Your opinion on UFC?

Nodin · 30-09-2012 9:23pm

Micky Dolenz wrote: »

You don't have anything to prove.

Nodin, Biggins is going to kick your ass.

Indeed. There is, however, a queue.

Biggins wrote:

Just being far over hyper-sensitive when someone don't like his favoured sport..

My favoured sport is in fact boxing. My problem, as I illustrated earlier, is not the fact that you don't like it.

Nodin · 30-09-2012 9:28pm

Biggins wrote: »

..........

I'll give you the benefit of the doubt, and thus apologise for impugning your honesty. However, I still maintain that the statement was rather a stupid one.

areyawell · 30-09-2012 9:29pm

UFC is fake dont know how people can watch it. Only thing I watch is WWE. John Cena is the best. Just look at this. Should be multi platnium artist. Miles better than eminem

and

Biggins · 30-09-2012 9:32pm

Nodin wrote: »

Indeed. There is, however, a queue.

"Nothing is so dangerous as an ignorant friend. Better is it to have a wise enemy."
Jean de La Fontaine

Micky Dolenz · 30-09-2012 9:33pm

Nodin wrote: »

Indeed. There is, however, a queue.

My favoured sport is in fact boxing. My problem, as I illustrated earlier, is not the fact that you don't like it.

The second quote isn't mine.

Biggins · 30-09-2012 9:34pm

Nodin wrote: »

I'll give you the benefit of the doubt, and thus apologise for impugning your honesty. However, I still maintain that the statement was rather a stupid one.

No worries - I'll still have that friendly drink with you some day.

(Wouldn't be the first time I'd said something stupid.)

Rigol · 30-09-2012 9:34pm

OP posted

"He also says that no UFC fighter could compete with the science of a Floyd Mayweather"

lets hear some thoughts on that.

I say even in a mma ring mayweather could still tear some a.ss.
They'd have a heck of a time getting past his hands.

1ZRed · 30-09-2012 9:36pm

Napper Hawkins wrote: »

Oh sthop it you!

Not until you're firmly playing on my side of the road!

yore · 30-09-2012 9:36pm

Nodin wrote: »

The purpose of pro-boxing is to win. The purpose of amateur boxing is to win. The shorter length of the amateur bout makes knockouts less likely.

Over the 30 plus years I've been watching boxing? Yes, indeed I have.

Many bouts yourself?

Ever been to an amateur show?

Nodin · 30-09-2012 9:37pm

Micky Dolenz wrote: »

The second quote isn't mine.

My bad. Tis fixed.

Professey Chin · 30-09-2012 9:38pm

Rigol wrote: »

OP posted

"He also says that no UFC fighter could compete with the science of a Floyd Mayweather"

lets hear some thoughts on that.

I say even in a mma ring mayweather could still tear some a.ss.
They'd have a heck of a time getting past his hands.

In a boxing match he'd beat any mma fighter. In an mma fight he'd be on his back and tapping in under a minute. No question about it

Nodin · 30-09-2012 9:38pm

yore wrote: »

Many bouts yourself?

Ever been to an amateur show?

I have, as the national stadium is within walking distance.

This is going somewhere....?

SureYWouldntYa · 30-09-2012 9:42pm

areyawell wrote: »

UFC is fake dont know how people can watch it. Only thing I watch is WWE. John Cena is the best. Just look at this. Should be multi platnium artist. Miles better than eminem

are ya well ?

yore · 30-09-2012 9:44pm

Nodin wrote: »

I have, as the national stadium is within walking distance.

This is going somewhere....?

Yeah, was just wondering how many bouts you'd had yourself. Or how many kids you'd coached.

Because a lot of people don't understand the difference between pro and amateur. I said I didn't have much time for pro boxing but really like the amateurs. You asked me to explain that to you. You don't seem to think that that is a legitimate position.

Have you ever been inside a local club. One full of kids that will train for years to have some bouts. If the kid loses his bout, he's not thrown out of the club. It's not all about winning.

enfant terrible · 30-09-2012 9:45pm

Rigol wrote: »

OP posted

"He also says that no UFC fighter could compete with the science of a Floyd Mayweather"

lets hear some thoughts on that.

I say even in a mma ring mayweather could still tear some a.ss.
They'd have a heck of a time getting past his hands.

He'd be destroyed by this guy who weighs less than nine stone.

http://www.ufc.com/fighter/Demetrious-Johnson

Nodin · 30-09-2012 9:50pm

yore wrote: »

Yeah, was just wondering how many bouts you'd had yourself. Or how many kids you'd coached.

