Boxing vs MMA : Using the "streetfight approach"

[Blue Notch]

Ok,

I have observed that whenever we get the old Boxing vs MMA debate, MMA fans, in general, always resort to the "MMA fighter will destroy the boxer in a street fight because the boxer can't fight off his back" argument. Thus MMA is the superior fighting sport. Makes sense...??

First and foremost, I believe that this is a pointless debate to have, since both boxing and MMA are regulated sports with seperate sets of rules. Everyone may have a preference of one over the other, but to say that one sport is better, is your personal opinion, and the argument in reality should end there.

However, to declare that MMA is superior, because an MMA fighter has a better ground game then a boxer and thus would win a street fight is not a valid argument. When someone says "streetfight", this should indeed mean a streetfight, not, as is implied with the statement, merely an MMA fight that happens to be fought on paved street rather than in a ring or octagon.

A streetfight is just that, a streetfight. This does NOT mean that it is necessarily a one on one fight, man vs man. Does not mean that eye gouging, finger breaking, hair pulling, all of the above, are barred from the fight. It does not even mean that a gun or a knife won't be brought into the fight. What it does mean, is that it is an uncontrolled fight, between an unknown quantity of participants with unknown skillsets and/or weapons, with an unknown instigating factor, whether it be robbery, thuggery, gang violence, etc... Otherwise, as I said, it would simply be an MMA fight on pavement, in which case, yes, the MMA fighter wins.

That being said, I beileve that an elite boxer would be a preferable choice over an elite MMA fighter, as your "partner" if you were to engage in an actual streetfight, with the above unknown factors. An elite boxer, more so than an elite MMA fighter, has the ability to neutralise (KTFO) multiple combatants (most likely unskilled in a martial art) more quickly than the elite MMA fighter. Having an MMA fighter as a partner, you would stand a greater chance of that fighter being occupied with a single opponent and unable to assist, than a boxer that can unleash LETHAL (ungloved, yes) combinations faster than most thugs could throw a single punch. The boxer would likely have a greater ability to withstand trauma from a weapon such as a bat or pipe, as they are trained specifically for evasive defence, and in the absence of it effective blocking including tight chin tucking and upper body movement to nullify impacts. On the ground, the boxer is not considerably disadvantaged against a typical street thug. He should be stonger, far more endurance, and maintain ungloved knockout power from most positions on the ground.

When your partner is laying a killer armbar on a thug on the ground, it won't help you much as his 3 buddys continue advancing on you. A boxer can, and there are documented cases, quickly nullify street fight threats in a way that MMA fighters, in my opinion, would not.

I'll take a boxer with me to the streets anyday. Single Boxer vs MMA fighter, in an MMA fight on the street??? No contest... but that's not a streetfight.

 

[Unknown Pleasures]

Lot of valid points.

In a scenario where there's a streetfight where all hell breaks loose in a crowded place, I'm inclined (not that I've had this happen in real life) to keep distance and hit anyone who gets close to me in a threatening manner.

If you're grappling with someone on the ground, anybody else can just jump in and start kicking you etc.

 

[lugubriousduck]

Okay...

Using logic, I doubt a MMA fighter would apply an arm bar to someone in a street fight with multiple opponents. And a boxer is unlikely apply boxing rules in a street fight. And any trained professional fighter for the most part should be able to beat up a petty thug.

 

[Blue Notch]

Okay...

Using logic, I doubt a MMA fighter would apply an arm bar to someone in a street fight with multiple opponents. And a boxer is unlikely apply boxing rules in a street fight. And any trained professional fighter for the most part should be able to beat up a petty thug.

Exactly.. there are no rules. My point was that a boxers trained skills would be of better use, he would be able to beat up the "petty thug" faster and more thouroughly than the MMA fighter.

 

[lugubriousduck]

Exactly.. there are no rules. My point was that a boxers trained skills would be of better use, he would be able to beat up the "petty thug" faster and more thouroughly than the MMA fighter.

Not necessarily.

 

[Blue Notch]

Not necessarily.

No of course not necessarily... but in my opinion this would usually be the case. As an example, I would easily choose an elite boxer to act as a "bodyguard" if I were to enter a hostile street fighting environment, say an all out riot, over an elite MMA fighter. What would you pick ???

 

[Unknown Pleasures]

I think it's kind of a grappler versus striker argument.

If I was in a bar room brawl, I'd rather have Tank Abbott backing me that Royce Gracie.

 

[lugubriousduck]

I would pick an MMA fighter (more striker based). An MMA fighter with kickboxing ability has a more diverse arsenal. He can deliver elbows, kicks, knees much more effectively than a boxer. And for the most part, their punches are not too shabby. A boxer is going to be great at punching, but he is going to be mediocre at everything else.

And most fights end up on the ground. A MMA fighter has a body better built for ground and pound. And also have better techniques to maneuver themselves to deliver decisive blows. While boxers can do that, they have not been specifically trained on the ground and would not perform as effectively.

But really... Be it MMA fighter or boxer. Any trained professional would brutalize common thugs. So it doesn't matter which one I have.

