Expect More MMA Stars to Have Boxing Matches Now

[_original_]

So Jake Paul can keep kicking their ass?

Cant believe Paul is a better representative for boxing that Fury.

[JakeTheBoxer]

It makes sense only in hw division.

Anybody thinks Beterbiev would struggle in a boxing match with MMA guy of his size?

[Rockin']

It makes sense only in hw division.

Anybody thinks Beterbiev would struggle in a boxing match with MMA guy of his size?

Fury got an easy match with his mma guy.

Hence his lack of training and skill displayed in the bout.

Beterbiev , if prepared properly, would carve an mma guy up while he sets him on his ass.

And if not propelry prepared, would give the Fury performance that we last saw out of him.

..............Rockin'

[Marchegiano]

All this shyt is gonna do in the long run is quickly drive MMA pay up, and boxing will as a result lose one of the few things it has left in its favour.

What is different now that did not exist during the Greek period, or the Roman period, or from the 1520s to the 1640s, or the 1720s, or the 1840s?


I'm just guessing too, but, the pattern we know goes like this; Boxing finds itself at a low in terms of public interest. A new sport with more relaxed, open, or no rules thrives in terms of interest but struggles in terms of capital. Said new sport can attract some level of talent and said talent increases as this new sport grows in capital. As the new sport begins to show signs of challenging boxing's role as the money sport in fighting the athletes themselves defect to boxing to get paid. The new sport becomes something of a feeder league where their best athletes use the new sport as a way in to the fight game with the goal of becoming a champion boxer not terribly unlike a tough man contest.


A lot of that, at this point, is checked off but that doesn't mean modernism of some form won't change things. You could be right, but why would you be? I'm not trying to be a ****, I am trying to pick your brain and get your perspective. We may disagree but I'm not baiting a flame-fest here. I mean this post to be respectful.

[TMLT87]

What is different now that did not exist during the Greek period, or the Roman period, or from the 1520s to the 1640s, or the 1720s, or the 1840s?


I'm just guessing too, but, the pattern we know goes like this; Boxing finds itself at a low in terms of public interest. A new sport with more relaxed, open, or no rules thrives in terms of interest but struggles in terms of capital. Said new sport can attract some level of talent and said talent increases as this new sport grows in capital. As the new sport begins to show signs of challenging boxing's role as the money sport in fighting the athletes themselves defect to boxing to get paid. The new sport becomes something of a feeder league where their best athletes use the new sport as a way in to the fight game with the goal of becoming a champion boxer not terribly unlike a tough man contest.


A lot of that, at this point, is checked off but that doesn't mean modernism of some form won't change things. You could be right, but why would you be? I'm not trying to be a ****, I am trying to pick your brain and get your perspective. We may disagree but I'm not baiting a flame-fest here. I mean this post to be respectful.

I think its pretty obvious at this point that boxing is never again going to be at the level it was in the last millenium before MMA existed/got big, and that MMA has entrenched itself now. To me Youtubers and MMA fighters headlining major boxing events is not a sign of boxing being in good health, its a sign of boxing needing outside help to generate mainstream interest. Also the way the UFC is set up, it keeps the train rolling regardless of any of this stuff, its more like a sports league.

I definitely dont think boxing is gonna "die" but I think the situation is probably going to be how it has been really for a while now. A 1a/1b thing where the popularity of each fluctuates a bit year by year or month by month depending on whatever fights are booked in either at the time, and they are both ahead in certain metrics. Perhaps MMA may jump ahead a little over the years as the money grows but its never going to be what we had up until the 90s where one combat sport (boxing) absolutely dwarfed everything else.

[Marchegiano]

I think its pretty obvious at this point that boxing is never again going to be at the level it was in the last millenium before MMA existed/got big, and that MMA has entrenched itself now. To me Youtubers and MMA fighters headlining major boxing events is not a sign of boxing being in good health, its a sign of boxing needing outside help to generate mainstream interest. Also the way the UFC is set up, it keeps the train rolling regardless of any of this stuff, its more like a sports league.

I definitely dont think boxing is gonna "die" but I think the situation is probably going to be how it has been really for a while now. A 1a/1b thing where the popularity of each fluctuates a bit year by year or month by month depending on whatever fights are booked in either at the time, and they are both ahead in certain metrics. Perhaps MMA may jump ahead a little over the years as the money grows but its never going to be what we had up until the 90s where one combat sport (boxing) absolutely dwarfed everything else.

Well, that's not a crazy prediction at all but I am curious why. My question was why not what, again, not trying to be a **** or combative, I just don't see anything different than the history that's already happened.

