Why is there that lingering to boxing in USA when MMA is better in many ways?

[wilberbear]

Why is there that lingering to boxing in USA when MMA is better in many ways?

Is this the right sub-forum? Should I be posting this on the boxing sub-forum?

Let's face it. Boxing is an incomplete sport. If you want to do an actual street fight, you would want to be trained in MMA, not boxing. That doesn't mean that boxing can't do street fighting; you can still kick, elbow, etc. Also, I certainly don't mean that you can't win against MMA with pure boxing. Such seems possible as a matter of blueprints. You are not really topping one technique with another. You are just making the good use of what you have to build up on your way to victory. Like, if there is a low kick? You do side step to dodge & work with what you have instead of doing an Muaythai low kick block. Or you can still elbow, kick, knee, whatever on the streets even if you are trained in boxing.

However, such doesn't take away the fact that boxing is an incomplete sport in terms of fighting. It's inferior compared to MMA (MMA punches include boxing anyway).

So, why is there that lingering over boxing as opposed to discarding it from interest to extinction (or at least becoming very minor)? Even in terms of historic value, boxing isn't really American. It's not Italian neither although Italians love to hug boxing. It's Mesopotamian & Greek. Now, MMA? It's American.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mixed_martial_arts

"In 1980 CV Productions, Inc. created the first regulated MMA league in the United States named Tough Guy Contest, later renamed Battle of the Superfighters, sanctioning ten tournaments in Pennsylvania. However, in 1983 the Pennsylvania State Senate passed a bill prohibiting the sport.[1][2] The combat sport of vale tudo that had developed in Brazil from the 1920s was brought to the United States by the Gracie family in 1993 with the founding of the Ultimate Fighting Championship (UFC)."

Japanese didn't start MMA despite many MMA moves being Jiujitsu (although MMA grappling is mostly just Greco-Roman wrestling particularly with the tackles or holds which are fundamentally different from Jiujitsu type joint manipulation hardly used in MMA relatively). Americans started the concept although Brazil (& hence Japan since Brazil's martial arts originate from Japan) had a big role in UFC apparently.

So, it makes sense for Americans to linger more towards MMA because 1. it is better than boxing (in fact, includes boxing) & 2. it is an American thing. Yes, Americans didn't make it from the scratch, but hamburger isn't an American invention neither as Germans already had Hamburg Sandwiches recorded back then. Since America descends from Europe, it's hard to avoid. Still, Americans started in that specific refined format. MMA is an American invention, started by America.

Now, I don't mean to look down on boxing. MMA uses boxing punches. The way they generate momentum, push shoulders, make use of multiple different punch trajectories, MMA punches are clearly from boxing, not Karate or whatever. It is just that I don't get why people still cling over boxing (why is boxing still so big an industry instead of making its way to extinction) when MMA makes sense to top boxing easily for those 2 reasons.

Now, this offline reality is obviously different from the online voices. In offline? Boxing seems far bigger than MMA. In online? There seem to be more MMA forums than boxing forums, more MMA fans than boxing fans. Maybe, after like 3 generations, boxing will go almost extinct & MMA will be even bigger than now?

 

[ThunderL1ps]

Because only the UFC is recognized as far as MMA in the States and it's run and operated by douche bags of epic proportions.

A lot of people are put off by the presentation of MMA in the USA.

Plus the big fight in boxing demolishes the big fight in MMA with the viewing public.

Boxing is never going away.

MMA didn't start in America either.

 

[leto1776]

Just because boxing isn't the complete elements of a fight, doesn't make the sport of boxing itself an incomplete sport.

Also, I would hardly call mma an American sport, because vale Tudo matches and mixed discipline had been going on in Brazil and elsewhere for years

 

[bad seed]

Let's face it. Boxing is an incomplete sport. If you want to do an actual street fight, you would want to be trained in MMA, not boxing.

is wrestling an incomplete sport because you cant punch? what about judo? tennis? basketball?

boxing is an athletic competition between two athletes within a certain ruleset. Its not street fighting, and neither is mma.

 

[LimitlessZane]

Why is there that lingering to boxing in USA when MMA is better in many ways?

Japanese didn't start MMA despite many MMA moves being Jiujitsu (although MMA grappling is mostly just Greco-Roman wrestling particularly with the tackles or holds which are fundamentally different from Jiujitsu type joint manipulation hardly used in MMA relatively). Americans started the concept although Brazil (& hence Japan since Brazil's martial arts originate from Japan) had a big role in UFC apparently.

So, it makes sense for Americans to linger more towards MMA because 1. it is better than boxing (in fact, includes boxing) & 2. it is an American thing. Yes, Americans didn't make it from the scratch, but hamburger isn't an American invention neither as Germans already had Hamburg Sandwiches recorded back then. Since America descends from Europe, it's hard to avoid. Still, Americans started in that specific refined format. MMA is an American invention, started by America.

The japanese didn't use the term "MMA" they called it kakutogi. if you want to say americans invented the term MMA then i agree. otherwise, i'm more inclined to think that what we now call MMA evolved from shoot-fighting in japan.

Because only the UFC is recognized as far as MMA in the States and it's run and operated by douche bags of epic proportions.

