What does the may/mac say about the the level of striking in MMA?

M

MaxMMA

Banned
Banned
Joined
Dec 12, 2016
Messages
5,488
Reaction score
2,860
Everyone knows the general attitude on this forum about striking in MMA. "These guys don't have that K1 level striking!" All the way down to "These guys would get crushed by any golden gloves champ!"

I didn't watch last night's fight, but it seems pretty obvious where I'm going with this. A guy with 0 pro boxing matches just survived and according to what I'm reading, was able to mount some kind of respectable offense against one of the best boxers of all time.

Is it time that the level of striking in MMA is given its due respect, or could any golden gloves state champ come in and mop the floor with the UFCs top 10?
 
The striking in MMA has been good for quite a long time now. The old saying is still true that styles make fights, McGregor was able to do decently against Mayweather, but against a boxer with skilled ring cutting like Canelo or Miguel Cotto, it's fair to assume he'd get knocked out properly.
 
Nothing, because Conor is not an average MMA striker and one is not a very big sample size.
 
I don't understand this need to compare MMA striking to pure striking arts.

The environments are completely different.

Of course someone who dedicates more time to striking will usually be better at it.

But that doesn't take anything away from striking in MMA - it's good and it's constantly getting better.

The Floyd/Mac fight doesn't really tell you anything in all honesty.

It just showed someone with more experience with hand fighting beating someone with less experience hand fighting. That's about it.
 
Azam said:
I don't understand this need to compare MMA striking to pure striking arts.

The environments are completely different.

Of course someone who dedicates more time to striking will usually be better at it.

But that doesn't take anything away from striking in MMA - it's good and it's constantly getting better.

The Floyd/Mac fight doesn't really tell you anything in all honesty.

It just showed someone with more experience with hand fighting beating someone with less experience hand fighting. That's about it.
Click to expand...
Because its been shat on by "purists" for quite some time now

When people stereotype MMA striking, they're thinking of winging wild loopy overhands all night, when in fact its completely dependent on the fighter and their base in striking. Even if its technical in MMA, it still gets shit. Fedor rolling off punches into his overhand/hook is a beauty to watch, but I'd still hear shit about it from boxing friends and associates how sloppy it is.
 
n.diazismylife1999 said:
Nothing, because Conor is not an average MMA striker and one is not a very big sample size.
Click to expand...
He's fought a few guys that were able to make the stand up competitive, or were able to survive longer than a quick KO. No doubt conor is not your average mma striker, but to say he is light years ahead of other MMA fighters in the striking department is grasping a little bit, no?
 
You like me were reading wrong. Based off the over exaggeration on the heavies i thought Conor was swarming Floyd with bombs and had him in trouble and I was all pumped to see the fight when it was available.

Then when i saw the fight i witnessed a tentative conor throw bizarre poking arm punches that did little before mayweather got tired of playing with his food and and clobbered him.

I still disagree entirely with anyone people trying to reason he looked "good" and im not even a mayweather fan. His cardio was god awful, his much lauded power was non existent, and he got played like a fiddle by an smaller much older man who has been retired for the past 2 years.
 
It doesn't say a great deal. The scorecards all have Mayweather clearly dominating that fight. Mayweather landed a ridiculous 53% of his punches vs. 26% for McGregor.

Consider that Mayweather is 40 y.o. and didn't take his usual defense heavy approach vs. a man a decade younger than him and known his punching power in MMA. The only thing I took away from this is what I already knew, MMA strikers aren't great boxers and not even great punchers.

The biggest area for improvement in MMA striking is striking defense but the overall gap in striking is significant.
 
j123 said:
Because its been shat on by "purists" for quite some time now

When people stereotype MMA striking, they're thinking of winging wild loopy overhands all night, when in fact its completely dependent on the fighter and their base in striking. Even if its technical in MMA, it still gets shit. Fedor rolling off punches into his overhand/hook is a beauty to watch, but I'd still hear shit about it from boxing friends and associates how sloppy it is.
Click to expand...

Of course some purists will shit on it just like some MMA fans shit on boxing for not being "real fighting."

They shit on it because they have no idea about striking in an MMA context - they don't understand the other variables that change how you strike because they only do that one pure style.

Those of us who've done striking/grappling/mma know that the stereotype is rubbish.

I think now more than ever before - more purists/fans are beginning to acknowledge that striking in MMA is a product of that environment and that it's its own thing - and can't really be compared as there are many more variables at work.

Elitism is what it is but it exists in every sport including MMA. Unfortunately it's not something that will go away - so best to ignore it rather than give it energy.
 
LEGS MAHONEY said:
You like me were reading wrong. Based off the over exaggeration on the heavies i thought Conor was swarming Floyd with bombs and had him in trouble and I was all pumped to see the fight when it was available.

Then when i saw the fight i witnessed a tentative conor throw bizarre poking arm punches that did little before mayweather got tired of playing with his food and and clobbered him.

I still disagree entirely with anyone people trying to reason he looked "good" and im not even a mayweather fan. His cardio was god awful, his much lauded power was non existent, and he got played like a fiddle by an smaller much older man who has been retired for the past 2 years.
Click to expand...

I did not watch, but from official news outlets, it seems like PBF was just toying with McGOAT.

If MMA striking is to be considered "good", then an MMA practitioner should at least not be made to look foolish in a ring with a boxers. Now PBF is one of the greats, but McGOAT is considered one of better strikers in MMA right now.

At this stage in MMA if striking is good, they dont have to win against a great boxer, but at least not look completely lost. That ought to be the litmus test for MMA striking. From what I read, that is not what happened.
 
