Mayweather-Marquez Results Trounced UFC 103

the fight was ****

 

HBO shows some of it's best fights on PPV, while others are on the network itself for subscribers.
So, it's not really entirely accurate to say "the best fights in boxing aren't even on PPV." Some are, some aren't.
And you still have to subscribe to channels like HBO and Showtime. The old timers will lament that fights used to be on free TV. This was back before most people on this board were old enough to remember.

As for the UFC having too many PPV events. Well, as long as the market sustains it, why wouldn't they put on as many PPV events as they do.
Obviously if they start showing too many events and they aren't making the kind of profit they are happy with, they'll show less.
It's up to the fans to express their disdain for so many events by not buying them.
I'm sure a lot of boxing fans didn't love having to pay $50 bucks for Mayweather/Marquez when big fights like that used to be shown on free TV back in the old days. But a hell a lot of them did because they didn't want to miss the fight.
The same is true with any PPV event. Of course we'd all rather watch it for free. But us fans are the ones who send out the message that we're OK with PPV because we buy it.

 

And the GSP/Penn SUPERFIGHT, Biggest fight in UFC history, wasn't? At least Boxings "WW P4P best vs LW P4P best" went the distance :deal

Face it, the fights were extremely similar, but MMA's version got hyped up as the best fight in history and boxings version got dismissed as a joke.

 

Can you blame the UFC for hyping the fight when every indication was that it would be competitive based on GSP and Penn's first fight? It just turned out GSP's game has evolved to a level where everybody ends up being dominated by him. No one could have predicted with certainty it would be such a one sided fight.

And just because the PBF/Marquez fight went the distance doesn't mean anything regarding it's entertainment value. Lot's of bad fights go the distance. (not saying the PBF fight was bad, was it certainly wasn't particularly entertaining)

I don't you think you can compare the two scenarios. Penn and GSP had fought before and the fight was close and very entertaining. Yes, hyping it as the best fight in UFC history was a bit hyperbolic, but it certainly had potential to be great considering the two fighters involved.
I mean, look at all the hype De La Hoya/Mayweather received as being a potentially "all time great" fight. It ended up being just OK.

How can you ever say with certainty that a fight is going to be non-competitive or boringly one sided? You can't. You can only look that at the fighters going into the fight, their resumes, and any past meetings they may have had.

A lot of people were cynical about the PBF/Marquez fight because they doubted Marquez's competitiveness moving up two divisions in weight. But not everyone was a naysayer. Some fans were expecting a close, competitive fight, and even predicting a Marquez win.
It certainly didn't turn out that way.

 

lmao you think it's good when a fight goes the distance?

sorry personally I prefer to see knockouts and submissions

 

What about Lesnar/Fedor? Penn/Aoki? Mousasi vs any top UFC LHW or even MW? Shields/GSP?

Those fights wont happen.

And shutup about Penn/GSP. That was the easiest fight to predict and a pretty joke "superfight." And im a huge Penn fan. But im not stupid to think that it would have somehow been a competitive fight.

The problem with MMA fans is they are very ignorant. They think boxing is corrupt and yet dont realize that the same amount of corruption if not more is occuring in their own sport. They are just too dumb to realize it.

 

No you are obviously missing my entire point. Although Mayweather dominated Marquez, he didn't beat him AS BADLY as GSP beat Penn, the fight was closer. My point was that Dana white hypocritically bashed Floyd for fighting Marquez, yet this same year hyped up GSP vs Penn (wW vs LW) as the greatest event in the sports history. :good

 

One-sided? YES
****? No, not if you like to watch incredible skill against a very good fighter albeit a small one.

JMM/Mayweather was far better than the "superfghts" UFC has been putting on. And I dont even think many even considered Mayweather/JMM a superfight because it wasnt.

 

Penn/GSP fought 3 years prior to their rematch. A fight where Penn cut up GSP on the feet but GSP was still able to manage to score takedowns for the majority of the fight and squeak out a decision. Since than, GSP is a MUCH better wrestler, improved submission defense and better on the feet. While at the same time BEING MASSIVELY BIGGER than Penn. I mean not only did I think GSP would win but he actually won EXACTLY the way I thought he would.

I really have to question the intelligence of people who thought this was going to be a good fight. I guess it just shows that people will buy into the UFC hype machine. People just let hype get to them.

