So this is a live test of the theory that the different gloves and liberal clinching rules from the early 1900s might have given the fighters back then a significant edge under their own conditions against modern guys? If so, I'll be watching this thread -- and sport -- with some interest. EDIT: @janitor, @BitPlayerVesti, @choklab, might want to get over here for this one. Just in case this event turns out to be a little living history experiment.
This is hilarious! The boxer got dropped heavily twice and then got outfought and out-punched in a war and even though he cracked the MMA guy flush dozens of times with full power flush right and left hooks right on the money ie. KO shots he couldn't hurt him. WTF?! One of the judges scored it a draw.
Boxing should win all three of these on paper. Shame if they do because that robbery in the first right could prove pivotal
The boxers seem to be confused to **** by the new geometrics of the ring. Seals needs 1-2's non stop.
These are exciting fights I think I can say that George Foreman would have been the ATG at Triad fighting there isnt an MMA fighter out there who would have been able to overpower big George in this style and his manhandling is perfect for this style. It reminds of besides the ring shape of boxing in the pre 30s era where infighting and standing grappling was kind of permitted. I dont think the boxing world could have chosen a more of a beta male group of boxers