Because a lot of people don't understand the difference between pro and amateur. I said I didn't have much time for pro boxing but really like the amateurs. You asked me to explain that to you. You don't seem to think that that is a legitimate position.

Have you ever been inside a local club. One full of kids that will train for years to have some bouts. If the kid loses his bout, he's not thrown out of the club. It's not all about winning.

.....the idea in the ring is to win the bout. Your statement was

The purpose of amateur boxing is to be fast and accurate, to hit and not be hit, to score points. The purpose of Pro boxing is to knock the other fella out

....not any comment about amateur boxing and the benefits thereof, more of a go at the skill level of the pros.

ScumLord · 30-09-2012 9:57pm

I wasn't to impressed with MMA until I watched UFC from number 1 up to todays. Boxing is one of the martial arts and is now just a disapline within MMA.

Boxing has spectators in mind, it's geared to keep the action going and is very restrictive in what you can do for that purpose, boxers still generate the most power in their punches but thats a learned skill that MMA fighters have too, it's just an MMA punch has to keep in mind that kicks and take downs can happen after you throw a punch.

It takes a time investment to understand UFC, it's complicated due to the range the fighters have but it is a much more superior sport in my opinion due to that range. The fighters have to have a much wider knowledge, they have to be fit in ways boxers don't have to be and Jiu Jitsu ads a real chess match side to the fight that just isn't needed in boxing. People don't understand the ground game so they find it boring compared to boxing but if you had an understanding of whats happening it changes how you veiw fights entirely.

It's going to superseed boxing, boxings corupt and all about the money, good fights aren't happening so that some guy can build up the purse for his retirement fight. MMA fighters are constantly learning and constantly fighting, boxing is still one of the most important martial arts to have a good grounding in but it's going to become just one aspect of MMA.

yore · 30-09-2012 10:03pm

Nodin wrote: »

.....the idea in the ring is to win the bout. Your statement was

....not any comment about amateur boxing and the benefits thereof, more of a go at the skill level of the pros.

I never had a go at the skills levels

. Amateur boxing is a more technical sport. That in no way implies that pro participants are less skilled.

What I originally said was,

yore wrote: »

I'm not a big fan of pro boxing, but I think amateur boxing is fantastic sport.

And you replied

Nodin wrote: »

...you'll have to explain that to me.

The reason I asked how many bouts yourself was to try to find out whether you had much actual experience of amateur boxing. I would be interested in hearing your opinions if you had. I think most am boxers would understand my point. They might not agree with it but wouldn't ask me to explain it!

yore · 30-09-2012 10:09pm

enfant terrible wrote: »

He'd be destroyed by this guy who weighs less than nine stone.

http://www.ufc.com/fighter/Demetrious-Johnson

What is this supposed to prove

In ufc you use kicks/elbows/grapple/punches. In boxing you can use punches.

I was a sh1t junior gaelic footballer. In GAA we kick/catch/fist/solo/block the ball. In soccer you can kick/head the ball. If you put me on a junior GAA pitch tomorrow marking Lionel Messi (or whoever, I don't know feck all about soccer), I'd probably be able to get as many scores off him as he would off me. That doesn't in any way mean I'm better than him!

Biggins · 30-09-2012 10:09pm

The Great Chinholio wrote: »

In a boxing match he'd beat any mma fighter. In an mma fight he'd be on his back and tapping in under a minute. No question about it

To be fair, every sport and its pro's and cons.

I'm often asked for example of a boxer and a karate fighter were in the same ring, who would win?

* A good karate fighter would know about hand and leg work, besides locks and grips, etc.
* A boxer would know more about maybe punches, constant movement and other aspects not included in Karate.

If a good boxer can strike at a small distance before a karate person can get in close, he/she could overcome their opponent.
The visa-versa applies.

The same principle of a good wrestler against a boxer applies too.
If a boxer is still standing he might win, if he's on the ground he might be a lot more prone to losing (given the skills of another used to lower ground level fighting)!

The above is a short version explanation.

Professey Chin · 30-09-2012 10:11pm

Biggins wrote: »

To be fair, every sport and its pro's and cons.

I'm often asked for example of a boxer and a karate fighter were in the same ring, who would win?

* A good karate fighter would know about hand and leg work, besides locks and grips, etc.
* A boxer would know more about maybe punches, constant movement and other aspects not included in Karate.

If a good boxer can strike at a small distance before a karate person can get in close, he/she could overcome their opponent.
The visa-versa applies.