The difference was Marquez/Mayweather was not really expected to be a competitive fight. I am a huge Marquez fan but even I only gave him a slight chance to even take a few rounds. I thought Mayweather would win 8-9 rounds to JMM's 3-4. It turned out to be even worse than that. Everybody in boxing thought it was an easy comeback win for Floyd.

However, in the UFC, it was almost split down the middle. It was built up to be some competitive war when in reality it wasnt. I dont blame the UFC for doing what its doing.

JMM/Mayweather is the exact equivalent of Penn/GSP. JMM essentially cleaned out 135 (not really but he beat arguably the two best 135'ers in the world) and moved up to fght Mayweather who is coming off a 2 year layoff. Penn moved up in weight to fight GSP.

 

BINGO. We have a winner.

 

I like to see good fights.

 

Define better?
It involved far more advanced boxing skills and someone who trains can definitely appreciate what Mayweather does in the ring. To me it was an incredible display of skill and quite exciting because I understand how hard/impossible it is to do what Mayweather does. To an average fan it looks quite plain, or so I've noticed.
MMA is a little more flashy because of so many different match-ups and can bring ground skills, which again can be quite entertaining depending on the fighter. Also, UFC isn't about "superfights" it's about putting on a great card, and UFC has been murdering boxing in terms of overall entertainment of their cards. Basically you rarely see when the whole PPV card sucks(not on paper but in actual entertainment). Heck last Fight Night was great to watch, every single fighter brought it like they were hungry... for food and rent.

 

UFC is all about superfights. Thats what the fight business is all about. Only difference is UFC markets their crappy undercard heavily as opposed to boxing.

And no, the UFC cards have not been better than that of boxing. Some of them have sucked alot and the majority of their superfights have been major letdowns. In fact all of them have. Literally all of the UFC PPV's have been one-sided. Penn/GSP, Lesnar/Mir, Alves/GSP, Belfort/Franklin, Penn/Florian, Leites/Silva, Silva/Griffin, Bisping/Hendo, Machida/Evans, Sanchez/Stevenson. Sure some undercard fights turn out to have some quick KO's but i'm more interested in watching good, skilled fighters fight not low-level fighters with weak chins and terrible striking. Thats the difference in MMA, fans love quick fights, in boxing fans rarely like it because they actually want to see a competitive fight.

You know what the biggest difference is though, the great fights we've seen in boxing have been FREE on HBO. Cotto/Clottey, Diaz/Marquez, Mosley/Margarito (one-sided but enjoyable because of the way Mosley took him apart) not to mention some great fights on Showtime as well. Those FREE HBO cards all featured top notch fighters, all ranked in the top 5 in their respective divisions. We've also had some very good HBO BAD cards as well featuring up and coming fighters.

UFC has had virtually no FREE cards, all of them have been PPV and many of them have been huge ripoffs. Sorry im not paying 50 bucks to watch Jardine/Rampage. And UFN's? C'mon man, they are one-sided fights featuring mid-low level fighters. Are some fights entertaining? Yes, but they arent particularly skilled at what they do. Was Credeur/Quarry entertaining? Yes, but some people think train wrecks are entertaining. The striking was terrible.

 

Strange, but I watched Mayweather/Marquez 24/7 and they hyped the fight in a way that made it appear it would be very competitive. Why didn't they level with us and admit it was a mismatch and Marquez had no chance?

Are we to believe they knew it was a mismatch but in an effort to sell tickets they deceived the viewers? If so, it sure worked considering the PPV numbers. Did most fans know when they bought the fight that it was a mismatch, but they still wanted to see it? Or did they buy into the boxing hype machine?

And yes, the UFC hype for Penn/GSP was very hyperbolic, but that's what hype is. You may have been one of the enlightened ones who knew Penn had no chance, but a lot of fans believed otherwise. And that belief wasn't created only because of the UFC hype. It was created because they had faith in Penn's abilities and obviously were underestimating GSP.
Us mere mortals don't have the foresight to know going into every fight what the outcome is going to be. Although for the record, I picked GSP!

 

Well, considering what Dana White is like, I don't worry too much about what he says. It'd be like listening to Mayweather's silly ramblings about MMA and believing them.
Of course Dana White is a hypocrite. His vested interest in his own company and sport ensures that he must be. You suddenly think he should start being fair and objective? Heh, don't hold your breath!

And besides, Dana got his come uppings when UFC 103 was easily beaten in the PPV numbers by the PBF fight.