Pavlik-taylor

[Poppy_Hillis 11]

Anyone see this fight? Fights like these make me wonder why people think UFC is so great in comparison. Can't wait for the rematch.

[bdc30 0]

Because for every 1 decent boxing match, there are 25 crap ones. Ufc FTW!If there are 2 or 3 "big" fights that deliver in a calendar year, that's considered a banner year for boxing. The UFC has 15-20 great fights a year.

[Poppy_Hillis 11]

Because for every 1 decent boxing match, there are 25 crap ones. Ufc FTW!If there are 2 or 3 "big" fights that deliver in a calendar year, that's considered a banner year for boxing. The UFC has 15-20 great fights a year.

Great fights in UFC aren't nearly what great fights are in boxing.

[BigLebowski 0]

I have to admit I haven't seen a boxing match that I enjoyed in several years. The UFC has won me over not so much for exciting fights, but for the technical superiority it holds over boxing. I don't care what anyone says, boxing is a one trick pony. You only need the tools for boxing. In the UFC you need multiple tools to be at the top of the food chain and stay there. That being said, I somehow caught a prefight show earlier this week and after seeing Pavlik's history this fight piqued my interest. I DVR'd it and watched 6 rounds earlier today before I had to leave. I thought Pavlik showed a SHEET-TON of heart in the 2nd round and was winning the fight through 6 with a solid jab and ring control. I got back this evening and just watched the 7th. I can't say that I was surprised by the outcome after seeing the first 6 rounds. I thoroughly enjoyed this fight and if boxing could produce more like it I think they would win some fans back.I personally don't like to see anyone constantly getting hit in the head even if it is with big gloves.

Great fights in UFC aren't nearly what great fights are in boxing.

I disagree with this. If you thought this fight was that good I could give you about 10 in the UFC this year alone that rivals it.

[Poppy_Hillis 11]

I have to admit I haven't seen a boxing match that I enjoyed in several years. The UFC has won me over not so much for exciting fights, but for the technical superiority it holds over boxing. I don't care what anyone says, boxing is a one trick pony. You only need the tools for boxing. In the UFC you need multiple tools to be at the top of the food chain and stay there. That being said, I somehow caught a prefight show earlier this week and after seeing Pavlik's history this fight piqued my interest. I DVR'd it and watched 6 rounds earlier today before I had to leave. I thought Pavlik showed a SHEET-TON of heart in the 2nd round and was winning the fight through 6 with a solid jab and ring control. I got back this evening and just watched the 7th. I can't say that I was surprised by the outcome after seeing the first 6 rounds. I thoroughly enjoyed this fight and if boxing could produce more like it I think they would win some fans back.I personally don't like to see anyone constantly getting hit in the head even if it is with big gloves.I disagree with this. If you thought this fight was that good I could give you about 10 in the UFC this year alone that rivals it.

I've seen some of the great UFC fights and find it pretty boring. I have many issues with the UFC that I won't get into here, but I will say don't be fooled into believing UFC holds technical superiority over boxing because there's seemingly more aspects to the fights.Boxing is to UFC as F1 is to Nascar for all of the same reasons, and it's too bad but it's only in the United States so I guess it's alright.

[bdc30 0]

Boxing is to UFC as F1 is to Nascar

You're delusional. F1 sucks even harder than boxing. I'm no nascar fan either, but I'd watch it any day over F1. That's almost a cure for insomnia.

[Poppy_Hillis 11]

You're delusional. F1 sucks even harder than boxing. I'm no nascar fan either, but I'd watch it any day over F1. That's almost a cure for insomnia.

I don't care about any car racing either, but the reason Nascar and UFC are more popular than their counterparts only in North America are for the same reasons.

[BigLebowski 0]

I don't care about any car racing either, but the reason Nascar and UFC are more popular than their counterparts only in North America are for the same reasons.

You calling me a redneck? WTF??J/KPoppy, you sound like a boxing purist. Nothing wrong with that at all, but it is tough to argue for the UFC with one.

[Poppy_Hillis 11]

You calling me a redneck? WTF??J/KPoppy, you sound like a boxing purist. Nothing wrong with that at all, but it is tough to argue for the UFC with one.

Haha, no I wasn't necessarily calling you one. I guess I just don't see what everyone likes about UFC. I have a friend who is really into it, so I've watched some fights and I just find it really boring. This may seem like a dumb argument, but I think it works. If you put any government trained field agent in a UFC fight they win every time, but put that same agent in a ring with a boxer and they'll lose every time for the same reason they won't be able to compete on a football field per se. Boxing is a sport and an art in and of itself, while UFC is just fighting with a very low talent pool.

