PDA

View Full Version : Other Sports Quick Rant about boxing...


Gary
04-19-2008, 09:41 PM
Just watched the Hopkins-Calzaghe fight. That fight demonstrated once again why I appreciate mixed martial arts fighting over boxing. Calzaghe wins with a constant barrage of pitter pat punching throughout the whole fight (he didn't once hurt Hopkins). The announcers hail him as one of the top 3 pound for pound fighters in the world today. This simply doesn't happen in mma. It is virtually impossible to win an mma fight if you don't have the ability to finish your opponent. Some may believe it to be too barbaric, but I believe that mma is a much truer test of a "fighter". I believe there are a handful of guys at the top of the mma scene that could step right in the the boxing ring against some of the best there is to offer & the mma guys would eat their lunch.

Rant over!

boogblaster
04-19-2008, 09:46 PM
I thought it was a decent fight ... Hopkins is too old tho ...

stlchiefs
04-19-2008, 09:53 PM
I watched the Wednesday or Thursday night fights on ESPN this week. Granted they aren't top fights, but after watching MMA all the time lately, the fights were BORING. They didn't even keep my attention at all. Boxing is going to need another big personality with a lot of talent to survive against MMA.

'Hamas' Jenkins
04-19-2008, 09:55 PM
Just watched the Hopkins-Calzaghe fight. That fight demonstrated once again why I appreciate mixed martial arts fighting over boxing. Calzaghe wins with a constant barrage of pitter pat punching throughout the whole fight (he didn't once hurt Hopkins). The announcers hail him as one of the top 3 pound for pound fighters in the world today. This simply doesn't happen in mma. It is virtually impossible to win an mma fight if you don't have the ability to finish your opponent. Some may believe it to be too barbaric, but I believe that mma is a much truer test of a "fighter". I believe there are a handful of guys at the top of the mma scene that could step right in the the boxing ring against some of the best there is to offer & the mma guys would eat their lunch.

Rant over!

That's ridiculous. Even stand up fighters like Chuck Lidell would get absolutely mauled by a top flight boxer. It's a somewhat similar skillset, but that doesn't mean it's analagous. In MMA, you just try to dodge the punches because moving your arms to parry blows can leave you open to a shoot takedown. Unless you are the 1987 Mike Tyson, trying to dodge with just your head and body will get you killed in the boxing ring.

<object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/ZYHSHd1xfpY&hl=en"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/ZYHSHd1xfpY&hl=en" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object>

Gary
04-19-2008, 10:00 PM
That's ridiculous. Even stand up fighters like Chuck Lidell would get absolutely mauled by a top flight boxer. It's a somewhat similar skillset, but that doesn't mean it's analagous. In MMA, you just try to dodge the punches because moving your arms to parry blows can leave you open to a shoot takedown. Unless you are the 1987 Mike Tyson, trying to dodge with just your head and body will get you killed in the boxing ring.

<object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/ZYHSHd1xfpY&hl=en"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/ZYHSHd1xfpY&hl=en" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object>

How many Hagler-Hearns type fights have you seen in boxing in the recent past. Also, I'd put a guy like George St. Pierre against Joe Calzaghe any day! It all boils down to how they would prepare for the fight. An mma fighter wouldn't have to worry about preparing a take-down defense or working on their juijitsu. They would work solely on boxing & boxing defense.
Look at the "top" guys in boxing pound for pound right now. Floyd Mayweather Jr. is considered the best right now. He does have good power, but he much more of a boxer than a power puncher like Hagler & Hearns were. Calzaghe is just a "I'll punch 10,000 times, never hurt any real opponent I face, & get the decision based on compubox numbers" fighter. Tonight he fought a guy that is just too old. He proved nothing in my mind tonight that tells me he is a "great fighter". If there is one guy I would call a good fighter it would be Kelly Pavlik. He has a stalking style & never stops moving forward even when he gets hurt (see 1st fight with Jermain Taylor).

