Mayweather vs De La Hoya.

[YorkieBen]

IF he's lucky enough to get near him. Look at Liddel and Tito Ortiz, Ortiz couldn't take him down, and got quite a beating



It was out before the IFL the IFL hit TV first - typical. However, this one is fronted by Chuck Norris!

No grappling, but that's why I like it, I like seeing a contest, not a street fight - and I know there's skill in submissions and grappling, but it's not for me.

The reason why Chuck beat Tito is because Chuck is a VERY accomplished wrestler. A grappler beats a striker 9/10 unless the striker has trained in grappling.

The WCL is poor kickboxing - no low kicks for a start, I hate shiny pants kickboxing. And no its not MMA, its low standard kickboxing.



I gave it to Floyd by 2 or 3 rounds, if Oscar had kept using his jab he could have knicked it but as per he gassed towards the end.

Oh well, IMHO you have to TAKE the champion's belt, not counter punch your way to it.

I totally disagree with this - a title fight should be judged exactly the same way as a normal fight. The who 'challenger has to take the belt' is a fallacy.

No grappling, but that's why I like it, I like seeing a contest, not a street fight - and I know there's skill in submissions and grappling, but it's not for me.

and if there is grappling involved it isnt a contest, okay then perfect sense.

Imo from a cardio point of view it is what you are used to - I know guys who run half marathons and guys who box and are knackered after grappling for 1 minute, I can barely run and boxing tires me greatly, whereas I can grapple for a long time

[Bazzlad]

The reason why Chuck beat Tito is because Chuck is a VERY accomplished wrestler. A grappler beats a striker 9/10 unless the striker has trained in grappling.

IIRC in that fight Chuck did next to no grappling/wrestling, he used his footwork to dodge Tito's drives at him and counter punched. Either way, he's not a bad striker.

The WCL is poor kickboxing - no low kicks for a start, I hate shiny pants kickboxing. And no its not MMA, its low standard kickboxing.

"Any striking techniques from Boxing, International-Style Kickboxing, and Full-Conact Karate are allowed. In order to maintain the fast pace of the action, clinching, holding or ground fighting (grappling) are prohibited."

Not quite low standard Kickboxing, but I see your point, however the fast pace wins for me. None of this rolling on the floor malarky, I want punches and I want them now.

This is a personal opinion, I know a lot of people like the UFC stuff, but I know a lot of people who think it's just the latest form of white trash entertainment as they call it in the states. (And I realise it started off like that and has worked its way into a real form of MMA but I digress)

I gave it to Floyd by 2 or 3 rounds, if Oscar had kept using his jab he could have knicked it but as per he gassed towards the end.

I'd like to have seen your card to be fair. I feel aggression and forcing the fight slightly gave Oscar the edge, however I can fully see the argument the other way.

I totally disagree with this - a title fight should be judged exactly the same way as a normal fight. The who 'challenger has to take the belt' is a fallacy.

I don't. IMO Mayweather fought the Champion's fight (probably only fight he's used to any more) and Oscar fought the challenger's fight. I still think to get a decision you need to out work the Champ, which Floyd didn't do. That said nor did Hatton agasint Collazo.

Imo from a cardio point of view it is what you are used to - I know guys who run half marathons and guys who box and are knackered after grappling for 1 minute, I can barely run and boxing tires me greatly, whereas I can grapple for a long time

QFT. Can't disagree with you on that one.

[YorkieBen]

The thing is technically in many ways Tito is a better boxer than Chuck - look how many times Tito caught Chuck etc -
the thing is Tito doesnt hit hard enough and Chuck has a monster chin (plus Tito is scared of getting hit) - The reason why Tito stood with Chuck is that he knows he cant take Chuck down - Chuck wrestled division I wrestling I believe which is a very high standard (I have sparred with a division I wrestler from the USA and he had a messed up ACL, so had to use his 'bad' side - and he was still probably the best wrestler in the UK at that point). Chuck and Tito used to train together so Chuck knows his weaknesses

Chuck's stadnup from a boxing standpoint is non-traditional at best - but it works for him because of his physical build

[SiM]

Takedown defense is using wrestling skill... Chucks a much better striker than Tito IMO... Tito's main strength is wrestling (he is famous for his GnP... GnP is boring imo). Chuck's main strength is striking IMO, he will only revert to wrestling when he needs to (altough he might be a great wrestler too)...

Look at their records:
Chuck - 23 Wins (15 KO's, 2 submission, 5 decisions)
Tito - 15 Wins (7 Technical Knockouts, 2 Submissions, 5 Decisions, 1 Knockouts)

Tito only has one KO compared to Chuck's 15 - there should be no arguement who the better striker is

[YorkieBen]

Takedown defense is using wrestling skill... Chucks a much better striker than Tito IMO... Tito's main strength is wrestling (he is famous for his GnP... GnP is boring imo). Chuck's main strength is striking IMO, he will only revert to wrestling when he needs to (altough he might be a great wrestler too)...

Look at their records:
Chuck - 23 Wins (15 KO's, 2 submission, 5 decisions)
Tito - 15 Wins (7 Technical Knockouts, 2 Submissions, 5 Decisions, 1 Knockouts)

Tito only has one KO compared to Chuck's 15 - there should be no arguement who the better striker is

Chuck is a better striker for mma, Tito's boxing fundamentals are technically more sound than Chucks - howerver Chuck hits far harder, has a better chin and doesnt mind taking a a few to land a shot.

Chuck does alot of things wrong technically - his hands are low and wide apart, he wings his punches, his overhead right is akin to a fast bowlers delivery - but as I said it works for him.

[SiM]

Chuck is a better striker for mma, Tito's boxing fundamentals are technically more sound than Chucks - howerver Chuck hits far harder, has a better chin and doesnt mind taking a a few to land a shot.

I agree with you completely.

Chuck does alot of things wrong technically - his hands are low and wide apart, he wings his punches, his overhead right is akin to a fast bowlers delivery - but as I said it works for him.

I wouldn't say its wrong technically, its just a different style. It works well because its unique.

Well if his mma career ends anytime soon, I am sure the US cricket team would be more than happy for him to bowl for them... lol... I don't think any umpire will give decisions against him then, lol