[BigLebowski 0]

If you put any government trained field agent in a UFC fight they win every time, but put that same agent in a ring with a boxer and they'll lose every time

That's actually a great idea. I would def get the PPV for this. All proceeds benefit the families of soldiers that died in action.Hopefully our guys are better trained than the Croats or Russians. They haven't been faring so well in the UFC.

[bdc30 0]

The statement that a "field agent" would own a UFC fighter is absurd. It would be ugly. The guys in the UFC train each and every day on a multitude of tactics, both for ground and standup fighting. The people in law enforcement DO have training, yes, but not nearly enough to overcome a UFC fighter. Plus, their training also allows them their use of force options (pepper spray, batons, etc). Any *ANY* UFC fighter would own 95% of law enforcement agents.

[BigLebowski 0]

I think Poppy was talking more along the line of Jason Bourne instead of Carey Mahoney.

[Poppy_Hillis 11]

The statement that a "field agent" would own a UFC fighter is absurd. It would be ugly. The guys in the UFC train each and every day on a multitude of tactics, both for ground and standup fighting. The people in law enforcement DO have training, yes, but not nearly enough to overcome a UFC fighter. Plus, their training also allows them their use of force options (pepper spray, batons, etc). Any *ANY* UFC fighter would own 95% of law enforcement agents.

I didn't say anything about law enforcement. I of course would take UFC fighters against them.

[Chris E 0]

The statement that a "field agent" would own a UFC fighter is absurd. It would be ugly.

Agreed, that was a stupid thing to say. I would call myself a fight fan, and I don't understand how you can like one and not the other. Ive only fairly recently started getting into boxing and I can appreciate the technique and talent of some of the fighters, and in the same way a guy off the street is not going to be able to master all the techniques required to be a good MMA fighter. To anyone is bored by UFC fights watch the LW division and keep your eye on guys like Spencer Fisher and Frankie Edgar.As for Pavlik vs Taylor, that has to be one of the best fights I have ever seen. Pavlik is a warrior and he poses a threat to anyone in the division.

[Jennings7 0]

The sports are completely different. Boxing is much like poker, and I would say the UFC is a hell of a lot like Blackjack. In boxing, you have to be patient and skilled while waiting to capitalize on your opponents mistakes. If you are to aggressive, you will get knocked out when you leave yourself open, but if you are to patient/passive, you will lose round by round, much like getting blinded out. UFC is like blackjack because if you know the numbers and know the game, you will win sometimes but are guaranteed to lose eventually. Look at Chuck Lidell, everyone wanted to hype him as being the greatest thing since sliced bread, but it came back to bite him. He eventually started losing. All the best UFC fighters lose much more often than the best boxing fighters, and I think thats indicative of the differing level in skill. A great boxer is going to be something like 40-5 or 50-7 at the end of his career. In the UFC, you are going to see a lot of records like 16-8 and 12-5 or 20-10. I think this shows that the ratio of skill and luck are much closer than in boxing. If you are a great boxer, skill overwhelms luck 9 out of 10 times. I don't think you can say that about UFC. When I watch the UFC, I see 2 bad asses who inevitably wrestle each other to the ground and pummel each other with elbows until its over, well at least a lot of the time. In boxing I see almost 100% skill. Just my 2 cents, I could be way off though, who knows. In the interest of full disclosure, I am more of a boxing fan, so my view could be slightly bias.

[Poppy_Hillis 11]

When I watch the UFC, I see 2 bad asses who inevitably wrestle each other to the ground and pummel each other with elbows until its over, well at least a lot of the time. In boxing I see almost 100% skill. Just my 2 cents

You said it much better than I did, especially ^^^.

[BigLebowski 0]

Alright, I am going to pick this one apart. Not because I love the UFC that much or because I dislike boxing...I just like a good argument.

The sports are completely different. Boxing is much like poker, and I would say the UFC is a hell of a lot like Blackjack. In boxing, you have to be patient and skilled while waiting to capitalize on your opponents mistakes. If you are to aggressive, you will get knocked out when you leave yourself open, but if you are to patient/passive, you will lose round by round, much like getting blinded out. UFC is like blackjack because if you know the numbers and know the game, you will win sometimes but are guaranteed to lose eventually.

Can we agree the UFC is like a turbo SNG? Only 3 rounds which leaves no time to be passive. I disagree with the making a mistake comment as well. Mistakes cost you much more in the UFC than they do in boxing. To my knowledge there are no undefeated boxers so aren't they all guaranteed to lose eventually as well?

Look at Chuck Lidell, everyone wanted to hype him as being the greatest thing since sliced bread, but it came back to bite him. He eventually started losing. All the best UFC fighters lose much more often than the best boxing fighters, and I think thats indicative of the differing level in skill.

