So the daft Mayweather v Ronda Rousey debate! (Spoiler)

Finn
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 5509
Joined: 07 May 2009, 15:56

Re: So the daft Mayweather v Ronda Rousey debate! (Spoiler)

Post by Finn »

Tarkus wrote:
Finn wrote: I can't believed you've watched the fight and still believe that Rouseys tactics were to stay on her feet and box with a boxer even when she was clearly losing. She got dicked and couldn't turn it into her fight it's as simple as.
Whole world believes that. Rousey and her couches are taken apart on MMA forums right as we speak for trying to box. Yes she had couple of attempts and Holms managed to get out as I said, courtesy to her wrestling training. Most of the time Rousey was punching rather then trying to take her down.
The whole world doesn't believe it because I don't believe it and I've been watching and taking part in fights for years. I'd take my own judgement over and army of arm chair internet posters any day of the week. If she could have wrestled she would have wrestled, she was getting hammered why would she continue with the same tactics into the second round out of choice? Why would her team even go in with the tactic of boxing with a several time female world boxing champion?
Stevieb8006
Heavyweight
Heavyweight

Re: So the daft Mayweather v Ronda Rousey debate! (Spoiler)

Post by Stevieb8006 »

Now I don't know mma well enough, but it looked to me that it wasnt even a case of RR "boxing against a boxer" as lots have said. Holm just wouldn't let Ronda fight her fight. HHs footwork and oblique kicks wouldn't let her get close for a takedown, and on the few occasions she attempted to grapple HH seemed to have the answer anyway.i thought that a) Holms rightfully showed Rondas skills no respect, and b) she just seems the superior physical specimen. That was my take, but like I say, I don't know much about the sport.

I would be interested if anyone could tell me, is this the first time a world class, not shot boxer in their prime has attempted mma? I know mercer and toned tried it when they were fogeys.
palooka
Light Heavyweight
Posts: 15698
Joined: 20 Jan 2012, 15:31

Re: So the daft Mayweather v Ronda Rousey debate! (Spoiler)

Post by palooka »

Tarkus wrote:
palooka wrote: Most high level amateur boxers have years invested in the sport and enjoy what they do - podium level boxers in the UK are on a decent salary and travel the world entering international competitions - they love what they do, its why they are so good at it.
There are lots of pretty good pro boxers that barely make living that would take those armatures apart.
palooka wrote:We could also turn it around and ask why an MMA champion doesn't just concentrate on striking and become a world champion boxer when the rewards for elite boxers are in the millions.

Most mma fighters do not have great striking skills and neither do most know how to defend against punches or ride a punch. The average MMA fighter who went to a pro gym in the US or UK to develop their punches would get shown some very hard lessons.
Who said that MMA fighters are a great punchers or have a chance in boxing. The arguement is that you dont need great punching skills in MMA.
palooka wrote:The wrestlers that have beaten boxers in the UFC have been elite level grapplers against either sub standard strikers or past it pros. If it goes that an elite wrestler will defeat a so so boxer is it difficult to imagine an elite boxer beating a so so grappler?
So then your logic is that all good boxers are happy and content to box and dont want MMA mllions while all wrestlers are poor bastards have no other options then to go to MMA.

For your information most of the top MMA fighters with judo background are not the top judokas at all.
Once a boxer has turned pro they can't go back amateur, for the most part most good pro boxers are older than their amateur counterparts, have more experience and are trained to box 10 or more rounds. Many people have contended that amateur boxing and pro boxing are very different sports indeed.

To be honest, Tarkus it seems as though a good natured debate has gone into a situation where you are either teaching me something I don't know or are putting me straight - I'd have thought that there were more big money boxers than big money MMA fighters and I've said nothing whatsoever about 'poor wrestlers' or judokas. It doesn't mean that much to me to get into a bad tempered spat to be honest.
Tarkus
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 2859
Joined: 04 Jul 2010, 08:50

Re: So the daft Mayweather v Ronda Rousey debate! (Spoiler)

Post by Tarkus »

Finn wrote: The whole world doesn't believe it because I don't believe it and I've been watching and taking part in fights for years. I'd take my own judgement over and army of arm chair internet posters any day of the week.
I did not say you should believe hat others believe. I said you should now be surprise I have opinion when whole world has the same opinion. And by the whole world I obviously meant all except you. Pay attention, it aint difficult.
Finn wrote:If she could have wrestled she would have wrestled, she was getting hammered why would she continue with the same tactics into the second round out of choice? Why would her team even go in with the tactic of boxing with a several time female world boxing champion?
Why do boxers do stupid things all the time. They had a game plan and a point to prove so they stack to it.
Counter-puncher
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 39141
Joined: 20 May 2008, 11:41

Re: So the daft Mayweather v Ronda Rousey debate! (Spoiler)

Post by Counter-puncher »

Stevieb8006 wrote:Now I don't know mma well enough, but it looked to me that it wasnt even a case of RR "boxing against a boxer" as lots have said.

