Latest on MJJC

MMA vs. Boxing

L.J said:
I dunno if one of those wide sloppy swings manages to get around your hands and gets you on the side of the head it's definately going to make your brain rattle around in your skull... not a good thing :lol:


I guess that's just the thing though, each fighting technique will have it's strengths and weaknesses against each other.

It's like comparing apples and oranges, they're both fruit but very very different.
Click to expand...

Ah, the benifits of a tight defense. If your hands are up, your not going to get caught with those looping shots, lol. Now, if you know how to counter, that's another story. Throw a sloppy shot, eat a straight right, and out go the lights.
 
When I watched the taped replay of the MMA fights on Wednesday night on Spike, once again I was impressed.

What I don't believe is that a boxer would be able to withstand the rush of a MMA fighter. Most boxers are taught to be light on their feet..."float like a butterfly, sting like a bee", but it doesn't help if someone is rushing at your hips and thighs in an attempt to throw you on your back.

I am always impressed when I see a MMA fighter take another fighter down and put him in all sorts of pretzel shaped positions in order to get them in a submission hold with a rear naked choke or an arm/shoulder or leg/foot bar.

They have so many names for the jijitsu moves on the ground. It's amazing to watch.

A tactical MMA fighter would literally attack a boxer in ways a boxer couldn't defend because once a boxer is thrown off and can't punch at a target he's vulnerable.

Now if the MMA figher is careless and doesn't crowd or manuever his way out of danger it would mean punishment for him if he got caught with a slamming fist.

The one thing that is prominent is their gloves.

Boxers have more padding, mainly because of the longer the fight goes on and all they can do is punch that they need extra padding to protect their hands...but a MMA fighter doesn't expect to punch for a long period of time so their punches, I believe are considered harder because of less padding.

When I started this thread it was directed at the actual sport of MMA vs. Boxing...not the actual fighting between a MMA fighter and a boxer.

Although, throughout the discussion it has become a question of who would win a fight between a talented boxer and a prolific mixed martial artist.

It's a toss up at best depending on what day of the week and who's pitted against who.

I'm sure, that if they were to set up 10 fights that the MMA fighter would win the majority only because of their all around skill in wrestling and other types of fighting.

Some boxers may be skilled in other types of fighting also, but you don't normally hear too much about it.

So...the debate continues, I'm sure.:)
 
ladyplatinum said:
The one thing that is prominent is their gloves.

Boxers have more padding, mainly because of the longer the fight goes on and all they can do is punch that they need extra padding to protect their hands...but a MMA fighter doesn't expect to punch for a long period of time so their punches, I believe are considered harder because of less padding.
Click to expand...


oooh when I was watching the documentary that I mentioned earlier they had a boxer punch a punching bag that was hooked up with impact recording equipment. First he gave it a right hook with a boxing glove, then he had a go with a mma glove and then he had a go bare knuckled.

there was little difference in impact between the two gloves, the softest punch coming from the boxing glove out of the two.

The hardest hit was the bare knuckle punch. and that was a lot more powerful.

so basically make sure a fighter never hits you bare handed :lol:


was really interesting but they said obviously bare knuckles don't last long as skin would crack and rip open over the knuckles especially if they're making contact with teeth etc.

One punch from a bare knuckled boxer/mma fighter to you teeth would result in a knock out according to force etc that was recorded.
 
wannabestartinsomthin21 said:
I watch a lot of this stuff and believe me, a majority of MMA fighters wouldn't stand a chance against a boxer if all they were allowed to do was trade. They don't hit as hard because a straight punch, thrown with coordination, getting your hips and legs in to it, is a lot harder then a looping, off balance punch. Think of it like, if Michael Jackson hit you, it would suck ass, not because he's strong as in, he can lift a lot of weight, but because he's super, super coordinated and can get his full body weight in to a single movement, all of that energy in to a single movement. A good boxer knows how to get all of his body weight in to a punch. MMA fighters often throw looping, wide shots, sloppy shots which leave them wide open to be countered. And any decent boxer would take full advantage of that. They throw sloppy hooks, which could easily be countered by a good boxer with a counter hook. MMA fighters throw lazy jabs often as well, which would leave them open to overhand rights. They keep their hands either too low often or they hold them up in a lazy fashion, not really concentrating on defense in any way, leaving their head static and their gaurd loose, easy to punch straight up the middle. A boxer has superior foot movement as well, which would allow them to both move away from an MMA fighter and cut off the ring better then an MMA figher knows how.