Chuck lost for the same reason Mike Tyson lost to Buster Douglas. Too much partying. It had nothing to do with the hype. Chuck has always been Chuck even before the UFC got big. Now it's just with prettier ladies and in nicer clubs. Let's at least give Chuck a little more credit than Tyson for actually losing to an A+ fighter and a B+ fighter. FWIW, I think Chuck is done. Guys are too good now for him to continue the partying and fighting.

A great boxer is going to be something like 40-5 or 50-7 at the end of his career. In the UFC, you are going to see a lot of records like 16-8 and 12-5 or 20-10. I think this shows that the ratio of skill and luck are much closer than in boxing. If you are a great boxer, skill overwhelms luck 9 out of 10 times.

Boxing has for as long as I can remember, especially in the HW division, been giving their champs handpicked cupcake opponents. Of course they are going to be able to go years without losing. They only fight every other year it seems like. By the time they face someone that doesn't look and fight like Steve Buschemi they are 29-0!The UFC is still growing out of infancy. Many of the fighters do not have "true" historical MMA records and the ability level is fairly even right now. The UFC has enough good fighters now that they aren't going to give any more cupcake matches. If you want to be a good fighter you will have to be facing someone solid EVERY single time you fight. Make a mistake and you will lose.

I don't think you can say that about UFC. When I watch the UFC, I see 2 bad asses who inevitably wrestle each other to the ground and pummel each other with elbows until its over, well at least a lot of the time. In boxing I see almost 100% skill. Just my 2 cents, I could be way off though, who knows.

Touche....when I watch boxing all I see is two guys who can't put a couple of sentences together continually beating each other in the head...again and again and again and again and again...and once more for good measure. There are very few intelligent boxers out there.

[fckthis 0]

They are different combat sports, and both can be boring. The fans love blood, guts and KOs. And which ever sport start delivering those is the most popular. Boxing was in a slump since 2002. No big names, no big fights, no big anything. All of a sudden, this year we're going to possibly have two super fights, with great matchups down the road too. You have two of the best super middleweights fighting in November, both unbeaten. You have the best fighter in the sport taking on a the british icon, Ricky Hatton, again both unbeaten. And you have Shane Mosley fighting Miguel Cotto, two sluggers, one up and coming, and the other a shoe in for the HOF, with the winner getting a chance at a possible showdown with the P4P king, Floyd Mayweather.I think what the UFC has going for them, is great matchups, mainly due to one governing faction, and basically one matchmaker, Dana White. The best vs the best, on a consistent basis. But it seems when titles are on the line, fighters start to shy away from the brute force and instead try and take it to the ground, which compares to clinching in boxing.

[Jennings7 0]

They are different combat sports, and both can be boring. The fans love blood, guts and KOs. And which ever sport start delivering those is the most popular. Boxing was in a slump since 2002. No big names, no big fights, no big anything. All of a sudden, this year we're going to possibly have two super fights, with great matchups down the road too. You have two of the best super middleweights fighting in November, both unbeaten. You have the best fighter in the sport taking on a the british icon, Ricky Hatton, again both unbeaten. And you have Shane Mosley fighting Miguel Cotto, two sluggers, one up and coming, and the other a shoe in for the HOF, with the winner getting a chance at a possible showdown with the P4P king, Floyd Mayweather.I think what the UFC has going for them, is great matchups, mainly due to one governing faction, and basically one matchmaker, Dana White. The best vs the best, on a consistent basis. But it seems when titles are on the line, fighters start to shy away from the brute force and instead try and take it to the ground, which compares to clinching in boxing.

Good points for sure. Although I'm looking forward to the Hatton fight, I think Mosley vs. Cotto will be more entertaining.

[fckthis 0]

Good points for sure. Although I'm looking forward to the Hatton fight, I think Mosley vs. Cotto will be more entertaining.

I think it'll be FOTY with Cotto getting stopped late.

[Jennings7 0]

I think it'll be FOTY with Cotto getting stopped late.

Yeah that is probably a good assessment, I tend to agree.

[BigLebowski 0]

They are different combat sports, and both can be boring. The fans love blood, guts and KOs. And which ever sport start delivering those is the most popular. Boxing was in a slump since 2002. No big names, no big fights, no big anything. All of a sudden, this year we're going to possibly have two super fights, with great matchups down the road too. You have two of the best super middleweights fighting in November, both unbeaten. You have the best fighter in the sport taking on a the british icon, Ricky Hatton, again both unbeaten. And you have Shane Mosley fighting Miguel Cotto, two sluggers, one up and coming, and the other a shoe in for the HOF, with the winner getting a chance at a possible showdown with the P4P king, Floyd Mayweather.I think what the UFC has going for them, is great matchups, mainly due to one governing faction, and basically one matchmaker, Dana White. The best vs the best, on a consistent basis. But it seems when titles are on the line, fighters start to shy away from the brute force and instead try and take it to the ground, which compares to clinching in boxing.

Very well said. I'll have to make sure to catch those fights.