Jump to content
Political Discussion Forums

Recommended Posts

I'm not sure what Canada's laws against assault on anyone have anything to do with MMA competitions. Keep on reaching!

Again you give yourself away as a recent arrival Mo. As IF "Canada's laws" are the only thing governing proper behaviour for men.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 411
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Again you give yourself away as a recent arrival Mo. As IF "Canada's laws" are the only thing governing proper behaviour for men.

Proper behavior for people in general has nothing to do with individual sports and their rules and regulations. You keep reaching and failing badly. As long as one operates within the rules of their respective sports, they're acting accordingly.

Link to post
Share on other sites

With a heavy emphasis on "gutless." Every real man knows this. At least every real red-blooded Canadian man. :lol:

No thats horse shit. The only Canadian men (red-blooded or otherwise) that consider any kind of serious fight over when one opponent is thrown to the ground, are idiots, or people who have never been in a real fight.

Virtually EVERY fight winds up a wrestling/grappling match on the ground with limited striking. You can call it cowardly if you want, but dont pretend that "Canadian men" share your position because virtually none of them would.

The rules in MMA have NOTHING TO DO with why the fights end up on the ground. The fights end up on the ground because when two humans fight THAT IS WHAT HAPPENS in most cases. They just allow the confrontation to run its course while making sure no serious preventable damage is done to the fighter.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Proper behavior for people in general has nothing to do with individual sports and their rules and regulations. You keep reaching and failing badly. As long as one operates within the rules of their respective sports, they're acting accordingly.

That would give rise to the logic that it would be OK to beat up a woman so long as it stays within the rules of the sport. Co-ed MMA, here we come - brought to you by the Sharia Law Corp.

Link to post
Share on other sites

No thats horse shit. The only Canadian men (red-blooded or otherwise) that consider any kind of serious fight over when one opponent is thrown to the ground, are idiots, or people who have never been in a real fight.

Virtually EVERY fight winds up a wrestling/grappling match on the ground with limited striking. You can call it cowardly if you want, but dont pretend that "Canadian men" share your position because virtually none of them would.

The rules in MMA have NOTHING TO DO with why the fights end up on the ground. The fights end up on the ground because when two humans fight THAT IS WHAT HAPPENS in most cases. They just allow the confrontation to run its course while making sure no serious preventable damage is done to the fighter.

Not in boxing they don't, where the fighters have more honour and respect than to hit a man when he is down. And usually most bar fights too and most of the time the opponents are drunk and even they know better. And most Canadian men, the real type - not the apologist types - would agree. If you want grappling, go to pro wrestling matches.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not in boxing they don't, where the fighters have more honour and respect than to hit a man when he is down.

You can't hit a downed opponent in boxing because it's against the rules. In boxing, you have to stand up in front of your opponent so it's easier for him to hit you, and for you to hit him. It's not really fighting, it's more of a punching competition.

And most Canadian men, the real type - not the apologist types - would agree.

Actually, they wouldn't. Most Canadian men know all about jujitsu, etc. They know all about ground combat fighting and submissions.

If you want grappling, go to pro wrestling matches.

Have you not heard of Olympic wrestling? :blink:

Link to post
Share on other sites

You can't hit a downed opponent in boxing because it's against the rules. In boxing, you have to stand up in front of your opponent so it's easier for him to hit you, and for you to hit him. It's not really fighting, it's more of a punching competition.

:lol::lol::lol: "...it's more of a punching competition..." I am thankful I didn't have a mouthful of coffee when I read that or it would be off to Staples for a new keyboard. Good one Shady!

Actually, they wouldn't. Most Canadian men know all about jujitsu, etc. They know all about ground combat fighting and submissions.

I am not disputing their knowledge of martial arts, just that aspect of it that would cause them to be gutless cowards and hit a man when he is down.

Have you not heard of Olympic wrestling?

Of course. But you missed the point. In Olympic wrestling, you don't punch a guy in the head when you are wrestling or you are eventually disqualified because, in Olympic wrestling, punching a guy in the head when he is down is considered gutless and cowardly.

