CrossFit Discussion Board

CrossFit Discussion Board (
-   CrossPit (
-   -   MMA Vs Boxing (

Chu Kim 09-16-2011 06:47 PM

MMA Vs Boxing
Yes, we all know that MMA fighters have a big edge when it comes to downright fighting when going up against boxers (or must of us assume so). My question is, when it comes down to it, which profession produces the superior athletes overall, MMA or Boxing? This is in terms of all the major areas, strength, speed, stamina, and also toughness and gymnastics-type abilities. Which, in general, is the better conditioned and more athletic of the two?

Doug Blankenship 09-16-2011 09:36 PM

Re: MMA Vs Boxing
Both Boxing and MMA produce amazing athletes but it does come down to the fighter and what test they would be ran through to tell who is the better overall athlete.

I would lean towards MMA fighters though.

Pearse Shields 09-17-2011 01:16 AM

Re: MMA Vs Boxing
A boxer who can handle a 12-round fight and go the distance is an incredible athlete. The same can be said for a 5 round MMA champ. They each have to work at different things, are slightly different athletes, and in my opinion, are separated just enough that comparisons would be unfair.

I'd have to say though, I'm probably more impressed by the boxer in this case.

David Meverden 09-17-2011 09:24 PM

Re: MMA Vs Boxing
I define being fit as being useful at all kinds of tasks and producing a good work output at nearly anything. Using that definition I think that (speaking in broad stereotypes, individuals will vary) boxers would be somewhat better at endurance tests, but that MMA guys will be fitter overall due to the much broader set of demands. The grappling side of MMA demands that the athlete develop balance, strength, and explosive movements for all kinds of positions on the ground and while tied up with opponents.

Katherine Derbyshire 09-18-2011 12:59 AM

Re: MMA Vs Boxing
On the other hand, one could argue that any sport in which head injuries are not merely incidental (as in football) but are deliberately inflicted is inherently anti-fitness.


Wayne Riddle 09-18-2011 12:47 PM

Re: MMA Vs Boxing
Not relevant, two different sports with different training goals and different requirements to be considered "superior" at their sport. Taking a professional athlete that specializes at something then try to argue in the general realm at how they do is comparing apples to oranges.

Becca Borawski 09-19-2011 11:43 AM

Re: MMA Vs Boxing

Originally Posted by Katherine Derbyshire (Post 986661)
On the other hand, one could argue that any sport in which head injuries are not merely incidental (as in football) but are deliberately inflicted is inherently anti-fitness.


One could argue that ALL competitive sports are anti-fitness, head trauma or not.

In regards to the OP's question, though, I agree with a couple other of the posters. It is both apples and oranges between boxers and MMA fighters and apples and oranges even between MMA fighters themselves. Depending on their background and specialization even within MMA, they will have vary different athletic capacities.

Chu Kim 09-19-2011 10:38 PM

Re: MMA Vs Boxing
I personally am of the opinion that different sports can produce higher and lower levels of general athletic fitness. There are sports that may require greater overall demands on the body in one or more major areas, or have a greater range of athletic requirements. Every sport is different, and will require you to develop a unique set of abilities, but some sports can certainly be categorized as more athletic in overall terms. I could be wrong, and it could be all "apples aned oranges", but what seems to clearly contradict that stance are the different levels of overall fitness between pro darts players and Olympic decathletes, for one example. Just google for images the phrase "champion darts players" and you will understand what I mean. Go ahead. Take a good look, and then ask yourself if the "apples and oranges" argument is valid. I didn't think so.

Wayne Riddle 09-20-2011 06:38 AM

Re: MMA Vs Boxing
Again, taking a general term and applying it to specialization doesn't work. Yup I would say an Olympic level sprinter is probably more "athletic" then a world champion dart player, but has the dart player developed the required skills for their sport to the highest levels possible?

Now if you want to talk about weekend warriors going out and doing some type of sport to stay fit then that is a totally different discussion.

David Meverden 09-20-2011 05:33 PM

Re: MMA Vs Boxing
I don't see anything wrong with asking what kind of sport produces a more well rounded and fit athlete. It doesn't have to be some kind of value judgement. Positing an opinion that training for Rugby makes a more rounded and fit individual than a shot putter doesn't mean that Rugby is better or a more valid sport.

I really like boxing and am not a big fan of grappling, but I can still take part in a discussion of the relative fitness merits to training for each.

All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:22 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
CrossFit is a registered trademark of CrossFit Inc.