RealGM

MMA v. Boxing!!!

Randy Couture is going to annihilate him.

Toney is punch drunk, not in his old form and is thinking he is going to knock out some
"washed-up white guy."

He's in for a big, big surprise.

I loved Toney, the boxer, but the MMA fighter version is going to have one UFC fight and that'll be all.

Couture ends it within 3 minutes and Dana White gets his wish.

Couture, RNC, round one.

It's an MMAer vs a boxer in MMA. The two sports aren't going head-to-head.

James Toney get destroyed in the UFC's hopefully brief return to the freak show fight game.

Couture by take down followed by embarrassment.

cowboyronnie wrote:It's an MMAer vs a boxer in MMA. The two sports aren't going head-to-head.

+1 Toney's in Couture's house. Couture takes it.

cowboyronnie wrote:It's an MMAer vs a boxer in MMA. The two sports aren't going head-to-head.

That's how it'll play in the media.

Dana White knows what he is doing.

Say Toney loses and the PPV numbers for the event were good. The press starts telling boxers and boxing promoters, who in turn say that Toney wasn't in his prime, etc. Then other boxers say they could beat an MMA guy in an octogon. Then "someone" puts up the money and we see another MMA vs Boxing main event in the future because it gets the people talking, which in turn gets the event in the media which leads to a high buy rate for the PPV.

That's why I think it is Boxing vs MMA, Part one.

Couture by domination .

Eh, they are two different sports, but it's still boxing vs. MMA in a way. We aren't trying to put Lebron James on skates, or throw Roger Federer in a pool here. Two fighters are going to fight.

An MMA contest is the best recreation of an actual fight we can legally promote and watch. I know most fights do not involve double leg takedowns or omoplatas, but the options are there. Unless I'm totally missing something (a good possibility), James Toney can bring every tool he has from the boxing ring into this fight. Yet most people aren't expecting that to help him against a guy who isn't exactly at the top of his game.

So yes, boxing and MMA are different sports, but they are both still fight sports when it comes down to it. If you want to ignore that and see them both as strict athletic competition with no more in common with each other than two other random sports (say, football and figure skating), then so be it. I'm sure it can even be argued convincingly. But most people see boxing as a fight, and MMA as a fight, and on Saturday, they will see the two collide, and 99 times out of 100, the MMA fighter will win.

I think Randy takes it via GNP, but I'm terrified that Toney just might catch him and K.O him on the way in, and how awful that will be...

CPT wrote:Eh, they are two different sports, but it's still boxing vs. MMA in a way. We aren't trying to put Lebron James on skates, or throw Roger Federer in a pool here. Two fighters are going to fight.

An MMA contest is the best recreation of an actual fight we can legally promote and watch. I know most fights do not involve double leg takedowns or omoplatas, but the options are there. Unless I'm totally missing something (a good possibility), James Toney can bring every tool he has from the boxing ring into this fight. Yet most people aren't expecting that to help him against a guy who isn't exactly at the top of his game.

So yes, boxing and MMA are different sports, but they are both still fight sports when it comes down to it. If you want to ignore that and see them both as strict athletic competition with no more in common with each other than two other random sports (say, football and figure skating), then so be it. I'm sure it can even be argued convincingly. But most people see boxing as a fight, and MMA as a fight, and on Saturday, they will see the two collide, and 99 times out of 100, the MMA fighter will win.

C'mon, man, this comes down to the semantics of calling a boxing match a "fight". Amateurs wrestlers fight too. But it's not the intent of either to be able to simulate a street fight. Boxing has been developed to have qualification after qualification after qualification. At one time in, like, Lancashire, boxers would strike downed opponents and even kick or choke. That was a fight. But there's been 140 years of polishing it down to a set of extremely limited techniques.

Really weak to base your argument on "fight".

And, really, what's going to be proven by Couture beating Toney? That "MMA is better"? At free fighting? More effective? Well, duh.

Pull a straight sprinter to a hurdling course, and then ask who's better at "racing" or "running" - sprinters or hurdlers?

cowboyronnie wrote:
C'mon, man, this comes down to the semantics of calling a boxing match a "fight". Amateurs wrestlers fight too. But it's not the intent of either to be able to simulate a street fight. Boxing has been developed to have qualification after qualification after qualification. At one time in, like, Lancashire, boxers would strike downed opponents and even kick or choke. That was a fight. But there's been 140 years of polishing it down to a set of extremely limited techniques.

Really weak to base your argument on "fight".

And, really, what's going to be proven by Couture beating Toney? That "MMA is better"? At free fighting? More effective? Well, duh.

I know it's not entirely accurate to call both boxing and MMA matches "fights," but it's also kind of disingenuous to pretend that they aren't, if that makes sense. Both sports are competing for the same audience (though you can certainly be a fan of both). They are more similar than almost any other two sports I can think of. There has been plenty of talk from both sides over the years about which sport is better, has better fighters, is the sport of the future, etc. There are bragging rights on the line here, whether you think there should be or not.

Most educated fans of either sport know that this fight won't prove much about MMA being better, MMA fighters winning real fights, etc, but there are plenty of people who have always thought a boxer could step in and knock these MMA guys out. Those people will most likely be proven wrong in this fight, but that 1% chance that they will be right makes this fight so much more interesting than your typical fight with a -700 favourite. Part of it is knowing that there will be so many people, likely many for the first time, watching this fight.

cowboyronnie wrote:Pull a straight sprinter to a hurdling course, and then ask who's better at "racing" or "running" - sprinters or hurdlers?

I get your point, except nobody cares. There's no debate to be had there.

Randy wins this freakshow by rnc in the 1st.

I view it as an aging fighter vs. an aging boxer. Nothing more. If you want to do boxing v. MMA, you will need to do a whole card with fighters and boxers in their primes. As it stands, this is a freakshow fight.

I wouldn't be surprised if Toney catches Couture within the first minute. The first punch that lands on Couture you have to believe he is going to sleep. If Couture can avoid that punch then everybody knows what's going to happen to Toney.

SDM wrote:I view it as an aging fighter vs. an aging boxer. Nothing more. If you want to do boxing v. MMA, you will need to do a whole card with fighters and boxers in their primes. As it stands, this is a freakshow fight.

I do not see this as a freakshow at all. I see two aging, but still competitive in their sport former champs fighting.

Freakshow to mean means having guys fighting as a novelty, but both these guys are real deal fighters.

Cammo101 wrote:

SDM wrote:I view it as an aging fighter vs. an aging boxer. Nothing more. If you want to do boxing v. MMA, you will need to do a whole card with fighters and boxers in their primes. As it stands, this is a freakshow fight.

I do not see this as a freakshow at all. I see two aging, but still competitive in their sport former champs fighting.

Freakshow to mean means having guys fighting as a novelty, but both these guys are real deal fighters.

I agree with you Cammo.

Hong Man Choi vs. Jose Canseco was a freak show.