Official Conor McGregor thread (part 4) *Updated Warning in 1st Post Re:Boxing match

Ush1

walshb wrote: »

Oh, I thought you were saying that he (Gracie) solved the 'wonder' argument, that any top 2000 MMA fighter beats any elite boxer in a "true" fight....

Isn't a "true" fight what MMA is? A fight with the least possible amount of rules whilst also being somewhat "safe" so that it can actually take place.

walshb

Ush1 wrote: »

Isn't a "true" fight what MMA is? A fight with the least possible amount of rules whilst also being somewhat "safe" so that it can actually take place.

I'd agree there.

Frank Bullitt

Ush1 wrote: »

Which martial art is most effective in a very limited rules situation.

So that would be BJJ then.

Correct me if I am wrong but weren't the early UFC events pretty much no holds barred? Hardly a "very limited rules situation".

EagererBeaver

Ush1 wrote: »

Isn't a "true" fight what MMA is? A fight with the least possible amount of rules whilst also being somewhat "safe" so that it can actually take place.

Is it? Who decided that? Why not a street fight? Or a knife fight? Why should it be unarmed?

EagererBeaver

The delicious irony here about the "top 2,000 MMA fighter demolishes any elite boxer" argument is that it completely ignores what is pretty much McGregor's only hope in the Mayweather fight - a big KO punch.

What happens in the theoretical fight where the boxer throws one shot that lands flush and the MMA fighter is out cold? It's the exact same arguement that people are clinging to here and then calling people "snobs" for giving McGregor next to no chance. Wonder for example, why do you get to make that claim and then complain that McGregor is being disrespected?

Outlaw Pete

walshb wrote: »

Well, seeing as I give Conor next to no hope of doing it it's not like I am that far off.....

But can't you see how saying something as dismissive as that, is sneering at the skills McGregor has shown thus far?

With regards to his ability to hurt fighters with punches that is..........

I mean, just because he has shown his punching skills within the confines of MMA, doesn't mean that they should be seen as of having such irrelevance that his chances of doing similar within the boxing ring...... are still roughly the same as the chances you'd have?

Sure, you even said that Mayweather could win with one hand.

That's snobbish tbf and you're far from alone as there are many like you that laugh at the chances of McGregor being able to land so much as a punch...........

But then, Paulie Malignaggi said he'd beat McGregor with one hand and a neck brace, doubt he'd suggest similar again.

Come Aug 27th, hopefully Paulie's not the only one with egg on his face in that regard.

walshb

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

Sure, you even said that Mayweather could win with one hand.

.

It's the hard truth of what I believe. He would win only being able to punch with one arm.

I would say that if Conor was my own flesh and blood. It's nothing against Conor.

I'd say the exact same if Poirier got in there, or even Aldo got in there, or Alvarez got in there...

People need to remove their sensitivities around this and not take these claims or beliefs as personal attacks on Conor.

It's nothing to do with a dislike of Conor or a snobbery regarding boxing.

I love boxing. I like MMA....

Frank Bullitt

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

But can't you see how saying something as dismissive as that, is sneering at the skills McGregor has shown thus far?

With regards to his ability to hurt fighters with punches that is..........

I mean, just because he has shown his skills within the confines of MMA, doesn't mean that they should be seen as of having such irrelevance that his chances of doing similar within the boxing ring...... are still roughly the same as the chances you'd have?

Sure, you even said that Mayweather could win with one hand.

That's snobbish tbf and you're far from alone as there are many like you that laugh at the chances of McGregor being able to land so much as a punch...........

But then, Paulie Malignaggi said he'd beat McGregor with one hand and a neck brace, doubt he'd suggest similar again. Come Aug 27th, hopefully Paulie's not the only one with egg on his in that regard.

Not to be pedantic, and it might not have been you, but I was bringing up certain aspects of his game in MMA to boxing and pointing (what I see) as flaws that would be a bad idea for boxing.

His hands for instance, when he is throwing his right, his left drops, when he is trowing his left, his right drops. He brings his chin up as well to look over his arm, where it is slightly exposed. He crosses his feet a lot as well, even in MMA. He also drags his hands back to his midsection/waits after his throws, which leaves himself open for counters.

When I did the above I was told "but yeah, thats in MMA man, not the same". Again, not sure if it was you or someone else. But if you are going to use his MMA skills as a positive then you have to use them as a negative as well in the confines of a boxing match.

GerryDerpy

walshb wrote: »

It's the hard truth of what I believe. He would win only being able to punch with one arm.