'Hamas' Jenkins
04-19-2008, 10:12 PM
How many Hagler-Hearns type fights have you seen in boxing in the recent past. Also, I'd put a guy like George St. Pierre against Joe Calzaghe any day!

I would love to see GSP box the 1994 Roy Jones, even though Jones would be giving up about 10 pounds. Jones would annihilate him, it wouldn't even be funny.

Hell, Jermain Taylor would rape him.

Fruit Ninja
04-19-2008, 10:16 PM
i watched the fight as well. Imo it was a pick em. Hopkins did hurt him once, but the rest of the fight. He was more or less doing nothing. Joe is the one that initiated the fight.

Gary
04-19-2008, 10:32 PM
I would love to see GSP box the 1994 Roy Jones, even though Jones would be giving up about 10 pounds. Jones would annihilate him, it wouldn't even be funny.

Hell, Jermain Taylor would rape him.

Thus the reason more & more people are moving away from boxing. You have to take you time machine back 4 years to get a guy to fight an mma fighter today. I'd give Pavlik better odds against GSP than Taylor.

KcMizzou
04-19-2008, 10:34 PM
Apples and oranges.

Really the big question, when considering these matchups is... which sport's rules are they fighting by?

Most MMA guys would ruin most boxers under MMA rules, and vice versa, IMO.

KcMizzou
04-19-2008, 10:39 PM
I watched the Wednesday or Thursday night fights on ESPN this week. Granted they aren't top fights, but after watching MMA all the time lately, the fights were BORING. They didn't even keep my attention at all. Boxing is going to need another big personality with a lot of talent to survive against MMA.Yep. MMA is a much more exciting sport, IMO. There's just so much more to it. The fighters have to be well rounded to survive.

Yeah, most boxers are probably better standing... of course. That's all they have to work on.

Fish
04-19-2008, 10:40 PM
Geez.... are we such an ADD society that we can't enjoy a boxing match anymore unless somebody gets knocked cold? It's not any fun unless someone is bleeding and brain damaged?

How sad....

I happen to really like MMA, but I'll never tire of the smooth brutal grace of a finely trained boxer...

KcMizzou
04-19-2008, 10:41 PM
Geez.... are we such an ADD society that we can't enjoy a boxing match anymore unless somebody gets knocked cold? It's not any fun unless someone is bleeding and brain damaged?

How sad....

I happen to really like MMA, but I'll never tire of the smooth brutal grace of a finely trained boxer...Good point. It's not like you can't be a fan of both.

'Hamas' Jenkins
04-19-2008, 10:41 PM
Apples and oranges.

Really the big question, when considering these matchups is... which sport's rules are they fighting by?

Most MMA guys would ruin most boxers under MMA rules, and vice versa, IMO.

He posed that in the thread opener...boxing rules, hence my take.

Gary
04-19-2008, 10:43 PM
Apples and oranges.

Really the big question, when considering these matchups is... which sport's rules are they fighting by?

Most MMA guys would ruin most boxers under MMA rules, and vice versa, IMO.

The rules definitely play a part in the comparison. I mainly like mma over boxing because I know I'll never see the day in mma where a man is called "pound for pound the best" or crowned "champion" for pitter-patting his way to victories. That to me is simply not a "great fighter". That's a guy who plays on the rules of the sport, knows how to survive against more fierce competition than himself, & can eek out a victory(& in some cases become a "champion").

KcMizzou
04-19-2008, 10:45 PM
He posed that in the thread opener...boxing rules, hence my take.Gotcha. Yeah, in that case, I'd have to agree with you. Boxers do one thing, very, very well. MMA is very different. (That's where the "Mixed" part comes in.)

Apples and oranges.

Fish
04-19-2008, 10:59 PM
The rules definitely play a part in the comparison. I mainly like mma over boxing because I know I'll never see the day in mma where a man is called "pound for pound the best" or crowned "champion" for pitter-patting his way to victories. That to me is simply not a "great fighter". That's a guy who plays on the rules of the sport, knows how to survive against more fierce competition than himself, & can eek out a victory(& in some cases become a "champion").

