Top Boxer vs. Top UFC Fighter?

**shmerham** · 07-12-2006, 11:58 PM

I think you need to create some sort of cross-over match. You make the rules looser than boxing, stricter than mma. Like maybe you can pin someone, but no submission moves. ...or you could just do the decathalon.

...it seems as though mma is mostly about technique at the highest level (all the guys are strong and fit). I don't know if the athletic advantage of the boxer would be a factor if say the boxer was given 2 or 3 years to learn mma.

Boxers aren't just the most athletic fighters; they're the most athletic athletes. No other sport uses so many athletic factors (strength, endurance, cardio, speed, power, hand/eye) so much.

**fez** · 07-13-2006, 12:11 AM

Originally Posted by iceman

Not that you would take the comp to the racers, I mean it would be like taking top freeskiers (most of whom raced, I know) to an FIS event and seeing what happens.

not exactly. i think my analogy is more accurate.
FIS is the more regulated, respected, entrenched sport where the elite athletes who follow the rules get paid, like boxing. free ski comps are less regulated, less well known, less money, more like free skiing.

and just as you said about those who couldnt hack it as boxers switching to ufc, maybe the ex-racers became free skiers after getting their asses kicked all over the race course.

**f2f** · 07-13-2006, 12:18 AM

Originally Posted by fez

maybe the ex-racers became free skiers after getting their asses kicked all over the race course.

ah, fantastic analogy! let's take abma and rahlves in last year's whatever movie they were in: they put gates on top of a mountain that nobody had skied on and had to freeride through them. fantastic segment!

the problem is, how do you judge them? if you take the racer's point of view, rahlves was much more agressive through the gates and probably did the "course" faster. if you take the freerider's point of view, abma kicked way more snow in the air and took more risks while going down (and a trick or two may have helped)...

so, who's better? i believe the answer is: it all depends.

edit: i meant rahlves, sorry. film is Hit List by MSP, powder issue is November'05

**StuntCok** · 07-13-2006, 01:11 AM

One thing on fitness levels of MMA (in K-1, at least) vs. boxing, there is more of an emphasis on power than cardio. The fights are only 3 rounds but have a higher KO ratio. Often boxers who enter the open weight division will put on weight to carry a heavier punch. You rarely see a boxer willingly carry body fat as they may have to last 12 rounds...

**MeatPuppet** · 07-13-2006, 01:16 AM

Originally Posted by Tippster

The first kick to the knee would end the boxer's chances, since he's not trained to worry about his legs.

Exactly, the UFC fighter has a lot of tools at his disposal that the boxer has never trained for; kicks, sweeps, knees, elbows, spinning attacks, etc.

My money would be on the UFC guy.

**addict** · 07-13-2006, 01:48 AM

Originally Posted by iceman

Well maybe we should make some money and find out for real, Ali fought, what, a kickboxer? I bet there's people who would pay to see the speed power and athleticism of a premier boxer and how it works in a different arena.

Ali fought a reasonably talented jiu jitsu guy from memory, and the fight ended with him screaming in pain after a knee kick from a guy that did a lot of rolling around the ground. But yeah, many UFC/pride fighters don't have great boxing skills, but this is because they usually chose a few significant weapons in their arsenal. They're not trying to win through technical points, they're trying to inflict pain. Look at Cro Crop, he's got a great sprawl defence and a powerful but obvious high kick. Yet he wins a LOT of matches. This kick would knock out de la Hoya before he got in boxing range, hell it knocked out Bob Sapp!

It is no longer just grappling dominated and a lot of MMA fights now are dominated by strikers. I'd doubt anyone in boxing would last 1/2 a round with Arlovski.

As for "just white guys". This is not true, there are many black, and asian guys fighting. And the money. Seriously? You really asking that? Why the fuck aren't you on a pro golfing website instead of a dirtbag freeskiing site

Of anyone, the people here should understand the passion of a sport/lifestyle that doesn't pay

Training with some amatuer MMA guys they have a real passion for their "sport" and are super fun, unassuming guys that just love to beat the shit out of someone that's trying to beat the shit out of them

It's also surprisingly technical, despite what many uneducated boxing fans think.

**splat** · 07-13-2006, 02:00 AM

Originally Posted by StuntCok

After grappling, low kicks are the bane of boxer's existence. You do not have to drop your guard to deliver them (they are not actually to the knee, by the way, but just above on the quad to cause the muscle to seeze). That is why boxers fared well against kickboxers from styles that did not kick low as higher kicks tend to cause fighter to lean and drop their gaurd, but when trying to strike fighters who had strong guards in place while delivering low kicks, boxers got savaged. In fact, the process of delivering a punch while someone is low kicking is very dangerous. Punching plants your feet harder and exposes more of the muscle that the low kick is targeting, making a low kick far more effective. In fact, most knockouts of boxers by kickboxers is a result of this very thing.

Couldn't agree more. My old kung fu master fought out of Hong Kong and had his shin broken by a one step front kick coming in under a high hand feint in his professional debut. I'm trying to find a vid of a shaolin master vs. a taekwondo master that is quite interesting, since you don't see much shaolin.
Maybe ravenousllama will throw his .02 in here. He's been around.

edit: plenty of vids here - http://fightauthority.com/

**ill-advised strategy** · 07-13-2006, 02:17 AM

I will say this:

there's an olympic training center where I grew up so there were olympic level boxers in my High School. The center opened around when I was starting high school so the influx of boxers was new. This being the U.P. and all, having a bunch of mostly inner city minority boxers show up in the high school was a little awkward, and some of the retarded, racist white trash yooper redneck types got into some fights with these olympic level boxers. I never saw a boxer do well in these...Granted there were a lot of factors, but they didn't fare very well in the streetfight scenario....at least from what I saw.

