The Daily Forecast just did an interesting debate on who would win a battle between a boxer and a MMA (or UFC) fighter. Paul Costanzo defended boxers while Drew Ellis made a case for UFC fighters. To read both arguments in their entirety, click the above links, but for the highlights, see below.
Costanzo’s main point was about boxers’ feet and their ability to potentially strike a MMA fighter when they’re loading up to attack. A boxer could keep everything in front of him while in an upright stance and exploit holes that a MMA fighter would leave while trying to use his assortment of moves.
Ellis objected to Constanzo assuming the MMA fighter wouldn’t be prepared for a boxer trying to exploit their weaknesses. His main point was once the MMA fighter gets a boxer to the ground, he could consistently strike from a position the boxer wouldn’t normally be in, and of course defeat him.
Of course this debate is all hypothetical, but it’s rather interesting. Personally, I think boxers are at a distinct disadvantage considering the amount of styles an MMA fighter uses. It would be like a construction worker showing to build a house with only a hammer and nails. However, give an experienced, prepared boxer like Floyd Mayweather Jr. time to train and it would be an interesting battle. And like Costanzo was arguing, a top boxer is going to find holes in an MMA’s style just based on the possibility a fighter like that may try to do too much in order to counter a boxers’ more conventional style.
