Greatest Ever Fighter?

I just think being a great boxers makes you great boxer. To me, fighting is much more than just boxing.

GDPofDRC wrote:

This thread...

+1

Before you ever heard of MMA, what did you call boxers? Was and is a boxer not called a fighter? Just because there's a new kid on the block doesn't take away from the history of a sport that reaches back hundreds of years. They are fighters... Just a different skillset and rule sheet.

It's like saying "Lance Armstrong is the best cyclist ever, thus would be the best triathlete ever as well".

I don't buy it.

And the is over the lack of Carlos Palomino in this thread.

LikesToFightGuy wrote:

Before you ever heard of MMA, what did you call boxers? Was and is a boxer not called a fighter? Just because there's a new kid on the block doesn't take away from the history of a sport that reaches back hundreds of years. They are fighters... Just a different skillset and rule sheet.

Before MMA? Why does that have any relevance to a question asked today? Boxers can be called fighters there is nothing wrong with that, but fighting encompasses more than just boxing.

GDPofDRC wrote:

It's like saying "Lance Armstrong is the best cyclist ever, thus would be the best triathlete ever as well".

I don't buy it.

And the is over the lack of Carlos Palomino in this thread.

A fighter is a fighter to me but hey I see your point. Also who is to say that MMA guys are the best fighters in the world anyways? I am sure there is a military guy who is trained to fight better than anyone in MMA. I say you would have to take every combat sport in the world into cosideration and to me SRR wins it hands down because of his great career.

GDPofDRC wrote:

LikesToFightGuy wrote:

Before you ever heard of MMA, what did you call boxers? Was and is a boxer not called a fighter? Just because there's a new kid on the block doesn't take away from the history of a sport that reaches back hundreds of years. They are fighters... Just a different skillset and rule sheet.

Before MMA? Why does that have any relevance to a question asked today? Boxers can be called fighters there is nothing wrong with that, but fighting encompasses more than just boxing.

That just depends on the rules. What about K1? what about a street fight? Even MMA has rules they have to follow. Does that make since?

GDPofDRC wrote:

LikesToFightGuy wrote:

Before you ever heard of MMA, what did you call boxers? Was and is a boxer not called a fighter? Just because there's a new kid on the block doesn't take away from the history of a sport that reaches back hundreds of years. They are fighters... Just a different skillset and rule sheet.

Before MMA? Why does that have any relevance to a question asked today? Boxers can be called fighters there is nothing wrong with that, but fighting encompasses more than just boxing.

You said boxers are boxers and not fighters. That's what I responded to. I'll give Fedor the same respect when he hits 100 wins. As long as we can all differentiate the skillsets, we can logically judge them together in a conversation like this. SRR was far more dominant in his sport than anyone has ever been in MMA. Thus getting the nod from the vast majority in this poll. He was the greatest ever...

LikesToFightGuy wrote:

GDPofDRC wrote:

LikesToFightGuy wrote:

Before you ever heard of MMA, what did you call boxers? Was and is a boxer not called a fighter? Just because there's a new kid on the block doesn't take away from the history of a sport that reaches back hundreds of years. They are fighters... Just a different skillset and rule sheet.

Before MMA? Why does that have any relevance to a question asked today? Boxers can be called fighters there is nothing wrong with that, but fighting encompasses more than just boxing.

You said boxers are boxers and not fighters. That's what I responded to. I'll give Fedor the same respect when he hits 100 wins. As long as we can all differentiate the skillsets, we can logically judge them together in a conversation like this. SRR was far more dominant in his sport than anyone has ever been in MMA. Thus getting the nod from the vast majority in this poll. He was the greatest ever...

Where do you rank Jeremy Horn?

The rules are the very thing that limits boxing in regards to the term fighter. If someone asks me who is the greatest fighter ever, rules do not factor into the equation what so ever for me. Those with the most talent to me are those who use their entire body, can utilize various styles and have displayed so on a stage with as few rules binding them as possible, hence mixed martial arts, where boxing is but one of many weapons available. You can't logically ask who the best fighter ever is based on how good they are within the confines of the rules of their sport unless that is what you ask.

I never said boxers were not fighters, I said fighting is more than just boxing.

