What are your thoughts!

[Guest friedrice]

MMA without a doubt pure warriors

whats ufc and mma ??

aint into fighting stuff but what are they.

[Symon 0]

Both codes produce fantastic sportsmen but they are almost as different as ferreting and lamping!

Very few can cross over to be good in both codes. Respect to all. Cheers, D.

 

I agree with this comment and well put D, but the welshman Joe C is a true champion and he has earnt his keep in the sport and never backs down from a challenge he went to America a prince and came home a king. Great pioneer of boxing and a real mans hero respect

[Symon 0]

MMA without a doubt pure warriors

whats ufc and mma ??

aint into fighting stuff but what are they.

 

UFC is Ultimate Fighter Championship usually on Bravo and MMA is Mixed Martial Arts both can be found on sat TV.

 

Cheers Sy.

[mole catcher 1]

anyone remember the Vale Tudo compertitions from the late 80s and early 90s? there still going on today in Japan and thats where your UFC came from and all the other spin offs. Vale Tudo is as close to street fighting as possible and is a hell of a lot more nasty to watch than the UFC. Where as the UFC has rules such as no kicking to the head of your apponant whilst he is on the floor this is not so with Vale Tudo, prety much anything goes apart from attacking the love spuds, eyes and throat. thats where Royce gracie and rickson graice made the name for themselves as well as their brother Royle (the R is pronounced as an H in their first names by the way)

 

As an ex boxer myself, as well as someone who has trained in a martial art i think they are both good forms of sport with each offering the watcher a good insight into the pugilistic arts. I dont think you can compare which is better as for example a better or harder fighting system. As was said before both have good and bad fighters within their own style. Put a boxer on the floor then hes fecked. put a grappler in the ring with a good stand up fighter, unless he can take it to the floor the grappler is in unfirmliar areas of fighting and will struggle.

 

Its a bit like asking whats the best dog, bull x or a whippet x?

[speedy 0]

i've been a long time sky pay per view customer of all the big fights, im happy to pay my money and wait up until 5 am to watch a boxing match, i cant say i would do the same with MMA but i do enjoy watching MMA.

boxing will always be my favourite sport to watch ive no doubts, ive too many memories and a history in watching and enjoying the sport that i'll probably always be biased that way but i do enjoy MMA. they both have their strengths and weaknesses and i think most have been covered already

[Tiff 36]

MMA is the type of fighting, the UFC is the biggest "major" promotional company who puts on MMA events, there is also Cage Rage/Elite XC, Pride, (now owned by the UFC and no longer promoting) M-1, Adrenaline etc.

 

There are hundreds of smaller "feeder" organizations that people can cut their teeth on fighting at the small shows before making it big and getting a UFC (or other big org.) contract.

 

Boxing and MMA are COMPLETLY different animals, you really can't compare the two. I am a much bigger fan of MMA, only a few boxers have ever excited me. And with only 2 (possibly) mma-related deaths in 20 years versus a dozen a year in boxing for the last 100 years, gimme mma!

[LDR 29]

i think people are over looking some points, obviously you cant put an MMA fighter in a ring with a boxer, likewise you couldn't expect a boxer to last 5 mins in an octagon!!!! so if we remove these things from the occasion and put them in a good old street fight with all their prospective skills, it's pretty obvious who's coming out on top!!!!! therefore, the MMA fighter is the more rounded, more usefull, more brutal, harder, devastating athlete!!!! here ends the lesson!!!! amen........

[trappa 518]

They are worlds apart in a monetary sense, but MMA hasnt been spoiled by money (yet) , boxing has, period.

As two disciplines, mma will beat boxing hands down. The ufc was started just to see which discipline was the best and its been proven that to be trained in multiple martial arts is of benefit.

ps i dont think bisping will get past anderson silva either. He has got to be, pound for pound, the hardest man on the planet.