Holm just wouldn't let Ronda fight her fight.

HHs footwork and oblique kicks wouldn't let her get close for a takedown, and on the few occasions she attempted to grapple HH seemed to have the answer anyway.i thought that a) Holms rightfully showed Rondas skills no respect, and b) she just seems the superior physical specimen. That was my take, but like I say, I don't know much about the sport
.

X2, like you I'm no mma expert but that's how it looked to me. It just looked like rr could never find the way to make the fight transition to grappling and holms footwork and quick strikes were the major part of it: Had she got trapped against the cage for a minute at a time it would have been different id guess
Stevieb8006
Heavyweight
Heavyweight

Re: So the daft Mayweather v Ronda Rousey debate! (Spoiler)

Post by Stevieb8006 »

Counter-puncher wrote:
Stevieb8006 wrote:Now I don't know mma well enough, but it looked to me that it wasnt even a case of RR "boxing against a boxer" as lots have said.

Holm just wouldn't let Ronda fight her fight.

HHs footwork and oblique kicks wouldn't let her get close for a takedown, and on the few occasions she attempted to grapple HH seemed to have the answer anyway.i thought that a) Holms rightfully showed Rondas skills no respect, and b) she just seems the superior physical specimen. That was my take, but like I say, I don't know much about the sport
.

X2, like you I'm no mma expert but that's how it looked to me. It just looked like rr could never find the way to make the fight transition to grappling and holms footwork and quick strikes were the major part of it: Had she got trapped against the cage for a minute at a time it would have been different id guess
Totally. I was watching and kind of waiting for a moment that never came. Thinking to myself, when this gets close up it will be a different fight. But credit to Holms, she handled it all.

But can anyone answer my question. Is Holms the first young/not shot/world class boxer to do mma? (Not to say anything daft like Boxings superior, I think this fight showed PEOPLE win fights, not styles)
Tarkus
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 2859
Joined: 04 Jul 2010, 08:50

Re: So the daft Mayweather v Ronda Rousey debate! (Spoiler)

Post by Tarkus »

palooka wrote:To be honest, Tarkus it seems as though a good natured debate has gone into a situation where you are either teaching me something I don't know or are putting me straight - I'd have thought that there were more big money boxers than big money MMA fighters and I've said nothing whatsoever about 'poor wrestlers' or judokas. It doesn't mean that much to me to get into a bad tempered spat to be honest.
I am trying to follow your logic. It hardly my fault if it doesnt seem to hold up to the scrutiny.

Here again look what you are writing:
palooka wrote: Once a boxer has turned pro they can't go back amateur, for the most part most good pro boxers are older than their amateur counterparts, have more experience and are trained to box 10 or more rounds. Many people have contended that amateur boxing and pro boxing are very different sports indeed.
I told you that lot of struggling pro boxers have a quality comparable to amateurs. If as you suggested those amateurs would destroy this and that then why don these guys go to MMA? And you are telling me pro boxers can go back to amateurs. I have no clue what that has to do with anything. And now you are blaming me for bad tempered spat. Honestly.


Theres is some kind of boxer chauvinism going on here. Although what would you expect from a boxing forum. :OhYes:
Coco
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 28521
Joined: 08 May 2007, 05:42

Re: So the daft Mayweather v Ronda Rousey debate! (Spoiler)

Post by Coco »

It was unfair to put Rousey in against the likes of Holm, Holm has probably been pound 4 pound the best in the world in boxing, albeit 10 years ago. Yes Rousey medaled in judo but has since beat a selection of failed porn stars.
palooka
Light Heavyweight
Posts: 15698
Joined: 20 Jan 2012, 15:31

Re: So the daft Mayweather v Ronda Rousey debate! (Spoiler)

Post by palooka »

I imagine that a good amateur is happy within his sport, as I said earlier, it takes a lot of time and effort to become proficient at boxing, why when they are getting results and recognition within their sport would they turn to another, particularly when they would lose their saleries, expenses and amateur status to fight as professionals?

