Randy Couture should fight James Toney in a Boxing Match. Why?

I'll respond to this with replies already given in this thread. If read by themselves, it should be enough. If read in the context of this thread in all it's replies, my position will be very clear.

In response to my OP I received this reply, on that same context of "equal ground" with various implications in other areas:

It went on as follows:

Hopefully that clears up any potential confusion.

 

Incredible. I spelled it out for you, plain as day, and you're still not getting it.

Toney is a novice Mixed Martial Artist. Novice is simply a qualifier. He's still a mixed martial artist.

Couture is an expert Mixed Martial Artist.

They're both mixed martial artists, just different levels. How they approached it varies but invariably there are many different ways to become a mixed martial artist.

(Without losing sight that they're not purely Mixed Martial Artists, as I clarified earlier)

How they came to be these things is important and I clearly delineate these in our previous posts.

 

Of course I have. It's simply incorrect.

If someone signs up to do boxing, and does it for a lesson or two, or however long or short you want, the moment they learn a boxnig technique, they're a boxer. They're a beginner. Just like the guys that fight in the local golden gloves are boxers, just like Floyd Mayweather is a boxer, they're simply on different levels.

Same thing applies here. What makes a mixed martial artist? Attempting to apply multiple (more then one) styles into one effective style. Toney attempted to do this by learning techniques other then boxing techniques to suppliment and make effective his boxing. Therefore, by definition, he is a mixed martial artist. You simply add in the qualifier to denote his level, which is a novice.

Edit - For matters of clarity, I should be even more specific.

If your average man/woman goes to learn boxing as self defense, in definition that doesn't make them a boxer, I'd concede. It makes them someone trained in boxing.

If you decide to put your boxing training to use in a combative athletics contest, then you're a boxer, no matter your level. You could be the worst boxer in the history of boxing, you're still a boxer (just a horrid one).

Toney attempted to learn the complexities of MMA to augment his boxing skills in an attempt to apply them in the MMA realm. Thus, he is a Mixed Martial Artist, regardless of his level of overall skill.

 

And I solved a math problem. Doesn't make me a math professor.

Qualifiers, limiting to the realm of combative athletics. It's all relative.

 

No shame in being wrong most of the time (this not being one of those times). I'm wrong all the time in areas where I'm completely oblivious, and I'm happy to admit that I am. Here is simply an area (martial arts) that I've been involved in my entire life (essentially), and have thought a great deal about.

Now if we were to talk about just boxing then for sure you'd be correcting me left and right. I'm not a boxing expert. Novice at best.

 

I'll also watch a good boxing match, but seems they've been few and far between recently.

I also started in TKD when I was 4, got my black belt when I was 13 and started boxing, muay thai and BJJ when I was 18. Muay Thai first, then BJJ and rounding it out with boxing. I now wish I did wrestling because damn it's effective when combined with other styles.

And even by loose standards, you're a mixed martial artist. You've studied multiple martial arts, you can combine them or keep them separate and use them each individually should the need arise, so you're a mixed martial artist. Easy, really.

Ever train any BJJ? If not, I'd highly recommend it. I wish to all hell we had it where I live when I was a kid. Way more effective the TKD in every sense of the word. TKD is largely useless by itself, I've found. My Muay Thai instructor beat the **** outta me when we sparred. I was simply never used to his kinds of techniques and the sheer effectiveness of his skill set under duress, which TKD doesn't teach you to cope with.

And yeah, interesting. You didn't come at me with anything malicious, but I suppose I was in kind of a "defensive" kind of position because of the way in which this thread was approached and because of the initial reply of Poppy with the heading "FAIL". So, I replied in kind. I should have been a bit more sincere to yourself, so my apologies. I try and keep it on level with whom I'm talking to, and you seem to be level-headed. So, thank you, sir.