I would say that if Conor was my own flesh and blood. It's nothing against Conor.

I'd say the exact same if Poirier got in there, or even Aldo got in there, or Alvarez got in there...

People need to remove their sensitivities around this and not take these claims or beliefs as personal attacks on Conor.

It's nothing to do with a dislike of Conor or a snobbery regarding boxing.

I love boxing. I like MMA....

And you need to stop thinking people are sensitive towards criticisms of Conor. I just think you're talking crap, nothing to do with being sensitive.

How can someone go 12 rounds against Paulie and by Paulie's admission win 7 rounds yet still be written off against a one armed Floyd Mayweather. It is just absurd and makes it look like you are just throwing OTT opinions out for the sake of it.

Outlaw Pete

Gintonious wrote: »

Not to be pedantic, and it might not have been you, but I was bringing up certain aspects of his game in MMA to boxing and pointing (what I see) as flaws that would be a bad idea for boxing.

His hands for instance, when he is throwing his right, his left drops, when he is trowing his left, his right drops. He brings his chin up as well to look over his arm, where it is slightly exposed. He crosses his feet a lot as well, even in MMA. He also drags his hands back to his midsection/waits after his throws, which leaves himself open for counters.

When I did the above I was told "but yeah, thats in MMA man, not the same". Again, not sure if it was you or someone else. But if you are going to use his MMA skills as a positive then you have to use them as a negative as well in the confines of a boxing match.

You're not comprehending the point......... and tbf, it was explained to you often enough at the time and so I'm not sure why.

A video was made that froze the action in an MMA fight, circled Conor's right hand, said he held it too low and also said that he held his chin up, was too square and rigid....... and you, and a few others, mirrored those views.... but that showed/shows a total ignorance of MMA..

The second fight with Diaz was the clip dissected in that video and what they failed to appreciate, as did those taht felt the guy made good points, was that in those fights Conor deliberately has his right low so that he could defend against Nate's kicks and also any attempted take downs. In fact he did quite well in that regard as Nate never succeeded in taking him down for that whole fight (well, not until the dying seconds at least).

So, you're retort will now no doubt be: 'Well, if we can't highlight his weak points in MMA fights, and say they put him in danger, then how come it is okay for you to highlight positive aspects of his MMA fighting and say they will help him in a boxing ring?' ........ right?

Well, that's real easy, as he won't be bringing the aspects of his MMA fighting (which you and others keep referring to) into the boxing ring, that would be ludicrous........... but he very much will be bringing the aspects of his MMA fighting which I, and others have cited, that's the difference......... and a pretty damn crucial one.

walshb

GerryDerpy wrote: »

And you need to stop thinking people are sensitive towards criticisms of Conor. I just think you're talking crap, nothing to do with being sensitive.

How can someone go 12 rounds against Paulie and by Paulie's admission win 7 rounds yet still be written off against a paraplegic Floyd Mayweather. It is just absurd and makes it look like you are just throwing OTT opinions out for the sake of it.

Paulie/Floyd?

I'll say no more....

I'd give Conor a better chance at beating a two armed Paulie than a one armed Floyd..

Frank Bullitt

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

You're not comprehending the point......... and tbf, it was explained to you often enough at the time and so I'm not sure why.

A video was made that froze the action in an MMA fight, circled Conor's right hand, said he held it too low and also said that he held his chin up, was too square and rigid....... and you, and a few others, mirrored those views.... but that showed/shows a total ignorance of MMA..

The second fight with Diaz was the clip dissected in that video and what they failed to appreciate, as did those taht felt the guy made good points, was that in those fights Conor deliberately has his right low so that he could defend against Nate's kicks and also any attempted take downs. In fact he did quite well in that regard as Nate never succeeded in taking him down for that whole fight (well, not until the dying seconds at least).

So, you're retort will now no doubt be: 'Well, if we can't highlight his weak points in MMA fights, and say they put him in danger, then how come it is okay for you to highlight positive aspects of his MMA fighting and say they will help him in a boxing ring?' ........ right?

Well, that's real easy, as he won't be bringing the aspects of his MMA fighting which you and others highlight into the boxing ring............ that would be ludicrous........... but he very much will be bringing the aspects of his MMA fighting which I, and others have cited, that's the difference......... and a pretty crucial one.

Ok, can't say I agree with that logic but thanks for clearing that up.

Frank Bullitt

https://www.instagram.com/p/BX0cYbbFMJj/?hl=en&taken-by=mrdavidhaye

Richard tea

I havent watched it yet. I was looking forward to this breakdown since saturday.