Is there so much money in MMA? How many fighters make a good living within the sport?

My contention was and is that a good amateur boxer has striking skills, power and speed and technique over the vast majority of MMA fighters. Rufus said he thought that Ronda would be able to take anytbing Floyd Mayweather could throw at her - I think that he's wrong. A trained hitter hits harder than a trained grappler.
liamlion
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 1956
Joined: 06 Jan 2005, 09:56

Re: So the daft Mayweather v Ronda Rousey debate! (Spoiler)

Post by liamlion »

The rematch should be cracking if this defeat doesnt finish Rousey mentally.

Personally, i think MMA is the tougher sport.
Finn
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 5509
Joined: 07 May 2009, 15:56

Re: So the daft Mayweather v Ronda Rousey debate! (Spoiler)

Post by Finn »

Tarkus wrote:
Finn wrote: The whole world doesn't believe it because I don't believe it and I've been watching and taking part in fights for years. I'd take my own judgement over and army of arm chair internet posters any day of the week.
I did not say you should believe hat others believe. I said you should now be surprise I have opinion when whole world has the same opinion. And by the whole world I obviously meant all except you. Pay attention, it aint difficult.
Finn wrote:If she could have wrestled she would have wrestled, she was getting hammered why would she continue with the same tactics into the second round out of choice? Why would her team even go in with the tactic of boxing with a several time female world boxing champion?
Why do boxers do stupid things all the time. They had a game plan and a point to prove so they stack to it.
Well several posters on here seem to think it was ronda failing to make it into her fight.

Thousands of fans can believe she for some reason decided to try and box the world boxing champion when her main discipline is judo, you can believe it, her team may even come out and say that is the case to save face.

BUT I don't believe it because I watched the fight and it didn't look like that to me and I've watched thousands of fights.

I could half believe that her plan A was to try and box to see how it went, but if her team didn't have a plan B to switch to grappling if boxing failed then I'm a monkey's uncle.

Yes boxers get tactics wrong all the time, so do mma fighters but that's a lot different to say Roysten Gracie back in the day going into the octagon against a world boxing champion, deciding to box them, getting hammered for a round and then thinking "I'm going to stick to boxing despite being the UFCs greatest jujitsu artist". It's completely implausible.
liamlion
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 1956
Joined: 06 Jan 2005, 09:56

Re: So the daft Mayweather v Ronda Rousey debate! (Spoiler)

Post by liamlion »

I think a big part of Rousey's problem and downfall last night was that she believed her own hype and thought she could just walk through Holm as she has done against all her other opponents.
Tarkus
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 2859
Joined: 04 Jul 2010, 08:50

Re: So the daft Mayweather v Ronda Rousey debate! (Spoiler)

Post by Tarkus »

Interesting that someone who claims to be a fighter and have seen million fights have not heard about the pride. Numerous times we have seen fighters doing absolutely stupid things and exactly the opposite to what their coaches are telling them. And yes, you can have plan A, B, C and D, but everybody has a plan until they get punched in the mouth.
Ricky_
Middleweight
Posts: 8896
Joined: 16 Oct 2013, 08:03

Re: So the daft Mayweather v Ronda Rousey debate! (Spoiler)

Post by Ricky_ »

HomicideHenry wrote:The difference is..... Holly Holm knows how to wrestle and kickbox.... Mayweather's just a man who knows how to box.... I don't think he could pull it off, even though she lost last night. One discipline isn't going to defeat a person who knows multiple ones.

For the last 10 years Floyd's grappling skills have been more impressive than his striking.
Finn
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 5509
Joined: 07 May 2009, 15:56

Re: So the daft Mayweather v Ronda Rousey debate! (Spoiler)

Post by Finn »

Tarkus wrote:Interesting that someone who claims to be a fighter and have seen million fights have not heard about the pride. Numerous times we have seen fighters doing absolutely stupid things and exactly the opposite to what their coaches are telling them. And yes, you can have plan A, B, C and D, but everybody has a plan until they get punched in the mouth.
I don't claim, I have been a fighter and I'm a huge fight fan. What you are trying to say is that out of pride a judo expert decided to box with a world boxing champion and despite getting hammered and clearly losing the fight, well before the knockout came, deliberately decided not to use any judo what so ever??

