Boxing V MMA [My english coursework] Thoughts?

[El Chicano]

[QUOTE=P4PKING_2008;3532788]Boxing Vs. MMA

"Boxing on the other hand has been a top worldwide sport since it was first recognised as an Olympic sport in 688 B.C."

There was no such thing as World Wide in 688 B.C.

Bwahahahahahaha!!!!

:gay:

Also, one hint of advice: SPELLCHECK

[NuckleHead11]

A lot of faulty logic and the passing of your own opinion as fact. This is a bad forum post, let alone something you would hand in for an English course.

MMA wasn't created in 1993, the UFC was. The UFC isn't MMA. That would be like saying Auto-racing is Nascar. Virtually anyone can be beaten by one another by brute strength? Royce Gracie, a 175 pound BJJ practioner was beating guys twice his size when the UFC truly was a freak show.

So the UFC had only one good year, yet you don't provide numbers for any other year, particularly 2007? No history or worldwide stars? Ask Japanese or Brazilians about that. Yes, Ali and Tyson transcended the sport of boxing, but guys like Chuck Liddell, Randy Couture, Tito Ortiz and Ken Shamrock are definitly well known. What makes Floyd any more of a WORLDwide star as opposed to any of the guys I mentioned? Whether it be K-1 putting on MMA matches, Pride, Cage Rage, etc. etc. a lot of fighters who are already well known in Asia, Europe and/or South America now have become stars in the States.

Top MMA fighters make 50K? Are you kidding me? In terms of base pay (stuff released to public) the top guys pull in anywhere from 250K to 1M. Including PPV bonuses, etc. the elite fighters are making millions per year. Guys on the undercard are making more than their peers on boxing cards. No, MMA stars aren't pulling down Mayweather money, but it is to be expected as MMA in North America is in it's infancy.

Brock Lesnar is the most popular MMA star? Says who? You? Looking at media exposure and who the UFC promotes, Lesnar is not at the top of the list. Certainly Lesnar proved to be a large draw in his first fight, but I bet some people still think he is doing pro wrestling.

Because boxing gets hyped better it is superior to MMA? That is like saying Paris Hilton is a better actress than Judy Dench because she gets more play in the media. Boxing has it's characters, but so does MMA.

Your entire paragraph on the technical aspects of boxing VS MMA is laughable. Essentially you label EVERY boxer as a Floyd Mayweather clone and EVERY MMA fighter as a scrub. You haven't watched any MMA, yet apparently all they have to do is get the fight to the ground and submit someone? Elite MMA fighters and boxers are the same, they possess the intangibles, talent and athletic ability. Different skills and training techniques may have to be utilized but you're delusional if you think BOTH parties don't train their asses off. You laud the elite boxer, yet fail to realize what an elite MMA fighter must do in order to be elite.

Nice supporting evidence from Floyd and Bernard. They couldn't possibly be saying that type of stuff to incite media coverage.

Your paper only proves that you think boxing is better than MMA. If you want to convince your teacher or any Joe Schmo you should probably do some research.

[damian5000]

You guys are complete morons. That's what an essay paper is supposed to do - show the author's point of view. Did any of you finish or even attend high school?

P4PKING, I counted at least 10 errors in the first 2 paragraphs. Spelling, grammer, puncuation etc... It really needs some work in that regard.

[El Chicano]

A lot of faulty logic and the passing of your own opinion as fact. This is a bad forum post, let alone something you would hand in for an English course.

MMA wasn't created in 1993, the UFC was. The UFC isn't MMA. That would be like saying Auto-racing is Nascar. Virtually anyone can be beaten by one another by brute strength? Royce Gracie, a 175 pound BJJ practioner was beating guys twice his size when the UFC truly was a freak show.

So the UFC had only one good year, yet you don't provide numbers for any other year, particularly 2007? No history or worldwide stars? Ask Japanese or Brazilians about that. Yes, Ali and Tyson transcended the sport of boxing, but guys like Chuck Liddell, Randy Couture, Tito Ortiz and Ken Shamrock are definitly well known. What makes Floyd any more of a WORLDwide star as opposed to any of the guys I mentioned? Whether it be K-1 putting on MMA matches, Pride, Cage Rage, etc. etc. a lot of fighters who are already well known in Asia, Europe and/or South America now have become stars in the States.