Edited by Shwa
Link to post
Share on other sites
Of course. But you missed the point. In Olympic wrestling, you don't punch a guy in the head when you are wrestling or you are eventually disqualified because, in Olympic wrestling, punching a guy in the head when he is down is considered gutless and cowardly.

No that objectively false and incorrect. You are disqualified because it is AGAINST THE RULES. PERIOD. The reason its AGAINST THE RULES is because wrestling is meant to showcase a certain skillset.

Same goes for boxing. Its meant to showcase standing hand strikes, so they make grappling illegal and keep the fighters on their feet.

MMA is not meant to showcase anyting really. You can use whatever skillset you want. Boxers can do well, kickboxers can do well, grapplers, shute fighters, jijitsu and so on.

I dont find any of those three sports cowardly at all. MMA is only different because instead of telling fighters exactly what they have to do to win, its left up to the fighter to decide.

Which makes for a great sport! Its the fastest growing sport in the world, and youre going to see a lot of people coming to MMA from wrestling, kickboxing, boxing and other sports. Manny Pacquiao is talking about fighting in the Octagon now. And the reality is that the combination of rules and techniques make MMA a much safer sport that boxing, and you can have an MMA career without ending up permanently punch drunk and losing the ability to string consecutive sentences together.

Link to post
Share on other sites

No that objectively false and incorrect. You are disqualified because it is AGAINST THE RULES. PERIOD. The reason its AGAINST THE RULES is because wrestling is meant to showcase a certain skillset.

Same goes for boxing. Its meant to showcase standing hand strikes, so they make grappling illegal and keep the fighters on their feet.

And the reason they are against the rules is because both sports are framed within a long standing cultural tradition that hitting a man when he is down is cowardly and gutless.

MMA is not meant to showcase anyting really.

Now we're talkin'.

You can use whatever skillset you want. Boxers can do well, kickboxers can do well, grapplers, shute fighters, jijitsu and so on.

Kickboxers also don't hoof people when they are down - an honourable sport.

I dont find any of those three sports cowardly at all. MMA is only different because instead of telling fighters exactly what they have to do to win, its left up to the fighter to decide.

Yes, so long as they don't use weapons. Yet. I mean there are martial arts that deploy devices. How long before we see that sneak into the "rules?" "It's only a little bamboo stick, come on, not like they are defenseless. Besides, its really about the grappling." :lol:

Which makes for a great sport! Its the fastest growing sport in the world, and youre going to see a lot of people coming to MMA from wrestling, kickboxing, boxing and other sports. Manny Pacquiao is talking about fighting in the Octagon now. And the reality is that the combination of rules and techniques make MMA a much safer sport that boxing,

Give it time. Once MMA has been around long enough and the participant numbers increase, the combatants will begin to manifest the long term health problems that are associated with such activities. Including cauliflower ears.

and you can have an MMA career without ending up permanently punch drunk and losing the ability to string consecutive sentences together

With some of the current fighters, how would you be able to tell?

Link to post
Share on other sites

You can't hit a downed opponent in boxing because it's against the rules. In boxing, you have to stand up in front of your opponent so it's easier for him to hit you, and for you to hit him. It's not really fighting, it's more of a punching competition

Really...That is possibly the dumbest thing I have read in a very long time...

If punching was the only prerequisite for being a superior boxer,people like Willy Pep,Maxie Rosenbloom,and,Pernell Whittaker would never have had success...

And people like Frank Bruno and Earnie Shavers(probably the hardest punching Heavyweight ever!) would have been Heavyweight Champion forever!!!

And George Foreman would not have lost to Ali in Kinshasa,Zaire in '75...

There are actual skills involved away from standing in front of your opponent and slugging away.The days of Gentleman Jim Corbett and Jim Jefferies are long gone...Jack Johnson made sure of that in 1909...

