Liddell's victims who have walked into that counter-over hand right of his!!

Ask Matt Hughes, why his attempts at shootin' on GSP went down, it wasn't because GSP was using grappling techniques, but he was winning the distance game, a stand-up fighter's distance game!! And those kicks to the thighs do hurt, hehe


I understand what you're trying to say, but Chuck Liddel has good takedown defense. He's wrestled before so he knows how to handle a wrestler. A pure boxer does not....

I understand what you're trying to say, but Chuck Liddel has good takedown defense. He's wrestled before so he knows how to handle a wrestler. A pure boxer does not....

Jim jeffries would oftenly wrestle as part of his training

Jim jeffries would oftenly wrestle as part of his training

Lol and?

As I stated before it depends on the fighters. But naturally a pure boxer would get taken down by a wrestler 9/10 times. Don't see how this is even an argument...

BTW, in case you've been living under a rock. The entire human race are fed with stereotypes the moment they get introduced to this world. The Japanese are no exception, especially the Japanese, you f**kin' Gaijin.
All you've done is insult your supposed Japanese heritage, and now I'm a "****ing gaijin?"

You're obviously a "jokester" with nothing intelligent to say though, this has long since been obvious. You must enjoy making a fool of yourself.

Lol and?

As I stated before it depends on the fighters. But naturally a pure boxer would get taken down by a wrestler 9/10 times. Don't see how this is even an argument...

sure it depends on the fighter and jim jeffries would have been a fighter that would have been able to handel any take down. so theirs one boxer that can handel takedowns.

theres me, and dc.

theres the maia or what ever fight that we want floyd keeps refrencing.

and i think i can refrence the vera vs so****ski as an example of some one that can fight with their hands so their able to avoid a take down. and the one time out of 10 it does happen veras immediately back on his feet.

sure it depends on the fighter but more often the not the fighter is able to handle it if their in any shape at all and has some knowledge of striking.

BTW, in case you've been living under a rock. The entire human race are fed with stereotypes the moment they get introduced to this world. The Japanese are no exception, especially the Japanese, you f**kin' Gaijin.

LOLOLOL SOMEBODY HAS SEEN TOKYO DRIFT

Jesus Christ dude, just delete this post. The things you're saying make no sense. You may not realize it, but what your entire argument is coming down to is you making excuse, after excuse, after excuse to find some non-existent reasoning as to why pure strikers are superior to MMA fighters. You must have some sort of confidence issue in your pro-striking argument to draw such ignorance and classlessness out in your posts.

LOLOLOL SOMEBODY HAS SEEN TOKYO DRIFT

Jesus Christ dude, just delete this post. The things you're saying make no sense. You may not realize it, but what your entire argument is coming down to is you making excuse, after excuse, after excuse to find some non-existent reasoning as to why pure strikers are superior to MMA fighters. You must have some sort of confidence issue in your pro-striking argument to draw such ignorance and classlessness out in your posts.Haha, nothing could be further from the truth.

If anyone who thinks one style is superior over the other, it's your buddy Organik. He's the one who thinks that no matter what, a wrestler beats a boxer 9/10.

Now, since somebody has "enlightened" him, I don't know why it took somebody else to convince him to look at it in another way, when the whole f**kin' time I've been explaining to him the same exact sh*t.

Go find a single statement I've made that would even suggest that I think boxers are generally superior to wrestlers. But, I do think this, that y'all are under-estimating the boxer!!

Who knows, it could very well end up that wrestlers get the takedown 9/10, hell make it 10/10 against boxers. But, it could also go the other way that the boxer is able to stay away for the duration of the fight and systematically bust up the wrestler or simply ko the wrestler 10/10.