Top MMA fighters make 50K? Are you kidding me? In terms of base pay (stuff released to public) the top guys pull in anywhere from 250K to 1M. Including PPV bonuses, etc. the elite fighters are making millions per year. Guys on the undercard are making more than their peers on boxing cards. No, MMA stars aren't pulling down Mayweather money, but it is to be expected as MMA in North America is in it's infancy.

Brock Lesnar is the most popular MMA star? Says who? You? Looking at media exposure and who the UFC promotes, Lesnar is not at the top of the list. Certainly Lesnar proved to be a large draw in his first fight, but I bet some people still think he is doing pro wrestling.

Because boxing gets hyped better it is superior to MMA? That is like saying Paris Hilton is a better actress than Judy Dench because she gets more play in the media. Boxing has it's characters, but so does MMA.

Your entire paragraph on the technical aspects of boxing VS MMA is laughable. Essentially you label EVERY boxer as a Floyd Mayweather clone and EVERY MMA fighter as a scrub. You haven't watched any MMA, yet apparently all they have to do is get the fight to the ground and submit someone? Elite MMA fighters and boxers are the same, they possess the intangibles, talent and athletic ability. Different skills and training techniques may have to be utilized but you're delusional if you think BOTH parties don't train their asses off. You laud the elite boxer, yet fail to realize what an elite MMA fighter must do in order to be elite.

Nice supporting evidence from Floyd and Bernard. They couldn't possibly be saying that type of stuff to incite media coverage.

Your paper only proves that you think boxing is better than MMA. If you want to convince your teacher or any Joe Schmo you should probably do some research.

Very good, well thought out post (1st one too)

[NuckleHead11]

Considering this essay seems to be argumentative (boxing is better than MMA) and P4PKing is attempting to use evidence to prove that, he needs to do better than simply show his opinion. You need to logically prove your thesis. Being biased and using incorrect information wouldn't fly in elementary school, let alone High School.

[P4PKING_2008]

[QUOTE=Puas;3533880]

Boxing Vs. MMA

"Boxing on the other hand has been a top worldwide sport since it was first recognised as an Olympic sport in 688 B.C."

There was no such thing as World Wide in 688 B.C.

Bwahahahahahaha!!!!

:gay:

Also, one hint of advice: SPELLCHECK

Yeah, I just did it in a few hours and havnt proof read as ya can tell haha.

A lot of faulty logic and the passing of your own opinion as fact. This is a bad forum post, let alone something you would hand in for an English course.

MMA wasn't created in 1993, the UFC was. The UFC isn't MMA. That would be like saying Auto-racing is Nascar. Virtually anyone can be beaten by one another by brute strength? Royce Gracie, a 175 pound BJJ practioner was beating guys twice his size when the UFC truly was a freak show.

So the UFC had only one good year, yet you don't provide numbers for any other year, particularly 2007? No history or worldwide stars? Ask Japanese or Brazilians about that. Yes, Ali and Tyson transcended the sport of boxing, but guys like Chuck Liddell, Randy Couture, Tito Ortiz and Ken Shamrock are definitly well known. What makes Floyd any more of a WORLDwide star as opposed to any of the guys I mentioned? Whether it be K-1 putting on MMA matches, Pride, Cage Rage, etc. etc. a lot of fighters who are already well known in Asia, Europe and/or South America now have become stars in the States.

Top MMA fighters make 50K? Are you kidding me? In terms of base pay (stuff released to public) the top guys pull in anywhere from 250K to 1M. Including PPV bonuses, etc. the elite fighters are making millions per year. Guys on the undercard are making more than their peers on boxing cards. No, MMA stars aren't pulling down Mayweather money, but it is to be expected as MMA in North America is in it's infancy.

Brock Lesnar is the most popular MMA star? Says who? You? Looking at media exposure and who the UFC promotes, Lesnar is not at the top of the list. Certainly Lesnar proved to be a large draw in his first fight, but I bet some people still think he is doing pro wrestling.