Now what do you think is more likely that scenario? or my scenario where she just couldn't deal with the striking of holm so therefore failed to bring her main discipline into the fight?
Boxerbeetle
Light Heavyweight
Posts: 32972
Joined: 19 Sep 2011, 10:59

Re: So the daft Mayweather v Ronda Rousey debate! (Spoiler)

Post by Boxerbeetle »

Ricky_ wrote:
HomicideHenry wrote:The difference is..... Holly Holm knows how to wrestle and kickbox.... Mayweather's just a man who knows how to box.... I don't think he could pull it off, even though she lost last night. One discipline isn't going to defeat a person who knows multiple ones.
For the last 10 years Floyd's grappling skills have been more impressive than his striking.
:lol:
palooka
Light Heavyweight
Posts: 15698
Joined: 20 Jan 2012, 15:31

Re: So the daft Mayweather v Ronda Rousey debate! (Spoiler)

Post by palooka »

Ricky_ wrote:
HomicideHenry wrote:The difference is..... Holly Holm knows how to wrestle and kickbox.... Mayweather's just a man who knows how to box.... I don't think he could pull it off, even though she lost last night. One discipline isn't going to defeat a person who knows multiple ones.

A master of one discipline should beat a Jack of many styles. Mayweather will have an enormous edge in power and speed at every punching distance, as soon as someone was in range he would strike and against someone with pretty rudimentary skills he would hit very hard indeed.
banjo
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 26471
Joined: 20 Nov 2007, 03:17

Re: So the daft Mayweather v Ronda Rousey debate! (Spoiler)

Post by banjo »

HomicideHenry wrote:The difference is..... Holly Holm knows how to wrestle and kickbox.... Mayweather's just a man who knows how to box.... I don't think he could pull it off, even though she lost last night. One discipline isn't going to defeat a person who knows multiple ones.
Floyd Mayweather is an athlete, a male athlete is superior to a female athlete.
Tarkus
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 2859
Joined: 04 Jul 2010, 08:50

Re: So the daft Mayweather v Ronda Rousey debate! (Spoiler)

Post by Tarkus »

Rousey is not just a judo expert. I have written already what you should already known anyway, as an MMA fan, she is training under the coach that emphases striking. She was moving towards punching and away from wrestling lately, like in her last fight she relied mostly on boxing. She started boxing here as well, she had some success but was somewhat outboxed by Holm in the beginning. But she was too proud to entirely abandon it especially that Holm was in retreat and Rouse perhaps thought she had a strength advantage, even later when it was getting dire. Also I repeat one last time, she did try grappling when opportunity presented itself but Holm used her wrestling skills to get out of it, which no pure boxer would have been able to do. She also kicked very well. It is obvious Rousey did not try to solely grapple, she was constantly punching. Thats not what you do when you want to grapple, You bend down, block incoming shots and try to grab legs or waist. Once again watch Tonney fight. That what wrestler does when he want to avoid punching.
palooka
Light Heavyweight
Posts: 15698
Joined: 20 Jan 2012, 15:31

Re: So the daft Mayweather v Ronda Rousey debate! (Spoiler)

Post by palooka »

I'm a beginner at MMA, been training about a year. We've been shown to slip inside a jab and go to a single leg take down or go to a throw from pummel. I understand that is a very basic way of getting from punching range to grapple and there will be many more. I know how easy it is to slip a punch when practising technique and how very difficult it is in practice and if the person throwing punches is skilled it is very very difficult to get to a take down position.
Finn
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 5509
Joined: 07 May 2009, 15:56

Re: So the daft Mayweather v Ronda Rousey debate! (Spoiler)

Post by Finn »

Tarkus wrote:Rousey is not just a judo expert. I have written already what you should already known anyway, as an MMA fan, she is training under the coach that emphases striking. She was moving towards punching and away from wrestling lately, like in her last fight she relied mostly on boxing. She started boxing here as well, she had some success but was somewhat outboxed by Holm in the beginning. But she was too proud to entirely abandon it especially that Holm was in retreat and Rouse perhaps thought she had a strength advantage, even later when it was getting dire. Also I repeat one last time, she did try grappling when opportunity presented itself but Holm used her wrestling skills to get out of it, which no pure boxer would have been able to do. She also kicked very well. It is obvious Rousey did not try to solely grapple, she was constantly punching. Thats not what you do when you want to grapple, You bend down, block incoming shots and try to grab legs or waist. Once again watch Tonney fight. That what wrestler does when he want to avoid punching.
Tarkus you are clutching strawers buddy. As I've already said in my posts Holms only used very rudimental wrestling it was no more than a person in a fight would do instinctively. She just effectively man handled ronda.