 

[Unknown Pleasures]

Kind of interesting... in my university days I worked as a bartender and saw my fair share of no-holds barred scraps.

In some cases (old people, unathletic drunk people) they did go to the ground.

Other times, they lasted a few seconds. I'd say 99% of them started with punches and ended with punche.... knees and elbows I don't recall ever seeing. Kicks only when someone was on the ground and the other person standing.

I only remember one episode of "ground and pound" and frankly the fight was really over when the GnP started; and I remember saving the guy doing the pounding from getting whacked by a pool cue by grapping it out of the other dude's girlfriends hands as she was about to swing it. lol, those were the days.

Anyways, my point, punching is a portion of MMA, but a massive portion of "street" fights.

 

[bradlee180]

And most fights end up on the ground.

Yeah, I've seen street-fights between untrained guys in bar-brawls and parking lots end up on the ground...but where are the statistics proving the street-fight goes to the ground at all when a world-class professional boxer is involved in a street-fight against a common hood(s)?

What would happen if an untrained regular guy got in a street-fight with guys like James Toney, Sam Peter, Wladimir Klitschko, David Haye, O'Neil Bell, Jean-Marc Mormeck, Glenn Johnson, Antonio Tarver, Jeff Lacy, Kelley Pavlik, Pantera Miranda, Ricardo Mayorga, Roman Karmazin,..or even 147 pounders or lower like Miguel Cotto, Margarito, Berto, Cintron, Judah, a tough cat like Feliciano, Ngoudjo, Vivian Harris,..Hell, even 130 pounders like Manny Pacquiao or Barrera?

This would not resemble a sloppy bar-brawl between a few untrained, drunken rowdies; we're talking world-class athletes who spend literally years honing their fighting skills and punching abilities. Just try to imagine any one of these guys squared off in front of you with bare-knuckles and no rules. A boxer's fists are viewed as lethal weapons in the eyes of the law. There's nothing stopping the boxer from kicking the downed opponent in the head neither to finish him off. One gets the impression that some people think a boxer's going to abide by the rules of boxing even in a street-fight?! A hell of a lot of pro boxers were rough troubled kids involved in plenty of violent no-holds barred street-fights.

Even a shot Fernando Vargas would totally waste a regular guy on the street.

 

[amhlilhaus]

I'd take a boxer in a street fight every time, they always have large posses who have guns most likely.

 

[Spawned_Fighter]

I would pick an MMA fighter (more striker based). An MMA fighter with kickboxing ability has a more diverse arsenal. He can deliver elbows, kicks, knees much more effectively than a boxer. And for the most part, their punches are not too shabby. A boxer is going to be great at punching, but he is going to be mediocre at everything else.

And most fights end up on the ground. A MMA fighter has a body better built for ground and pound. And also have better techniques to maneuver themselves to deliver decisive blows. While boxers can do that, they have not been specifically trained on the ground and would not perform as effectively.

But really... Be it MMA fighter or boxer. Any trained professional would brutalize common thugs. So it doesn't matter which one I have.

yea, this about somes it up imo

 

[CaseBeatButcher]

most mma fighters throw punches when they are in a street fight thats why tito got k.o'ed by lee murray and wanderlei was k.o'd by crazy horse and don frye was k.o'ed by that boxing trainer.

Unless the mma guy knows the other guy is a boxer. id bet money on the boxer specially sicne a fair fight on the streets last about 2 seconds till people break it up or jump in

 

[Brendon Katz]

No of course not necessarily... but in my opinion this would usually be the case. As an example, I would easily choose an elite boxer to act as a "bodyguard" if I were to enter a hostile street fighting environment, say an all out riot, over an elite MMA fighter. What would you pick ???

I dont know if your know who geoff thompson is? in this context, he is one of the most experienced bouncers, street fighters and self- defence teachers in the world. hes seen and been in more fights than most people could imagine. Suffice is to say, he knows what hes talking about when 'entering a hostile street fighting enviroment' and he firmly stands behind the motto - if you cant grapple (standing and on the ground), your dead, especially against multiple opponents.

 

[consortium11]

I think the issue with grappling is mainly to avoid the ground. I mean, everyone generally accepts that in a multi-person street-fight, one of the last places you want to be is on the ground, either GnP'ing or getting punched/kicked etc etc... you're far too vulnerable to everyone.

Everyone's seen the footage of the Turkish boxer holding off 4 people in the street, but he was able to do that because there was a lot of space. What happens if he couldn't? A crowded bar, a narrow alley etc etc. People are going to get within clinch range, and as early UFC's showed, if two people with no trained takedown ability grapple, the one going for the takedown normally gets it. If a world class boxer doesn't have room to move, then while he may be able to one-punch some people, what happens if someone grabs him from behind? He trips over someone? Etc etc.

And that's the other point about why grappling is necessary. If you do get taken down, you want to be able to get back up again as quickly as possible. If you don't know how to do that, then you probably won't be able to.

Perfect "bodyguard" for a street-fight? Chuck. Yes, his standup is terrible in terms of technique, but he packs one hell of a punch when he does land... and he'll be standing up throwing punches all night. Apparently he used to roll with the anti-fa back in the day (which is why is genius that Stormfront supported him against Tito), so he's been in the odd ruck before as well.