OUSOONERSOU wrote:

LikesToFightGuy wrote:

GDPofDRC wrote:

LikesToFightGuy wrote:

Before you ever heard of MMA, what did you call boxers? Was and is a boxer not called a fighter? Just because there's a new kid on the block doesn't take away from the history of a sport that reaches back hundreds of years. They are fighters... Just a different skillset and rule sheet.

Before MMA? Why does that have any relevance to a question asked today? Boxers can be called fighters there is nothing wrong with that, but fighting encompasses more than just boxing.

You said boxers are boxers and not fighters. That's what I responded to. I'll give Fedor the same respect when he hits 100 wins. As long as we can all differentiate the skillsets, we can logically judge them together in a conversation like this. SRR was far more dominant in his sport than anyone has ever been in MMA. Thus getting the nod from the vast majority in this poll. He was the greatest ever...

Where do you rank Jeremy Horn?

Should I really have to address this?

GDPofDRC wrote:

The rules are the very thing that limits boxing in regards to the term fighter. If someone asks me who is the greatest fighter ever, rules do not factor into the equation what so ever for me. Those with the most talent to me are those who use their entire body, can utilize various styles and have displayed so on a stage with as few rules binding them as possible, hence mixed martial arts, where boxing is but one of many weapons available. You can't logically ask who the best fighter ever is based on how good they are within the confines of the rules of their sport unless that is what you ask.

I can. And in my opinion, the greatest MMAer ever has never been even close to as dominant as the greatest boxer ever. I didn't even have to think about the answer when I saw the poll...

Yikes.

LikesToFightGuy wrote:

the greatest MMAer ever has never been even close to as dominant as the greatest boxer ever.

I agree but that in no way would make the boxer a better fighter than all others, it just means they had a better career than all others in their sport.

OUSOONERSOU wrote:

LikesToFightGuy wrote:

GDPofDRC wrote:

LikesToFightGuy wrote:

Before you ever heard of MMA, what did you call boxers? Was and is a boxer not called a fighter? Just because there's a new kid on the block doesn't take away from the history of a sport that reaches back hundreds of years. They are fighters... Just a different skillset and rule sheet.

Before MMA? Why does that have any relevance to a question asked today? Boxers can be called fighters there is nothing wrong with that, but fighting encompasses more than just boxing.

You said boxers are boxers and not fighters. That's what I responded to. I'll give Fedor the same respect when he hits 100 wins. As long as we can all differentiate the skillsets, we can logically judge them together in a conversation like this. SRR was far more dominant in his sport than anyone has ever been in MMA. Thus getting the nod from the vast majority in this poll. He was the greatest ever...

Where do you rank Jeremy Horn?

name 15 Hall of Famers and 24 champions Jeremy beat?

my only point is it was silly of LTFG to say "I'll give Fedor the same respect when he hits 100 wins"

Horn would have him crying in submission with ease. No problem.

OUSOONERSOU wrote:

my only point is it was silly of LTFG to say "I'll give Fedor the same respect when he hits 100 wins"

I said Fedor... Not Jeremy Fucking Horn...

Quote :

name 15 Hall of Famers and 24 champions Jeremy beat?

Apples to oranges. There aint 15 HoF'rs yet.

Wolfgangsta wrote:

Yikes.

That's what your wife said when I unzipped...

Join the conversation coward. Not really a debate, because they are two different things that most of us understand... But for some starnge reason I'm curious of your thoughts on it...

Wolfgangsta wrote:

I'll go ahead and start where this thread will eventually end up and say Chuck Norris.

This thread only survives outside the trash realm for the dearth of activity in the MMA section, you'll get nothing more than the above comment out of me.

I am going with the Chuck Norris assessment. I can live with that.

Wolfgangsta wrote:

Wolfgangsta wrote:

I'll go ahead and start where this thread will eventually end up and say Chuck Norris.

This thread only survives outside the trash realm for the dearth of activity in the MMA section, you'll get nothing more than the above comment out of me.

Surprisingly no one else mentioned Chuck Norris. Also, if this thread ended up in the trash then that would be an abuse of your powers.

In MMA you get much more damage than in a boxing match so you can't expect a good MMA fighter to ever have a 100 fight career. Also, like I stated in the boxing section if SRR was fighting today he would've never fought as much as he did in his day.