Jump to content

The most intriguing UFC question ever. The power of MMA.


Jamhet

Recommended Posts

Imagine, we are able to go back in time to November 12th of 1993, when McNichols Sports Arena in Denver, Colorado, held the first Ultimate Fighting Championship event - UFC 1.

 

You are an MMA fan from 2011. But you will fight that evening.

You're not a fighter though, you have never fought, you don't even any practical experience in any martial art whatsoever. But, you have watched MMA diligently for years, and you are very fit, strong and athletic.

 

Now, your opponent will be a boxer. It's 1993, the boxer thinks boxing is the best martial art ever, he never cared for grappling, nor has he ever seen a submission move, he wasn't in the need of defending a takedown in his life. He walks into the fight thinking that he will box you and KO you, because he's a boxer and nobody can mess with a boxer, duh.

 

Who will win the fight?! Who's more likely to win the fight?

 

Oh, and what is our strategy?

Our strategy is to use the knowledge we possess, the MMA knowledge from 2011 - we will want to take the boxer down with a double leg or a single leg in the first possible occasion - then, passing his guard (if there is any), mounting him and either g'n'pounding him or securing a kimura, an armbar, or a leg lock. We will want to press his chest so he can't breathe, if he rolls on his back - we'll go for a rear naked choke.

We've never done this - but we've watched MMA for years, we know how all the techniques look like and when they are used.

 

So who's more likely to win the fight?

The boxer from 1993, who can only box, or the 2011 guy, who although has had no fighting training, has huge knowledge he brought from 2011 after many years of MMA evolution.

Both competitors are the same in size, strength and conditioning.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Boxer has the odds in his favor.

 

In sports you don't know something well until you've done it thousands of times.

 

It may look easy but it's not and the boxer has combat experience so his nerves will be cool.

 

One little mistake gauging the distance and the novice is going down.

 

If he can manage the takedown thats still no gaurantee that he can keep the boxer down with control he hasn't trained but only seen.

 

Seeing is not knowing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's not MIke Tyson. It's some random' date=' average boxer.[/b']

 

The point is, you cant generalize you know, not every 2011 guy who is an MMA fan can do what other MMA fans can do. Lets say Jamhat can take down the boxer but UFCGOD1 doesnt have the balls to do so. So in this case if UFCGOD will represent the 2011 guy then I say he has no chance, but if its Jemhat I say about 20%

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The point is' date=' [b']you cant generalize[/b] you know, not every 2011 guy who is an MMA fan can do what other MMA fans can do.

LOL

This is a hypothetical question, therefore I will - cause I have to - generalize.

Like I originally said - the 2011 MMA fan is athletic and all that, he's no goof ball.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If I don't shoot well' date=' then still I can go Thales Leites on the floor. The boxer will not go in my guard to GnP me, because he doesn't know how and he wouldn't even think of doing that.[/quote']

 

You aren't Thales Leites. Hell, the guy in this scenario isn't even Brock Lesnar in terms of BJJ.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Like i said before seeing is not knowing. You aren't any more likely to apply anything more than the boxer except the boxer knows how to strike, take a punch and knows what the pressure of a fight is like.

 

Look at it this way you take two kids one has trained in boxing for say 2-3 years. The other plays basketball so he's athletic but his only experience is he's played UFC undisputed and watched a few mma fights.

 

I know who i'd put my money on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Look at it this way you take two kids one has trained in boxing for say 2-3 years. The other plays basketball so he's athletic but his only experience is he's played UFC undisputed and watched a few mma fights.

In this case I would also vote for the boxing kid, becuase kids are stupid, and playing a video game without giving it any thought is not the same as engaging in cerebral analysis of something, as fan of sports do.

 

We're talking about a grown up, intelligent guy, who will have a high awareness of what's going on and what he should do, not some kid who pressed buttons on a Playstation. Someone who when he's watching an MMA fight on tv or youtube can make well informed judgements upon what a fighter should do in a given situation because he's into it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In this case I would also vote for the boxing kid' date=' becuase kids are stupid, and playing a video game without giving it any thought is not the same as engaging in cerebral analysis of something, as fan of sports do.

