Dana has said that he might be open for it in the future but note that there are still people that feel about MMA the same way that the OP does and the UFC is just now finishing off a gigantic campaign to make MMA a legitimate sport and it has taken years; at one point, the UFC almost had to go out of business since it was illegal everywhere and they were barred from televising their events. If they started hosting female fights then that would be a step backwards from where they are right now because even people that are fans right now feel the same way about female fighting as the OP does about all fighting.joekerr31 said:
UFC and other MMA....bunch of animals!!
- Thread starter mahon83050
- Start date
mahon83050
Banned
Why am I a retard because of my opinion? Huh? I think I have valid reasons......Master Bates said:
Bible_Belt
Master Don Juan
MMA may have a lower serious injury rate, but those guys' cauliflower ears are fvcking gross! Look closely at the ears of the fighters. They are usually shaped like anything but ears. It is caused by grinding into a mat and prevented by wearing headgear. ufc fighters should really wear headgear over their ears, but headgear looks goofy, so it might hurt the league ratings and they don't use it.
Ur not gonna get cauliflower from a fight, you get it from all the practice leading up to the fight.Bible_Belt said:
+ you can get the fluid drained within something like 24 hours so no ones gonna be getting it from a fight even if they do get it cuz they have doctors there that will drain it.
Okay, I'll bite: Mahonn, MMA has actually make people SAFER, by eliminating the culture of overblown, ineffective martial arts techniques.
You have all these "eighth degree black belts" who were taught by "instructors for the Korean national Tae Kwon Do team." You have McDojos that give out brown or black belts without sparring, and the students think they can handle themselves in a fight. You've got "yellow eyebrow mantis kung fu" masters teaching Dim Mak (Death Touch).
Even the guys at more realistic Thai Boxing gyms and (some) Wing Chun gyms used to say, "I'm not learning that jiujitsu sh!t, I'm here to learn fighting, not wrestling."
A lot of that crap has stopped because of MMA. But there's still more to go.
You have all these "eighth degree black belts" who were taught by "instructors for the Korean national Tae Kwon Do team." You have McDojos that give out brown or black belts without sparring, and the students think they can handle themselves in a fight. You've got "yellow eyebrow mantis kung fu" masters teaching Dim Mak (Death Touch).
Even the guys at more realistic Thai Boxing gyms and (some) Wing Chun gyms used to say, "I'm not learning that jiujitsu sh!t, I'm here to learn fighting, not wrestling."
A lot of that crap has stopped because of MMA. But there's still more to go.
Joekerr
http://www.towerwebsites.com/photos/topfueldad2002/xc4.jpg
http://i154.photobucket.com/albums/s267/goheelsgo/gina_carano.jpg
http://img400.imageshack.us/img400/6921/40382ve5.jpg
Holy fuck!
Current World Champ here:
http://www.towerwebsites.com/photos/topfueldad2002/xc4.jpg
http://i154.photobucket.com/albums/s267/goheelsgo/gina_carano.jpg
http://img400.imageshack.us/img400/6921/40382ve5.jpg
Holy fuck!
The Inside Man
Master Don Juan
Yep...by the time the fighters get to the UFC they will have cauliflower ear if they're going to get it. Alot of people get it when they start training on the ground hard, especially in wrestling. Can also get it from strikes but not as common. I think it looks hardass, but glad I never developed it.dirtyvibe said:
Gina Carrano is super HAWT!
Bible_Belt
Master Don Juan
I went to a cage fight tonight. There were a lot of HBs there. It's probably because fighting attracts high-testosterone men. Race car drivers have hot wives as well. The nascar wives are beauty queens. Something about risking your life or at least bodily harm...
Yeah, absolutely. Fighters, racedrivers etc. usually do have sizzlingly hot chicks. That´s one thing about the logic of evolution (among many others) I can´t figure out.Bible_Belt said:
What is it that magnetically draws chicks to guys with a high risk style of living? What´s there to win for them? Chances are extra high the guy might get killed and leave her alone on her ace with a bunch of kids.´Evolutionary - not desirable. Wouldn´t be according to logic, medium risk men with a good balance of risk (i.e. winning, striking it rich, fame etc.) and security (not being killed) be much more desirable? Any thoughts? The thrill of being around a man´s man overriding everything else?
Sorry if this is slightly OT
Computer geek would be the other extreme. No risk taking whatsoever.wolf116 said:
I asked a lot of chicks I know which guy they really loved in their life. And guess what - three (!) told me that the only real love of their life, the one that made them shaky in the knees and forget everthing else and which whom they would have gone live on the moon - were gangsters. Bandits. And guess what? Two of the three are dead already, the third disappeared without a trace.
I understand that gangsters and fighters are alike in being the penultimate male in taking no orders and no shyt from anybody. Like penultimate maleness. That´s textbook stuff.