 

 

MMA hasnt been spoilt by money ????....the whole sport is different to what it started out as BECAUSE of money !....the ufc brought in new rules to be accepted by tv...if thats not a sport being spoiled by money i dont know what is......as 2 disciplines mma will beat boxing hands down ? what does that mean ? beat it how .........ufc/mma is barely recognisable to the sport it started off as a mere 15 years ago......i listened to an old interview on sky a while back with ken shamrock talking about how excited he was at the prospect of having a real fight in a cage and getting paid for it.....he then went on to explain how the whole sport changed for tv revenue/money/being socially acceptable....and how if they hadnt of brought in all the new rules no money would have been made......pretty much self explanatory really.

 

 

Your wrong their mate. Initially the only UFC rules were no eye gouging and no biting, im pretty sure that was it.

Rules and rounds were brought in to make it a better fight, if you remember royce gracie fighting tank abbot in ufc 7 i think, royce v shamrock in 6? long 30 min fights that would have been better if breaks were introduced and vis a vis, rounds.

The other rules werent introduced for tv purposes imo, it was fighters were being injured and unable to fight for months after each bout, which is no good to anyone really.

MMa is better for any rules brought in now surely, it keeps the fighters fighting! you wouldnt have heard of chuck liddell if he had had his nose bitten off in his first fight would you? he would never had fought again. we wouldnt be talking about anderson silva being probably the best fighter in the world if he had had his larynx crushed first time in the cage, do you get my drift?

We need rules.

[gnasher16 30,121]

Yes but it defeats the whole object of the sport.....as the chap above says,the origins of mma was vale tudo......ufc 1 to about 7 was it i cant remember....were real fights,as close to what anyone could call " a real fight "...that was its design.....but it was banned in most states in america because it was too violent !!....the many rules since have been brought in by the ufc backing down to society and tv companies.......as you saidthere was 2 rules thats all....now thats a fight.....yes timed rounds make sense......but the amount of things you now cant do in a fight stop it from being a " real fight " which is what the original idea of the sport was.........just as a quick example...and i hate to drop names......but a dutch chap i used to know actually beat randy couture back in the late 90,s when randy was a lot younger and at the top of his game.....this was vale tudo.....he admitted he probably wouldnt have beaten him in a ufc contest but vale tudo was very close to a real fight hence he beat him........the sport today certainly isnt what they tried to bill it as in the early 90,s...and it WAS for monetary reasons not safety......still a very exciting sport though....but i dont believe it will ever have the tradition/money/fame etc of boxing.

As for a boxer or mma fighter winning a street fight .....pointless argument.

[trappa 518]

I know where you are coming from but UFC didnt derive from vale tudo. VT is a different thing completely. UFC 1 came about when the question was asked - would a boxer beat someone from karate, would judo beat jui jitsu, and the ultimate fighting championship was born.

As for it not ever being up there with boxing for money and fame only time will tell. MMA is officially the fastest growing sport in the world, and after watching the video of the last ufc with budweiser sponsoring move of the match etc, i think it will get bigger than boxing, but on the downside, i believe that , like boxing money WILL eventually spoil the bouts. You only have to see dana white and the fretita(cant spell) brothers getting brock lesnar on board, its obvious they want the wwf nuggets following.

anyway,im going now, back sunday.

[LDR 29]

Yes but it defeats the whole object of the sport.....as the chap above says,the origins of mma was vale tudo......ufc 1 to about 7 was it i cant remember....were real fights,as close to what anyone could call " a real fight "...that was its design.....but it was banned in most states in america because it was too violent !!....the many rules since have been brought in by the ufc backing down to society and tv companies.......as you saidthere was 2 rules thats all....now thats a fight.....yes timed rounds make sense......but the amount of things you now cant do in a fight stop it from being a " real fight " which is what the original idea of the sport was.........just as a quick example...and i hate to drop names......but a dutch chap i used to know actually beat randy couture back in the late 90,s when randy was a lot younger and at the top of his game.....this was vale tudo.....he admitted he probably wouldnt have beaten him in a ufc contest but vale tudo was very close to a real fight hence he beat him........the sport today certainly isnt what they tried to bill it as in the early 90,s...and it WAS for monetary reasons not safety......still a very exciting sport though....but i dont believe it will ever have the tradition/money/fame etc of boxing.

