UFC is sold to casuals way more than boxing is. Okay for people like me eh. You're getting butthurt over nothing.
Why? For casuals exactly boxing is sold better: bums in row, nice record, ppl worship record numbers and KOs plus belts. Then they might milk belts, damn a lot of belts milking boxers. All matchmaking in pro boxing is almost always too predictable and boring till half death until highest level fights. Maybe you might insult MMA and worship boxing business, for me they both are boring, espeically pro boxing matchmaking and officiating, for me more suitable and entertaining is stuff like stadium MT, oly wrestling or KB. Sorry, ofc casuals should be served and they are paying bills to watch predictatble and boring pro boxing.
I agree with the divisions/belts thing but at the end of the day it still dilutes the product somewhat from an entertainment perspective, because its just harder to follow and be invested in everything. Even the UFC itself has had this to some degree considering how many more divisions they have today than they did in the 00s, but its still much less of a cluster**** than boxing is. Obviously boxing is much older, so its had more time for the skills to develop and has a much bigger talent pool, so on that basis yeah I guess the level of competition at the top in relative terms is higher, but its kind of apples to oranges because they're just so different. Right now if someone is a top MMA fighter I think its fair to say they're one of the best fighters on the planet at their weight. If theres someone out there from another combat sport who could come in tomorrow and beat Usman, Oliveira, Yan etc under rules that allowed both sides to use their entire skillsets i'd be pretty damn surprised. As for the star thing. Canelo, Fury and AJ are indisputably huge stars, bigger than anyone other than Conor. But the UFC has a higher quantity of needle mover names than boxing. Its reflected in the wider range of names pulling good numbers on PPV, and in social media followings etc. Theres various reasons for this - the UFC being a large centralized easy to follow platform giving these names exposure, also because things tend to move faster when it comes to guys getting big fights to raise their profiles. Adesanya is a good example of this, remember hes only been in the UFC since 2018 and look at him now, meanwhile in boxing you've got a guy like Crawford who is 37-0 and has been a world champion for 7 years and he STILL hasnt had that Floyd/Oscar style breakout moment that elevates him into a star. Jorge is another example, you're right he is pretty much a journeyman/gatekeeper, and hes been around forever, and thanks to a catchphrase, a backstage brawl and a flying knee he went from being a guy most casuals had never heard of to one of the biggest stars in combat sports within like 6 months. You could argue thats more WWE than sport, but its a testament to the relative ability of MMA to quickly build stars and connect with the casual audience.
If you find boxing boring then why are you on a boxing forum to discuss it? I just gave my opinion on UFC and i'm not denying boxing cards are poor because the majority of them are.
Sometimes happens less predictable fights, sometimes guys I know are on cards and I too had been in boxing. Boxing likes me as craft , fight cards usually are too predictable, esp undercards. I do not judge MMA only from UFC, there are multiple orgs and there is not only boxing or mma : KB and stadium MT etc fights + am boxing to watch.
UFC's main strength is everything is more organized and is easier to follow and is marketed better than any other mma organization. That's usually a thing i hear when i speak to friends who are fans of MMA. They say everything is much easier to follow than boxing which is true. Crawford has been managed poorly and i think that's down to him being with Top Rank and he needs a big fight to solidify him as a proper star. The main criticism i have with UFC is they push out a lot of Fight Nights which in turn can weaken the product overall. It may garner more eyes to the sport and that's essentially what the money men want. I just think they could actually create better PPV cards if they didn't push those out so frequently. I think knowing who an elite fighter is in mma is a lot more obvious to the casual observer.
Partially. Technically to follow KB, MT, not alone mma or wrestling is more difficult than boxing. However yeah : there are too much ways to win and lesser influence from A/B side there for cards cos more methods to finish a guy in distance.
For me the sweet spot was like 20-25 events per year, which is what they were doing at the turn of the 00s/10s. Pretty much half PPV, half free cards. You werent waiting ages between cards but it didnt feel like you were being bombarded with them to the extent that most didnt feel special anymore either. I kinda miss having just 5 divisions too. Although granted the sub 155 divisions do have a lot of great talent in them.
Yeah this is very true. I used to love K-1 in the 00s but kickboxing as a whole is in a weird place these days. It seems to be doing pretty well in Japan but its not accessible to a wider international audience the way K-1 was back in the day. And Glory shows are really infrequent now. **** I miss the days of Semmy, Hoost, Aerts, Le Banner etc. I actually kinda liked it more than MMA even.