Also... your "pitter-patter" analogy is way off base. I guarantee you very very few if any of us posting in this thread could withstand a few minutes of that "pitter-patter". Just because they're not losing consciousness because of the hits doesn't mean it's weak.

Your definition of a "great fighter" may not be the same as someone elses.

And I've seen plenty of MMA fights were neither guy looks like he's really "hurting" his opponent. Plenty.....

KcMizzou
04-19-2008, 11:02 PM
And I've seen plenty of MMA fights were neither guy looks like he's really "hurting" his opponent. Plenty.....On a recent episode of TUF, I believe Dana White called it "two turtles ****ing".

LMAO

Fish
04-19-2008, 11:10 PM
On a recent episode of TUF, I believe Dana White called it "two turtles ****ing".

LMAO

Ha ha.... that a perfect analogy....

KcMizzou
04-19-2008, 11:11 PM
Ha ha.... that a perfect analogy....Luckily, most MMA fights don't go that way.

Gary
04-19-2008, 11:23 PM
Also... your "pitter-patter" analogy is way off base. I guarantee you very very few if any of us posting in this thread could withstand a few minutes of that "pitter-patter". Just because they're not losing consciousness because of the hits doesn't mean it's weak.


Your definition of a "great fighter" may not be the same as someone elses.

And I've seen plenty of MMA fights were neither guy looks like he's really "hurting" his opponent. Plenty.....

How are boxing matches scored? I believe the amount of damage your are able to inflict plays a part, as well as controlling the pace of the fight(ring general-ship). Even the announcers in tonight's fight brought up the question of who to score a round for - Calzaghe for simply landing more punches or Hopkins for landing the only punch in the round that actually did some damage. I'd be willing to wage money that almost none of the fights you watched in mma where neither guy was hurting the other were of this caliber fight tonight.

I never said I could step in the ring & trade punches with a guy who has been training to box for __ number of years. Take tonight's fight for instance...Calzaghe was hailed as one of the top three fighters in boxing after his win. Anyone who not only watched tonight's fight but also has followed Calzaghe's career knows that his method to victory is to out-punch his opponent. This was especially apparent when he knew he was stepping in the ring with a aging but still very sound fighter in Bernard Hopkins. I don't know if you saw the fight or not, but NONE of his punches hurt Hopkins & several of them missed. A lot of the punches he did land were brushing or glancing at best. This was supposed to be Calzaghe's final answer to all the critics that said he couldn't come to the United States & compete at the level of Western boxers. Maybe Hopkins was a bad opponent stylistically for him, but he still didn't prove anything to be called one of the top three fighters in the sport tonight.

I simply believe that most mma fighters have more of a warrior's spirit in them than most boxers do because they have to. Boxing used to have those guys (Like Hearns/Hagler), but the promoters & the money have changed the sport for what seems to be a long time to come. In the UFC, it's always about who is the best two fighters out there to pit against each other & let's find out which is the better fighter. In boxing, the very first question is always "what is the biggest payday fight?"...no matter the actual quality of the pure competition aspect of the fight.

Fruit Ninja
04-19-2008, 11:41 PM
There are alot of different factors in boxing. Each person see's it different. Most of the great boxers skills are so evenly matched that its almost damned near impossible to tell who won, but someone must win a round.

I like both sports. I am more of a boxing fan, but i do watch MMA once in a while and its mildy entertaining to me.

Fish
04-20-2008, 12:02 AM
How are boxing matches scored? I believe the amount of damage your are able to inflict plays a part, as well as controlling the pace of the fight(ring general-ship). Even the announcers in tonight's fight brought up the question of who to score a round for - Calzaghe for simply landing more punches or Hopkins for landing the only punch in the round that actually did some damage. I'd be willing to wage money that almost none of the fights you watched in mma where neither guy was hurting the other were of this caliber fight tonight.

