[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.

[JLUVBABY]

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.

i agree... mma fans are a different type of fight fan all together different from your average boxing fan...

[D-MARV]

Yup. Different type of fan.

Personally, I can't go 1 full minute watching MMA without growing restless. I'm not knocking the sport but that's just not my style.

In boxing, I don't necessarily think that quick KO's are looked upon as a bad thing. Mike Tyson was one of the most watched fighters of all time and many knew that there was a good chance that the fight wouldn't leave the first round.

Take Edwin Valero for example.. He was certainly on his way to being a decent draw simply because his fights ended in knockouts. Most fans that tuned in to his fights knew that his fight would likely be ended early.

This post has been edited by D-MARV: Aug 2 2010, 05:16 PM

[gravytrain]

I think it's because MMA is just more appealing to some people, they want to see the physicality of it rather than the sweet science of boxing.

[Lil-lightsout]

IMO is because boxing fights are generally scheduled for more rounds. Championship for MMA is 5 rounds, while boxing is 12 rounds. Maybe it is just a perception call?

[JonnyBlaze]

I think it's because MMA is just more appealing to some people, they want to see the physicality of it rather than the sweet science of boxing.

Barbarians vs. scientists??

[Box in Hand]

Barbarians vs. scientists??

Yup Yup.

[Snoop]

Probably because they have about another 4 fights that are very good and boxing only has the main event about 90% of the time.

If all 4 of those fights ended in under 90 seconds, would people still think it was worthwhile?

[rusty_trombone]

Because most mma fans are fucking dumb ass rednecks, and apparently add runs in their inbred genetic pools.