As for a boxer or mma fighter winning a street fight .....pointless argument.

 

 

sorry gnasher maybe i titled this thread wrong, i didnt mean ufc as an organisation against boxing...... i simply meant an MMA fighter against a boxer!!! for arguements sake, silva in a 'fight' against his weight category oponent in boxing!!!

 

earlier on you were all for boxing being the best bods in the fight game, when in reality boxers are a one trick pony......useless!!!!

[gnasher16 30,121]

Trappa....ufc/mma....was designed as a contest to see who would win a fight,it was never specifically aimed at martial arts/boxing.....which martial art does head butting come under ? headbutts played a big role in the early ufc,s....as did groin shots,kicks to the head of a downed opponent......and many more...none of these come under the banner of a martial art...its just part of what happens in a real fight........vale tudo was the nearest thing to a real fight which is why fighters such as randy couture started off in it in the no rules fighting world.

Personally i think dana white is an embarrassment,the man has no class and talks like an infant....but yes he is a sharp money man and in that way has made the ufc organisation more succesful....but at what price !

 

Longdogrunner.....you just cant throw 2 sports together and say who would win....you might as well compare a tennis player to a squash player or cricketer and say who would win because they all involve a bat and ball !....theres no logic to it......look at the marquiss of queensbury rules and then look at the rules of mma.......how can you even compare the 2 as sports.

[wetdogsmell 99]

i perfer mma to boxing because there are so many ways a fight can end. i've had a few pro mma fights and i don't think you can say mma fighters are better than boxers or vise versa, i think its down to the individual cos i've beaten a pro boxer and been knocked out by a boxer :kiss: so what ever floats your boat

[mole catcher 1]

but UFC didnt derive from vale tudo.

 

Vale tudo came about as a way of getting the fudal war lords of centuries ago in japan to pit their finest fighters against each other for both money and honour. They even had sword fights as well as fist fights to the death. Believe it or not they still have fights to the death in japan, their fudal system is still going strong today. There wasnt the barriers of this style being called this or that and which was a better style, it was fighting pure and simple. Im not sure how you can say the ufc didnt come from Vale tudo, this has history going back centries and as a nation Japan holds the longest recorded history of the pugal arts (not wars but fighting tourniments) with many coming from it, Possible even the Queensbury rules being derived from it.

 

As for which form of contest holds the closest to a real fight then possible Pincat silat (knife fighting) is the nearest. seems to me most fights in the street involve knives now days so why not included that in the UFC to see who would win in a real fight? of course to make such a suggestion is obsurd but getting back to the tourniment of fisticuffs it is in my opinion a mix of more than one question.

 

which is better to watch?

which holds more skill?

which is more in keeping with the reality of todays world?

ect

ect

ect

 

just my opinions of course

[LDR 29]

Trappa....ufc/mma....was designed as a contest to see who would win a fight,it was never specifically aimed at martial arts/boxing.....which martial art does head butting come under ? headbutts played a big role in the early ufc,s....as did groin shots,kicks to the head of a downed opponent......and many more...none of these come under the banner of a martial art...its just part of what happens in a real fight........vale tudo was the nearest thing to a real fight which is why fighters such as randy couture started off in it in the no rules fighting world.

Personally i think dana white is an embarrassment,the man has no class and talks like an infant....but yes he is a sharp money man and in that way has made the ufc organisation more succesful....but at what price !

 

Longdogrunner.....you just cant throw 2 sports together and say who would win....you might as well compare a tennis player to a squash player or cricketer and say who would win because they all involve a bat and ball !....theres no logic to it......look at the marquiss of queensbury rules and then look at the rules of mma.......how can you even compare the 2 as sports.

 

 

Not really like comparing teenis to cricket is it??? they're both fighting sports, its just one is better than the other......for me personally its MMA......