A much more plausible type of question, MMA fighters who will excell in K1

This question makes no sense. None whatsoever.

They're both equally difficult. They're both specialized aspects of combative athletics and as such both require a great deal of time and effort to be great.

To say that can't provided they put in the time and effort is wrong. But, what I think you'll find is that most, if not all, of them simply don't want to. They wanted to be Mixed Martial Artists.

If I was given the choice to become anything I wanted: Boxer, Thai fighter, Wrestler, Brazilian Jiu Jitsu fighter, or a Mixed Martial Artist, my choice is abundantly clear. I'd want to be the latter of all of them. And it certainly wouldn't be the easiest path to take. It all likelihood, it'd be the most difficult.

 

You're going to be another HENDO, aren't you?

My answer is very, very clear. Yes, if you exclude or ignore everything I've said except the last part, then yes, my anwer makes no sense. However, I suggest reading everything I said and not being selective.

Your question itself is what makes no sense and I delineated why. You're asking, "A much more plausible type of question, MMA fighters who will excell in K1"

What I seem to have to say again, which by itself is kind of silly because I've already said it, is that by saying that it's more plausable to compete in K-1 then in boxing is by itself absurd. They're both equally difficult because they're both specialized aspects of combative athletics. They both reqiure a tremendous amount of time and effort to be successful.

I go on to compare it with the other aspects (more popularly effective) of combative athletics; Brazilian Jiu Jitsu and Wrestling.

And I go on to propose that many MMA fighters, if given the chance to specialize exclusively in one of the named aspects, they wouldn't choose to do so. That want to do MMA and as someone who has been involved in martial arts the overwhelming majority of my lifetime, I can completely agree. I wouldn't want to limit myself as I'm sure is their mindset.

If that isn't clear enough then I really can't imagine what would be.

 

how does his question makes no sense since there are a few k1 fighters who crossed over and vise versa, most mixed martial artists start out as a 1 dimensional fighter (kick boxers & thai boxers or a grappler) and learn other skills.

 

I've already answered this, but I'll detail further.

His specific problem lies in him saying that it's more probable of an MMA fighter finding success in K-1 which implies that boxing is more difficult, which I find absurd.

Also, you may have not read his entire post or whatever, but he also specifically says to ignore guys who have already competed in K-1 events.

And yes, most start out in individual backgrounds. Most really had no choice but to start out with one or two aspects of combative athletics because MMA wasn't as clearly defined 10 years ago as it is now. What you'll see in the future, probably very near future, is that guys will have maybe a background in one aspect but not as prolonged. They'll go right into MMA to learn all aspects with emphasis on being well rounded from the beginning and not having a defined base. The well rounded-ness will be the base.

So, had he phrased his question without his bias I'd have had no problem and could have provided some decent answers, but I take objection with his phrasing which clearly shows a bias toward boxing, and an unrealistic one.

 

well it would imo be easier for mma's to fight at a decent level in k1 than it would for them to fight at a decent level in boxing!

 

Well, it's your opinion. You'd be wrong, I think, but seems that I'll never convince you of that regardless of what suggestable evidence I present.

But, I run into that with boxing fanboys so I'm used to it.

 

boxing fan boys?

u can most likely name 5 mma fighters who would stand a decent chance at k-1
but you cant name 5 who could could compete at a decent level in boxing!

 

Yeah, I'm not convincing you of anything.

 

yeah ur not partly because u cant see out ur own ass!

5 fighter who could compete in k-1

1. overeem ( already has but started his career in mma)

2. melvin manheof

3.paul daley

4.pat barry

5.andre arlovki

now 5 mma fighters who could compete at a high level in boxing

1. ???? bj penn is the best boxer in mma but in pure boxing he would get stopped quick!

 

Okay, I tired leave alone, but now you've given me no choice by your choosing to respond with vitriole. So, now I have little choice but to make you look stupid and/or make you look like you have little idea as to what you're talking about. Which won't be difficult because of the way you approached this, in this thread at least, is highly suggestive of both.

First, your list of fighters who would be successful in K-1 includes Andrei Arlovski. He would, quite clearly, go on the boxing list. So, here you're wrong. Very wrong. Couldn't be more wrong.

Also, one thing to also consider is the question is who from an MMA background can go into K-1 and achieve some success. The problem here is that MMA type striking essentially mirrors K-1 type striking. Boxing is a far more restrictive and limited form of striking and to try and severely limit someone with a more extensive striking backround so would be to go against their instincts and as such would be more difficult. So, by the pure nature of it all, they're more apt to be successful from a pure technical aspect relative to experience in K-1. Boxing is too limited and restricted.

Also, one huge mistake you're making is a distinction between which MMA fighters would have success immediately in K-1 or boxing and which is more difficult. They're two completely different things and you're lumping them in together. Again, this is wrong. (I'm seeing a pattern here)

As to why MMA fighters would, statistically, have more success in K-1 type striking careers is already clearly explained. Now, as to what is more difficult? That's a hugely semantic and very debatable question, but to exclusively say one is more difficult then another, assuming they're both starting out with a "clean slate" of technique, then it's pretty clear that both are absurdly difficult and require a tremendous amount of time and dedication. To say that MMA fighters couldn't find success in boxing is simply....well, wrong. (Pattern continues) Their dedication would carry over should some of them actively choose to pursue boxing. Not many at all will choose to do so, of this I'm fairly certain.

So, congratulations. You got me to respond to your childish reply.

Oh sweet irony...

 

All sports are equally difficult inherently, it is a matter of beating the competition.

Boxing has a talent pool of competitors about a million times more populated than K1, which is a very limited sport in terms of participation world wide. More people to beat means more quality is required to reach the top; its simple numbers.

It's easy to run, but its not easy to be a competitive runner.

K1 also shares more in common with MMA, obviously it is an incredibly different sport, but less different than boxing.

That all being said, outside of the names mentioned, and the fighters proven in K1 (Overeem, Manhoef) I put forward:

Lyoto Machida, he wouldn't be the first Karate competitor to do very well, and his experience in MMA would help prepare him for the different style of K1 compared to karate.

A prime Jens Pulver would have been OK, he actually kickboxed some, had a respectable low level pro boxing record and even did shootboxing pretty well.

 

right first off i never said boxing is more difficult to learn but its more difficult for mma fighters to have succsess because there used to kicks knees elbows and punches whereas boxing is just hands therefore boxers become masters with there hands which takes a lifetime of training!
so yes it would be easier for an mma striker to compete in k-1 than boxing!
and this is what in part this thread was about naming fighters you think might perform well in k-1!
and arlovski would do better in k-1 than boxing!

 

Very true, and a point I myself have mentioned a few times (not in this thread). I wouldn't go so far as to say that the boxing talent pool is overwhelming larger then say the combination of fighting styles that can attract to K-1 (Muay Thai, kickboxing, boxing + another style, etc...). I would say it's larger, but not by a significant amount, and even if it is, at the very top the "talent" is pretty much even. You have guys that are masters of technique and of their sport. It's impossible to say that that boxer is clearly more technical in boxing then that K-1 fighter is at K-1. The distinction by itself is impossible, let alone the absurd claim that is inherent.