 

[Kid McCoy]

Ok,

I have observed that whenever we get the old Boxing vs MMA debate, MMA fans, in general, always resort to the "MMA fighter will destroy the boxer in a street fight because the boxer can't fight off his back" argument. Thus MMA is the superior fighting sport. Makes sense...??

First and foremost, I believe that this is a pointless debate to have, since both boxing and MMA are regulated sports with seperate sets of rules. Everyone may have a preference of one over the other, but to say that one sport is better, is your personal opinion, and the argument in reality should end there.

However, to declare that MMA is superior, because an MMA fighter has a better ground game then a boxer and thus would win a street fight is not a valid argument. When someone says "streetfight", this should indeed mean a streetfight, not, as is implied with the statement, merely an MMA fight that happens to be fought on paved street rather than in a ring or octagon.

A streetfight is just that, a streetfight. This does NOT mean that it is necessarily a one on one fight, man vs man. Does not mean that eye gouging, finger breaking, hair pulling, all of the above, are barred from the fight. It does not even mean that a gun or a knife won't be brought into the fight. What it does mean, is that it is an uncontrolled fight, between an unknown quantity of participants with unknown skillsets and/or weapons, with an unknown instigating factor, whether it be robbery, thuggery, gang violence, etc... Otherwise, as I said, it would simply be an MMA fight on pavement, in which case, yes, the MMA fighter wins.

That being said, I beileve that an elite boxer would be a preferable choice over an elite MMA fighter, as your "partner" if you were to engage in an actual streetfight, with the above unknown factors. An elite boxer, more so than an elite MMA fighter, has the ability to neutralise (KTFO) multiple combatants (most likely unskilled in a martial art) more quickly than the elite MMA fighter. Having an MMA fighter as a partner, you would stand a greater chance of that fighter being occupied with a single opponent and unable to assist, than a boxer that can unleash LETHAL (ungloved, yes) combinations faster than most thugs could throw a single punch. The boxer would likely have a greater ability to withstand trauma from a weapon such as a bat or pipe, as they are trained specifically for evasive defence, and in the absence of it effective blocking including tight chin tucking and upper body movement to nullify impacts. On the ground, the boxer is not considerably disadvantaged against a typical street thug. He should be stonger, far more endurance, and maintain ungloved knockout power from most positions on the ground.

When your partner is laying a killer armbar on a thug on the ground, it won't help you much as his 3 buddys continue advancing on you. A boxer can, and there are documented cases, quickly nullify street fight threats in a way that MMA fighters, in my opinion, would not.

I'll take a boxer with me to the streets anyday. Single Boxer vs MMA fighter, in an MMA fight on the street??? No contest... but that's not a streetfight.

People will say:

 

[FIGHT FAN]

it really all depends on the situation(you can rationalize it anyway you want). as the above person already mentioned; id rather have tank on my side in a street fight then royce gracie(even though royce was the better MMA fighter).

 

[screw_job101]

I've been thinking of this lately. My point of view goes like this:

1. Size matters. The bigger guy regardless of skill level will win the fight most of the time.

2. First advantage usually wins. Between two guys with no skills, the first guy to land a clean punch or the first guy to slam the other guy to the pavement, or land on top of the other guy wins.

3. Punch strength vs. Ability to take a punch. Since the most basic form of hurting another guy is thru punches, the guy with stronger punches wins. The ability of the other guy in taking the punches will dictate the length of the fight.

4. The crazier guy wins. Between two similar sized guys with no skill, the guy who is not afraid to get punched or the guy who is more furious will win.

Between Boxer vs. MMAist, considering what I said above, the boxer would more likely win. Front runner boxers are more effective street fighters. Zab Judah has a well documented street fight win streak. And I think he win against any other 147 fighter in a bareknuckle street fight.

If there would be a scientific street fight style, it would be boxing first with some wrestling or judo. Kicking is too risky.

 

[FIGHT FAN]

zab judah has a documented street fight win streak(thats news to me). didn't he run away from a couple of thugs? there's plenty of other boxers with street fight experience. i remember reading that jeff fenech knocked out a 230 pound bouncer with one punch?

 

[HuMz]

1 week ago, I was at a party and we were pretty drunk. I had to sprawl like 3 times from dunk retards who wanted to take me down for whatever reason. I was laughting but they wanted to kill me.

mma give you this all round explosiveness, not only from punches, getting up fast, wrestling the guy that grab your hair, etc

but yeah standup is a big part of a street scenario

example, Igor Vovchanchyn would be a great streetfighter

http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x32uba_igor-vovchanchyn-hl-by-damien_sport

There's nothing stopping the boxer from kicking the downed opponent in the head neither to finish him off. One gets the impression that some people think a boxer's going to abide by the rules of boxing even in a street-fight?!

Nothing stop a boxer or any thug to stomp or soccer kick someone,

but if you pratice this daily (mma), you become good at it

that's like the guys who don't train who says: "your grappling would not work on me I would just grab your balls", well just try it man, just try it