UFC champ Brock Lesnar LOL

Discussion in 'MMA Forum' started by conditioner101, Jul 11, 2009.


  1. ufoalf

    ufoalf Boxing Addict Full Member

    6,880
    1
    Jan 18, 2007
    Power does not make you a legit striker??? SO WHAT? It's not the fact that he's legit striker that poses the danger, it the fact that if he DOES land at will be lights out. Again, you're think boxing ALL the time, thats your problem. Getting AWAY is not that easy in MMA because of clinching. Defensive fighter in boxing ALWAYS end up in a clinch. That's what someone like Lesnar wants in the first place.

    Do you not understand the difference in NUMBER of those one dimensional fighters that are out there in 2009 compared to... say, 2002? In 7 years there's no one dimensional champions. UFC is the top of MMA right now, top10 in all the weight divisions will very rarely have purely one dimensional fighters. Compared with 2000 where there was bunch of wrestlers and BJJ experts running around.

    Again, yes there's still exception to the rule still because the sport is quite young. Maia is a great example, he excels at BJJ so well that its hard for well rounded fighter to stop his BJJ or the takedowns.

    Is that why Roach thinks Arlovski could beat Valuev??? Arlovski even with his weak as chin would crack top 20 within 2 years. If he was to devote himself.
     
  2. chimba

    chimba Off the Somali Coast Full Member

    20,005
    7
    Mar 8, 2007
    :lol:
     
  3. Beebs

    Beebs Boxing Junkie Full Member

    14,226
    5
    Feb 21, 2007
    It can but "not pure" and still be the "purest". While Vale Tudo actually takes the "pure" mantle; MMA is by far the closest in any combat sport.
     
  4. Beebs

    Beebs Boxing Junkie Full Member

    14,226
    5
    Feb 21, 2007
    Thank you, the only factor, the only single factor, that even remotely matters when juding striking is, "is it proven to work?" nothing else even remotely matters. The only thing that matters when comparing striking is "who is going to get the better result out their striking?", not how good it looks.

    Less sure about this, I think there will always be a place for guys like Aoki, Kiatoka, Imanari (all from the same camp I believe). It will ebb and flow, as guys get more well rounded a specialist will be able to exploit the inevitable advantage he has in his area. Although they I guess they will have to be more like two dimensional, have a way to get to their area, Aoki has very good judo takedowns and great guard pulls, Kitaoka has good wrestling takedowns, and Imanari can pull of slides into leg lock or sweep positions.
     
  5. codeman99998

    codeman99998 Boxing Addict Full Member

    3,713
    1
    Aug 28, 2006
    No CDN, the way people fight in MMA is simply not the way YOU would likely fight in a real fight. I imagine that if you fought someone in a real fight and that someone was a WRESTLER, he would put you on your back.
     
  6. ufoalf

    ufoalf Boxing Addict Full Member

    6,880
    1
    Jan 18, 2007
    That's true. There will be a place for people like that for years to come but it will be increasingly more difficult as youngsters will grow up that studied ALL MAs at the same time. The gap will start getting a little tighter. Like I said, it has been a trend where more and more will rounded fighters are appearing. Let's face it, anymore than striking alone or wrestling alone is already getting into roundness.

    Liddell even if he IS fights one-dimensionally he has sustained his reign thanks to ability to defend takedowns or to stand up once taken down. It was difficult to deal with him because of that. But he's one foot inside "one-dimensional" and he is one of the greatest champions, but this is different time now and his era has passed, now the top spots are riddled with well rounded 205's and he, IMHO, wouldn't keep up even if he was younger. I would call the likes of Cane or Congo or Kimbo one dimensional. Congo is the epitome of failure to learn wrestling in short time span. He'll never be a champ because of that weakness. Champ like that lasts only as long as he's fed right opponents.
     
  7. cdnboxing

    cdnboxing Well-Known Member Full Member

    1,638
    0
    Jun 20, 2008
    Most MMA'ers have a more well rounded attack, this much is obvious. However, insisting that an MMA'er would defeat the boxer in a REAL FIGHT as much as you guys think is absurd. Because as much as you hate to admit it, boxing is by far the most practical form of REAL LIFE combat. And a good to elite boxer would win that exchange with an MMA'er 99 times out of 100. And obviously, when it comes to clinch work and ground work, advantage goes to MMA however, that does not include all the other variables of a REAL FIGHT.

    Its a stupid debate. The bottom line is MMA and BOXING are sports, neither is the SPORT of fighting like Rogan says. MMA is by far the least limited sport but still limited.
     
  8. cdnboxing

    cdnboxing Well-Known Member Full Member

    1,638
    0
    Jun 20, 2008
    When has Lesnar made anybody go lights out? The point is he knocked down but NOT knocked out mediocre strikers. Lesnar certainly doesnt have feather fists, he obviously has some power but its not world-class power. And power does not make you a good striker, because against a good striker, Lesnar wouldnt be able to land or should not be able to land the shots hes been able to land against his previous opponents. Lesnar simply looks like a fish out of water on his feet, he looks uncomfortable and hes completely untested.

    Roach does not honestly believe AA could beat even a shitty fighter like Valuev.

    AA looks like a god damn amatuer sparring guys like Fres Oquendo and some of the mid-level guys at wild card. The dude was knocked down by Andy Ruiz who is a 19 year old amatuer.

    Roach thought he could make some money off of Arlovski. He has name recognition, is athletic and has the look of someone who could be popular.

    AA wouldnt get close to top 20, thats just absurd. There is alot more to boxing than what you see in MMA.
     
