why can't boxers be moved up as quick as MMA fighters?

[thealfa]

Why can't boxers be moved up as quick as MMA fighters? Are boxers/boxing promoters concerned with having attractive record instead of good fights? The way Tye Fields or Joe Mesi was managed. I notice in MMA, Gina Carano was already a superstar with a record of 2-0. Her first fight was nationally (and worldwide?) televised? She is now 7-1, still a huge step up/superstar. Kinda lock Brock and Lesner. Wasn't the first fight of both, their first or second fight yet it was a huge event without anyone worrying about their "records"?

In boxing it is different, you have to have a 20-0 record before anyone even hears of you. The only 2 fighters in boxing that I feel was moved up quick was Spinks when he fought Ali and won, it was Spinks' 7th fight, wasn't it? Huge step-up. And John Carlo's first fight with a Spinks. Carlo won. Huge step-up.

Why doesnt anyone in boxing let a fighter with a 5-0 make a huge leap and fight someone in the top 20? This moves people quick in the game and to see who is real legit. A determined 5-0 boxer could be interesting to watch fight a top 20 or 30 fighter. Rankings are questionable and so are records. An undefeated record doesn't always mean you're good. It's just you fought bums. 300 something amateur record does not mean you'll be fresh in the pros, ask Dominick Guinn, the former heavyweight hopeful.

If Mesi Had fought anyone for a title and took a chance early on in his career maybe his dream of becoming champion would have came true instead of waiting for Jirov to pummel his ass and eventually got brain damaged then retired. He could have done it, but in boxing a perfect record matters. It should be the fight, not the record. Mesi fights are not all that exciting to me either way.

Just a thought.

[thealfa]

opps I meant to say Lesner and Mir...

[Chr0nic]

there was amir khan and jeff lacy and many more before them, but we're slowly learnin to let these guys first prove themselves first in boxing

in mma, they do that with lesnar and **** because they know people will pay to see him fight as he was already a huge superstar in the wwe
same as a boxer turning pro after winning the olympics
although in the ufc there actually are'nt many superstars and so they try to build up as many fighters as they can

[BOOMbip]

Because boxers half to do more then get 7 tattoos dye there hair and work out for 6 months to reach a pro level...

It's obvious why you can't put a top tier fighter against a guy with 5 pro fights....it would be a massacre.


Boxers have to be developed...you can't just one day decide to become a boxer when your 30(I mean you can but don't expect a title shot)....you have to be schooled since(in many cases) you are a kid...A lot of the best boxers in the world come from fighting family's and all they do is Box and train to box from the time they are children...You have to be taught boxing...it's not just fighting.

[Crazylegs77]

cause they dont wont to lose until they get a big money PPV fight.

[dans]

Losing is more acceptable in MMA because they're using small gloves and anything can happen. Because of that, you don't have as many "do or die" fights. So guys like Paulie Malignaggi and Jeff Lacy for instance; Lacy had a "do or die" fight last weekend and Paulie has the same this weekend. But if Paulie loses he will be 26-3. Could you imagine an MMA guy that is 26-2 in a do or die fight? No because losing doesn't mean the same thing between the sports.

I'm not making any judgement on boxing or MMA.

Just sayin

[Crazylegs77]

Losing is more acceptable in MMA because they're using small gloves and anything can happen. Because of that, you don't have as many "do or die" fights. So guys like Paulie Malignaggi and Jeff Lacy for instance; Lacy had a "do or die" fight last weekend and Paulie has the same this weekend. But if Paulie loses he will be 26-3. Could you imagine an MMA guy that is 26-2 in a do or die fight? No because losing doesn't mean the same thing between the sports.

I'm not making any judgement on boxing or MMA.

Just sayin

But if there is any reason losing in boxing is worse its because most fights are not really vs level opposition especially the first 20 or so fights.

[Fulcrum29]

Why can't boxers be moved up as quick as MMA fighters? Are boxers/boxing promoters concerned with having attractive record instead of good fights? The way Tye Fields or Joe Mesi was managed. I notice in MMA, Gina Carano was already a superstar with a record of 2-0. Her first fight was nationally (and worldwide?) televised? She is now 7-1, still a huge step up/superstar. Kinda lock Brock and Lesner. Wasn't the first fight of both, their first or second fight yet it was a huge event without anyone worrying about their "records"?

