It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Boxing vs. UFC

page: 1
<<   2 >>

log in


posted on Feb, 7 2009 @ 07:09 PM
I see alot of this all over the Internet and hear it talked about. It normaly goes somthing like this.
Boxer-"A boxer would just knock him out before he knew what hit him.He would not have to get him on the ground in the prom night position and donkey punch the other dude"

MMA guy-"No way, The UFC guy would win all fights end up on the ground"
I'm tired of it and want to put my view on it in.
They are both right.

"Who would win in a fight? A boxer or a UFC/MMA fighter"

Well first off they are two totally different sports. It would be like saying who would win in a game a chess player or a poker player. It would greatly depend on what they are doing.

In the UFC, fighters have to train to go 3-5 5min rounds with 60 second breaks for a total of 25min fighting time. A UFC fighter has to spend a lot of time learning to get someone else in and their self out of submission holds. Their gloves are small and only have a small amount of padding to protect the fighters knuckles and have open fingers so they can grip and wrestle. Their stance varies greatly from fighter to fighter. A UFC fighter can square up, get in a kick boxers stance or just get in a wrestlers stance to grapple. A UFC ring is octagon shape so it is easy for a fighter to get in and out of the corners.

Boxing is pretty straight forward. 3(for armature)-12 3minute rounds with 60 second breaks for a total 36min of fighting time. Boxers have to learn how to protect themselves from the different types of punches and to stay on their feet no matter how hard they get hit. They will wear 8-12oz gloves for their fights with enough padding for a fighter to throw his fist full force into his opponent. In boxing a square ring is used generally the fighters try and stay off the ropes out of the corners.

The fight.

So lets say you get 2 of them in a ring to fight what would they be doing?

In any ring the boxer would do better he would be trained to stay out of the corners and on his feet. The UFC fighter would do poorly in a boxing ring because he would not know how to get himself out of the corner.

What game are they playing?

It really goes without saying if they were to do the MMA thing the UFC guy would probably win. He can grapple and go to the ground as many times as he wants and get the boxer in all types of complicated holds. The boxer would have no idea what to do about a kick to the leg or a knee to the face.

If they were boxing the boxer would probably win. The boxer would know how to move his feet for the fight, block and slip effectively. The UFC fighter would have to struggle with throwing a large portion of his training out. he would still have his reflexes and would drop his guard in an attempt to block kicks that would never come, he would have to stay on his feet and be unable to take the fight to the ground.

You talking about a street fight?

Street fights are no sport at all and all bets would be off. In a street fight anything goes. Its more like the thunder dome, 1 round that goes until the fight is over. Not to mention there would be no reff to stop one guy from biting an others ear off, hitting him with a rock, or a swift kick/punch to the nuts(nothing can train you for that), using your pinky finger to take an eye out, pulling a knife etc.....

So just something to think about next time the question comes up among friends. And for all of you who i know have a undying urge to post something along the lines of

"Chuck Liddell when he was 24 would be able to beat James Bradock in his hay day"

or vice-versa go ahead it will only make it look like you can't read.

posted on Feb, 7 2009 @ 08:28 PM
I'm a female and I love boxing. It's the only sport I pay any attention to. I've watched UFC cage fighting before, but I don't care for all the blood, and I really don't care to see two men in precarious positions.

Although I would say a cage fighter would beat a boxer in a fight because there's really no rules in cage fighting.

Yep, they are two totally different sports.

[edit on 7-2-2009 by Schleprock]

posted on Feb, 7 2009 @ 09:10 PM
yeah this has already been discussed long ago when they called it a blood sport, but now everything is cool between the two, whoever still brings this argument needs to grow up and just have respect for the two.

i do both and i haven't heard this for about a year now, even from fellow boxer and professional fighters, the only people who talk are usually fans who are average joe's to the sport

posted on Feb, 7 2009 @ 09:14 PM
do you box?
My trainer has me spar with girls to work on my defence. Im not allowed to hit them, but its tough trying to decide which ones to slip and which ones to eat.

posted on Feb, 7 2009 @ 09:21 PM
Nope, I don't box. I think I'm a bit too old and too soft to box.
I watch all the fights on hbo, though. I remember as a kid watching The Raging Bull, and I've loved boxing since then. Will I see you on hbo anytime soon?

posted on Feb, 7 2009 @ 11:24 PM
Boxing VS UFC?

Well boxing is a strike sport, meant for effective strikes to disable the opponent. From what I have seen UFC very grapple based. Most of the fighters train in juijutso or a similar submission art. UFC fighters seem like they do not wish to be hit often, probably because of lack of protective gear. They are indeed diffrent worlds.

The only thing I see them have in common is that they are both endurance fighting styles.

[edit on 7-2-2009 by LeTan]

posted on Feb, 12 2009 @ 03:05 PM
reply to post by Schleprock

Although I would say a cage fighter would beat a boxer in a fight because there's really no rules in cage fighting.

There are rules in Mixed Martial Arts. 13 years ago there were barely any rules or fouls. The sport has gone very far now with athletic commissions regulating events.

[edit on 12-2-2009 by Striker122]

posted on Feb, 18 2009 @ 08:49 PM
I just for some reason dont like MMA that much. I respect the athletes I know that they prepare themselves and train like hell, but I ust like a bit more the drama during a boxing fight.