I never said I could step in the ring & trade punches with a guy who has been training to box for __ number of years. Take tonight's fight for instance...Calzaghe was hailed as one of the top three fighters in boxing after his win. Anyone who not only watched tonight's fight but also has followed Calzaghe's career knows that his method to victory is to out-punch his opponent. This was especially apparent when he knew he was stepping in the ring with a aging but still very sound fighter in Bernard Hopkins. I don't know if you saw the fight or not, but NONE of his punches hurt Hopkins & several of them missed. A lot of the punches he did land were brushing or glancing at best. This was supposed to be Calzaghe's final answer to all the critics that said he couldn't come to the United States & compete at the level of Western boxers. Maybe Hopkins was a bad opponent stylistically for him, but he still didn't prove anything to be called one of the top three fighters in the sport tonight.

I simply believe that most mma fighters have more of a warrior's spirit in them than most boxers do because they have to. Boxing used to have those guys (Like Hearns/Hagler), but the promoters & the money have changed the sport for what seems to be a long time to come. In the UFC, it's always about who is the best two fighters out there to pit against each other & let's find out which is the better fighter. In boxing, the very first question is always "what is the biggest payday fight?"...no matter the actual quality of the pure competition aspect of the fight.

Your first sentence explains a lot. Boxing is not scored in KOs. That's not the goal. If it were the case, they wouldn't have multiple judges.

Boxing uses what's called the 10 point system. Basically the judges grade each round on 4 catigories and the awarded winner of that round gets 10 points, the loser is judged on 9 or less points.

Rounds are scored by judging four areas of performance. Each area should theoretically count for 25% of the score for a given round. The areas are: clean punching, effective aggressiveness, ring generalship and defense (http://everything2.com/title/defense). In practice, clean punching counts for more than the other three since in boxing, the clean punch is the only weapon against an opponent. The other three criteria are used when necessary to score a close round.
Effective aggressiveness means being aggressive toward your opponent while landing clean punches. If you move toward your opponent but can't land clean shots, you don't have effective aggressiveness.
Ring generalship is a measure of who is controlling the ring. For example, you will often hear boxing announcers talk about how a boxer is "cutting off the ring" and keeping the opponent contained, often cornering the opponent.
Defense is exactly as it sounds -- when a fighter is able to defend against punches from the opponent. Generally this means ducking, blocking, or backing up. Defense is generally considered the least important of the four scoring criteria.
http://everything2.com/index.pl?node_id=895105


I was waiting for this fight ever since Hopkins said "I would never let a white boy beat me. Never,"

That gives a guy something to fight for. And he did.

The sport hasn't changed. Not boxing. The audience has. It was the money and the promoter that bred MMA to the level it's at. Shorter, more violent matches. That doesn't mean tougher fighters, or more "warrior spirit", it means different judging/scoring/round length/glove weight/rules/ring size and shape/etc.

MMA has some great fighters. Some real animals. Boxing still does too.

KcMizzou
04-20-2008, 12:04 AM
Your first sentence explains a lot. Boxing is not scored in KOs. That's not the goal. If it were the case, they wouldn't have multiple judges.

Boxing uses what's called the 10 point system. Basically the judges grade each round on 4 catigories and the awarded winner of that round gets 10 points, the loser is judged on 9 or less points.
MMA uses the same system.

KcMizzou
04-20-2008, 12:05 AM
MMA has some great fighters. Some real animals. Boxing still does too.No argument there.

Zeke Ziggle
04-20-2008, 12:08 AM
I never said I could step in the ring & trade punches with a guy who has been training to box for __ number of years. Take tonight's fight for instance...Calzaghe was hailed as one of the top three fighters in boxing after his win. Anyone who not only watched tonight's fight but also has followed Calzaghe's career knows that his method to victory is to out-punch his opponent. This was especially apparent when he knew he was stepping in the ring with a aging but still very sound fighter in Bernard Hopkins. I don't know if you saw the fight or not, but NONE of his punches hurt Hopkins & several of them missed. A lot of the punches he did land were brushing or glancing at best. This was supposed to be Calzaghe's final answer to all the critics that said he couldn't come to the United States & compete at the level of Western boxers. Maybe Hopkins was a bad opponent stylistically for him, but he still didn't prove anything to be called one of the top three fighters in the sport tonight.