A lot of people are put off by the presentation of MMA in the USA.

Plus the big fight in boxing demolishes the big fight in MMA with the viewing public.

Boxing is never going away.

MMA didn't start in America either.

i have to agree with the presentation, the metal intro they'd play and dudes with shaved heads and tattoos never appealed to me, although i can understand who they were trying to target in america.

but these things are less important, what is more important to me are the rules. if fans really are interested in fighting then the rules are what makes the difference to everything; from the way fights are scored, the way they are officiated in the cage, to the way a person actually fights in the cage.

also, imho boxing is more popular to the general public probably bc its easier to understand to a complete novice. trying to explain a guard pass, or the difference between a kimura and americana takes a while and so only people with a keen interest are really going to try to understand it.

 

[Jorge Luis Borges]

The TMAs and boxing and wrestling really develop specialization. You'll never really learn the best techniques unless you focus on one part of fighting at a time.

MMA has the advantage of putting ti all together to see what really works best, but it has the disadvantage that most fighters, even some of the best fighters, are jacks of all trades.

 

[ThunderL1ps]

The japanese didn't use the term "MMA" they called it kakutogi. if you want to say americans invented the term MMA then i agree. otherwise, i'm more inclined to think that what we now call MMA evolved from shoot-fighting in japan.

Pankration was in the original Olympics. That was more NHB than the NHB that became MMA. Although it went the way of the dodo for a while.

The Japanese didn't come up with anything new. They took from other cultures, including their martial arts.

 

[ThunderL1ps]

The TMAs and boxing and wrestling really develop specialization. You'll never really learn the best techniques unless you focus on one part of fighting at a time.

MMA has the advantage of putting ti all together to see what really works best, but it has the disadvantage that most fighters, even some of the best fighters, are jacks of all trades.

Some fighters that have been called the best are nothing but lay and pray artists at the core of their technique.

I can see why casuals combat sport fans wouldn't want to watch "Amreican MMA" over boxing where you don't see any of that ....man-on-man laying on a mat business. I'm generalizing obviously, but you get my point.

 

[LimitlessZane]

Pankration was in the original Olympics. That was more NHB than the NHB that became MMA. Although it went the way of the dodo for a while.

The Japanese didn't come up with anything new. They took from other cultures, including their martial arts.

ok fair enough, if we want to go back that far.

 

[LimitlessZane]

Some fighters that have been called the best are nothing but lay and pray artists at the core of their technique.

I can see why casuals combat sport fans wouldn't want to watch "Amreican MMA" over boxing where you don't see any of that ....man-on-man laying on a mat business. I'm generalizing obviously, but you get my point.

that's something where I have a disconnect with some fans. on the one hand I can appreciate the argument that pinning someone takes skill and the onus should be on the person on the bottom to get to their feet. and if they won by doing so technically they did win the fight.

but on the other hand, winning a fight by causing a stalemate, is that really winning a fight? i guess its just a matter of how you see it. for me i rate fighters who are finishers, but I can understand the other point of view.

 

[ShinkanPo]

that's something where I have a disconnect with some fans. on the one hand I can appreciate the argument that pinning someone takes skill and the onus should be on the person on the bottom to get to their feet. and if they won by doing so technically they did win the fight.

but on the other hand, winning a fight by causing a stalemate, is that really winning a fight? i guess its just a matter of how you see it. for me i rate fighters who are finishers, but I can understand the other point of view.

Reminds me of the Fight Gilber Yvel Vs. Kasoyuki Fajita

 

[ThunderL1ps]

that's something where I have a disconnect with some fans. on the one hand I can appreciate the argument that pinning someone takes skill and the onus should be on the person on the bottom to get to their feet. and if they won by doing so technically they did win the fight.

but on the other hand, winning a fight by causing a stalemate, is that really winning a fight? i guess its just a matter of how you see it. for me i rate fighters who are finishers, but I can understand the other point of view.

It also nearly killed off NHB coupled with sanctions that the sport was barbaric. Nobody wanted to see two guys laying on a mat without stand-ups. It wasn't viewer friendly. I've noticed that in the UFC, they seem to allow nothing to go on longer than in say Strikeforce did. Same environment, but a little less tolerance for nothing going on. When Zuffa bought Strikeforce, the time on the mat with nothing going on was as long as the UFC's fighs.

I prefer finishers too. Fighters that game the system, whether it be lay and pray, fence press, running away, etc. I have no time for their fights. You can get away with a lot more of that in a cage ( fence press obviously, running) than a cage due to the shape of the fighting surface and the borders that surround it. It's almost a different sport.

 

[LimitlessZane]

Reminds me of the Fight Gilber Yvel Vs. Kasoyuki Fajita

i'm watching that fight right now (i'll admit I haven't seen it). I just finished the first 10 min round.

apart from the kimura attempt, it went from fujita getting a td - landing in side control. attempting to go to mount, gets put into half guard. then most of the round in half guard and fujita going for the kimura. does the fight continue in a similar way?

