Bigger Gap in Skill: CM Punk vs Gall in MMA or Floyd vs Conor in Boxing

Se4n

Blue Belt
@Blue
Joined
Nov 28, 2014
Messages
894
Reaction score
0
Id say Floyd Conor just because Conor is taking his first match against arguably the GOAT and definitely the best defensive boxer of all time whereas Mickey Gall was still very inexperienced vs Punk.
 
Floyd versus Conor in boxing. Floyd's in over his head. The one dimensional bum won't last three rounds.
 
Id say Floyd Conor just because Conor is taking his first match against arguably the GOAT and definitely the best defensive boxer of all time whereas Mickey Gall was still very inexperienced vs Punk.
I'd agree. Punk, like Conor, was also too old to make a run in their sports but Punk at least had an interest as a hobby for years and actually trained for over a year in MMA. In a legit, Floyd actually wants to win and humiliate Conor fight, this would last under 15 seconds.
 
Comparing CM Punk to Conor....you lot are going to be miserable as hell after Saturday.
 
Another reactionary thread.

I just wanted to post in such a historic thread, as I will be defecating on it on August 27th, midnight time.
 
Punk vs. Gall.

Mr. Brooks was an actor that was tossed in an MMA match with a guys with an actual MMA skill set (Judo + BJJ + wrestling).

Conor at least knows how to throw a punch. He even has been punched AND punched people in an actual professional fight.

That does NOT mean I think Conor has a chance to beat Floyd.

It's just that Brooks had even longer odds to beat Gall.
 
Punk had the bigger skill gap, because at least Conor is already a successful MMA fighter and punching was the key to his success.. Punk had no athletic background. If Conor was an actor who played irish boxers in a few films then decided he wanted to box Mayweather with zero combat sports experience, that would be more comparable to CM Punk.
 
It's Punk/Gall by a landslide. That was actually what people claim this is. Punk had no training in any discipline and got thrown in there with a fairly decent prospect. And of course Gall made him look like a complete novice. A) Floyd will not make Conor look THAT bad, and B) Conor's been boxing since he was like 12. Sure, not ONLY boxing, but he's still been doing it. Night and day difference between these comparisons.
 
let's rate their skills to come, and we'll conclude a massive gap??

1 = Conor


x = tie

2 = Floyd


1. Strength

2. Power

3. Speed

4. Cardio

5. Defence

6. Footwork

7. Boxing technique

8. Ring IQ

9. Ring Control

10. X-factor
 
Punk was a broken down 40 year old with minimal athletic ability.
 
Floyd versus Conor in boxing. Floyd's in over his head. The one dimensional bum won't last three rounds.
Good point, although both of them involved a young martial artist in their prime facing down against a smaller broken down old man with a very limited skill set. I guess I agree with you overall but it's a tough one.
 
In terms of overall MMA skills, Punk-Gall wasn't that big of a mismatch. There's a reason Gall shot for an immediate takedown and that's because Punk had a significant edge in the striking department. Punk, while having the ground skills, simply wasn't prepared for a panic wrestler. He showed up for a proper fight and the other guy didn't.

Mayweather is facing a guy whose basic boxing qualifications are that he used to take a weekly hour class at his local gym to try and fend off the bullies who used to torment him, all the while trying and failing miserably to make it in a true elite sport like football. It's debatable whether he could beat Mayweather Sr, much less Jr.
 
Back
Top