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

[trg6863]

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.

I'm sorry but I don't agree. You can argue that both are equally as difficult. In boxing, you spend all of your training focusing on one aspect of fighting but in MMA you have to be skilled for anywhere the fight goes. That is why it is easier for someone in MMA to have a few wins and still become champion because there are multiple ways to win a fight besides boxing. While I don't like Lesnar, he had an amazing wrestling background and is a huge dude who actually has to cut to make the maximum weight for heavyweight. In MMA wrestlers normally do very well as they are able to control their opponents on the ground and it sure makes it easier when you're a silverback who outweighs your opponents by at least 20 pounds.

[sycomantz]

not a fan of MMA but GSP is a beast. eventhough you have to know more fighting forms with MMA that doesnt make it equal to boxings learning curve.

YOU can only be great in 1 thing technically...the other trades will fall short a bit.

MMA fighters careers are short for a reason...and their records arent nearly as long nor do fighters hold on to belts and titles for long periods of time

Boxing>MMA

[Pullcounter]

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 mma can be mastered in a year whereas boxing cannot.

[TheGreatAli]

Nothing to do with risks, there's just more skill in boxing. To get to the top takes years.

[DonTaseMeBrah]

cuz it takes actual skill in boxing. it just goes to show you how much better boxing is than mma.

you will never see a journeyman with pink hair knock out one of the biggest stars in boxing.

a great boxer will always beat a great mma fighter in boxing
a great wrestler will always beat a great mma fighter in wrestling.

[Owlzfan84]

very few boxers are ready for world title fights within the first few fights. Its just a far more difficult sport to master.

i can only think of Leon Spinks who won a title that early...and though he didnt go for a title early in his career, i do believe Mayweather was good enough to win a title within his first 7 fights.

[trg6863]

not a fan of MMA but GSP is a beast. eventhough you have to know more fighting forms with MMA that doesnt make it equal to boxings learning curve.

YOU can only be great in 1 thing technically...the other trades will fall short a bit.

MMA fighters careers are short for a reason...and their records arent nearly as long nor do fighters hold on to belts and titles for long periods of time

Boxing>MMA

One thing I dislike about most boxing fans on this site is that they tend to only look at the lower tier of fighters in MMA. So you are telling me that guys like GSP, Machida, Silva, and BJ Penn are not as techniclly skilled just in other aspects or all around? Again, they are not just fighting boxing, they have to be competitive everywhere. I think that's pretty difficult to "master" several completely different styles of fighting. I actually truly love watching both sports and think that some of you really do not realize that a lot of these guys put in just as much training, hard work, and dedication into what they do.

[trg6863]

cuz it takes actual skill in boxing. it just goes to show you how much better boxing is than mma.

you will never see a journeyman with pink hair knock out one of the biggest stars in boxing.

a great boxer will always beat a great mma fighter in boxing
a great wrestler will always beat a great mma fighter in wrestling.

Does that mean that a great boxer or wrestler will always beat them in an MMA fight? No. And please do not use Sylvia and Mercer as an example. Sylvia came in as a fat ass, has terrible movement, and was worse technically with his best asset which was striking.

[DonTaseMeBrah]

Does that mean that a great boxer or wrestler will always beat them in an MMA fight? No. And please do not use Sylvia and Mercer as an example. Sylvia came in as a fat ass, has terrible movement, and was worse technically with his best asset which was striking.

carano, frank mir, kimbo slice. mma is treading on water in terms of stars. they will never be as big & as culturally significant as boxing.

journeymen with pink hair & a last second replacement will never beat a boxing star.

2-0,5-0 boxers will almost always never beat a estbalished boxer let alone a superstar.

What pisses me off is how mma fans go to boxing sites & message boards & comment about how much mma is taking over & is better than boxing.

I have never done that. i dont know if boxing fans go to mma message boards & talk junk. just like you brah, you are obviously a mma fan, wtf are u doing in a boxing website?

[ColtraneChanges]

A boxer can spend an entire career focusing on four points of contact. His entire training will solidify in his mind and his body that there are four attacks possible. The points of contact consisting of his two hands and those of his opponent.

This knowledge allows for the boxer to focus in acute areas when considering both offense and defense. Obviously the whole body plays a role in boxing but the hands are the tip of the sword. His mind is conditioned to contemplate the defense and attacks based on those facts.

For a mixed martial artist the spectrum broadens considerably. Where only the hands are employed as weapons in boxing, in MMA there are eight points of contact. Two feet, two knees, two elbows, and two fists.

Multiply that by two and a fighter has eighteen things to consider before throwing a punch. That doesn’t take into consideration the ability to take one down, or complex aspect of submissions.

So where a boxer can focus in a broader spectrum and excel in that area, an MMA fighter must spread his mind thinner, as well as his body and also remain effective based on those aspects.

Those points are the very reason why the two can not be compared. Is it tomayto tomawto, or is it apples and oranges? The latter makes more sense.

- from Todd Jackson's most recent piece.