Because boxing gets hyped better it is superior to MMA? That is like saying Paris Hilton is a better actress than Judy Dench because she gets more play in the media. Boxing has it's characters, but so does MMA.

Your entire paragraph on the technical aspects of boxing VS MMA is laughable. Essentially you label EVERY boxer as a Floyd Mayweather clone and EVERY MMA fighter as a scrub. You haven't watched any MMA, yet apparently all they have to do is get the fight to the ground and submit someone? Elite MMA fighters and boxers are the same, they possess the intangibles, talent and athletic ability. Different skills and training techniques may have to be utilized but you're delusional if you think BOTH parties don't train their asses off. You laud the elite boxer, yet fail to realize what an elite MMA fighter must do in order to be elite.

Nice supporting evidence from Floyd and Bernard. They couldn't possibly be saying that type of stuff to incite media coverage.

Your paper only proves that you think boxing is better than MMA. If you want to convince your teacher or any Joe Schmo you should probably do some research.

I am not asking for an argument. It is my opinion and It is writing to persuade so of course it will have my opinion. How would I persuade anyone with a balanced argument?

You guys are complete morons. That's what an essay paper is supposed to do - show the author's point of view. Did any of you finish or even attend high school?

P4PKING, I counted at least 10 errors in the first 2 paragraphs. Spelling, grammer, puncuation etc... It really needs some work in that regard.

I know some of these think I did it to argue over it. Dumbass mma fanboys.

Yeah I need to proof read it myself. I have noticed numerous errors now haha.

[P4PKING_2008]

Considering this essay seems to be argumentative (boxing is better than MMA) and P4PKing is attempting to use evidence to prove that, he needs to do better than simply show his opinion. You need to logically prove your thesis. Being biased and using incorrect information wouldn't fly in elementary school, let alone High School.

Its for college. And what facts could I get apart from ppv figures? And quotes from those that know what there talking about.

[MaTTuP]

Maybe the next essay should be a regression analysis to prove that when 4-wheelers are in the shop, college classes aren't in session and there are a lack of local bar fights UFC ppvs do bigger numbers...

[damian5000]

Considering this essay seems to be argumentative (boxing is better than MMA) and P4PKing is attempting to use evidence to prove that, he needs to do better than simply show his opinion. You need to logically prove your thesis. Being biased and using incorrect information wouldn't fly in elementary school, let alone High School.

I'm not saying he proved his argument or that it's a great paper.

Anyone who's trying to prove a point needs to be biased to some degree otherwise there wouldn't be a paper would there numb nuts?

[NuckleHead11]

I'm not saying he proved his argument or that it's a great paper.

Anyone who's trying to prove a point needs to be biased to some degree otherwise there wouldn't be a paper would there numb nuts?

You don't have to be biased. Everyone has done argumentative essays on things they could care less about. Even if you are biased towards a subject, you can't show that in the essay. Essentially it's like a jury, you have to showcase both the Yes and No, but obviously in an argumentative paper you have to take a side.

As for improving your paper P4PKing, I'd suggest a more definitive introduction. i.e. Boxing is better than MMA because of these things (list them). I think a better paper would be one disproving the notion that boxing is dead.

PPV figures would be good to use. Although, since UFC is privately owned, there are only estimates available for more recent events (I believe roughly the last year and a half or so). I know Ortiz-Liddell 2 still holds the record for largest PPV buyrate, not sure which event holds the record for largest livegate (probably UFC 83 in Montreal). Contrast that with Mayweather-De La Hoya. Salary figures are sometimes hard to come by as well, they will release base pay and certian bonuses, but there are plenty of behind the doors bonuses, sponsorship money, etc.

As for quotes, that might be a bit tougher to find. Certainly fighters have commented on the boxing VS MMA debate, but a lot of it is hot air. Perhaps an analyst that covers all combat sports.

Anderson Silva (UFC MW champ and unanimously a top 3 P4P fighter) wanting to box Roy Jones Jr. could be postured into the continued life of boxing.

It's tough to prove your point via anything training, since that is highly subjective. Instead of deriding the talent or training of MMA fighters you could just comment on the abilities of certain boxers. Definitly point out guys like Tyson or Ali and the great history boxing has compared to the infancy which MMA is in.