The same principle of a good wrestler against a boxer applies too.
If a boxer is still standing he might win, if he's on the ground he might be a lot more prone to losing!

The above is a short version explanation.

And the simple reality is a boxer doesnt know how to stop a takedown especially low like a toe hold and wouldnt be able to counter/defend it.
If the boxers standing he can win but in an MMA fight he wont be able to stay standing.

yore · 30-09-2012 10:12pm

Biggins wrote: »

To be fair, every sport and its pro's and cons.

I'm often asked for example of a boxer and a karate fighter were in the same ring, who would win?

* A good karate fighter would know about hand and leg work, besides locks and grips, etc.
* A boxer would know more about maybe punches, constant movement and other aspects not included in Karate.

If a good boxer can strike at a small distance before a karate person can get in close, he/she could overcome their opponent.
The visa-versa applies.

The same principle of a good wrestler against a boxer applies too.
If a boxer is still standing he might win, if he's on the ground he might be a lot more prone to losing (given the skills of another used to lower ground level fighting)!

The above is a short version explanation.

My Da would bleedin' batter your Da

(That's what this thread is becoming)

mackg · 30-09-2012 10:14pm

Fight_Night wrote: »

Your Dad obviously just doesn't know what he's talking about. Mixed Martial Arts, as the name suggests, is just a mix of martial arts(fighting styles), and is no more akin to human cockfighting than boxing is.

I much prefer it to boxing myself. It's safer, far more entertaining and because it's essentially a no weapons street fight in a boxing ring, you can see who the best overall fighter is, as opposed to who has the best punches or the best feet.

It's not really though. There are a load of rules to it.

http://www.ufc.com/discover/sport/rules-and-regulations#15

Micky Dolenz wrote: »

Mod

I can confirm that Biggins is in fact, this man.

He's a Republican?

ScumLord wrote: »

It's going to superseed boxing, boxings corupt and all about the money, good fights aren't happening so that some guy can build up the purse for his retirement fight. MMA fighters are constantly learning and constantly fighting, boxing is still one of the most important martial arts to have a good grounding in but it's going to become just one aspect of MMA.

Hopefully UFC won't end up the same but it's not hard to see it happening.

ScumLord · 30-09-2012 10:14pm

Biggins wrote: »

I'm often asked for example of a boxer and a karate fighter were in the same ring, who would win?

With MMA you can find out what will actually happen.

karates advantage over boxing would be the karate guy could keep the boxer at distance and out of striking range, legs are longer than arms so they can hit from further away. There is a famous karatee fighter in UFC at the moment Lyoto Machida, some people find him boring because he stays out of harms way and waits for his moment to give an effective kick.

B.A._Baracus · 30-09-2012 10:15pm

Geez. John Cena rapping is terrible. :pac:

On the subject of wwe and it being fake. Reckon a few UFC fights had to of been "rigged" aswell. Happened in boxing. Happened in cricket. Happens with anything where big money is at hand.

Biggins · 30-09-2012 10:16pm

The Great Chinholio wrote: »

And the simple reality is a boxer doesnt know how to stop a takedown especially low like a toe hold and wouldnt be able to counter/defend it.
If the boxers standing he can win but in an MMA fight he wont be able to stay standing.

Indeed.

Professey Chin · 30-09-2012 10:17pm

B.A._Baracus wrote: »

Geez. John Cena rapping is terrible. :pac:

On the subject of wwe and it being fake. Reckon a few UFC fights had to of been "rigged" aswell. Happened in boxing. Happened in cricket. Happens with anything where big money is at hand.

Its happened in Japan a few times. Outside that theres been questionable decisions but never any allegations of corruption

Biggins · 30-09-2012 10:17pm

mackg wrote: »

...He's a Republican?

We are all Republicans south of the border!

mackg · 30-09-2012 10:22pm

The Great Chinholio wrote: »

And the simple reality is a boxer doesnt know how to stop a takedown especially low like a toe hold and wouldnt be able to counter/defend it.
If the boxers standing he can win but in an MMA fight he wont be able to stay standing.

This is true. Just ask James Toney

Internet Hero · 30-09-2012 10:23pm

James Toney got tapped out by Randy, but it was well known that Toney wasn't doing much by way of wrestling/grappling in his training camp, instead hoping to rely on his shoulder rolling and head movement. He got shown up in an mma setting. That however is not to say that a talented boxer, like Toney, couldn't be a little mma gem if he was able to get some takedown defence and grappling.

