Replies

[Jack 1000]

What I don't understand is,

How come if a boxing match ends in say 90 seconds, people think they got ripped off. But if an MMA fight ends in 90 seconds, many people think that's amazing? I have seen some of these MMA events that are over at the drop of a hat, and so many people think that's great, even if they paid $50 for it. But for boxing, you pay $50 for a PPV that ends in 90 seconds, people think that sucks.

Personally, for boxing, I like the fighter to get some rounds in. I love knockouts but I don't want the fights to be over too quickly. I would like 3 rounds of action or more for my money in most cases. And of course, if a fight is a two-sided 12 round war, or in the earlier years of 15 rounds, what MMA purist would not love to see something like that!? Now, the MMA contests even at non-title duration are too short. Only 3 rounds for non-title fights? You just get into a fight, and its over.

The 5-round title matches are a little better. But I like the longer distance durations that boxing provides. It demonstrates the importance of endurance and stamina in conditioning. MMA guys don't have to have that long of an endurance clip because their fights are so much shorter. Longer distances, are the true measuring sticks of boxing champions. And MMA, no matter what spin you put on it, can't say that.

I'd like to hear how other people feel about this.

Jack

[Box in Hand]

MMA fans have a gladiator mentality where they want blood immediately which is why they always boo technical matches. Most boxing fans love the little nuiances such as slipping punches, the beauty of a jab, body attack, etc. I for one loved the Gatti Ward trilogy for its blood and guts but I can watch Hopkins dismatle Trinidad any day of the week.