UFC is bigger than boxing in america

Serra was a more credible fight for Pierre than Bean was for Holyfield, Rahman for Klitschko, Frazier for Jones Jr, Jackson for Lewis, or the first 5 fights of De la Hoya's welterweight reign. Serra was a well respected lightweight that had given BJ Penn a good fight. Again, Serra wasn't hand picked. He won a tournament to get his shot.

Lesnar's NCAA accomplishment are not more important than Harrison's medal. Lesnar's wins over Herring, Couture, Mir, and Carwin are bigger than any of Harrison's professional boxing wins.

 

Nobody gave Serra any credibility when he went up against GSP because he wasn't top ten (or even ranked). Beating Spratt & Carter in exhibition fights and barely edging Lytle should not earn anybody a title shot and it doesn't make him anymore credible then your examples.

Lesnar 'earned' his UFC title shot based on this (lets compare with Harrison):

Kim = can
Mir = loss
Herring = Sprott
2-1 < 27-4
NCAA title < Gold Medal

AND A LOT OF HYPE...which is all this 'MMA is a sport that caters to fans' is.

 

I assume your a boxing diehard trying to downplay MMA. So all you got to use to **** on MMA is Lesnar and Serra? Didnt Sugar Ray Robinson loose to a nobody in Randy Turpin? Or how bout Ali losing to 6 fight novice Leon Spinks? Im tempted to bring up Butterbean and Marvis Frazier but I shall resist. Im grown up to know that upsets and mismatches happen in all sports, and it's hypocritcal to accuse MMA fighters of taking easy fights when boxers do the same

 

ummm...i'm a huge MMA fan (combat sports fan). I just don't like people shitting on boxing while putting their head in the sand when it comes to problems in MMA.

 

That's fair enough, I thought you were doing the opposite, my bad :thumbsup
These boxing/MMA threads do tend to get silly like that

 

Honestly, I can't believe that i'm still suckered into participating in MMA vs Boxing debates (my fault). It's been done to death. I just wanted to offer a different perspective. Boxing is a broken sport, there is no debate there.

I'm done.

 

Most boxing fans don't understand, or are ignorant of the differences between to two sports. Generally speaking all you'll get is the boxing is sloppy and the roll on the floor like girls ect.
In boxing a record is more important cause there is only 3 way's you can lose.

 

The Serra fight was a gimmick, not a gimmie. It's not like Pierre was attempting to fight a 2-3 nobodies to 1 somebody type ratio. The UFC did their 4th season of TUF, which is mostly done for gaining attention for their brand, and awarded the winner with a title shot. Serra didn't earn his shot the traditional way, but he sure justified it when fight night came.

I never said that Lesnar earned his title shot fairly. Lesnar's rapid rise was largely due to his already being a celebrity. What you questioned was how Lesnar's NCAA accomplishments were any better than Harrison's Olympic Medal. I answered that they were not. First Herring defeated Kongo leading up to his fight with Lesnar. That is more impressive than any of Sprott's wins. So Sprott does not equal Herring in my opinion, but pretend that it does. Couture, Mir, and Carwin are all greater feats than beating Herring. So, hype or not, Lesnar accomplished more in his few fights as an MMA pro than Harrison ever did as a boxing pro.

Now neither Couture nor Lesnar dominated the UFC heavyweight division the way Wladimir Klitschko has his, so I can't say Lesnar reached that status. I would have to equate his victory over Couture as being similar to had an inexperienced boxer defeated George Foreman, after his fight with Moorer, somewhere around 1995. Then that boxer going on to defend against Moorer and then maybe David Tua. Tua would have been unproven, and only have around 20 fights at that point.

Anyway, none of this is important. I still argue MMA is getting their bigger fights to happen more regularly than boxing. That is a large reason for its recent success.

 

Yeah, but my dad can beat up your dad.