Originally posted by Erbad
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
My Reason why MMA wont gain as many fans as Boxing
Collapse
-
-
Originally posted by squealpiggy View PostWhat does the bolded phrase actually mean? "Most realistic combat sport"? It's a sport. I don't see how you can have sport which is any less or more "realistic" than any other. Like football is the most realistic ball and goal sport in which you principally use your feet, or table tennis is the most realistic paddle/ball/table sport?
Boxing is where it's at for me.
Comment
-
before boxing fans continue to bash MMA (i am also a boxing fan), please tell me what fighting means??? what is a "FIGHTER?". Boxers were naturally called "fighters" back then when there was no MMA. But now, only MMA can be considered a "complete fighter"
Both sports have their share of boring matches, But i will say that watching two heavyweights go at it for 12 rounds sometimes put me to sleep...
Comment
-
Originally posted by travi$ View PostNobody wants to see 3 rounds of men rolling around on the floor..
Dont get me wrong.. i can watch UFC, only really enjoying it when they dont take it to the ground..
I was in my mates house.. the UFC came on, and around 10 neutral spectators who had never watched it before were bored to **** watching two dudes grapple/mount on the floor.. taking the piss out of it at some points
MMA fans would enjoy the grappling, because of the skill/strength required..but its just a load of crap for people to watch
But boxing has "immediate" appeal.. who doesnt enjoy two guys punching eachother?
Anyone Agree?
they both have their ups and downs... obviously you know my preference though...
Comment
-
the reason why both sports have borng matches is the fights are not preplanned /directed / colegraphed like in the movies. People get tired, get defensive, get hit for real, get scared, trying to win by any means necessary.....taking lesser risk..etc etc....
Comment
-
it's true that fights going to the ground will appear boring. but this is only to someone who doesn't understand wrestling or BJJ. i used to get bored during old UFC fights (and that was back when they didn't even stand em up) but i ended up bein friends with this amatuer fighter who really introduced me to sport.
he knew Tito and Rampage and got us training over at Team Punishment. once you start rolling around then you understand the full aspect of the ground game and THEN it becomes very exciting. transitions and counters start to make sense and you can really appreciate the skill it takes to pull these off. plus, you can see when somebody's setting something up. i usually call these out even before the commentators do. what looks like simple clenching or sqirming around is really a chess match of utilitzing core strength to throw off someone's core balance before executing a submission, mount, or choke.
i'm not saying everyone should get out and train or you'll never enjoy ground work. but you should consider watching these fights with someone who knows what they're talking about instead of just a bunch of testosterone-induced drunks looking for knockouts.
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by c'monmang' View Postmost realistic COMBAT sport....geesh..
That's the question, are you saying it is the combat sport that is closest to the reality of an actual fight? Is that something to aspire to?
Define fighting. Is fighting two drunks outside a nightclub in a spastic battle for kurbside supremacy? Is it a police officer beating the crap out of a teenager he caught with weed? Is it a scared soldier beating the brains of his enemy all over the floor because if he doesn't his enemy will do it to him?
Fact: A large proportion of MMA fights end with a submission. Try "submitting" to a nightclub bouncer.
Fact: A large proportion of MMA fights end in a TKO when the referee steps in to save the downed fighter from further damage. Zero MMA fights end with the victors friends stomping the loser into a coma.
Fact: The rest of MMA fights end when a series of judges add up their scores and declare a winner. "Ah Fritz I thought I had you when I shattered your skull with a rock, but you hung in there and got the win, good show..."
MMA is a sport, it has rules that take it from "reality", it has goals which are not concurrent with the reality of fighting and violence. This notion that it is somehow a more genuine indicator of "real life" fighting is absurd and does not stand up to the basest of scrutiny. Those abercrombie and fitch-wearing ****wickets who constantly **** on about the realism of MMA are just as delusional as the martial arts fantasists who insist that their untried fighting technique is deadly on "the street".
Comment
-
Originally posted by squealpiggy View PostHow is it more realistic a sport than boxing? In boxing are you not really hitting your opponent? How is it any more realistic then point-karate? In point-karate are you not really trying to score points?
That's the question, are you saying it is the combat sport that is closest to the reality of an actual fight? Is that something to aspire to?
Define fighting. Is fighting two drunks outside a nightclub in a spastic battle for kurbside supremacy? Is it a police officer beating the crap out of a teenager he caught with weed? Is it a scared soldier beating the brains of his enemy all over the floor because if he doesn't his enemy will do it to him?
Fact: A large proportion of MMA fights end with a submission. Try "submitting" to a nightclub bouncer.
Fact: A large proportion of MMA fights end in a TKO when the referee steps in to save the downed fighter from further damage. Zero MMA fights end with the victors friends stomping the loser into a coma.
Fact: The rest of MMA fights end when a series of judges add up their scores and declare a winner. "Ah Fritz I thought I had you when I shattered your skull with a rock, but you hung in there and got the win, good show..."
MMA is a sport, it has rules that take it from "reality", it has goals which are not concurrent with the reality of fighting and violence. This notion that it is somehow a more genuine indicator of "real life" fighting is absurd and does not stand up to the basest of scrutiny. Those abercrombie and fitch-wearing ****wickets who constantly **** on about the realism of MMA are just as delusional as the martial arts fantasists who insist that their untried fighting technique is deadly on "the street".
Comment
-
Originally posted by Cptn. Howdy View Postit's true that fights going to the ground will appear boring. but this is only to someone who doesn't understand wrestling or BJJ. i used to get bored during old UFC fights (and that was back when they didn't even stand em up) but i ended up bein friends with this amatuer fighter who really introduced me to sport.
he knew Tito and Rampage and got us training over at Team Punishment. once you start rolling around then you understand the full aspect of the ground game and THEN it becomes very exciting. transitions and counters start to make sense and you can really appreciate the skill it takes to pull these off. plus, you can see when somebody's setting something up. i usually call these out even before the commentators do. what looks like simple clenching or sqirming around is really a chess match of utilitzing core strength to throw off someone's core balance before executing a submission, mount, or choke.
i'm not saying everyone should get out and train or you'll never enjoy ground work. but you should consider watching these fights with someone who knows what they're talking about instead of just a bunch of testosterone-induced drunks looking for knockouts.
Comment
Comment