Junior Dos Santos relies on boxing and is able to do so because his takedown defence is so good he forces people to stand and bang with him like he did with Frank Mir.

Dangerous Man · 30-09-2012 10:32pm

Overwhelmingly, boxers have little to no chance against MMA fighters. They haven't trained to stop TDs; they haven't trained to transition on the floor; they haven't trained to prevent submissions; they haven't trained to avoid / check leg kicks; they haven't trained to avoid Muay Thai clinches; they haven't trained at the distances required to fight MMA; they haven't trained to understand the different types of stances needed when you're fighting different types of fighters - the list is endless.

MMA is highly technical - much more so than boxing and requires much more rounded skills.

Having said that - Ray Mercer knocked out Tim Sylvia... although Sylvia, well, the less said about him the better.

Biggins · 30-09-2012 10:35pm

I just want to say, I miss Sumo wrestling.
There should be more of it!

scudzilla · 30-09-2012 10:35pm

I can't stand this UFC thing, it's all fake.

Anybody can do it, all ya gotta do is kick and punch someone till they shout 'stop'

Any Top 20 boxer would beat ANY UFC fighter

Biggins · 30-09-2012 10:37pm

scudzilla wrote: »

...Any Top 20 boxer would beat ANY UFC fighter

IF he/she is still standing long enough to win!

El Guapo! · 30-09-2012 10:41pm

Biggins wrote: »

I just want to say, I miss Sumo wrestling.
There should be more of it!

It's riddled with corruption though.

Biggins · 30-09-2012 10:42pm

Dean09 wrote: »

It's riddled with corruption though.

So it seems at times.
Darn shame.

ScumLord · 30-09-2012 10:44pm

Dangerous Man wrote: »

they haven't trained to avoid Muay Thai clinches;

I actually have a friend who is doing boxing training and he spars with a kickboxer every so often and the kick boxer throws kickboxing punches. Boxing turns out to have very few punches, there's essentially only 6 in amature but they generate a hell of a lot more power than anything in kickboxing. The kickboxer was throwing a higher volume of punches though.

scudzilla · 30-09-2012 10:49pm

Biggins wrote: »

IF he/she is still standing long enough to win!

no, at any time in any way. UFC is a fixed sport

Dangerous Man · 30-09-2012 10:49pm

scudzilla wrote: »

I can't stand this UFC thing, it's all fake.

Anybody can do it, all ya gotta do is kick and punch someone till they shout 'stop'

Any Top 20 boxer would beat ANY UFC fighter

Okay. Thanks.

Biggins · 30-09-2012 10:50pm

scudzilla wrote: »

no, at any time in any way. UFC is a fixed sport

El Guapo! · 30-09-2012 10:51pm

Dangerous Man wrote: »

scudzilla wrote: »

I can't stand this UFC thing, it's all fake.

Anybody can do it, all ya gotta do is kick and punch someone till they shout 'stop'

Any Top 20 boxer would beat ANY UFC fighter

Okay. Thanks.

I'd hazard a guess that was tongue in cheek.
Either that or he lost a lot of money in last nights event!!

rossie1977 · 30-09-2012 11:26pm

flyswatter wrote: »

I've no interest in UFC but this statement is a bit daft in fairness.

while obviously one is real and the other entertainment, dana white (ufc president) has used alot of ideas that were made popular by wwe owner vince mcmahon to build ufc, thats no secret, white would admit it himself, mcmahon made his money in ppv, merchandise, cable tv and a strong international market, white has followed, its also somewhat ironic that the biggest star in ufc history is a man who made his name in wwe, a certain brock lesnar

Father Damo · 30-09-2012 11:33pm

Internet Hero wrote: »

Cage fighting. My dad is a big boxing fan but he doesn't like UFC. He says it is savagry and that boxing is science. He also says that no UFC fighter could compete with the science of a Flyod Mayweather. He says it is human cock fighting.

What you think? UFC good or bad?

He is completely correct. Boxing is an art. UFC is professional playground brawling.

In your pants.

The only thing more pathetic than UFC is the fanboys who claim I dont like it because I dont get it or appreciate the skill of it. I do get it. I do appreciate that the fighters train hard. It still does not mean it is not a joke of a sport. Utter skanger entertainment for cretins.

Agricola · 30-09-2012 11:34pm

Im sure theres a lot of skill involved in UFC but the untrained eye really doesnt see it as it mostly ends up in the 2 fellas rolling around on the floor for most of the match.
Id rather watch a boxing match any day.