Keeping your chin tucked doesn't really have to do with protecting the throat. Keeping your hands up does. Keeping your chin tucked helps a fighter to obsorb blows to the jaw and head better because it takes away some of the impact and shock to the neck.

I'm not saying an MMA fighter wouldn't have a chance against a boxer. But their best chance would be to get them to the floor and submit them. Because MMA fighters don't even have very good kicks.
Click to expand...

Well of course a stand-up only match would favor the boxer. That's a given. I'm not sure if boxers have superior foot movement either, I've seen MMA guys float around the ring/cage like nothing and deliver flying knees to the face. I've seen many boxers get caught with their hands down too and get punched with a fist you could see coming a mile away. Moorer/Foreman springs to mind.

It just depends on who would be matched up and in what type of fight. Boxing, MMA, or some hybrid of rules? That's why I think it's a bit of an unfair comparison.
 
Last edited:
ladyplatinum said:
When I watched the taped replay of the MMA fights on Wednesday night on Spike, once again I was impressed.

What I don't believe is that a boxer would be able to withstand the rush of a MMA fighter. Most boxers are taught to be light on their feet..."float like a butterfly, sting like a bee", but it doesn't help if someone is rushing at your hips and thighs in an attempt to throw you on your back.

I am always impressed when I see a MMA fighter take another fighter down and put him in all sorts of pretzel shaped positions in order to get them in a submission hold with a rear naked choke or an arm/shoulder or leg/foot bar.

They have so many names for the jijitsu moves on the ground. It's amazing to watch.

A tactical MMA fighter would literally attack a boxer in ways a boxer couldn't defend because once a boxer is thrown off and can't punch at a target he's vulnerable.

Now if the MMA figher is careless and doesn't crowd or manuever his way out of danger it would mean punishment for him if he got caught with a slamming fist.

The one thing that is prominent is their gloves.

Boxers have more padding, mainly because of the longer the fight goes on and all they can do is punch that they need extra padding to protect their hands...but a MMA fighter doesn't expect to punch for a long period of time so their punches, I believe are considered harder because of less padding.

When I started this thread it was directed at the actual sport of MMA vs. Boxing...not the actual fighting between a MMA fighter and a boxer.

Although, throughout the discussion it has become a question of who would win a fight between a talented boxer and a prolific mixed martial artist.

It's a toss up at best depending on what day of the week and who's pitted against who.

I'm sure, that if they were to set up 10 fights that the MMA fighter would win the majority only because of their all around skill in wrestling and other types of fighting.

Some boxers may be skilled in other types of fighting also, but you don't normally hear too much about it.

So...the debate continues, I'm sure.:)
Click to expand...

That's not really true, about a boxer being unable to defend against an MMA fighters rushes. Footwork is largely involved in avoiding such attacks, and any decent boxer should have good foot work, latteral movement to circle away from and around their opponent. Also, when MMA fighters rush, they often get caught by punches coming in. A boxer would be able to defend using a simple, stiff jab or an uppercut. Or even just a stiff side kick, which is a simple kick, but the most effective.

Also, about the gloves, MMA fighter's gloves are smaller, but they're stuffed with a foam material, while a boxers glove is a lot of the time stuffed with horse haire or cotton, actually making it possible to feel the knuckles through a boxers glove, where as with an MMA fighters glove, because of their small size, the padding is itself softer. Any 8 oz. boxing glove, stuffed with horse hair, probably stings almost as much as an MMA glove stuffed with foam. But, if the two styles were to fight, I imagine they would be required to use the same equipment. Meaning either boxing gloves or MMA gloves.

And an MMA fighter doesn't hit as hard as a boxer because they don't throw their punches correctly. You have to throw straight punches while turning your hip and legs in to it to gain the maximum amount of strength behind it and MMA fighters, majority wise, just don't do that.
 
Last edited:
soso def said:
how can u have ur hands up in a fight when ur preparing to take down ur opponent?
Click to expand...

Always keep your hands up or you'll get hit right in the face. It's just a common law, lol. If you're preparing for a take down, it shouldn't be obvious to your oppenent that that's what you're trying to do by running in with your hands down. Otherwise, you'll get countered. You should only go for a take down when you're within range, right on top of your opponent. Rushing in with your hands down, which is what a lot of them do, usually results in their face getting punched in, lol.
 