  9. cdnboxing

    cdnboxing Well-Known Member Full Member

    1,638
    0
    Jun 20, 2008
    Agreed,

    The bottom line is there will always be a place for one-dimensional fighters but that is largely dependent on that style. Theres a reason why there are numerous successul one-dimensional wrestlers in MMA. Its because, it truly is the most effective style in MMA that allows you to dictate and control where the fight takes place.

    BJJ is also another skillset where you see alot of one-dimensional fighters but less than wrestlers simply because BJJ'ers often lack the takedown ability of some of the elite or good MMA wrestlers. This is why you saw Thiago Silva get lit up against Machida, his takedowns are mediocre and he sucks on the feet.
     
  10. cdnboxing

    cdnboxing Well-Known Member Full Member

    1,638
    0
    Jun 20, 2008
    Thats what the one-dimensional fighters want. The way MMA is going, the sport is going to be full of Forrest Griffins and Heath Herrings.

    Liddell wouldnt and cant keep up because he sucks at striking.

    I would also call Carwin a one-dimensional fighter despite him having good power. He is still very raw.
     
  11. ufoalf

    ufoalf Boxing Addict Full Member

    6,880
    1
    Jan 18, 2007
    I don't have to hate to admit anything. I see this **** almost every night I work. Boxing is not where it ends 95% of the time, it stays there if there's a lot of room which in many places like bars and clubs there isn't. Boxing is not the most effective REAL LIFE combat and you're just blowing your horn. If anything Mui Thai is LIGHT years ahead of boxing as far as practicality in a street fight. You know what happens? One leg kick from a decent sized person will land almost EVERY time in REAL LIFE, and in REAL LIFE it will disable anyone just as well as punch to the jaw.

    What's so hard to believe that MMA'er will defeat a boxer in a street fight? Than again you're one of the fanboys who still truly believes that a boxer can waltz into MMA scene and crack into championship so it's pointless to even argue a REAL FIGHT with you...
     
  12. Bill Butcher

    Bill Butcher Erik`El Terrible`Morales Full Member

    28,518
    82
    Sep 3, 2007
    You are really thick as **** are you not sir ?

    Lesnar has excellent wrestling, athleticism, speed & raw power, those are brilliant things to have going into a street or MMA fight... in boxing you are only allowed to punch, obviously Lesnar wont be able to use all his strengths - or anywhere near all his strengths for that matter - in a plain boxing match but he can in an MMA fight, thats why he`s so successful.

    Put Lesnar in with either Klitschko in an anything goes fight then put Lesnar in with Fedor in an anything goes fight & compare the results...
    Fedor > Lesnar > Klitschko

    Stop making an ass out of yourself talking about things you dont know... they are 2 different sports, how hard is that to understand ?
     
  13. cdnboxing

    cdnboxing Well-Known Member Full Member

    1,638
    0
    Jun 20, 2008
    So, you say there isnt enough room to box, and yet you say Muay Thai which you cannot even spell correctly is more practical? That makes no sense.

    I've worked at a bar and in my experiences, literaly every fight I saw with your rare exception began with an exchange of punches and sometimes the fight ended on the ground. But the problem is these guys were drunk as hell and had no boxing experience. Its pretty safe to say that a CLEAN, EFFECTIVE puncher like an elite boxer would likely finish that brief fight on the feet and than promptly go back to the bar for another round without getting his hands dirty.

    No, the problem is MMA is not a REAL FIGHT. Because if it was a REAL FIGHT, Ortiz wouldnt have got sparked by a middleweight striker in Lee Murray in a REAL FIGHT.

    And im sorry but boxing is simply the most efficient way to fight in a REAL FIGHT. Randy Couture who is a wrestler and a crappy striker even said it himself, in a REAL FIGHTING situation he would try to stay on his FEET. Boxing is just the cleanest and most effective way to fight in the real world especially if and when there are multiple attackers.

    I obviously would favour the MMA'er IN MMA over the boxer. But a boxer ALWAYS has a chance because of his abilities. This simply cannot be ignored and if an elite boxer stepped into MMA and the MMA'er stood with that boxer it would be essentially lights out. There is nothing revolutionary about MMA striking, its terrible with the exception of a couple fighters. And make no mistake about it, that boxer would beat that ass on the feet with the exception of a a couple fighters.

    The way an MMA'er wins is what they would and should do and that is attempt to take the fight to the ground. Joe Stevenson in regards to Mayweather even acknowledged he obviously wouldnt stand with Mayweather, he would take him down.

    So basically, a boxer has a chance to win in MMA given their opponents gameplan, however, in boxing, the MMA'er has NO CHANCE to win regardless of the gameplan.

    Its just incredible how you dismiss the ability of a boxer in a REAL FIGHT thinking that what you're seeing in MMA resembles that of a REAL FIGHT. It doesnt, its a sport. And the skills a boxer posesses are huge assets in a REAL FIGHT.

    The bottom line is, this debate is stupid, because REAL FIGHTS are unpredictable and its stupid talking about it.
     
  14. québecwarrior

    québecwarrior Georges 'Rush' St-Pierre Full Member

    6,938
    0
    Jun 5, 2007
    Lol, Tito Ortiz was drunk when he was Koed by Murray.
    Murray too, but I wouldnt take that street fight as an exemple to help yourself.
     
  15. Polymath

    Polymath Boxing Junkie Full Member

    8,651
    4
    Sep 29, 2007
    ^ First time I've ever agreed with cdnboxing.

    Good post sir.