 

We're talking about a grown up, intelligent guy, who will have a high awareness of what's going on and what he should do, not some kid who pressed buttons on a Playstation. Someone who when he's watching an MMA fight on tv or youtube can make well informed judgements upon what a fighter should do in a given situation because he's into it.[/quote']

 

Sorry but again seeing is not doing. There are alot of fine points to techniques that you can't learn from just seeing. The novice is just as much a novice as the boxer in grappling except the boxer actually has a skill set and has atleast some mental prepardness for combat. There's a big difference between seeing something and getting in there and doing it.

 

I still say the boxer has a huge advantage.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've had this situation a couple of months ago.

I was in a bar and a friend of mine was drunk, there was a rock concert so he was in a crazy mood. He came up to me and tried to wrestle me.

I know for sure that before I started watching MMA I would've reacted in a completely different way then I did here.

The moment he started messing with me, instead of fighting his hands I secured the underhooks ("Underhooks! Underhooks!") to control him and I threw him onto the wall.

Then he leaped towards me and I sprawled ("Sprawl! Sprawl!") and went for a guillotine choke.

Before I knew MMA, I always thought a choke works by squeezing the arteries which cuts off the oxygene, which takes time. But here, I knew I simply needed to put some pressure on his neck, which I did. I stood with my feet spread and applied some force.

 

He surrendered ;)

 

I'm obviously NOT comparing a boxer to a drunk dude. I'm only pointing out, and proving how valuable knowledge is, and what difference it brings.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Imagine' date=' we are able to go back in time to [b']November 12th of 1993[/b], when McNichols Sports Arena in Denver, Colorado, held the first Ultimate Fighting Championship event - UFC 1.

 

You are an MMA fan from 2011. But you will fight that evening.

You're not a fighter though, you have never fought, you don't even any practical experience in any martial art whatsoever. But, you have watched MMA diligently for years, and you are very fit, strong and athletic.

 

Now, your opponent will be a boxer. It's 1993, the boxer thinks boxing is the best martial art ever, he never cared for grappling, nor has he ever seen a submission move, he wasn't in the need of defending a takedown in his life. He walks into the fight thinking that he will box you and KO you, because he's a boxer and nobody can mess with a boxer, duh.

 

Who will win the fight?! Who's more likely to win the fight?

 

Oh, and what is our strategy?

Our strategy is to use the knowledge we possess, the MMA knowledge from 2011 - we will want to take the boxer down with a double leg or a single leg in the first possible occasion - then, passing his guard (if there is any), mounting him and either g'n'pounding him or securing a kimura, an armbar, or a leg lock. We will want to press his chest so he can't breathe, if he rolls on his back - we'll go for a rear naked choke.

We've never done this - but we've watched MMA for years, we know how all the techniques look like and when they are used.

 

So who's more likely to win the fight?

The boxer from 1993, who can only box, or the 2011 guy, who although has had no fighting training, has huge knowledge he brought from 2011 after many years of MMA evolution.

Both competitors are the same in size, strength and conditioning.

 

The boxer dude, there's a big differnce between watching it for years and training it. The fan would know what an armbar or a kimura is based on but he doesn't have the knowledge of those litle details that make it work.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well obviously the drunk dude hasn't been watching enough boxing. lol

 

Seriously though experience is where it's at. Just because i see Micheal Jordan do a fadeaway jumper doesn't mean i can do one. You have to practice to get good at it.

 

I'd still give a very high chance for the boxer to win.

 

Now if the novice trained for 6 months solid and fought an average boxer with some years of experience i might give the novice better odds.

 

but no training at all the odds aren't good imo.

 

Im a very firm believer of you don't know something until you've done it many times especially with something as complex as fighting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've had this situation a couple of months ago.