It does not matter if MMA is different game than boxing. MMA should look better in boxing, then pure boxer will in MMA. MMA practitioners ought to know enough to not look foolish under tighter ruleset.
 
Depends on what you mean. I look at fundamental stuff like shifting weight into strikes, being balanced, being in position to throw and absorb shots, not having your chin in the air, etc because these things are fundamental no matter the ruleset. If you have a guy with his chin in the air, reaching for his punches, off balance with his weight way past his lead foot, you can't make the argument "Oh it's different because it's MMA." Bad fundamentals are bad fundamentals, and even in high level MMA you just see these egregious mistakes more often than in boxing or Kickboxing. What's different between MMA and boxing are the set ups and approaches. I've seen too many bad fundamentals get excused for being different because it's MMA.

Your narrative of the fight isn't what I saw. I saw a guy doing better than expected, partially due to him being deliberately carried by Mayweather, but he still ultimately got schooled and stopped as expected. I didn't see this "respectable" offense at all. I saw one of the most lauded power punchers in MMA throw shots that had no effect on a smaller, older, retired man. The power and chin of top level boxers is a level above MMA that much is true.
 
I'd be cautious of drawing any overly flattering conclusions about the technical merits of MMA stand-up verses boxing based on Conor being able to make it to round 10 (and having a few highlight moments).

Yeah he's a decent boxer, but he's also a tremendous athlete who had time, and every single physical advantage on his side last night... and he still got thoroughly dominated and stopped. Mayweather won based purely on boxing mastery. McGregor's shifting aside, which is not exclusive to MMA, nothing in his stand-up that he may have derived from MMA served him in the fight.

Personally, the biggest takeaway was just how human Floyd looked when faced with an opponent with a genuine height AND reach advantage. Don't even think DLH had both over him. It's been something his detractors, and haters, have been harping on forever... I'll resist the urge to dredge up old names. Woulda, coulda, shoulda.
 
Buddy Revell said:
I'd be cautious of drawing any overly flattering conclusions about the technical merits of MMA stand-up verses boxing based on Conor being able to make it to round 10 (and having a few highlight moments).

Yeah he's a decent boxer, but he's also a tremendous athlete who had time, and every single physical advantage on his side last night... and he still got thoroughly dominated and stopped. Mayweather won based purely on boxing mastery. McGregor's shifting aside, which is not exclusive to MMA, nothing in his stand-up that he may have derived from MMA served him in the fight.

Personally, the biggest takeaway was just how human Floyd looked when faced with an opponent with a genuine height AND reach advantage. Don't even think DLH had both over him. It's been something his detractors, and haters, have been harping on forever... I'll resist the urge to dredge up old names. Woulda, coulda, shoulda.
Click to expand...

There is no physical advantage in boxing, mate. They fight at the same weight. In fact Conors muscles is what burn him and are a disadvantage for boxing. In MMA it may help due to the existence of wrestling. But uninterested Floyd walked trough and carried at the same time McGregor. The fight was a big joke.

On topic we can say that if McGregor is one of the best boxers in MMA, the level of boxing in MMA is not good, but good enough for the sport of MMA. MMA fighters barelly box in the pocket and the outside fighting is way different too, even the medium distance fighting is different. So a MMA fighter being a better boxer is not needed, although a good boxer can take advantage of his skills in a MMA fight.
 
Ilk said:
There is no physical advantage in boxing, mate. They fight at the same weight. In fact Conors muscles is what burn him and are a disadvantage for boxing. In MMA it may help due to the existence of wrestling. But uninterested Floyd walked trough and carried at the same time McGregor. The fight was a big joke.

On topic we can say that if McGregor is one of the best boxers in MMA, the level of boxing in MMA is not good, but good enough for the sport of MMA. MMA fighters barelly box in the pocket and the outside fighting is way different too, even the medium distance fighting is different. So a MMA fighter being a better boxer is not needed, although a good boxer can take advantage of his skills in a MMA fight.
Click to expand...

It's McGregors inexperience as to how to carry his weight and how to exert himself over a 10-12 round championship fight that cost him. More heavily muscled boxers than he exhibit great gas tanks all the time. McGregors style is very taxing on him physically-- the price he pays for being a really mercurial fighter.
 
Buddy Revell said:
It's McGregors inexperience as to how to carry his weight and how to exert himself over a 10-12 round championship fight that cost him. More heavily muscled boxers than he exhibit great gas tanks all the time. McGregors style is very taxing on him physically-- the price he pays for being a really mercurial fighter.
Click to expand...
Naw he lost because he wore Everlast
 
Conor landed a few clean punches. He didn't look terrible, and gave a good account of himself for an MMA fighter fighting Mayweather. The fight wasn't close, it wasn't competitive, and he had little worthwhile offense.
 
j123 said:
Naw he lost because he wore Everlast
Click to expand...

Please! Everybody knows he lost because of the massive 8 ounce gloves (those extra 4 ounces are a killer!)

Then if that wasn't enough stacked in Mayweather's favor, there was the WIND RESISTANCE -- on account of the larger size of said gloves -- that was sapping McGregor of his vitality and his punches of their vigor. McGregor totally would've won in a REAL FIGHT.
 
The entire thing was a scam. Mayweather is retired and Conor is a moron. Edit: Actually Conor's fans are the morons, Conor made a lot of money off that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,236,402
Messages
55,417,934
Members
174,764
Latest member
durbanik916

Share this page

Back
Top