MMA vs. Boxing could easily be made, but why not so far?

[Dice]

And to show some support to the thread starter I would like to see boxer vs mma but it wouldnt be exciting because I know the boxer would get destroyed. Dont forget its not just if the boxer is taken to the ground, a boxer could also get wiped out by a kick to the face by a kick boxer just like Mercer got

[Dice]

True, True...but he had the right idea.

Who was the Asian Fighter that basically handled him way back? stocky guy

Your probably talking about Kazushi Sakuraba the Gracie Hunter

[ricoboxing]

True, True...but he had the right idea.

Who was the Asian Fighter that basically handled him way back? stocky guy

kimo

from hawaii i believe

[Steak]

and as for the topic, it would be a waste of time. as boxing fans, we like to see two guys with a lot of skill when it comes to fighting with their fists. the boxing vs mma scenario you came up with is basically just an mma event. we dont really want to see grappling, we like to see hgih level boxing that clearly is only found in boxing matches.

besides, every one of the fights would be mismatches, and not fun to watch. this is what would happen. either.
1. The boxer keeps it a standup fight and easily schools and knocks out the mma fighter. or
2. The mma fighter takes the boxer down and easily schools and finishes the fight on the ground.

both scenarios are garbage. thats not entertaining. its not that interesting when top level guys knock out bums, and mma fighters' standup is pretty much the equivilant of a bum in boxing. just as a boxers' grappling ability is going to be for the most part bum level in wrestling, JJ, etc.

[Benny Leonard]

a sport in nature is not fair. if I get into a fight with a guy on the street because he wants to kill me or something and theres no way of getting away, I would
A. Shoot him if I had a gun
B. Stab him if I had a knife
C. Pick up some object like a beer bottle to use as a weapon.
D. Hit him in the balls/poke eyeballs/some other horrible thing.

In other words, I would not use any boxing or mma tactics. the best fighter in a street fight is probebly a track runner or something like that, because he can get away and will never lose a fight. If you get into a fight in the streets, if youre alive, not seriously injured and still have your money/valuables, you won no matter what.

Eh, LOL...go back over all my posts.

That's why I first mentioned Gracie rules first because I doubt any fighter would want to get their testicles ripped off, lose their eyes, and have someone bite their Neck. So take those three "rules" and have your fight.

What ever you are born with when you came out of your Mother's womb is what you are allowed to have. And yes, I know the brain came out with your body and the mind could invent the gun...but come on, you know what I mean I hope

The objective is to see what is the best style of fight without setting to many rules that prevents a fighter from displaying his "craft."

But if we want it with no rules...sure, as long as their is no added weapons. It's just going to make it harder to get them to fight unless we enslave them and force them to fight like they did back in the day

[col Blake]

It won't happen because they are to different disciplines you knucklehead, why not get the worlds best swimmer and see if he can become world 100 metres champion.

[Benny Leonard]

and as for the topic, it would be a waste of time. as boxing fans, we like to see two guys with a lot of skill when it comes to fighting with their fists. the boxing vs mma scenario you came up with is basically just an mma event. we dont really want to see grappling, we like to see hgih level boxing that clearly is only found in boxing matches.

besides, every one of the fights would be mismatches, and not fun to watch. this is what would happen. either.
1. The boxer keeps it a standup fight and easily schools and knocks out the mma fighter. or
2. The mma fighter takes the boxer down and easily schools and finishes the fight on the ground.

both scenarios are garbage. thats not entertaining. its not that interesting when top level guys knock out bums, and mma fighters' standup is pretty much the equivilant of a bum in boxing. just as a boxers' grappling ability is going to be for the most part bum level in wrestling, JJ, etc.

Even when that MMA fighter started as a Kickboxing Champion?

So if I locked these two guys in an empty room...who is favored?

[Steak]

Eh, LOL...go back over all my posts.

That's why I first mentioned Gracie rules first because I doubt any fighter would want to get their testicles ripped off, lose their eyes, and have someone bite their Neck. So take those three "rules" and have your fight.

What ever you are born with when you came out of your Mother's womb is what you are allowed to have. And yes, I know the brain came out with your body and the mind could invent the gun...but come on, you know what I mean I hope

The objective is to see what is the best style of fight without setting to many rules that prevents a fighter from displaying his "craft."

But if we want it with no rules...sure, as long as their is no added weapons. It's just going to make it harder to get them to fight unless we enslave them and force them to fight like they did back in the day

ok...so you pretty described a fight with mma rules. mma does not = a real fight. thats real fair.

the only fair thing to do would be to have the guys fight each other twice, once in boxing and once in mma rules. and we all know how that would turn out. out of 100 total matches, boxers would win about 53 of them, mma would win about 47 or them, with the boxers winning 100% of the boxing matches and the mma fighters winning almost all of the mma matches.

[Allucard]

Just added it: We can go old school UFC rules when Gracie owned it which is almost no rules. Just no testicle shots and poking of the eyes. The rest is allowed.

It just wouldn't work. Most boxers have very weak legs and yes you have the occasional average boxer trying mma or K1 (form of kickboxing) with very little success. 2 reason pop to mind. Boxers have very weak legs leaving them very vulnerable to low kicks (the average mma or k1 fighter will take a few low kicks with little to no fuss but all the boxer i've seen will immediately try to grab the guy's leg because the low kicks will really hurt like hell to the untrained leg (and you need years and years to get "used to" taking a proper low kick). The second reason is the ground game, there is simply no way an mma fight stays off the ground unless both fighters want to or a 1st punch KO happens, specially in HW. Even the best boxer would lose badly to just a average mma professional. Note that most boxing details like faints and keeping your distance with the jab just don't apply because of knees, elbows, etc. Just a bad idea. Under boxing rules though, the opposite happens in most of the cases (although Anderson Silva WOULD beat Roy Jones v.08).

[FLYBOY]

Are you seriously that ignorant?

What do they teach in the Military?

i never said that mma as a defence strategy is silly.... it's good no doubt. BUT mma as a sport LOL don't even get me started. who the **** wants to watch 2 guys dry humping each other on the ground!

seriously just stop this bull****. take this **** to the mma section. lol comparing boxing to mma