I was in a bar and a friend of mine was drunk' date=' there was a rock concert so he was in a crazy mood. He came up to me and tried to wrestle me.

I know for sure that before I started watching MMA I would've reacted in a completely different way then I did here.

The moment he started messing with me, instead of fighting his hands I secured the underhooks ("Underhooks! Underhooks!") to control him and I threw him onto the wall.

Then he leaped towards me and I sprawled ("Sprawl! Sprawl!") and went for a guillotine choke.

Before I knew MMA, I always thought a choke works by squeezing the arteries which cuts off the oxygene, which takes time. But here, I knew I simply needed to put some pressure on his neck, which I did. I stood with my feet spread and applied some force.

 

He surrendered ;)

 

I[u']'m obviously NOT comparing a boxer to a drunk dude.[/u] I'm only pointing out, and proving how valuable knowledge is, and what difference it brings.

Underhooks look pretty gay when you're out in public.

I hope you're aware of that lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Boxer has the odds in his favor.

 

In sports you don't know something well until you've done it thousands of times.

 

It may look easy but it's not and the boxer has combat experience so his nerves will be cool.

 

One little mistake gauging the distance and the novice is going down.

 

If he can manage the takedown thats still no gaurantee that he can keep the boxer down with control he hasn't trained but only seen.

 

Seeing is not knowing.

 

Sorry but again seeing is not doing. There are alot of fine points to techniques that you can't learn from just seeing. The novice is just as much a novice as the boxer in grappling except the boxer actually has a skill set and has atleast some mental prepardness for combat. There's a big difference between seeing something and getting in there and doing it.

 

I still say the boxer has a huge advantage.

Well obviously the drunk dude hasn't been watching enough boxing. lol

 

Seriously though experience is where it's at. Just because i see Micheal Jordan do a fadeaway jumper doesn't mean i can do one. You have to practice to get good at it.

 

I'd still give a very high chance for the boxer to win.

 

Now if the novice trained for 6 months solid and fought an average boxer with some years of experience i might give the novice better odds.

 

but no training at all the odds aren't good imo.

 

Im a very firm believer of you don't know something until you've done it many times especially with something as complex as fighting.

_____________

 

+1

(true) experience is the most important factor in this sort of fight

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Both competitors are the same in size' date=' strength and conditioning.[/quote']

 

 

This one aspect makes the situation very interesting. There are many people out there that are fomer high shool/college athletes that are in tremendous shape and can obviously handle the physical challenge of a cage match. So the atheltic 2011 MMA fan using the takedown, GNP, basic submissions...

 

Great post. Most interesting question posted on this forum in a very loooonnng time.

 

Of course you do realize that Royce and Ken Shamrock were present at McNichols Sports Arena on that fateful day in November.

 

So the 2011 MMA Fan would have been screwed even if he did beat the boxer. Personally I would prefer to face Ken. Royce liked to break people's arms back then just for fun.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If the 2011 guy plans on taking it to the ground and subbing the boxer and the boxer thinks the ground game is a joke then the 2011 guy will win because if you go into a fight delusional that something isnt gonna happen like ur going to get taken down and subbed then your probably not ready for an mma fight. Toney was so delusional he thought the ground game was a joke and look what happened.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If the 2011 guy plans on taking it to the ground and subbing the boxer and the boxer thinks the ground game is a joke then the 2011 guy will win because if you go into a fight delusional that something isnt gonna happen like ur going to get taken down and subbed then your probably not ready for an mma fight. Toney was so delusional he thought the ground game was a joke and look what happened.

 

That's a fair point but Toney fought a pro MMA fighter. Big difference.

 

I have a little story as well. When i went to my first bjj class i had watched mma fights and even trained a little with friends with instructional tapes. I thought i knew quite a bit but after that class i was humbled at how much i didn't know and that was against beginners who'd only been there a few months before me.

 

I think there's an idea within some of the mma community that thinks just because they've seen some mma fights and they tackled thier brother and slapped him around a bit they think they can fight. lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's a fair point but Toney fought a pro MMA fighter. Big difference.

