Why are boxers considered "shot" when MMA fighters aren't?

Not to the level of every seeing big MMA event. There's booing at every MMA event, and it's deafening and embarassing.

 

i am not in the minority it tends to be dumd american fans who boo, if you ever watched pride there fasn but ufc and boxing fans to shame.

 

in mma all you need is one strike or/and push on pike.
in boxing you have to have alot of skills,speed and power to keep fighting at advanced ages.
main thing is that shot fighters rarely get out of rounds 5/6 but in mma a 1st roudn ko is kinda common if not expected. so you never see a fading fighter. some mma guys get koed when they are still fresh.
stamina isnt an issue in mma and when it is it usually when both men are tired. also few mma guys try to go the distance or at least steal rounds which in boxing is common.

ray mercer might be shot but does it mean that in the early 90's he could of been just as bad in mma than the next man.

 

when mma goes to ground without either guy being bjj based the fight is boring and crap to watch

 

Hasn't Shamrock's been considered shot to tiny pieces for years now?

 

There's truth to what the OP is saying.
But it didn't always use to be like that.
An undefeated fighters loses now in boxing, and his next fight is refered to as a 'crossroads' fight.

But, look back when Julian Jackson lost to Mike McCallum. I don't remember many saying "well, Jackson is done for.... so, who's the next prospect?".

 

I do. It's pretty much every other thread on this forum after a big fight.

"This guy is done. Stick a fork in him."

 

U can't call an MMA fighter shot because its more than one way to beat a man in that sport...dude could be old and still have power like in boxing...or still be crafty enough to make someone submit.

But i guess they could be consider shot when they don't have decent reflexes anymore...not like Roy Jones but like Meldrick Taylor or Riddick Bowe

 

Flyin Ryan,
yeah, people say that now.
But not so much when Jackson, McCallum, Herol Graham, Benn, Eubank, Watson, Sumbu Kalambay, Norris and Nunn were fighting.

 

Allright then, so why do boxing fans now do that?

Why don't boxing fans want to watch a fight between the #3 and #4 guys in a division after they each lost to #1 and #2?

 

i dunno it's usually when hype,age,lack of real talent is proven.

somone like tye fields is not getting a world title shot. but because of his record he was considered a contender....everyone knew he was going to get sparked by any mildly decent counterpuncher (monte barret not being a good puncher nor a good counterer).


i think the sticka fork in him comments are kinda considered.


but people do forget that most boxers out there arnt looking for titles they are looking for money and know that titles and belts will recieve a extra bit green on the paycheck.

some fight becuase you can get £200 a night on a journeyman card.

peter buckley isnt fight/sparring 300 times becuase he wants to win a title or be a contender. perosnally in person i felt his skills did indicate that he could of been good domestic level figther. but thats not his game. his game is being called in as a replacement on short notice get payed £3,000 and up for a night maybe 4 rounds thats 16 mins. he is there to lose.


does anyone think dumas is gonna be a champ no but becuase of that undefeated rec.


**** it what am i talking about ramble ramble ramble ramble ramble ramble ramble:dead :dead :dead :dead :dead

 

Its kind of complicated, and takes a while to explain, but here goes.

Boxing is a more scientific, developed sport than MMA. What do I mean by this? First of all, about the betting odds for a fight. I think if you look at statistics, Las Vegas book makers are right a much higher of the percentage of time with their odds for boxing than with MMA. The outcome of a boxing match is easier to predict. This is because MMA is a less scientific sport, the fighters are still figuring out what works and what doesn't, and when it works, and when it doesn't. And because there is more potentially going on in an MMA fight, it will take even longer for it to develop to the level that boxing is at. So even though one fighter may be perceived to be much more skilled than another, that other fighter could still win... and has a greater chance to do so than in boxing.

Also, you mentioned ages.. but look at other physical differences between MMA fighters. Theres a lot more room for weight differences, In boxing, there are new weight classes every few pounds, but in MMA the differences are much bigger.

As MMA ages as a sport, fighters learn from their mistakes, and new generations of fighters get increasingly better at their craft... it will seem more like boxing. MMA fights will go to decisions more.. and also you'll see just the way MMA fighters LOOK be completely different. Boxers physiques are carefully sculpted to be the most efficient as possible for fighting. MMA fighters often have bodies like body builders, with way more muscle than is needed for fighting. Boxers have very defined muscles, but they are only as big as is natural for them to be fighting, and still be able to move, have stamina, etc etc. Many MMA fighters fight at a weight too heavy for them really to fight at as effectively as possible.

There really is no weight class for guys that should naturally fight at 130 lbs.. so they fight at 155, or maybe even higher. When MMA has proper weight classes... eventually fighters will realize understand the concept of a good fighting weight.. and they'll even look more like boxers.

Ken Shamrock and Randy Couture also despite being pretty old to be fighting... take considerably less blows to the head than boxers. They don't fight as often, and they take much fewer punches per fight than boxers do. Its not unusual, over 12 rounds for a boxer to get hit over a hundred times... or even hundreds of times if they lose. A few fights a year... over a few years.. this is WAY more punishment than MMA fighters take. Also, its not unusual for MMA fighters to start in the sport much later than boxers.

Boxing is such a developed, scientific sport... that usually to have the experience and skill it takes to succeed as a pro, you have to have a long amateur career, and then fight many pro fights before fighting word class fighters. An MMA fighter can have no background in real fighting, train for a few months.. and fight TV, in front of huge audiences right away. ****, pro wrestlers fight in MMA. In boxing.... boxers go to pro wrestling for a pay day. Which makes more sense?

 

MMA is young and the skill level is a lot lower at the moment, allowing the quality old fighters to still do well. Plus grappling is better suited to aging fighters than striking is as striking is heavily reliant on speed an accuracy, things that fade quickly with age.

 

silly thread cos im not sure where the idea MMA doesnt have shot fighters comes from. some MMA fighters are considered 'shot' as in cro cop and lidell. Shamrock is considered as beyond shot.

I think exactly like boxing its a combination of one fight too many, getting old and losing the top level of certain relied on attribute(s), shattered confidence or being totally exposed.