Originally Posted by SweetScienceFan
Is fighting only about ages in your book? What about the fighters themselves, their backrounds, does that mean anything? Kimbo is 33 and has been doing nothing but fighting in the street. Mercer has been training and competing at a top level of boxing all of his life. The answer to your question is simple. I see your point of it not being a big deal, if you agree that boxing is an extremely limited fighting sport compared to an MMA fight. I agree, which is why I certainly wasn't shocked to see Kimbo beat him. Had it been a top shelf MMA fighter, I would have bet everything that I own on the MMA fighter regardless of who the pure boxer was.
This argument that most are having goes back to the old boxing is a superior sport world. People have been saying for years that someone like Mercer would kill Kimbo in a fight. Not a boxing match, but a fight. This is a wake up call for people who think that boxers are unstoppable fighters in a real atmosphere. Who think that they will "kill people with those little gloves". The reality is that in a real fight, most of the beautiful, techincal ins and outs of boxing are pretty much useless.
Well, for my part I would never say boxing is a "superior" sport. That is a ridiculous concept in my opinion. How can one sport be "superior" to any other?? Ridiculous. They are just different.
What I find funny is how people talk about MMA being closer to a real fight, like that's something to be proud of. Who cares - it still ISN'T a real fight. If I want to see a real fight I'll start one in a bar. That isn't why I watch boxing.