**StuntCok** · 07-13-2006, 02:32 AM

Originally Posted by addict

Look at Cro Crop, he's got a great sprawl defence and a powerful but obvious high kick. Yet he wins a LOT of matches. This kick would knock out de la Hoya before he got in boxing range, hell it knocked out Bob Sapp!

His kick is especially effective because he is a southpaw. It goes through the gaurd quite effectively

**bagtagley** · 07-13-2006, 08:31 AM

Originally Posted by StuntCok

Still, even knees are hard to use and if any of those techniques do not result in a one hit knockout, you are fucked.

Did you see the Pride fight a few weeks ago where Imanari kept going in for his "patented leg lock"? Dude kept his cool and kept Imanari away, and even managed to get out of a few locks. Then BAM, caught him on the way in w/ the most precise knee to the forehead I've ever seen.

To further derail this thread, I saw the Gracie/Hughes fight a few nights ago, and really regretted watching it. I remember seeing Gracie dominate the first UFC fights, and it sucked seeing him get his ass kicked by that meathead.

**Mcwop** · 07-13-2006, 08:36 AM

Chuck Liddell (who's nickname is Iceman, Iceman), shows that a striker who can prevent a takedown is very effective. So if the boxer is good at preventing a takedown, I say that they could be very dangerous. Boxers can hit very hard.

**s.p.c** · 07-13-2006, 08:43 AM

more apt, racers in bumps, and bumpers in gates...

fish out of water. fish in this case..... well if you wrestled/ grappled i think you know

**Obstruction** · 07-13-2006, 09:00 AM

My money is on the pro boxer, fast hands, timing and the ability to take pain in addition to discipline and toughness.

Just because these guys follow the rules when they compete doesn't mean they would be a pussy in a bar fight.

I'm betting that a pro boxer is going to say "fuck the Marquis of Queensbury up the ass" and get pretty ugly with anyone who is in the ring with him and is "extreme fighting."

**Tippster** · 07-13-2006, 09:10 AM

Wait, are you asking the UFC fighters to fight "fair," as in Queensbury rules? Then they have no chance. However, if the reverse is true - a "no holds/kicks/etc. barred" brawl then I'm with Stuntcok. Those UFC guys (and better) know how to take a punch too, so a one-shot knockout is pretty unlikely unless it lands square on the jaw.

**JMan** · 07-13-2006, 09:23 AM

who won the tito ortiz vs ken shamrock fight?

**lemon boy** · 07-13-2006, 09:26 AM

Sorry ice but my money's on the UFC dudes every time.

**Woodsy** · 07-13-2006, 09:29 AM

Originally Posted by lemon boy

Sorry ice but my money's on the UFC dudes every time.

so thought you would say who cares the dood wqith the shotgun always wins

**lemon boy** · 07-13-2006, 09:31 AM

Originally Posted by Woodsy

so thought you would say who cares the dood wqith the shotgun always wins

That's just a given.

**f2f** · 07-13-2006, 09:47 AM

Originally Posted by JMan

who won the tito ortiz vs ken shamrock fight?

ortiz. crappy vid: http://youtube.com/watch?v=kWPu5CJhMLE

**CornFu** · 07-13-2006, 10:43 AM

Originally Posted by Obstruction

Just because these guys follow the rules when they compete doesn't mean they would be a pussy in a bar fight.

It's not about the Heart of the fighter. It's about the reaction patterns that the fighter has drilled into himself over thousands of hours of training. A well trained fighter doesn't think, he lets his intent lead his actions. If the reaction patterns haven't been drilled properly, they won't be there. A boxer has a very narrow range of reaction pattern compared to a good MMA fighter.

**stump832** · 07-13-2006, 11:10 AM

My choice for ultimate pride fight boxer matching champion is Bas Rutten, aka, El Guapo.

**sea2ski** · 07-13-2006, 04:32 PM

I think it really depends on the rules used.

I would also add that I remember watching a top level boxer go against a top level kick boxer back in the 70's on Wide World of Sports. The rules they used were such that the kick boxer was only allowed to kick above the waist and not go after the legs. Well under these rules the boxer knocked out the kick boxer in the third round. He was able to duck or block all the kicks and pretty much beat the hell out of the kickboxer once he was able to get inside and use his technique. The kickboxer had no answer to his quick combos and got knocked out pretty quickly after seemingly be in charge of the fight to that point.

I think as other people stated the boxer probably would have been in a very different situation had the kickboxer been able to go after his legs. The boxer would have had to use a defensive techniques that weren't part of his normal training.

**Stu Gotz** · 07-13-2006, 05:01 PM

If the boxer had no cross training, the fight would be over pretty quick. The UFC fighter would basically tackle the boxer and then ground and pound until the boxer gave up.

I've always thought that pure wrestlers would do very well, but I've seen some really tough amatuer wrestlers (olympians, all americans) get obliterated by less than top notch competition.

It's a very conterintuitive way to "fight." Fight from your back, never get below knee level, etc. You've got to be wary of a lot of things going on, or you'll get knocked in the noggin fairly hard.

Fedor Emelianenko would beat Wladimir Klitschko like a wet dish towel.