Last edited:
Superstition said:
Well of course a stand-up only match would favor the boxer. That's a given. I'm not sure if boxers have superior foot movement either, I've seen MMA guys float around the ring/cage like nothing and deliver flying knees to the face. I've seen many boxers get caught with their hands down too and get punched with a fist you could see coming a mile away. Moorer/Foreman springs to mind.

It just depends on who would be matched up and in what type of fight. Boxing, MMA, or some hybrid of rules? That's why I think it's a bit of an unfair comparison.
Click to expand...

They do have better footwork, overall. Footwork is based on how well you control and use the ring and/or cage. Boxers have superior latteral movement, in general. Of course boxers get caught with their hands down and with punches you can see coming. But boxing is based largely on affective timing, counter attacks, etc... Some boxers are superiror to others, sometimes fighters get lazy, sometimes they just don't have a good defense, especially against someone who knows how to come in on you or counter you from a distance. Whenever you throw a punch, you leave yourself vulnerable for a period. A boxer with good defense will snap out their jab and bring it back as quickly as possible, while a lot of MMA fighter throw lazy jabs and get countered with an overhand punch. My point is, a lot of MMA fighters display poor boxing skills and would get torn up in that department against any decent boxer. And in terms of wrestling, obviously boxers don't know how to do that. That's why I said, if an MMA fighter could get it to the ground, then the boxer wouldn't have a chance. But they would have to get it there first.
 
Last edited:
not in mma....if you're preparing to grappel, then ur hands would be lower. there's loads more to defend in mma than damn boxing. sorry but not even sugar shane or a naked zab judah can make me ever goback
 
In terms of what you like to watch and what you're entertain the most by then I'd say mixed martial arts fighters entertain me a thousand percent more than boxers.

I mean when you think about it...people like to see fighting from all angles and MMA gives you that.

Total aggression, no holds barred rambling with fists, elbows, knees, forearms, feet, legs wrapped around bodies and choke holds, then shake hands and hug when it's over.

With only a few rules...no direct elbows to the top of the head; no headbutting; no thumbs in the eyes and no punches in the groin; otherwise it's balls to the wall, may the best man (woman) win. (Check out CBS - 5/31/08)

This is real fighting and the guys usually aren't mad at each other. The intent is purposeful to beat the hell out of your opponent by any means necessary.

It's what people like to see. Boxers, of course, will always have their fans but I'm leaning more toward MMA fighters because I like to see the total package on display.
 
Last edited:
In terms of what the original poster/post was aiming for, then I will say MMA is more my style. I'll occasionally watch boxing on the big nights, but it cannot hold my attention, and even the matches between light-heavyweights, middle-weights and heavy-weights feel the same. In MMA, small guys are lighting-fast, strikers can sometimes beat the hell out of each other, you have Randy Couture who shocks everyone when he dismantles fighters predicted to win, sometimes you have five-5 minute rounds of guys going back and forth.... there's just so much to it. It has a huge edge on boxing for me.

Will it ever overtake boxing? That I do not know. Remember... there was a time when pro-wrestling was far ahead of boxing. So I say it's completely possible. MMA has gotten huge in the last few years and it's still growing.
 
You do see the total package in terms of pure skill and athletisism combined in boxing. If you're always looking for a knock out or blood and guts, then yeah, MMA would be your cup of tea, but if your looking for the sweet science, boxing is your match.

Katie, there's no excuse for keeping your hands low unless it's just a pure wrestling match.
 
wannabestartinsomthin21 said:
You do see the total package in terms of pure skill and athletisism combined in boxing. If you're always looking for a knock out or blood and guts, then yeah, MMA would be your cup of tea, but if your looking for the sweet science, boxing is your match.

Katie, there's no excuse for keeping your hands low unless it's just a pure wrestling match.
Click to expand...

I'm failing to understand why you keep insisting on making this a debate.

Professional boxing does not, in no way, consist of more skill than MMA fighting.

Yes, I prefer to see as much action as possible. Why would that be debatable, if you're watching A FIGHT?

I've seen tons of boxing matches and I've been disappointed tons of times with the lack of the sweet science being exhibited.

I'll tell you what...I'll keep watching for the take downs and ground and pounds and rear naked chokes in the UFC...

and

you do whichever you please.