I don't need to watch the toney fight to know how to do a take down. The debate isn't can randy couture All American wrestling elite and UFC legend take down a shot middle weight boxer that's bulked up to heavy weight with dodgy knees and no footwork James toney. The debate is could ronda rousey a judo expert take down an in shape a top level female boxing champion in holm. Holm was never going to stand stationary and let ronda grab her leading leg, she just moved out of range when she wasn't striking And then used her footwork to dart in and out of range. Short of crawling along the floor ronda had no choice but to stand upright and try and close distance in order to use her grappling, but she couldn't do that.

I'm not saying a grappler can't take down a boxer I'm saying ronda rousey wasn't and isn't good enough to take down a top level boxer.
palooka
Light Heavyweight
Posts: 15698
Joined: 20 Jan 2012, 15:31

Re: So the daft Mayweather v Ronda Rousey debate! (Spoiler)

Post by palooka »

Holm hit Ronda with some straight left hands straight into her chin, I agree that Holm didn't need much grappling skill to avoid the ground game. Holm really just pushed Ronda off and backed away.
Finn
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 5509
Joined: 07 May 2009, 15:56

Re: So the daft Mayweather v Ronda Rousey debate! (Spoiler)

Post by Finn »

palooka wrote:I'm a beginner at MMA, been training about a year. We've been shown to slip inside a jab and go to a single leg take down or go to a throw from pummel. I understand that is a very basic way of getting from punching range to grapple and there will be many more. I know how easy it is to slip a punch when practising technique and how very difficult it is in practice and if the person throwing punches is skilled it is very very difficult to get to a take down position.
In practice I always found it easiest to cover up and close the distance between me and my opponent, taking the shots on the guard, and either go for a Muay Thai clinch pulling their head down for a standard guillotine or just drop low to single or double leg them. I prefer the guillotine because if they are any good at sagging you can end up flat on your face while they jump on your back and go for a rear choke which is my favourite counter move.

Where do you train mate?
Last edited by Finn on 15 Nov 2015, 15:33, edited 1 time in total.
crusader
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 16875
Joined: 19 Jan 2009, 20:14

Re: So the daft Mayweather v Ronda Rousey debate! (Spoiler)

Post by crusader »

Yep, the left hands were getting through easily and it was a left hand that staggered Rousey and set up the KO. Holm is a far better striker than anyone Rousey has faced (the striking ability of her opponents has been comparatively terrible--they look like basic bar room brawlers) and it showed.

I was happy to see the result after all the absurd hype about Rousey being some type of indomitable monster.
palooka
Light Heavyweight
Posts: 15698
Joined: 20 Jan 2012, 15:31

Re: So the daft Mayweather v Ronda Rousey debate! (Spoiler)

Post by palooka »

Finn wrote:
palooka wrote:I'm a beginner at MMA, been training about a year. We've been shown to slip inside a jab and go to a single leg take down or go to a throw from pummel. I understand that is a very basic way of getting from punching range to grapple and there will be many more. I know how easy it is to slip a punch when practising technique and how very difficult it is in practice and if the person throwing punches is skilled it is very very difficult to get to a take down position.
In practice I always found it easiest to cover up and close the distance between me and my opponent, taking the shots on the guard, and either go for a Muay Thai clinch pulling their head down for a standard guillotine or just drop low to single or double leg them. I prefer the guillotine because if they are any good at sagging you can end up flat on your face while they jump on your back and go for a rear choke which is my favourite counter move.

Where do you train mate?
Mick Shores Martial Arts Academy in Doncaster. My son's been training for a few years now and I started in the adults class so when he gets there we'll have something in common and I wanted him to have a positive view of me.

I'm not a natural, I do a private half hour of escrima then the mma, he teaches a few leg and foot locks from catch wrestling, he trained under Larry Hartwell. I do a Brazilian Jiu Jitsu class as well but I'm not getting any better at that - I'm going to either do 2 Jiu Jitsu classes a week or stop altogether, either improve or drop it.

Where are you at, Finn?
Post Reply