Does size matter....ok we know it does...so more in mma, or boxing

Definitely more in Boxing as they have many more weight classes and a history of upsets to pair with!

DLH's best would have never been good enough for a MW title, but he gave his all against Hopkins and it was like pushing a cart uphill..... A six pound difference in class we are talking here.

 

Brock prove muscles win fights.

Boxing is about skill.
ufc is a bodybuilding contest.

 

This content is protected

With so many more techniques and variables going into a Mixed Martial Arts bout, the most intelligent (skilled) fighter has almost always won in MMA. Pacman would have absolutely nothing for a man that outweighs him by 100 pounds :deal

 

MMA, unfortunately, has the wrestling weight-cutting mentality. Kids die every year cutting weight in wrestling. With that being said, I'm not sure which sport size really matters more, per se. But MMA is definitely more geared towards gaining any size advantage, possible.

Boxing: With age, boxers go up in weight.

MMA: James Irving kills himself draining down to 185lbs.

 

This might be the stupidest thing you've posted yet. I'm impressed.

 

Usually, the fewer the techniques, the more strength comes into play. More often than not, more size equates to more strength. This would make it look like size is a bigger factor in boxing. The only problem with this logic is that strength isn't really boxing's most crucial attribute. Speed is.

MMA is still too young for us to know for sure. The weight classes are closer to boxing's original 8, as opposed to today's 17. How often has a fighter from a lower class won a title at a higher weight in mma? It's a lot fewer than it has happened in boxing, but boxing has had more fights and fighters, both historically and presently.

With take downs and top control being so important in mma's present scoring, I have to lean towards size being more important in mma.

 

How much do you think Aldo has to offer for Cain Velasquez?

 

boxing because its a more limited. in mma, a guy might have an advantage in size, strength, power, speed and you have more options to take away that advantage.

It would be VERY difficult to overcome Floyds speed and timing in boxing but in MMA, you take him down and it's a done deal. It would be difficult to overcome Wlads reach advantage and stand with him, start kicking the **** out of his legs and you are one step closer to winning.

 

This content is protected

I like that bit, it made me smile. Sounds like something I'd day.

 

This is because boxing is far more refined. They use every pound of weight as a functional strength while MMA doesnt do that yet. Matt Hughes claims to have submitted Brock Lesnar a few times during training but hes a more skilled wrestler.

 

its a answer that is not ever going to be ABSOULUTE as its case specific anyway one CUTs it. Overall, however, i would say that boxing without doubt has refined itself to being more dependent on WIEGHT as a MEASURE. The very fact that GSP is considered to fight Silva and Silva to fight Jon Jones shows the overall difference. In boxing, fights with this size disadvatange would usually not even be considered. One poster mentioned Mayweather witch to me is bang on the money. In mma a dude as talented as Mayweather could be DEALT with via such a WIDE variety of DIFFERENT techniques. In boxing however, this is FAR LESS of a option. Same with Vlad. Say what you want about Vlad, the fact is for his size he has FAST hands. In MMA facing a opponent like Vlad one would be mad to stand and trade PUNCHEs with him with or without a size difference. As another said on here, take his legs out or take him down. However, with the greater rule restrictions of boxing it LIMITs the techniques available and thus if one is facing a dude like Floyd or Vlad to beat them they are going to have to be nearly as fast or at least ALOT BIGGER to nulify the SPEED and TIMING differences. Bigger of course means potentially more POWER in a single shot as well it means potentially MORE range [[ depending on height to weight ratio etc ]] to deal with the ABILITY of a dude like Floyd or Vlad etc.

 

No he did not prove that. Say what you like about Brocks FAKE pro wrestling entertainment background. The fact is Brock was VERY ATHELTICALLY skilled for a very BIG FELLA. Alot of speed for that size. That is very UNUSUAL. Brock is huge but his size is not very UNUSUAL. The amount of guys as big as him or bigger is endless. They could not compete in MMA with the success that Brock had. Trust me, many of them have tried and failed at levels that often dont even reach the mainstream fan. Happens all the time.

As for Brock, in the end his muscles did not even win him fights as look at his fight with Cain? If a fighter could prevent Brock from bum rushing him and force him to stand and trade his stand up was very LIMITED. Brock proved only what was proven time and again in MMA since before the very first UFC. Top notch wrestling ability translates VERY WELL into top notch MMA ability. It does not translate perfectly just as BJJ etc does not translate perfectly. Simply put in a fight with LESS rules the ability to grapple is HUGE. The reason A Silva is so good OVERALL is ALSO because he can grapple. No he may not be able to grapple better than the best his divsion has to offer and YES his grappling ability is NOT the STRONGEST part of his fighting ability, however, Silva can grapple with the BEST of them and has done exactly that.