And I'm not only talking the big hyped-up fights, the best boxing matches are usually not the PPV one, but the smaller fight on ESPN,HBO, FOX, Showtime and a bunch of hispanic channels.

That said, I really respect MMA athletes, to say that this MMA fighter would beat a certain boxer or viceversa is really ignorant because the two sports are worlds apart in many many aspects.

posted on Apr, 18 2009 @ 12:26 AM
Apples and oranges. I like Joe Rogan's analogy:

Boxing:MMA as Checkers:Chess

And that's not a knock on boxing at all. Boxing is one element of fighting, while MMA encompasses a much broader spectrum of the combart arts.

posted on May, 3 2009 @ 06:24 PM
boxing is far more technical then mma because its one discipline and you have to master it if you want to be great

posted on May, 3 2009 @ 07:02 PM
Grappling versus striking.
Unless the grapple comes first, the strike will take out the opponent.
I cant really see them in a ring, I think if they did by natural default they were start to strike and defend. The grapple would be hard to achieve when you have fists in your face, abs, kidneys. You would be forced to block.

posted on Jun, 10 2009 @ 08:46 AM
I hope when you said to step into the ring you meant in general boxing and not an actual ring, because......Pride Fighting from Japan fights in a boxing style ring. So where they fight is more dependent on the fight rules.

Many of you forget that a lot of this guys coming into MMA are world class kick boxer, maui thai, and other striking combat sports. So to say a boxer would absolutely win at striking is a fallacy. A boxer maybe more skilled with his hands, but he has nothing with his legs. Good leg kicks are more than enough to take the power right out of the boxers hands. (If you don't believe me about leg kicks watch this ) It also gives the other fighter room to shoot for the take down. At which point the fight is pretty much over.

Boxing hasn't changed much in the past 25 years. I can watch an MMA fight from 2 years ago and see the evolution of the game. Currently BJJ mixed with some sort striking, is what the winning combo is. Only a couple years ago greco roman wrestling and boxing were the winning mix.

posted on Jul, 1 2009 @ 04:51 AM
I personally prefer Mixed Martial Arts (UFC).

posted on Jul, 1 2009 @ 08:21 PM
Well I am a HUGE UFC fan! I have watched it for 6 years now and I love it. I am female and its the only sport I bf jokes and calls it my porn. I am very active when I watch, sort of like a die hard football fan yelling plays at the tv...I do all that. A friend and I watch it all the time together. Most guys are completely shocked at how much we know about the sport. I have watched boxing and you cant compare the two they are different. I have heard this argument many times and I just ignore it. A MMA fighter is so different from a boxer and I cant see how anyone would think they are a like. IMO GSP would kick all boxers butts! But that's my own bias opinion. Boxing is a good sport but I prefer UFC!

posted on Jul, 3 2009 @ 07:02 PM
I think more MMA guys would win vs. boxers......probably bout 70-75% of the time

MMA can be devestating with kicks and also they could get a boxer to the ground and submit him......because the threat of kicks could get a boxer out of his rythym and possibly a bit scared (once a few kicks to the leg leave welts like baseballs or a foot fly's by his head) i think a few guys could stand up and land some good blows against boxers although most likely as the second part of some combination

MMA guys with no ground game , wrestling, or weak kicking skills would lose more but i don't think there are that many that lack all 3 skills

[edit on 3-7-2009 by cpdaman]

posted on Jul, 11 2009 @ 05:19 AM
I think throwing in the kicks,takedowns,knees, and elbows would throw a boxer off. Boxing is a sport that I am extremely fond of. As it was my starting point in the martial arts world. If your putting a boxer and a mma guy together, the mma guy is going to win most of the time, simply because he has many more weapons to throw at you. Your legs have much more power and reach then your arms, takedowns wear you out a whole different way then striking and knees and elbows can seriously hamper your rhythem.

I have fought in local fights in California and Utah for a couple years now. I have had the opportunity to train with Carlson Gracie,Aldo Ortegga,Court McGee,The mori academy,Team quest,The Fight Lab, and a whole host of gyms and trainers. Not to mention my father holding a black belt in Judo and a brown belt in Jiu Jitsu! So, im not just giving you some uneducated guess. This is my opinion based on experience and my knowledge of the sport.

posted on Sep, 14 2009 @ 09:05 PM
reply to post by WisdomInChains

boxing is nowhere near as technical as mma.
sorry bout that

posted on Sep, 14 2009 @ 09:06 PM
reply to post by zazzafrazz

if you want to see them in a ring do a search for the old 'pride' organization. it was the premier org in japan and they fought in a ring.
some of the most fantastic fights are by way of pride, not the ufc

posted on Sep, 14 2009 @ 10:43 PM
I like MMA I think theres more action in it but thats just my personal preference.

posted on Sep, 15 2009 @ 02:02 PM
I'll say this, you'd probably have to give MMA the edge on the whole, but if you put those little gloves they use in MMA on Manny Pacquiao, and he caught the MMA fighter with one clean shot to the head and disoriented him, he'd follow up with so many crushing punches to the head so fast you would think you were watching 'The Matrix'. Same thing goes for Mayweather. That kind of speed and power with those tiny little gloves is lethal. Kill the head and the body will follow.

It's much harder to be a great boxer than it is to be a great MMA fighter IMO.


new topics

top topics

<<   2 >>

log in