GerryDerpy

walshb wrote: »

Paulie/Floyd?

I'll say no more....

I'd give Conor a better chance at beating a two armed Paulie than a one armed Floyd..

I am not surprised - because otherwise you would have to admit to your illogical reasoning.

Ash.J.Williams

Just for the record I'm cheering for conor but if it goes mayweathers way it won't bother me, too much .... Is that the way most conor/mma fans are thinking?

Tigger

Ash.J.Williams wrote: »

Just for the record I'm cheering for conor but if it goes mayweathers way it won't bother me, too much .... Is that the way most conor/mma fans are thinking?

no

wonderfullife

EagererBeaver wrote: »

Wonder for example, why do you get to make that claim and then complain that McGregor is being disrespected?

I'm actually shocked it's even a debate but it does back up what Luke Thomas was saying about boxing fans/purists/pundits ignorance of MMA.

The reality is very simple here: A "real fight" i.e. unarmed combat, is like the decathlon in the sense it's a multi-discipline situation. A boxer brings in one speciality. If Usain Bolt comes over to the decathlon he gets destroyed because he doesn't have enough weapons to compete. He doesn't have the shot put, the javelin, the discus, the pole vault, the 1,500m...

Boxers don't have enough weapons to compete in a real fight. They just have their fists. In rare instances, that will be enough! BAM and KO the opponent. I can't believe people are pushing back against the idea that mixed martial artists are vastly superior fighters than boxers. Crazy.

Ash.J.Williams wrote: »

Just for the record I'm cheering for conor but if it goes mayweathers way it won't bother me, too much .... Is that the way most conor/mma fans are thinking?

I'd be extremely disappointed (more so than the Diaz loss) but less disappointed than if he were to challenge for Woodleys belt and lose.

Losing to Floyd Mayweather won't define Conor's career by any means.

Winning against Floyd Mayweather will though!!

Conor could defend the lightweight title 6 times, capture a 3rd UFC title etc but he'd always be remembered as the guy who beat Floyd Mayweather.

hewhoscares

EagererBeaver wrote: »

The delicious irony here about the "top 2,000 MMA fighter demolishes any elite boxer" argument is that it completely ignores what is pretty much McGregor's only hope in the Mayweather fight - a big KO punch.

What happens in the theoretical fight where the boxer throws one shot that lands flush and the MMA fighter is out cold? It's the exact same arguement that people are clinging to here and then calling people "snobs" for giving McGregor next to no chance. Wonder for example, why do you get to make that claim and then complain that McGregor is being disrespected?

Exactly.

And that silly top 2000 claim, like Joshua for example wouldn't just overpower anyone under 205 trying to take him down. And he'd be able to swarm a good few others over that weight i reckon.

John_D80

Threads gone full retard.

RoryMac

GerryDerpy wrote: »

How can someone go 12 rounds against Paulie and by Paulie's admission win 7 rounds

Can you point out where Paulie said that?

EagererBeaver

wonderfullife wrote: »

I'm actually shocked it's even a debate but it does back up what Luke Thomas was saying about boxing fans/purists/pundits ignorance of MMA.

The reality is very simple here: A "real fight" i.e. unarmed combat, is like the decathlon in the sense it's a multi-discipline situation. A boxer brings in one speciality. If Usain Bolt comes over to the decathlon he gets destroyed because he doesn't have enough weapons to compete. He doesn't have the shot put, the javelin, the discus, the pole vault, the 1,500m...

Boxers don't have enough weapons to compete in a real fight. They just have their fists. In rare instances, that will be enough! BAM and KO the opponent. I can't believe people are pushing back against the idea that mixed martial artists are vastly superior fighters than boxers. Crazy.

Again, you've completely ignored the point. You've categorically claimed that, with rare exceptions, the MMA fighter beats the boxer in what you term a "real fight" every time. I don't disagree with you, even ignoring for the fact that you're trying to push the "real fight" angle the whole time.

However, you completely ignore the fact that the inverse of this is the exact same argument you make for McGregor winning - he has a chance, his fearsome left, a KO punch etc. You accuse people of being disrespectful to McGregor and get on your high horse about people saying he has no chance. You then proceed to completely disrespect elite boxers by saying they'd be dominated by bum MMA fighters. Ray Mercer, 48 years old, fat and half brain damaged, KOed Tim Sylvia.

As for the idea that mixed martial artists are "vastly superior fighters" than boxers, again, this is provocative rubbish. Boxing is a real fight. Muay Thai is a real fight. Wrestling is a real fight. MMA is a real fight. Etc etc etc.