If you have watched Calzaghe for his career then you shouldn't have expected a knockout. the man has mad a reputation for beating all kinds of boxers but the vast majority of his wins have come by TKO. And in calling him one of the top three in the world pound for pound its hard to argue. 45-0 and his decade long run at the top with the WBO belt

Gary
04-20-2008, 12:27 AM
[QUOTE=KC Fish;4696411]Your first sentence explains a lot. Boxing is not scored in KOs. That's not the goal. If it were the case, they wouldn't have multiple judges.

But the most decisive way to win is by KO, & I'm sure there are a bunch of boxers out there that would disagree with you about a KO not being their goal. MMA also uses a 10 point system. The judging criteria is based on effective striking, grappling, aggression, & octagon control.

Gary
04-20-2008, 12:38 AM
If you have watched Calzaghe for his career then you shouldn't have expected a knockout. the man has mad a reputation for beating all kinds of boxers but the vast majority of his wins have come by TKO. And in calling him one of the top three in the world pound for pound its hard to argue. 45-0 and his decade long run at the top with the WBO belt

His unbeaten record isn't something to ignore, but this was once again supposed to be his fight to shut up the critics that say he hasn't fought the best the West has to offer throughout his career. I'm not saying he has been fighting school girls his whole career, but tonight (in my humble opinion) didn't do anything to disprove the critics. I hope he picks an opponent for his next fight that will better answer the question of his place in boxing.

Ultra Peanut
04-20-2008, 01:00 AM
waugh waugh waugh mmmaaaaa

thurman merman
04-20-2008, 01:37 AM
boxing sucks

jjjayb
04-20-2008, 08:37 AM
I've seen my share of boring mma fights also. Watching a couple guys grapple for 20 minutes is no better than watching a boring boxing match. There are still exciting boxing matches. See Marquez vs. Vasquez 1 2 and 3. I also think MMA is taking more fans from the WWF than they are from boxing. I don't know any true boxing fans that have stopped watching boxing due to MMA. I usually here wrasslin' fans that don't watch boxing anyway complain about boxing being boring.

beach tribe
04-20-2008, 11:59 AM
MMA is the true test of a "fighter".

Boxing is well...the test of a boxer.

Put an MMartist in the ring with a boxer, and he will get his face smashed.

Put a boxer is the ring with an MMAer, and will prolly last asbout 20 seconds.

Bwana
04-20-2008, 12:07 PM
That's ridiculous. Even stand up fighters like Chuck Lidell would get absolutely mauled by a top flight boxer.


Not if they were fightning MMA rules........

B_Ambuehl
04-20-2008, 01:27 PM
I believe there are a handful of guys at the top of the mma scene that could step right in the the boxing ring against some of the best there is to offer & the mma guys would eat their lunch.

As someone who has done both, I can assure you this is FAR from the truth. It's also a major problem with boxing. It looks too easy. It takes YEARS to become a good boxer. Most of the guys you see on TV started very, very young. A good MMA fighter on the other hand can be developed rather quickly and it's something a person can start in their 20's and still become elite at. That doesn't happen much in boxing. MMA is more exciting to the avg watcher but boxing doesn't get much respect except for the people invovled in it who know how difficult it really is.

Gary
04-20-2008, 02:12 PM
I don't know any true boxing fans that have stopped watching boxing due to MMA.

I don't believe the die hard boxing fans will jump ship to MMA either. However, MMA is beating boxing in pay per view & yes it is also beating wrasslin'(although who gives a shit except die hard wrasslin' fans).