 

I have a little story as well. When i went to my first bjj class i had watched mma fights and even trained a little with friends with instructional tapes. I thought i knew quite a bit but after that class i was humbled at how much i didn't know and that was against beginners who'd only been there a few months before me.

 

I think there's an idea within some of the mma community that thinks just because they've seen some mma fights and they tackled thier brother and slapped him around a bit they think they can fight. lol

 

So true lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, you say knowledgeable, so I'm guessing it's not a TapouT wearing know-it-all. If the guy REALLY is knowledgeable, he could try to force a clinch or a takedown, and from there get a sub. It's not like being a boxer is an auto-win or KO. Though I guess it's easier said than done.

 

You don't need serious experience like Royce had in his days, it's not like he was doing the most complex transitions and submissions. It really depends on if you're smart enough to go for something simple and not something like a triangle, which although not the most complex, if you never actually did it before, you might not be choking correctly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's a fair point but Toney fought a pro MMA fighter. Big difference.
But Toney also had half a year of grappling training with King Mo and other fighters to prepare fore takedowns and stuff.

 

When i went to my first bjj class i had watched mma fights and even trained a little with friends with instructional tapes. I thought i knew quite a bit but after that class i was humbled at how much i didn't know and that was against beginners who'd only been there a few months before me.

But the case is opposite to that - you're fighting a boxer, who not only hasn't trained grappling, but he hasn't even seen it, he's not aware of the simplest of submission (like giving up his back etc.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think there's an idea within some of the mma community that thinks just because they've seen some mma fights and they tackled thier brother and slapped him around a bit they think they can fight. lol

Whereas on the other side, you've got people who think "Nah, he won't ever take me to the ground. Grappling is gay, it's useless. I will punch him in the face when he tries to take me down. My fists are rocket fast, I will land 20 uppercuts before he reaches me, and his silly huging and humping will not help him if he can't punch."

 

But we know how such stories end, don't we.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This thread is a little ridiculous. Thinking that watching making wrestling makes you able to get a takedown on someone is like thinking that watching boxing teaches you how to punch correctly. I don't know if you've seen two people who don't know how to wrestle grapple before but it usually involves an awkward stalemate or both parties falling to the floor with neither having favorable position. If you're wondering how all these former all-american wrestlers in the UFC get takedowns so easily its because they've practiced FOR YEARS. I think some people underestimate how hard it is to take down a boxer. The only reason they fall over the second someone touches them like Toney or the guy with one glove is because the other person is extremely confident in their takedown ability. Join a wrestling team or take a BJJ class and see how weird and uncoordinated you feel the first day... now imagine doing that while someone who can actually punch is trying to punch you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know if you've seen two people who don't know how to wrestle grapple before but it usually involves an awkward stalemate or both parties falling to the floor with neither having favorable position.

Exactly! But that works in favour of the 2011 guy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

what people are not seeing is the completely level playing field presented physically and exactly how crap someone is who has never even heard of something.

 

If i had never seen a car before I would have no idea what it's for, let alone drive it.

But if i've seen how someone drove it i could pick it up alot quicker.

 

given the situation and my knowledge not only of mma, but also the boxers lack of grappling awareness, I wouldn't be as hesitant as some other guys here.

 

Sure the boxer's experience standing is undeniable, but it wasn't stated that he's some champ boxer with devastating ko power, he might be a technical boxer who dances around.

 

Not all boxers are guaranteed to shut your lights out with the slightest connection.

 

And considering how it's been proven before that people with absolutely zero grappling experience will tap simply to dominant positions held by his opponent, I would have confidence in the safe grappling route then the one lucky punch route.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Go on youtube and you will find dozens of videos of dumb, scrawny high school kids simulating MMA fights in the gym locker room or in someone's back yard.

 

I am amazed at how good some of them are. Especially when it comes to transitions between clinch, takedown, passing guard. And these are a bunch of pubescant morons who are doing it because they saw it on TV.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...