Mate, I really rate Garcia. But he's a Gatekeeper, and has been for ages. His days of winning titles and being a force ended a good while back. And Crawford stepping in with a world class boxers ai t happening anytime soon. Mayweather undercards were abysmal, as are most big boxing events.
1). No, there's too many belts per division. Imagine getting THREE or FOUR people in ONE WEIGHT DIVISION all claiming to be "the champ". So funny it's sad. MMA have got this right. 2) That's sometimes detrimental. You think Loma or Usyk really give a hoot about the pro game? It's a cash-out for the elite & a living for those not good enough to get to the top level in that world. And the rules aren't the same, so kinda pointless really. 70-400 fights and for what? 3) The level of competition is not higher, in MMA ALL kinds of stylists try their hand at it. Boxers just face boxers, some of whome are around forever. And you have Boxers like Manny who is old as he'll still relevant, Hopkins was in his 50's ffs and ruled with an iron fist. Laughable. 4) In an ACTUAL FIGHT, a wrestler COULD get laid out with one shot. That's because that's what happens when you fight someone who has a varied skill set or does something you don't or you're in an ACTUAL FIGHT, not a Boxing match. And world class wrestlers 9/10 DOMINATE the sport.
It's better to have one belt per division but it isn't make or break for the sport. You have guys like Brock Lesnar with a limited skillset who became champ in UFC relatively quickly. Poor heavyweights like Tim Sylvia becoming a world champ. I think the UFC heavyweight division is pretty weak and a fighter with 4 years of training has become world champion mostly just knocking guys out. He's fought like two or three top heavyweights in his career so far. He lost to two of them before avenging defeat against Miocic. I don't think guys like Derrick Lewis show that the UFC heavyweight division has become more advanced and improved. In terms of higher competition i meant relative to the sport and that's true. A lot of mma fighters are just jack of all trades kinda guys who aren't particularly exceptional in any area. A lot turn to mma because they can't make it in other sports or the money isn't there in other combat sports to begin with. If a world champion boxer is going against another world champion boxer the level is more balanced. Yes, there's anomalies like Anthony Joshua vs Charles Martin but overall you get a better idea of their talent level if they have a world title. In mma you can have a world class kickboxer vs a wrestler. It's not telling me the competition is higher in it's relative sport.... all it's telling me is a kickboxer might beat a wrestler or a wrestler might beat a kickboxer. The wrestler the world class kickboxer might be fighting may be considered average in a wrestling competition. You have artificial ratings where journeymen can become contenders and the rankings aren't always considered properly.
But it is. When dod we see No.1 vs No.2 in Boxing as frequently as we do in MMA? Brock was a legit world class wrestler. Look at his amateur career. Not the WWE nonsense. And many boxers are one-dimensional. Look at Wilder ffs, he CANNOT Box, yet held the belt. Dude, Tim was a lifetime ago. As was the art vs art thing. Practicing that many arts will leave some gaps in some arts, and you'll get better at what you're good at.
He was legit and maybe Kurt Angle would've done well in UFC, too. I just think he didn't have to try and got over on his name recognition. If you compare his competition to the old world class boxer heavyweights they looked small and tame in comparison. You really think Derrick Lewis is any good? He's a contender and he beat Ngannou in a boring, uneventful fight. Maybe the worst fight ever. I mean Lewis isn't bad but he doesn't seem like he's anything special or some world beater. Just a big strong heavyweight. Tim Sylvia might be a harsh pick because it was in a time where UFC was starting to grow but he was one of the worst belt holders ever. I mean one thing with the heavyweight division skills can be negated a bit by natural strength and power.
More balanced for sure? Like the same Pulev was cotender vs 38 y.o Wlad and then he was 33 y.o. When Pulev is 39 y.o, again he is cotender, now vs A.J. I might bring next examples: Wlad had cotender for his belt in then undefeated Wach who then had 27-0-0 pro record and was not smaller or lighter than Wlad. Later this boxer had fought vs Povetkin and too had lost. Years later he boxed vs White. Interesting also is Chisora. He boxed vs Vitali and Haye in 1 single year, later he appeared vs Fury etc boxers. White. Now recently he had Usyk and Parker. Boxing really is so competitive?
