It is, however, a legitimate contest rather than performance entertainment. Have you ever seen Pride FC in Japan? Until recently (they were bought out by the UFC) they provided very high-quality and professional MMA contests--which they could afford to do because they have a huge fanbase over there. A few of their better fights and highlights: [YT]tjD8yLh9B4w[/YT] [YT]X8ZA5Wr8W7Q[/YT] [YT][a7aCz1EtPs0/YT] [YT]C5I_uMO_3XY[/YT] [YT]B-XnkgwUcL4[/YT] [YT]o9KVHfEqXb4[/YT] (in the above, you can see him disposing of a professional wrestler who foolishly thought that MMA is an exhibition rather than a sport)
Regarding PRIDE FC, PRIDE is actually a pro-wrestling organization, but one that specializes in legitimate matches, not worked bouts. PRIDE's matchmaking, for example, is straight out of the pro-wrestling handbook, with charismatic, interesting fighters fed a few tomato cans to build up their reps before being vaulted into big-money matches against established stars. PRIDE also sanctions "freakshow" matches, which, while entirely legitimate from the sporting standpoint, would nonetheless never be allowed by American sanctioning bodies.
Dempsey is intriguing. I would suggest that you want to go for what you know in any combat situation. A boxer needs to emphasize punching. The guys who have nuclear blasts and are naturally aggressive, not deliberate would do better. Tyson springs to mind. I think that the problem with boxers in such contests is that they are not used to a guy rushing in so low and they freeze up or try to fend them off with outstretched arms. At best they back up and punch those "get off me" punches. All wrong. If Tyson just spent time catching guys coming in low/shooting in with short uppercuts and hooks I think he'd kill some of them. There's always a window against the wrestler. It's brief, but it's there. The boxer has to find it and then shoot withouth hesitation and with confidence.
Sure, but this is a point that shouldn't be overlooked. PRIDE is (was) every bit a pro-wrestling promotion. The only difference between them and, say, the WWE is that PRIDE books legitimate bouts almost exclusively (but not 100%).
Boxing does not involve two men in their underwear rolling around the ring. Do not get me wrong, if you like that sort thing, good on you (damn you for causing the floods in this country ), you cannot help being who you are, hey I get my jollies from seeing a man get KO'd that is morally in society a lot worse.
There are martial arts with great traditions that go back 1,000 of years, and there is what they call 'Sports Entertainment' that does have a pseudo homoeroticism about it and attracts a lot of males aged 15 to 35 as followers. I am not a qualified Psychologist so I guess I should not jump to conclusions!
Not this again. atsch We're not gay for watching MMA (nor gay at all, for that matter). It's the first true arena for reality testing of martial arts since the wrestler/jiujitsuka matches of the 19th century...or Greek Pankration, if you want to go back that far. In only a decade, it has done away with most of the "pressure points", "deadly ninja strikes", etc. that have plagued the martial arts for most of the latter half of the 20th century, and emphasized testing of techniques in an "alive" manner. By lessening the chances that questionable "masters" will be sending their students into dangerous situations with useless techniques, it's performed a great service. And it's finally been regulated as a true sport, further creating a neutral competitive format to test various styles. ...and it also provides us the opportunity to ask interesting questions like, "Would Jim Jeffries have beaten Ali in an MMA match?" and have a reasonably good chance of getting the correct answer.
His not a wrestler, but i think his big size can give him some help. Personally, i dont think any heavyweight champion that i know, really knows what the do when you go down.
Your attitude towards MMA seems typical of the boxing fan who is igonrant about MMA and who feels threatened by the popular rise of PRIDE, K-1 and now the UFC. As for which HW champion would do best (other than the earliest ones who incorporated some wrestling into their training) I think it's really difficult to say. I don't think it's as easy as saying that the shorter champions (Tyson, Marciano) with lower centres of gravity would be more successful as that suits some techniques but not others. Fighters with longer arms and legs (Holmes, Lewis) would have more potential leverage on the ground. We don't know how flexible each champion was either, which could be significant. One area that is particularly important in MMA is conditioning. Therefore champions who were well conditioned and had good stamina would have an advantage. For this reason someone like Lewis in MMA would be more likely to cut to say 220 rather than bulk up to 240+. Carrying extra weight around would not be a great tactic.
Do not need the pseudo homoeroticism for that (although it doers work as people reflect and are really uncomfortable with them words; so much for living in a modern Society...) The truth is Wrestling has been going in this form for a hundred years, and it has lived in harmony with boxing. If people want to change its name, then come back in 120 years when like boxing it has had at least three shows virtually every single day for that entire period and I will call it boxings equal Popularity wise, boxing is unlikely to reach its peaks in the 50s and again in the 80s. I'm alright because I was the in last generation to experience a boxing boom, so there will probably always be fans of the sport either older or the same age as me, and my decent knowledge of sport pretty much stops post 97/98 anyway.
:huh The small shorts are to facilitate movement and prevent a guy from getting a good grip. Little different from boxing trunks...except recently, when the trunks have become more like skirts. I might add that boxing evolved from MMA (Petter, Passchen, Figg) and remained pretty MMA-ish for the next century and a half. And I agree that the two will easily coexist...but why the hostility toward it?