 

[ShinkanPo]

i'm watching that fight right now (i'll admit I haven't seen it). I just finished the first 10 min round.

apart from the kimura attempt, it went from fujita getting a td - landing in side control. attempting to go to mount, gets put into half guard. then most of the round in half guard and fujita going for the kimura. does the fight continue in a similar way?

Yup something like that with a few punches thrown around and more Kimura attempts you can also here Don Frye in the corner screaming "Fujita Punch Fujita Punch"

 

[LimitlessZane]

It also nearly killed off NHB coupled with sanctions that the sport was barbaric. Nobody wanted to see two guys laying on a mat without stand-ups. It wasn't viewer friendly. I've noticed that in the UFC, they seem to allow nothing to go on longer than in say Strikeforce did. Same environment, but a little less tolerance for nothing going on. When Zuffa bought Strikeforce, the time on the mat with nothing going on was as long as the UFC's fighs.

I prefer finishers too. Fighters that game the system, whether it be lay and pray, fence press, running away, etc. I have no time for their fights. You can get away with a lot more of that in a cage ( fence press obviously, running) than a cage due to the shape of the fighting surface and the borders that surround it. It's almost a different sport.

i feel like we're a dying breed. maybe its because there are a lot of amateur wrestlers as fans nowadays, since they probably see the ufc as their major league, with the MW champ and now LHW champ being predominantly wrestlers.

who knows, maybe thats why the ufc has a greater tolerance for no action on the ground.

 

[Jorge Luis Borges]

Some fighters that have been called the best are nothing but lay and pray artists at the core of their technique.

I can see why casuals combat sport fans wouldn't want to watch "Amreican MMA" over boxing where you don't see any of that ....man-on-man laying on a mat business. I'm generalizing obviously, but you get my point.

Actually, I think "American MMA", whatever it is you mean by that, is well past the heyday of lay and pray. It has not been a significant problem over the past few years.

 

[wilberbear]

Meant an incomplete sport in terms of fighting.

As for the modern MMA format, it seems to have started in America according to wiki. As for the concept of punching & kicking & grabbing, Bareknuckle boxing, Prizefighting, Pankration, pro-wrestling always existed. I don't see how Japanese pro-wrestling (or shoot fighting) has to do with MMA.

Added a link.

http://historyofbkb.weebly.com/bkb-figureheads.html

"It was also pretty brutal, with the bare-knuckle fight allowing slapping, kicking, biting and gouging. Sometime before 1723, Figg let his Amphitheatre to another boxing master and began to prize-fight on a regular basis at 'The Boarded House' behind Oxford Street, in Marylebone-Fields. It was not only men who fought there, but women and animals. Figg fought about once a month".

" Jake Kilrain (February 9, 1859 – December 22, 1937) was the popular name of John Joseph Killion, a famous bare knuckle fighter and glove boxer of the 1880s."

Also, American pro-wrestling has shoot fighting. The concept has always been there.

 

[LimitlessZane]

Meant an incomplete sport in terms of fighting.

As for the modern MMA format, it seems to have started in America according to wiki. As for the concept of punching & kicking & grabbing, Bareknuckle boxing, Prizefighting, Pankration, pro-wrestling always existed. I don't see how Japanese pro-wrestling (or shoot fighting) has to do with MMA.

Added a link.

http://historyofbkb.weebly.com/bkb-figureheads.html

"It was also pretty brutal, with the bare-knuckle fight allowing slapping, kicking, biting and gouging. Sometime before 1723, Figg let his Amphitheatre to another boxing master and began to prize-fight on a regular basis at 'The Boarded House' behind Oxford Street, in Marylebone-Fields. It was not only men who fought there, but women and animals. Figg fought about once a month".

" Jake Kilrain (February 9, 1859 – December 22, 1937) was the popular name of John Joseph Killion, a famous bare knuckle fighter and glove boxer of the 1880s."

Also, American pro-wrestling has shoot fighting. The concept has always been there.

mate if we're talking about bare knuckle boxing, then thats different. i thought we were talking about modern mma. I'm not really an expert, but from my understanding Antonio Inoki who is an owner of a pro-wrestling organisation created a shootfighting event in the late 1970s which included mixed martial arts bouts. that's all i was trying to say. if someone corrects me, then i'll gladly accept it. thuderl1ps has already done that on the first page, when talking about pankration.

 

[wilberbear]

I was just quoting Wiki.

"Various mixed-style contests took place throughout Europe, Japan and the Pacific Rim during the early 1900s. In 1980 CV Productions, Inc. created the first regulated MMA league in the United States".

In terms of the concept, it always existed. In terms of the specifically regulated format, started in USA. Or so I am told. Let me have a link if it says otherwise.

As for Japanese having shoot fighting in the 70's, does it have any direct relation to the modern MMA regulated format? I couldn't read such on wiki. I don't know. For now, I am going with "not" unless someone gives me something to read on it. If not, if we are just looking at the concept of such, then it always existed up to the 20th century particularly the early 1900's.

Like, hamburger patty sandwich always existed in Germany, but USA was the first one to create a hamburger in that regulated format as hamburger is today. As for the concept, it always existed. Certainly not from Japan. We are looking at either the concept or the format, right?

 

[Fahrenheit1221]

Haven't seen one of these threads in a while.