To give one example, think of the era of the sword. You already know boxing was an ancient sport that pre-dates any sword-based sport, event, competition, or even exhibition/display. Sword based events were massively popular and boxing was not just on the low, it was illegal.

Where is sword fighting now? Some HEMA **** right? Bro, this did not happen once. What I wrote is like a synapsis for an event that took place all over Europe at different times, which is why I said "sword era" rather than a specific year. Happened in the 1500s in Italy but not until the 1700s in England.

Okay, but that was so long ago how about more recent.

What happened to Rough - n - Tumble? RnT exists in the USA from the early 1600s until the 1890s. It's really simple, rules are agreed to pre-fight, there are 0 codified or united rules all participants follow. RnT in America is way more popular than LPRR, the form of boxing of that day, until abouts the 1850s, hung around until the 1890s.


Even more recently, the transition from Bare Knuckle to Queensbury.

Throw it way, way, way, back and you can even used military training as an example of boxing's ability to not just survive different martial arts or sports but thrive and find itself on top again. Boxing pre-dates formations, boxing pre-date knowledge of asian martial arts, boxing pre-dates all firearms, boxing is still part of modern military training.


It's a marvel of a sport that's been here since before Sparta was called Sparta. It's seen countless other forms of fighting for countless useless raise in popularity, taper, then fall off in the thousands of years it has existed. Always a mainstay in the culture of the known world.



Again, you are not wrong per-se. It's all just prediction. Interest for interests sake really. I wonder what AI predicts.

[TMLT87]

Well, that's not a crazy prediction at all but I am curious why. My question was why not what, again, not trying to be a **** or combative, I just don't see anything different than the history that's already happened.

To give one example, think of the era of the sword. You already know boxing was an ancient sport that pre-dates any sword-based sport, event, competition, or even exhibition/display. Sword based events were massively popular and boxing was not just on the low, it was illegal.

Where is sword fighting now? Some HEMA **** right? Bro, this did not happen once. What I wrote is like a synapsis for an event that took place all over Europe at different times, which is why I said "sword era" rather than a specific year. Happened in the 1500s in Italy but not until the 1700s in England.

Okay, but that was so long ago how about more recent.

What happened to Rough - n - Tumble? RnT exists in the USA from the early 1600s until the 1890s. It's really simple, rules are agreed to pre-fight, there are 0 codified or united rules all participants follow. RnT in America is way more popular than LPRR, the form of boxing of that day, until abouts the 1850s, hung around until the 1890s.


Even more recently, the transition from Bare Knuckle to Queensbury.

Throw it way, way, way, back and you can even used military training as an example of boxing's ability to not just survive different martial arts or sports but thrive and find itself on top again. Boxing pre-dates formations, boxing pre-date knowledge of asian martial arts, boxing pre-dates all firearms, boxing is still part of modern military training.


It's a marvel of a sport that's been here since before Sparta was called Sparta. It's seen countless other forms of fighting for countless useless raise in popularity, taper, then fall off in the thousands of years it has existed. Always a mainstay in the culture of the known world.



Again, you are not wrong per-se. It's all just prediction. Interest for interests sake really. I wonder what AI predicts.

The world is completely different now though in terms of the presence of mass media and how much exposure and access people have to different things. Millions of people werent tuning in to watch fights in the 1700s. Organised sports as we know them today essentially didnt exist. I would assume (you seem to know a lot about this so you tell me) that a lot of why boxing was "cleaned up" into what we now recognise as boxing was to make it more palatable and presentable in the mass media age?

Anyway, at this point the UFC is 30 years in, and has been legitimately competitive with boxing for a good 15 or so. Boxing is still here and doing fine but is it ever going to occupy the kind of space in the sporting landscape it had up until the 80s, arguably 90s? is MMA ever going to shrink back into 90s/early 00s levels of obscurity again? it seems pretty unlikely, imo.

FWIW, I dont think MMA can grow much beyond where it is either. Theres perhaps room for more growth outside of the UFC, but I think the biggest stars and fights they've had so far are more or less the ceiling. I cant see there being years that are much bigger than 2016 and 2009 were, its peaked.

[NYG]

Hey Puta don't get traded round the pod for some commissary & stamps while calling home for $ you'll never receive you micro di.. weak ass bit..

Suck my ****ing **** you piece of ****

[SN!PER]

There's gonna be a lot of young MMA prospects trying to make a name for themselves in boxing...

...and there's gonna be a lot of brutal knockouts lol

[TMLT87]

There's gonna be a lot of young MMA prospects trying to make a name for themselves in boxing...

...and there's gonna be a lot of brutal knockouts lol

Its not gonna be prospects. Its going to be the guys who have already built a name for themselves in MMA, who can leverage their star power into the big paydays and high profile fights immediately.