inky wrote:
Wow...a lower degree? I'm at a loss for words.
I'm pretty sure they could've just made the sport into an all out brawl or even a gladiator style match complete with swords, spears, and nets; sprinkle it with a bunch of flashy stuff and a ton of shenanigans, but they didn't. Now what does that tell you?
The whole point of no hitting below the belt and putting limitations and setting rules is all part of the game and it does not, in any way, place the sport at a lower degree in comparison to any other sport because they're not even related in the first place.
Now if the basis for your hierarchy of fighting sport is based on how well they'd do in a real street fight - they might as well just stick to using guns and explosives.
In conclusion, they're two different sports and are not related in any way - never was, never will.
How should a fighting hierarchy be then? by which is more beautiful? which has more drama? Why do people watch fighting sports? To see people beat each other up.
Even fi they are 2 different, it doesnt mean you cant make comparisons. Would Lebron James make a good tightend in football?
in MMA, there are less rules and restraints, Manny Pacquiao has probably mastered all the strateges in boxing, but in a UFC fight, there are endless possibilities. UFC fighters are more well-rounded.
i couldnt find a way to phrase it, so to a lesser degree is not teh correct phrases, but do you see what im trying to say? im not disrespecting the whole sport of boxing, its the whole idea that boxing is like playing tic-tac toe whereas MMA is Chess. Certain ppl are attracted to certain sports. its in a lesser degree in terms of strategy.
btw, if people wanted to see a brawl, they can go watch wrestling.