In the end, I'm still not going to say that boxing is better than mixed martial arts.

They are different and good in their own ways. MMA won't erase any of the great boxing matches I've seen in my life time, but I don't care to spend time watching many of the newer boxing events.

I will most likely watch the amateur boxers in the SUMMER OLYMPICS, only because I like to see the up and coming youth do their thing, but I'll be watching mainly because of the spirit of the Summer Olympics more than anything else.
 
plus, as different as they are, no doubt MMA incorporates a lot of Western boxing techniques and disciplines just like many other martial arts. in muay Thai, we take many elements from the well-established form of boxing. however, we're no where as disciplined in boxing's main strides.

if a boxer happens to be matched with an mmaist, for one thing the latter may seem to have an upper hand but more often than not (s)he'll be relying too much on the legs and find that the outcome would be more even than the weapon-handicap would otherwise make it seem.

and boxing may just be the most universally respected combat sport within MAs.

but as they say, it's like comparing a tiger and a lion - same meat-churning cat, but with a completely different nature.
 
mma has it all. and yes, at one point fake ass wrestling did overshadow boxing BUT was it ever a constant main ticket event in vegas? if not, then it wasn't really showing longevity.

what dana white has done w/ teh ufc has brought mma to a whole new level. now, main event fights in vegas aren't w/ heavyweight boxers, it's w/ middle and light weight mma fighters and they take constant center stage at mandalay, the palms, and mgm.
 
ladyplatinum said:
I'm failing to understand why you keep insisting on making this a debate.

Professional boxing does not, in no way, consist of more skill than MMA fighting.

Yes, I prefer to see as much action as possible. Why would that be debatable, if you're watching A FIGHT?

I've seen tons of boxing matches and I've been disappointed tons of times with the lack of the sweet science being exhibited.

I'll tell you what...I'll keep watching for the take downs and ground and pounds and rear naked chokes in the UFC...

and

you do whichever you please.

In the end, I'm still not going to say that boxing is better than mixed martial arts.

They are different and good in their own ways. MMA won't erase any of the great boxing matches I've seen in my life time, but I don't care to spend time watching many of the newer boxing events.

I will most likely watch the amateur boxers in the SUMMER OLYMPICS, only because I like to see the up and coming youth do their thing, but I'll be watching mainly because of the spirit of the Summer Olympics more than anything else.
Click to expand...

Why are you getting so mad? I was just trying to point out the differences and why it's a silly thing to say that an MMA fighter has a signifigant advantage over a boxer. I'm just stating some facts about boxing because it seems like a lot of you don't actually know that much about it.
 
wannabestartinsomthin21 said:
Why are you getting so mad? I was just trying to point out the differences and why it's a silly thing to say that an MMA fighter has a signifigant advantage over a boxer. I'm just stating some facts about boxing because it seems like a lot of you don't actually know that much about it.
Click to expand...

This is the first day that I actually read your response. Sorry it took me a few days to reply.

I don't understand what you mean.

I never got mad.

What I got was as I said...failing understand why you kept repeating the same argument (base point, I should say).

I know Boxing, very well. That was never a diminished thought in my posts. Maybe other readers don't know about boxing.

What I was referring to was the fact that more than myself had voiced (typed) opinions for MMA as their preferred sport over Boxing and you insisted on stating the same thoughts over and over.

From what was said in all the posts, I'm sure everyone knew that you were strongly for Boxing.

I didn't respond with anger or madness. I was more perplexed than anything, but I thought I ended that post on a good note.

I hope this clears things up.:)

Oh and by the way just an added note...I believe that Michael attended that UFC event that was reported. As I said, MMA is on the move UP.
 
I wasn't really repeating myself. People kept coming up with arguments as to the advantages MMA fighters had over boxers, they thought, and I was simply responding to those arguments with my own. I wasn't intending to anger or annoy anybody, I was just discussing the matter. For example, you and a few others brought up how much more MMA fighters have to defend, etc... and I responded that it's still no excuse to keep your hands down, etc... Just going back to my original point regarding the superior technique of many boxers over MMA fighters. Since the discussion branched off in to who is more affective as a fighter, I was merely giving my reasons for believing that boxers are techniqualy superior athletes to MMA fighters.

And yes, I know Michael was at a UFC fight. It's popular now. I never denied that. But it still won't ever make boxing obsolete.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top