They are vastly superior mixed martial artists, not "fighters".

Frank Bullitt

wonderfullife wrote: »

I'm actually shocked it's even a debate but it does back up what Luke Thomas was saying about boxing fans/purists/pundits ignorance of MMA.

The reality is very simple here: A "real fight" i.e. unarmed combat, is like the decathlon in the sense it's a multi-discipline situation. A boxer brings in one speciality. If Usain Bolt comes over to the decathlon he gets destroyed because he doesn't have enough weapons to compete. He doesn't have the shot put, the javelin, the discus, the pole vault, the 1,500m...

Boxers don't have enough weapons to compete in a real fight. They just have their fists. In rare instances, that will be enough! BAM and KO the opponent. I can't believe people are pushing back against the idea that mixed martial artists are vastly superior fighters than boxers. Crazy.



I'd be extremely disappointed (more so than the Diaz loss) but less disappointed than if he were to challenge for Woodleys belt and lose.

Losing to Floyd Mayweather won't define Conor's career by any means.

Winning against Floyd Mayweather will though!!

Conor could defend the lightweight title 6 times, capture a 3rd UFC title etc but he'd always be remembered as the guy who beat Floyd Mayweather.

Do yourself a favour and call it what it is, an MMA fight.

The sooner you do that, the sooner your posts won't sound like a regurgitated Conor McGregor interview.

You say Luke Thomas was saying "about boxing fans/purists/pundits ignorance of MMA", thats the same as you and your ignorance of boxing.

wonderfullife

Agree to disagree.

Bob Bennett (Executive Director, Nevada State Athletic Commission) says Kenny Bayless is out:

"Conor McGregor had nothing to do with Kenny Bayless’ removal,” Bennett said.

“Kenny Bayless was removed from being considered because of the comment. Based on his comment — he shouldn’t be talking to the media unless it’s something mundane, like about how an official works — he was removed long before McGregor said anything."

Regarding 8oz gloves:

"Conor is the stronger fighter. If he catches Floyd with the lighter glove, it can do some damage,” Bennett said. “Both of them think it’s to their advantage."

The hearing to decide the referee and glove size is tomorrow. It's apparently down to either Robert Byrd or Tony Weeks for ref. If Bennett's comments are anything to go by, the 8oz gloves will be approved.

thewheel2.0

walshb wrote: »

I think and have always thought that Aldo was a good mover and had good boxing skills....

Aldo for me looks easier and more relaxed and natural in boxing than Conor.

Not sure what point you are trying to make here as regards the fight on August 26...

How you can give Aldo credit for having good boxing skills but not give Conor credit for having *some* boxing proficiency?

Conor bate him with a punch like

Frank Bullitt

wonderfullife wrote: »

Agree to disagree.

Bob Bennett (Executive Director, Nevada State Athletic Commission) says Kenny Bayless is out:

"Conor McGregor had nothing to do with Kenny Bayless’ removal,” Bennett said.

“Kenny Bayless was removed from being considered because of the comment. Based on his comment — he shouldn’t be talking to the media unless it’s something mundane, like about how an official works — he was removed long before McGregor said anything."

Regarding 8oz gloves:

"Conor is the stronger fighter. If he catches Floyd with the lighter glove, it can do some damage,” Bennett said. “Both of them think it’s to their advantage."

The hearing to decide the referee and glove size is tomorrow. It's apparently down to either Robert Byrd or Tony Weeks for ref. If Bennett's comments are anything to go by, the 8oz gloves will be approved.

AKA, I can't prove my ridiculous claim so I won't answer.

ardinn

Gintonious wrote: »

AKA, I can't prove my ridiculous claim so I won't answer.

AKA better things to be doing that dealing with your shít!!

GerryDerpy

RoryMac wrote: »

Can you point out where Paulie said that?

https://youtu.be/C9eTmkE_kQ8

Sorry I haven't got the time to listen again for the exact time he says it but he admits Conor first 5 rounds and last 2.

Frank Bullitt

ardinn wrote: »

AKA better things to be doing that dealing with your shít!!

Ah yes, nothing to so with his garbage about "real fights" and "people view Mixed Martial Artists as the real toughest guys."

Outlaw Pete

Gintonious wrote: »

AKA, I can't prove my ridiculous claim so I won't answer.

Nice of you to admit it :P

Gintonious wrote: »

Let's just agree to disagree then, no ill feeling or anything.