Edited by Jack Weber
Link to post
Share on other sites

Kickboxers also don't hoof people when they are down - an honourable sport.

You can't do that in MMA either. Seriously, do you know anything about the sport? You've made so many incorrect assertions that I've lost count. You clearly have no idea what you're talking about. We get it. You don't like MMA. Give it a rest already.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You can't do that in MMA either. Seriously, do you know anything about the sport? You've made so many incorrect assertions that I've lost count. You clearly have no idea what you're talking about. We get it. You don't like MMA. Give it a rest already.

Of course I know quite a bit "about the sport" hence the reason I have the opinion I do. My point about kickboxers is that they also know that it is cowardly to strike someone when they are down. But if the rule-of-thumb is to allow MMA fighers sort it out themselves, then why disallow hoofing a guy while he is down? He can still defend himself and it he takes a boot to the temple, the ref can call the fight over right?

Link to post
Share on other sites

But if the rule-of-thumb is to allow MMA fighers sort it out themselves, then why disallow hoofing a guy while he is down? He can still defend himself and it he takes a boot to the temple, the ref can call the fight over right?

No, the rule of thumb isn't to allow fighters to sort it out themselves. Your ignorance is off the charts. Why are you still posting? All of your assertions have been incorrect.

Anyways, why does boxing disallow punching to the back of the head? After all, if the fighter is up standing, he still should be able to defend himself right? :rolleyes:

Link to post
Share on other sites

They can knee the guy repeatedly in the face when he's down, I think that's allowed. Elbowing is allowed, for sure. What next, stomping his testicles with 6-inch stilletto spiked heels?

Helluva great sport...

;)

Nope. You cant kick a downed opponent to the head or knee him. And you can only use forearm elbows

Next fallacious argument please!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Of course I know quite a bit "about the sport" hence the reason I have the opinion I do. My point about kickboxers is that they also know that it is cowardly to strike someone when they are down. But if the rule-of-thumb is to allow MMA fighers sort it out themselves, then why disallow hoofing a guy while he is down? He can still defend himself and it he takes a boot to the temple, the ref can call the fight over right?

No you know absolutely nothing about the sport, and youve demonstrated again, and again, and again.

My point about kickboxers is that they also know that it is cowardly to strike someone when they are down

Thats nothing but a huge assumption. Repeating it 1000 times wont make it true.

But if the rule-of-thumb is to allow MMA fighers sort it out themselves, then why disallow hoofing a guy while he is down? He can still defend himself and it he takes a boot to the temple, the ref can call the fight over right?

Because theres still rules, they are just different. Kicking a downed opponent to the head is illegal because the promoters, and the various athletic commisions decided it there was too much risk of head injury. Its illegal for the same reason punching to the back of the head is.

Which is another difference between MMA and boxing. MMA protects the fighters from head injuries. Boxing still uses the standing 8 count after all these years even though they know FULL WELL that it puts fighters at serious risk of head injury, and death. If you need the ref to step in and stop a fight it should be OVER... not started up again, so the guy can take a few hundred more blows to the head (now in a dazed state where he cant defend against them as well).

The STANDING EIGHT COUNT is 100 times more dangerous than elbows or ground and pound.

You dont have a god damn leg to stand on. Your entire argument has been nothing but hyperbole and fallacy, and subjective opinion.

Link to post
Share on other sites

No, the rule of thumb isn't to allow fighters to sort it out themselves. Your ignorance is off the charts. Why are you still posting? All of your assertions have been incorrect.

Anyways, why does boxing disallow punching to the back of the head? After all, if the fighter is up standing, he still should be able to defend himself right? :rolleyes:

I don't know???

Maybe because it's called a Rabbit Punch and it's where your brain stem connects with your spine and one solid shot there and it's the big adios?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Nope. You cant kick a downed opponent to the head or knee him. And you can only use forearm elbows

Next fallacious argument please!

Only forearms and elbows on someone who is down...

Yeah,that's definately preferable to a Standing 8 Count...