But gangsters die early. They leave their chicks with kids. So falling in love with such guys is completely self destructive for chicks. Why is it that they do it anyway?
Bible_Belt
Master Don Juan
There's something primal and genetic about it. The highest testosterone men are the most 'manly,' which indicates that they have the best genes. The lust of getting knocked up and the logic of raising kids are very different. The high-testosterone guy's job is done when he passes on his genes. He can go die or leave after that, and the women will find an afc to raise the kid, getting her the best of both worlds.Rudra said:
Interesting thought...Bible_Belt said:
BTW compare the time a small child needs constant attention for survival - which is two years, to the time the feeling of love lasts usually in all its stages - which is two years as well. Well isn´t nature some calculating beotch...
Its better to get your facts stright then come out and say "I think" and make an educated guess on something. Here is an article that someone wrote which I found that talks about the Myths of MMA:mahon83050 said:
http://www.bullshido.net/forums/showthread.php?t=52963&page=2&highlight=myths
"MMA people only care about winning and being the best."
Quite the contrary. Due to the competitiveness of not only MMA competition, but MMA style training, it becomes quickly apparent that there is no such thing as being unarguably "the best" but rather the "best you can be"
- "MMA people rely on brute strength and muscle to win fights, rather than technique and skill"
Furthest from the truth. One of the basic components to winning MMA bouts is a solid ground game which includes heavy grappling skill, one of the most difficult skill sets to gain proficiency in. If you look back to early MMA where it was still "style vs style" the only ones who tried to use brute strength were those claiming a background in a striking art, where the grapplers were smaller and relied soley on superior technical proficiency, even if it was sloppy by todays MMA standards. Today, being well rounded with accurate and well timed striking abilities, and flawless and economical movements on the ground are necessary to succeed in MMA. Musclebound bar brawlers don't stand much of a chance against todays fighting athletes.
- "MMA people are musclebound meat heads who spend their whole day at the gym, bragging about how much they can benchpress"
No, although benchpressing and other weight resistant workouts can be a great part of an athletes training regimen, trying to bench a ridiculous amount of weight, or put on heavy body mass is seldom a desired goal. Bulking up is not necessarily a benefit in fighting beyond mere intimidation, thus developing explosive lean body muscle is a more sought after goal. Look at the current roster of MMA fighters; how many of them fit this description of Pro Wrestling looking mound of muscle?
- "MMA fighters are rude"
Some are, some aren't. That's people. You shouldn't base your expectations on the character of a person based on how they train in martial arts.
- "MMA lacks tradition"
This coming from most likely someone who trains in an art created in the last 50 or so years and passed on to some talentless hacks in the US is quite laughable. If anything MMA is the only form of martial arts that has stuck to its tradition....the tradition of having fighters of various backgrounds come and test themselves against each other in as free an environment as legally sound. One that has lasted since the time of the ancient Greeks, if not before then (at least 2655 years ago)
- "MMA lacks culture and morality"
Speaking with Japanese terms, and putting Kanji writing that you can't read on your belt or gi does not = "culture." You shouldn't need to try and find another countries culture at your local strip mall. If that's what you want, then you have more problems then I can answer. As far as morality is concerned, I don't need the person who is teaching me fighting skills to tell me when and where I can or should use it. Why should this responsibility be bestowed upon martial arts instructors? Why not say, oh....Teachers, Police, Law makers or how about ones PARENTS? *gasps*
- "MMA fighters only train to learn how to fight and beat people up"
oh....um....well actually I guess that one's pretty much right. Got me there!
- MMA is more dangerous than boxing
It's either that or something along the lines of MMA is "human ****fighting" , competitors die all the time, it's a bloodsport, etc. Bill O Reilly summed it all up well when he scoffed at Dana White during an interview when White said MMA had elbows, knees, and submissions but was actually safer than boxing (check it out on youtube). Besides the fact that O Reilly is a retard, I think most uninformed people would agree with him. However, what many people fail to grasp is that there are crucial rule differences between boxing and MMA that make MMA considerably safer than boxing.
1) There is no standing 8/10 count (at least not in the UFC n Pride, but I believe Shooto has one?) so extensive damage to the head is far less; if you're down n out you're not getting back up for more.
2) The grappling element; clinches are not broken, you can stall on the ground, end the fight w/ a submission instead of going for a KO, this results in less damage to the head.
3) Referee stoppages occur much more often and quickly in MMA when compared to boxing. Again this all equals to less damage to the head and much shorter fights.
4) 12 Rounds max vs 5 rounds max, you do the math. I know its not always 12 rounds, but just the fact that it exists
As for the bloodsport thing, MMA has developed into a legitamite sport w/ rules and a whole list of fouls. Groin punching, hair pulling, nipple twisting, whatever, all that is history, MMA is sanctioned in most states and the 90s stereotype of a bloodsoaked cage no longer exists.