Boxing as a Non-Combative Martial Art ...

[GrandpaBernard]

It’s an age old argument, but I’m essentially in agreement. I prefer watching boxing, where it’s much more appealing to see two highly skilled combatants face off. But I like both sports. Boxing is, of course, a very effective fighting form; but for real-world combat, I think it’s pretty clear that MMA is superior.

I much rather have boxing on my side than grappling

boxing can drop 2 or 3 bigger guys in 30 seconds then get out of there

Grappling can’t do that

[YGriffith]

boxing can drop 2 or 3 bigger guys in 30 seconds then get out of there

that's not boxing, that's being built different.

[GrandpaBernard]

that's not boxing, that's being built different.

Years ago a local boxer did just that to 4 bouncers

mexican in a TINY man weight class with a crap pro career

what fans would call a tomato can

[BoxingArts]

Boxing is just another combative art to go along with the many. There is no 1 perfect art. If you watch boxing, it is because you prefer this "art" over the others. Nothing wrong with that.

I love the MMA guys that say, yeah, but you can kick and take down. I say, "yeah, but I don't care about any of that". I prefer all standup, punch for punch type of combat. There is something about seeing "masters" of 1 art go at it than watching MMA where guys are doing back flips and all kinds of ****** stuff that looks cool when it lands, but is also luck at times. Like landing a 1 in a million, spinning, back flip, side to side, round house head kick bs. It looks wild, it is wild and it makes for great 5 second clips, but otherwise, it's a ****show if you ask me, lol.

I like seeing two who attempt to master their 1 craft go at it and see who can exploit who better.

... (thus) ... https://www.boxingarts.com/culture/

[TMLT87]

I love the MMA guys that say, yeah, but you can kick and take down. I say, "yeah, but I don't care about any of that". I prefer all standup, punch for punch type of combat. There is something about seeing "masters" of 1 art go at it .

I love both sports but I can totally understand this viewpoint. There is an appeal to the purity and simplicity of boxing, nowhere to hide, no plan B, its basically rock vs rock whereas MMA is rock, paper, scissors. Its a lot more aesthetically pleasing too whereas MMA is quite messy and chaotic.

I think the appeal of MMA though is its the ultimate arena for proving who the best fighters are. Obviously there are still rules but 90+% of the techniques from basically every unarmed martial art are allowed. Its by far the closest combat sport to basically putting two guys in a room unarmed and seeing who would walk out, and that lends a certain weight and legitimacy to it and to the fighters imo.

I much rather have boxing on my side than grappling

boxing can drop 2 or 3 bigger guys in 30 seconds then get out of there

Grappling can’t do that

Definitely a bad idea to grapple in the street if you can avoid it. But in a 1 on 1 situation generally if you have a grappler vs a pure striker the guy that wants to close distance and grab is gonna come out on top.

Obviously MMA fighters are a mix of the two though.I doubt most would bother grappling on the street unless the other person happened to be a boxer.

[CubanGuyNYC]

I much rather have boxing on my side than grappling

boxing can drop 2 or 3 bigger guys in 30 seconds then get out of there

Grappling can’t do that

You think the average boxer — or even a good one — can take care of 2 or 3 bigger guys in any amount of time, let alone 30 seconds? I don’t think that’s realistic. Two reasonably capable men can pounce on you before you can cause enough damage. Forget about three. To be fair, no fighting art makes a person reliably capable of taking on multiple assailants. Maybe if we’re talking about a high-level fighter against average men. But your average boxer/MMA guy versus several average men? I don’t think so.

[ELPacman]

I love both sports but I can totally understand this viewpoint. There is an appeal to the purity and simplicity of boxing, nowhere to hide, no plan B, its basically rock vs rock whereas MMA is rock, paper, scissors. Its a lot more aesthetically pleasing too whereas MMA is quite messy and chaotic.

I think the appeal of MMA though is its the ultimate arena for proving who the best fighters are. Obviously there are still rules but 90+% of the techniques from basically every unarmed martial art are allowed. Its by far the closest combat sport to basically putting two guys in a room unarmed and seeing who would walk out, and that lends a certain weight and legitimacy to it and to the fighters imo.


Definitely a bad idea to grapple in the street if you can avoid it. But in a 1 on 1 situation generally if you have a grappler vs a pure striker the guy that wants to close distance and grab is gonna come out on top.

Obviously MMA fighters are a mix of the two though.I doubt most would bother grappling on the street unless the other person happened to be a boxer.

Yeah and I totally get that. If someone started a fight with you on the street, more than likely, it's going to end up on the ground at some point. Nothing wrong with that. Though just like a street fight, it gets messy. That is back to my appreciation for 1 particular form of fighting that in itself is very violent and devastating. Seeing two masters go at it, is something to behold. The levels it displays are so great.

If you watched Vasquez-Marquez 1,2,3, you might of thought these guys were pure sluggers based on how their fights went down, yet there was so much technical aspects going on throughout the brutal display they put on. Now if you took a lesser slugger and put him in with either of them two, they would have been blasted out in a 1 or 2 rds. Even at the most brutal high level, it is still a level that would make a lesser opponent look like he didn't belong quickly. I love that stuff.

[baroidi]

you already have boxercise lol

[GrandpaBernard]

You think the average boxer — or even a good one — can take care of 2 or 3 bigger guys in any amount of time, let alone 30 seconds? I don’t think that’s realistic. Two reasonably capable men can pounce on you before you can cause enough damage. Forget about three. To be fair, no fighting art makes a person reliably capable of taking on multiple assailants. Maybe if we’re talking about a high-level fighter against average men. But your average boxer/MMA guy versus several average men? I don’t think so.

I’ve seen a so and so boxer handle 3 bouncers who were all bigger than him

bouncers were fortunate the police came

same guy would have been ucked had he been a wrestler. Grapple one guy down to the ground, but there’s two more standing and ready

guys who boxed for years > 3 average joes

[GrandpaBernard]

I love both sports but I can totally understand this viewpoint. There is an appeal to the purity and simplicity of boxing, nowhere to hide, no plan B, its basically rock vs rock whereas MMA is rock, paper, scissors. Its a lot more aesthetically pleasing too whereas MMA is quite messy and chaotic.

I think the appeal of MMA though is its the ultimate arena for proving who the best fighters are. Obviously there are still rules but 90+% of the techniques from basically every unarmed martial art are allowed. Its by far the closest combat sport to basically putting two guys in a room unarmed and seeing who would walk out, and that lends a certain weight and legitimacy to it and to the fighters imo.


Definitely a bad idea to grapple in the street if you can avoid it. But in a 1 on 1 situation generally if you have a grappler vs a pure striker the guy that wants to close distance and grab is gonna come out on top.

Obviously MMA fighters are a mix of the two though.I doubt most would bother grappling on the street unless the other person happened to be a boxer.

Boxing has intimidation factor if ganged up on

Regular person will get gun shy upon seeing their partner get laid out