Link to post
Share on other sites
No, the rule of thumb isn't to allow fighters to sort it out themselves. Your ignorance is off the charts. Why are you still posting? All of your assertions have been incorrect.

Nope, I was just taking a page from one you experts:

...MMA is only different because instead of telling fighters exactly what they have to do to win, its left up to the fighter to decide.

Anyways, why does boxing disallow punching to the back of the head? After all, if the fighter is up standing, he still should be able to defend himself right?

Irrelevant. The issue is about hitting a man while he is down, widely seen by most Canadian men to be gutless and cowardly. Generally taught to them by their Canadian parents.

Link to post
Share on other sites

No you know absolutely nothing about the sport, and youve demonstrated again, and again, and again.

Thats nothing but a huge assumption. Repeating it 1000 times wont make it true.

Because theres still rules, they are just different. Kicking a downed opponent to the head is illegal because the promoters, and the various athletic commisions decided it there was too much risk of head injury. Its illegal for the same reason punching to the back of the head is.

Which is another difference between MMA and boxing. MMA protects the fighters from head injuries. Boxing still uses the standing 8 count after all these years even though they know FULL WELL that it puts fighters at serious risk of head injury, and death. If you need the ref to step in and stop a fight it should be OVER... not started up again, so the guy can take a few hundred more blows to the head (now in a dazed state where he cant defend against them as well).

The STANDING EIGHT COUNT is 100 times more dangerous than elbows or ground and pound.

You dont have a god damn leg to stand on. Your entire argument has been nothing but hyperbole and fallacy, and subjective opinion.

The Standing 8 Count has nothing to do with head injuries in Boxing....

Repeated blows to the head,which are inherent in any combative sport,are the biggest cause of head injuries.

You should look up the cause and effect of Pugilistica Dementia...This will help you out a little....

Link to post
Share on other sites

No you know absolutely nothing about the sport, and youve demonstrated again, and again, and again.

Repeating it 1000 times wont make it true.

No, I know plenty about the sport, enough to see that it contravenes a well establish and culturally traditional Canadian ethic about not hitting a man when he is down.

Thats nothing but a huge assumption. Repeating it 1000 times wont make it true.

Not when it comes to a Canadian kickboxer who knows better.

Because theres still rules, they are just different. Kicking a downed opponent to the head is illegal because the promoters, and the various athletic commisions decided it there was too much risk of head injury. Its illegal for the same reason punching to the back of the head is.

There's no risk of head injury if the guy is defending himself - isn't that how the your arguments have gone so far? Yes, it is dangerous and thus unfair and thus gutless and cowardly.

Which is another difference between MMA and boxing. MMA protects the fighters from head injuries. Boxing still uses the standing 8 count after all these years even though they know FULL WELL that it puts fighters at serious risk of head injury, and death. If you need the ref to step in and stop a fight it should be OVER... not started up again, so the guy can take a few hundred more blows to the head (now in a dazed state where he cant defend against them as well).

At least he is standig up and still dangerous.

The STANDING EIGHT COUNT is 100 times more dangerous than elbows or ground and pound.

Riiiiiight. :lol:

You dont have a god damn leg to stand on. Your entire argument has been nothing but hyperbole and fallacy, and subjective opinion.

And yet you have nothing to counter my position but all this damning apologist crap. Which leads me to believe that you too find hitting a man when is down is a titch distasteful too. If you don't believe me, go ask one of your parents.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Irrelevant. The issue is about hitting a man while he is down, widely seen by most Canadian men to be gutless and cowardly. Generally taught to them by their Canadian parents.

Nope. You're completely wrong again. And the only way to hit a fighter who is down in MMA is to also be down.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know???

Maybe because it's called a Rabbit Punch and it's where your brain stem connects with your spine and one solid shot there and it's the big adios?

But according to him, when you're standing, you can always defend yourself. And only hitting somebody that's down is wrong. Apparently not then huh?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




  • Tell a friend

    Love Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
×
×
  • Create New...