In boxing it is different, you have to have a 20-0 record before anyone even hears of you. The only 2 fighters in boxing that I feel was moved up quick was Spinks when he fought Ali and won, it was Spinks' 7th fight, wasn't it? Huge step-up. And John Carlo's first fight with a Spinks. Carlo won. Huge step-up.

Why doesnt anyone in boxing let a fighter with a 5-0 make a huge leap and fight someone in the top 20? This moves people quick in the game and to see who is real legit. A determined 5-0 boxer could be interesting to watch fight a top 20 or 30 fighter. Rankings are questionable and so are records. An undefeated record doesn't always mean you're good. It's just you fought bums. 300 something amateur record does not mean you'll be fresh in the pros, ask Dominick Guinn, the former heavyweight hopeful.

If Mesi Had fought anyone for a title and took a chance early on in his career maybe his dream of becoming champion would have came true instead of waiting for Jirov to pummel his ass and eventually got brain damaged then retired. He could have done it, but in boxing a perfect record matters. It should be the fight, not the record. Mesi fights are not all that exciting to me either way.

Just a thought.

Simple: boxing has a far greater learning curve because it is a far more difficult sport. Not necessarily by its nature or essence, but simply there is far more competition due to having far more skilled opponents in boxing as compared to MMA. MMA is young and 90% of opponents are completely unskilled bums, whereas a large portion of boxers are "world class" and as such you need many more fights to prepare you for that big stage than you would in MMA where a guy that's 2-0 can just come in off the street (or off WWE for that matter) and win the world heavy weight championship. In boxing such a thing is impossible because boxing is a far more difficult sport to master than MMA in its current form.

[PEPE213]

Why can't boxers be moved up as quick as MMA fighters? Are boxers/boxing promoters concerned with having attractive record instead of good fights? The way Tye Fields or Joe Mesi was managed. I notice in MMA, Gina Carano was already a superstar with a record of 2-0. Her first fight was nationally (and worldwide?) televised? She is now 7-1, still a huge step up/superstar. Kinda lock Brock and Lesner. Wasn't the first fight of both, their first or second fight yet it was a huge event without anyone worrying about their "records"?

In boxing it is different, you have to have a 20-0 record before anyone even hears of you. The only 2 fighters in boxing that I feel was moved up quick was Spinks when he fought Ali and won, it was Spinks' 7th fight, wasn't it? Huge step-up. And John Carlo's first fight with a Spinks. Carlo won. Huge step-up.

Why doesnt anyone in boxing let a fighter with a 5-0 make a huge leap and fight someone in the top 20? This moves people quick in the game and to see who is real legit. A determined 5-0 boxer could be interesting to watch fight a top 20 or 30 fighter. Rankings are questionable and so are records. An undefeated record doesn't always mean you're good. It's just you fought bums. 300 something amateur record does not mean you'll be fresh in the pros, ask Dominick Guinn, the former heavyweight hopeful.

If Mesi Had fought anyone for a title and took a chance early on in his career maybe his dream of becoming champion would have came true instead of waiting for Jirov to pummel his ass and eventually got brain damaged then retired. He could have done it, but in boxing a perfect record matters. It should be the fight, not the record. Mesi fights are not all that exciting to me either way.

Just a thought.

Because in MMA the fight can change INSTANTLY.
In boxing it's all about skills.
A boxer who is 5-0 vs a boxer who is 26-0.
You'll tell the difference in skills. A punch won't change the fight unless you're a big puncher. And nowadays boxers don't have punching power.
In MMA you [can] get lucky.
Just an unbkown elbow shot to the face will get you a victory. That's why MMA is such a big draw.

[TEXSTRO]

If you ask a questions like this its pretty much obvious you know nothing about the sweet science. MMA only has a select few that have great boxing skills and thats only for mma standards. So when you start off in MMA you learn the 1-1-2- combo throw in a couple haymakers and bam!! Your on the same level as everyone else. A couple grapling moves a few submissions and your ready to go! Its really an add water type of sport. Boxing is something you must master. That why we only get a select few that come every decade.