I also don't "understand" all the titles and organizations in boxing, and what means what as far as titles (I'm not too dumb to learn them, I've just never had the interest). Knowing that the UFC is the "top" league makes it a hell of a lot easier to follow.
[Reply]

I think I'll put it this way. Of course they have better hand striking technique in boxing than in MMA. Thats just obvious.

I would also see better kicks in a Taekwondo tournament, better wrestling at an NCAA wrestling tournament, better jiu jitsu in a no-gi jiu jitsu grappling tournament, and better knees and elbows in a muay thai fight. In each of those cases you may see subtleties in technique that get lost in the more generalized world of MMA.

With the possible exception of muay thai, I'm just not interested in watching specialists demonstrate their mastery over a very specific, very narrow skill in the wider sport of MMA. I just want to see a fight, and thats what you get with MMA.
[Reply]

I'd agree that most of us are where you are. I too wrestled and (in other threads) have documented some dislike for things like riding time, because it's not "action" nor is it wrestling IMO. And it takes one hell of an imagination to differentiate it from stalling.

But to your point, I agree, MMA is more of what people want than what we grew up with watching in a boxing ring.

That being said, I've often wondered if MMA might serve itself some good by instituting a pin rule of sorts. I love some grappling, I really do, but I'd also appreciate some level of "you need to get off your back" being applied to the sport. Since that one act - getting pinned - is central to wrestling I think there should be some recognition of it in MMA too. Minimally, if not a pin, I'd love to see back points awarded at the scoring table at least. IOW, you may not win-by-pin (or a "fall" as we call it), but laying/being on your back for more than a brief second should start jeopardizing your ability to win that round. I'm sure many think it already does, but with what I've seen, and fighter's willingness to lay there feet-cocked, I'd argue it's not enough. Simply put, in wrestling, and fighting in general, being on your back is never a good thing; I think MMA should recognize that.
[Reply]

Sure.... if you want to eliminate an entire style of fighting.
I'm okay with letting them fight from their back.
[Reply]

Every wrestler in the fall, or near-fall, position agrees with you.

It's all good, I'm sure they'll never do it, but I can hope..
[Reply]

The UFC is in a blessed position that may not last forever. The problem with a monopoly is of course questions on fighter pay and lack of competition may allow the promoter to reap huge profits, but the benefit is that the best fight the best.

If Bellator and a 3rd promotion both rose in prominence, signed some of the best fighters, and were seen as equal to the UFC, then we'd be in the same situation as boxing, where you have multiple champions who don't fight each other, or wait till they are past their primes, and easy ways to duck fights.
[Reply]

And that's perfectly reasonable. There is often more action in MMA than in boxing. However, the skill level in top level MMA is vastly inferior to the skill level in top level boxing. That doesn't mean it's not entertaining...I'm often more entertained by watching UFC than boxing. It just means that the sport still has a LONG way to go before it's fully matured.

It isn't just about the fighters, either. It's about the trainers. It's about the fans who grow up watching the sport and taking it up their entire lives. It's about the prize money being large enough to lure top level talent away from other sports.

I've mentioned before that Matt Mitrione was a friend of mine. He didn't take up the sport until after he had retired from the NFL, got bored of the corporate gig, and decided to take up fighting. Next thing you know, he's one of the top fighters in the sport. He's a great dude, and that's awesome for him, but let's be honest. If he had decided to box instead, he wouldn't be ready to line up against Klitchko any time soon.
[Reply]

It's probably the same thing, though, with college sports.
I love the NFL, and it's #1 for me, but college football is right behind. Because of their lack of skill, there are things they can do that NFLers cant. I like college basketball far more than the NBA, and the same thing applies (although that gap has closed).
[Reply]

The skill level in MMA has improved massively in the men's non-heavyweight divisions in just the last few years. The new athletes in the UFC are almost all guys who almost exclusively trained MMA. He would not do well today. The top male non-heavyweight boxers would get taken down and thrashed by the wrestlers and jiu-jitsu submission grapplers if they tried to switch without a hell of a lot of training.
[Reply]

Heck no. The sport already slanted towards wrestlers enough as it is.
[Reply]

I don't understand? If it were at all slanted towards wrestling there would be a lot more value placed on the person on their back losing because, well, they were on their backs.

I get the notion that if you're going up against a wrestler, like a person savvy in Judo, you're well-advised to keep them at a distance, but I don't see anything that slants it towards wrestling because nothing from folkstyle, freestyle, or greco seem to garner any wins based on their scoring methods.

And I'm a little conflicted, but only a little, I realize there's some value in certain martial arts having a "fight from your back" (Up Kicks) component, and there have been some recorded KOs using the Up Kick, but I'm just not seeing what I've seen as very exciting.
[Reply]

If fighting from your back is such a disadvantage, then fighters shouldn't need points for getting their opponent into that position. They should just beat the crap out of their opponent once they get him on his back.

What next? Do you give points out for throwing punches that get blocked?
[Reply]

You're an idiot!
[Reply]

How well do you follow the sport? For years there has been controversy in judging where fighters working from their back have lost decisions to wrestlers who did very little with top position. This was because judges didn't know what they were watching and assumed the guy on his back was losing, simply because he was on his back most of the fight.

Wrestling is a great base for mma. Wrestlers are usually strong, understand body positioning and momentum, and most have the time have great endurance. They can usually survive their first few fights using simply their wrestling knowledge, while the train up other aspects of their game.

That being said though, a lot of the way the survive is safe, top control. The rules allow them to hold top position without doing much damage, as long as they appear 'active.' Adding more rules to help wrestlers will promote the practice even more, and in turn make the sport more boring. Fuck that in general.
[Reply]

And Saul touches on the problem. Judges already give hypothetical points for a takedown, regardless of whether the fighter does anything with it once he has his opponent on the ground. It's the reason you'll see a stand up battle going on, and if it's a close round, one guy will shoot in for a takedown close to the end of the round in order to score 'points' with the judges to steal the round.
[Reply]