B.A._Baracus · 30-09-2012 11:39pm

Agricola wrote: »

Im sure theres a lot of skill involved in UFC but the untrained eye really doesnt see it as it mostly ends up in the 2 fellas rolling around on the floor for most of the match.
Id rather watch a boxing match any day.

A good point.

IMO, alot of MMA fights can be boring. Two guys just totally cautious of each other. Of course, with good reason! not wanting to make a false move and leave themself open for something... but that can often not translate well for "good television"

To quote Dana White himself "I wanna see action" - sadly MMA being a legit fight can often lead to uneventful fights.

enfant terrible · 30-09-2012 11:47pm

yore wrote: »

What is this supposed to prove

In ufc you use kicks/elbows/grapple/punches. In boxing you can use punches.

I was a sh1t junior gaelic footballer. In GAA we kick/catch/fist/solo/block the ball. In soccer you can kick/head the ball. If you put me on a junior GAA pitch tomorrow marking Lionel Messi (or whoever, I don't know feck all about soccer), I'd probably be able to get as many scores off him as he would off me. That doesn't in any way mean I'm better than him!

What are you talking about did you even read the post I was replying to

"I say even in a mma ring mayweather could still tear some a.ss.
They'd have a heck of a time getting past his hands. "

He asked about how mayweather would get on in a mma ring and I replied back to that.

Where did I say a UFC fighter beating a boxer in a cage proves anything?

yore · 01-10-2012 12:05am

enfant terrible wrote: »

Rigol wrote: »

OP posted

"He also says that no UFC fighter could compete with the science of a Floyd Mayweather"

lets hear some thoughts on that.

I say even in a mma ring mayweather could still tear some a.ss.
They'd have a heck of a time getting past his hands.

He'd be destroyed by this guy who weighs less than nine stone.

http://www.ufc.com/fighter/Demetrious-Johnson

enfant terrible wrote: »

What are you talking about did you even read the post I was replying to

"I say even in a mma ring mayweather could still tear some a.ss.
They'd have a heck of a time getting past his hands. "

He asked about how mayweather would get on in a mma ring and I replied back to that.

Where did I say a UFC fighter beating a boxer in a cage proves anything?

Yes I read the posts.

The other poster asked for thoughts on the fact that mayweather would handle himself at MMA. You relpied Mayweather would be destroyed by some 9 stone UFC fella. Sorry if I misunderstood, but you seemed to be implying that the UFC fella is "better". Why else compare across sports? What was the point you were making then

EDIT. Sorry. I probably should have directed my post at the previous poster too as he initially asked the question

enfant terrible · 01-10-2012 12:08am

yore wrote: »

Yes I read the posts.

The other poster asked for thoughts on the fact that mayweather would handle himself at MMA. You relpied Mayweather would be destroyed by some 9 stone UFC fella. Sorry if I misunderstood, but you seemed to be implying that the UFC fella is "better". Why else compare across sports? What was the point you were making then

"Why else compare across sports?"

That was his whole question, he asked how mayweather would do in a cage, I replied back to that question.

And again I never said the mma guy is "better"

He would be destroyed by mayweather in a boxing ring obviously.

enfant terrible · 01-10-2012 12:10am

yore wrote: »

Yes I read the posts.

The other poster asked for thoughts on the fact that mayweather would handle himself at MMA. You relpied Mayweather would be destroyed by some 9 stone UFC fella. Sorry if I misunderstood, but you seemed to be implying that the UFC fella is "better". Why else compare across sports? What was the point you were making then

EDIT. Sorry. I probably should have directed my post at the previous poster too as he initially asked the question

No need to apologise easy mistake to make.

ScumLord · 01-10-2012 12:14am

rossie1977 wrote: »

its also somewhat ironic that the biggest star in ufc history is a man who made his name in wwe, a certain brock lesnar

Brook Lesner was a joke, the only reason he got big fights was due to his name and he was shown for the joke that he is in just about every fight. He made his money out of UFC and quit because he couldn't hack it, he was lucky in the fights he won.

Father Damo wrote: »

He is completely correct. Boxing is an art. UFC is professional playground brawling.

If boxing is an art then so is every other martial art making MMA a superior art as it incorporates all the arts. It is a new martial art in it's own right because it's not hampered by the restrictions of the individual martial arts which requires a new way of implimenting the individual disciplines. It's complete nonsense to say the art form you happen to like is better than all the rest.

Your opinion on UFC?

Comments