Author Topic: top ranked boxer vs. best MMA fighters who wins  (Read 19440 times)

big L dawg

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 5729
  • i always tell the truth even when i lie...
Re: top ranked boxer vs. best MMA fighters who wins
« Reply #125 on: February 11, 2009, 05:35:24 PM »
Rather debatable assumption.Sometimes even Francois Botha performed creditably in K1:

http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x207bo

Was Bonjasky still considered an elite K1 fighter in 2004?

Of K-1 fighters who tried to make a transition into the relatively lucrative world of boxing Ray Sefo was a notable failure.
&feature=related[/youtube]
 ;D


Muay Thai fighters like Samart Payakaroon or Khaosai Galaxy did manage to make a successful transtion into boxing in their late teens/very early twenties.Smart is considered one of the very greatest ever Muay Thai fighters.
World Champion Vitali Klitschko was also an amateur kickboxer as a teen.






what happened in that vid is what would happen to 99% of MMA fighters that steped into a boxing ring.
DAWG

James Phoenix

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 1056
  • Beatific
Re: top ranked boxer vs. best MMA fighters who wins
« Reply #126 on: February 11, 2009, 09:28:09 PM »
MOST K1 guys started in boxing and got there ass kicked and now fight for peanuts. A great boxer could knock out 2or 3 guys easily in a street fight. Good luck to the MMA guy that tries that.

False, false, false...

Most K-1 guys started in Muay-Thai; Seidokaikan Karate; Kyokushin Karate; and Kickboxing.

Why don't you admit you're wrong?

Quote
Mighty Mo had his jaw broken in his first boxing match. Ray Sefo was knocked almost into a coma in a boxing match. Lebanner suffered the same fate in boxing. Fighting no name boxers yet these guys are at or near the top in K1. Why wouldn't you try boxing first it would only make sense to fight with the potential of making a fortune.

Why should a K-1 fighter expect to do well in a boxing ring when half his weapons (kicks) are taken away?
That's like saying a marine sniper would get owned in a close quarter duel with 9mm. It's a totally ridiculous argument.

Why do they fight? They fight because they enjoy it.

Rather debatable assumption.Sometimes even Francois Botha performed creditably in K1:

This isn't an assumption - it's a fact.

Boxers get owned in K-1; their proficiency with punching doesn't make up for their lack of range.

Botha performed credibly in K-1? Dude, don't you know his K-1 record is 2 wins, 6 losses? No, you didn't.
And his two wins were over injured fighters. So gimme a break.

BTW it's credibly.
Stop trying to sound intelligent when you can't even spell correctly; it makes your arguments less credible.

Ray Mercer won an Olympic gold medal in boxing, and was the WBO Heavyweight Champ, yet he couldn't hack it in K-1:
Quote
Mercer opted to travel to Japan and challenged Musashi(Seidokaikan Karate Fighter) in the kickboxing combat sport K-1 on June 6, 2004. He was knocked down in the first round and went on to lose via unanimous decision. On March 19, 2005, he had one more K-1 bout against Remy Bonjasky, to whom he lost via KO after being caught with a single high kick in the beginning of the first round.That was Bonjaskys only kick in the fight, and he didnt punch even once. As Mercer put it, "I got the shit kicked out of me".

Please refrain from making uninformed comments on shit, thanks.
☠ Order of Nephilim

imarcus

  • Getbig I
  • *
  • Posts: 4
Re: top ranked boxer vs. best MMA fighters who wins
« Reply #127 on: February 12, 2009, 01:10:12 AM »
You K1 supporters are getting desperate when all you have is BOJANSKY'S  win over an old punch drunk guy named RAY MERCER  you referred to him as a boxer to try to prove a silly point. I would call him a senior citizen. In describing MERCERS ancient accomplishments of world champ and Olympic champ. Your feeble attempt at trying to give K1 credibility is pathetic. You conveniently forgot to mention that the BOXER RAY MERCER was 48 YEARS OLD*** thats right 48. FRANCOIS BOTHA THE OTHER 40 SOMETHING boxer that you referred to still managed to kick the ass of LEBANNER, AERTS, and if you saw the fight BOJANSKY. All young top 10 contenders in K1 who were all allowed to kick and they still lost to the old man. Send a 48 year old K1 fighter to fight a top 10 contender in boxing. Just remember to send a coffin to put him in after the fight... Get real**

fredrollon

  • Getbig III
  • ***
  • Posts: 974
Re: top ranked boxer vs. best MMA fighters who wins
« Reply #128 on: February 12, 2009, 06:22:59 AM »
False, false, false...

Most K-1 guys started in Muay-Thai; Seidokaikan Karate; Kyokushin Karate; and Kickboxing.

Why don't you admit you're wrong?

Why should a K-1 fighter expect to do well in a boxing ring when half his weapons (kicks) are taken away?
That's like saying a marine sniper would get owned in a close quarter duel with 9mm. It's a totally ridiculous argument.

Why do they fight? They fight because they enjoy it.

This isn't an assumption - it's a fact.

Boxers get owned in K-1; their proficiency with punching doesn't make up for their lack of range.

Botha performed credibly in K-1? Dude, don't you know his K-1 record is 2 wins, 6 losses? No, you didn't.
And his two wins were over injured fighters. So gimme a break.

BTW it's credibly.
Stop trying to sound intelligent when you can't even spell correctly; it makes your arguments less credible.

Ray Mercer won an Olympic gold medal in boxing, and was the WBO Heavyweight Champ, yet he couldn't hack it in K-1:
Please refrain from making uninformed comments on shit, thanks.


I'm well aware of both fighters.
Botha performed reasonably creditably here considering he was a pretty poor K1 fighter and was up against Bonjasky(one of the best k1 fighters of all time) and was winning for the best part of the fight.Who is the boxing equivalent for Bonjasky...Wladimir Klitschko? Do you see any K-1 fighter dominating him for a few rounds of boxing.

You're seriously not suggesting that washed up and disinterested fighters like Botha and Ray Mercer (who has out of the sport of boxing for years with hepatitis B) provide a reasonably good idea about how the most formidable boxers in the last 25 years , Tyson and Lewis at their peak ,would have performed  in K1?  ???  (BTW I think Mercer would have done quite well in K1 before his diagnosis of hepatitis in 1998.)

fredrollon

  • Getbig III
  • ***
  • Posts: 974
Re: top ranked boxer vs. best MMA fighters who wins
« Reply #129 on: February 12, 2009, 06:26:11 AM »
In fairness ,in the beginning of Botha's K1 career I assumed that Botha at least would have performed much  better than he ultimately did.... ;D
Some of the kickboxers are excellent fighters.  :)

Pecs

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 1590
Re: top ranked boxer vs. best MMA fighters who wins
« Reply #130 on: February 12, 2009, 07:59:03 AM »
hmmm... this thread still going on.....
once and for all.... in 8 out of 10 times, boxers win a BOXING match while MMA fighters win a FIGHT (assuming they are both the same level in their own skills)


fredrollon

  • Getbig III
  • ***
  • Posts: 974
Re: top ranked boxer vs. best MMA fighters who wins
« Reply #131 on: February 12, 2009, 09:03:21 AM »
You K1 supporters are getting desperate when all you have is BOJANSKY'S  win over an old punch drunk guy named RAY MERCER  you referred to him as a boxer to try to prove a silly point. I would call him a senior citizen. In describing MERCERS ancient accomplishments of world champ and Olympic champ. Your feeble attempt at trying to give K1 credibility is pathetic. You conveniently forgot to mention that the BOXER RAY MERCER was 48 YEARS OLD*** thats right 48. FRANCOIS BOTHA THE OTHER 40 SOMETHING boxer that you referred to still managed to kick the ass of LEBANNER, AERTS, and if you saw the fight BOJANSKY. All young top 10 contenders in K1 who were all allowed to kick and they still lost to the old man. Send a 48 year old K1 fighter to fight a top 10 contender in boxing. Just remember to send a coffin to put him in after the fight... Get real**


mid forties.... and he was thrown in with the very best k1 fighters....

oldtimer1

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 16965
  • Getbig!
Re: top ranked boxer vs. best MMA fighters who wins
« Reply #132 on: February 12, 2009, 04:28:28 PM »
Boxing is a  brutal sport with phenomenal athletes.  It has stood the test of time.  Boxing is one dimensional while MMA is geared toward real street fighting.  Any MMA guy who would put down boxing has never spent any time punching in the ring.  Tapping is easy compared to getting hit 35 times in the face per round.

I would answer it like this.  The top boxers would embarrass every MMA champ in every weight category in the boxing ring.  Every MMA champ would embarrass most boxing champs in the octagon. 

luvvsuNOT

  • Getbig III
  • ***
  • Posts: 834
Re: top ranked boxer vs. best MMA fighters who wins
« Reply #133 on: February 20, 2009, 07:57:30 PM »
Boxing is a  brutal sport with phenomenal athletes.  It has stood the test of time.  Boxing is one dimensional while MMA is geared toward real street fighting.  Any MMA guy who would put down boxing has never spent any time punching in the ring.  Tapping is easy compared to getting hit 35 times in the face per round.

I would answer it like this.  The top boxers would embarrass every MMA champ in every weight category in the boxing ring.  Every MMA champ would embarrass most boxing champs in the octagon. 

I like this post. It's true that in the submission aspect of the game a person can take as much or as little punishment as he chooses. He can tap as soon as his arm gets caught or be a tough guy and get it broken. In striking you can't have your opponent pull his punches. Boxing deals only with striking so it takes it's toll and it doesn't seem like the ref intervenes when a guy is getting railed as quickly as they do in MMA. They seem to leave it to the corner to throw in the towel or wait until the guy drops. Since MMA allows you to keep attacking even when the opponent is down the refs have to be more proactive and are trained to do so. In that sense MMA fighter don't have to endure as much punishment. Also, MMA is still new and they want to be far more cautious that fighters don't get seriously injured and taint the sport.

And you have to compare apples to apples. Just like how absurd it is to compare bodybuilders to fighters. At least there's some relation between boxers and MMA fighters but absolutely none in regard to bodybuilders. Fedor would look ridiculous in a thong, oiled down and posing next to Dex just as much as Dex would look ridiculous trying to trade blows with Fedor in the cage or ring.

fredrollon

  • Getbig III
  • ***
  • Posts: 974
Re: top ranked boxer vs. best MMA fighters who wins
« Reply #134 on: February 20, 2009, 08:15:49 PM »
Boxer Vs wrestler in an MMA contest? It depends a lot ,of course on who the boxer and who the wrestler is. Between two competent practitioners of their respective discipline,though, a wrestler will usually win.

I think that's common sense and was the opinion of most knowledgeable people,even before MMA started.