Mas Oyama was badass.
EDIT: I skipped to the end and didn’t notice he’d already been mentioned.
[quote]Jlabs wrote:
ramon dekkers[/quote]
+1 cool poinys for you my man.
[quote]Elaikases wrote:
Schwarzfahrer wrote:
According to Jon Bluming, Mas Oyama never fought anybody, not even a single bull.
As far as boxing, I’d say Marciano with Sugar Ray Robinson being a close second one. In his time, Rocky was stellar and he made the best out of the training know how and his physical capabilities that was humanly possible.
Also, I don’t think you can compare today’s heavy boxers with most champions of the past. Today’s heavyweight champs are taller, heavier and are fighting strategically more anaerobic.
As far as MMA, the answer is obvious.
Oyama did a tour of the U.S. where they put up cash and you got it if you last five minutes in the ring with him.
That was a lot of fights.
He did the bull routine in small stadiums, for audiences.
Mas Oyama Mas Oyama - Wikipedia
Bluming http://www.jonbluming.com/ and http://www.jonbluming.com/ex.html
http://www.masutatsuoyama.com/100mankumite.htm
[/quote]
Sorry, but this is a misunderstanding.
A whole lot of fair boxing bouts don’t count, even if they’re for real, which they’re probably not, anyway.
Or did he fight real contenders?
As for fighting bulls? Where’s the footage?
As a kid, I drooled about how he supposedly killed over 100 of them. Now it says “49 with his karate chops and killing three in one blow each”. So how many did he kill now? Killing a bull repeatedly with one blow and no video?
Don’t show me the youtube stuff, it’s beyond comedy.
The wiki is as helpful as for finding evidence for Bruce Lee’s fights ([quote]1960, KO in “first round” in a streetfight against “unknown” in Seattle[/quote])
And it certainly doesn’t help that the wiki lists CRACKED.com (I’m not making this up!) as it’s source.
Legend has it, his mountain training…
No date, witnesses, footage, ANYTHING? The best fought him for multiple days, the organization alone of this “tournement” was quite a feat. This is pure fiction.
The hundred man kumites are very hard, I’ll give him that, if he actually did one, but it’s also very different from fighting real opponents. It’s more a very difficult fighting marathon.
I’d rather take Bluming’s word.
[quote]shizen wrote:
Mike tyson because he had one of the best fighter mentality’s. He also showed that shorter boxers can dominate in the heavyweight class. Not to mention he was genetically gifted. He could have been so much more if he wasn’t screwed with his trainers ext ext.
Wasted talent for a good part of his career, he could have been a lot more then he already was. [/quote]
I think Mike Tyson’s mental fortitude was the weakest part of his fight game… if someone actually challenged him or took him into later rounds he became a shadow of himself.
I’d probably have to go with Karelin for GOAT. The problem with greatest fighter of all time questions is that Fedor is a favorite against everyone that has been named, so we are obviously not talking about who would win in a fight. If we are going by who was most dominant in their respective combat sport, no one beats Karelin (or Fedor either, actualy, but his career is still young…).
Hands down, Goku.
Gohan had potential, but hey. he chose to discard the genetic lottery.
[quote]tayjeremy wrote:
Hands down, Goku.
Gohan had potential, but hey. he chose to discard the genetic lottery. [/quote]
Good for you 
[quote]WhiteFlash wrote:
My pop [an ex-fighter] was a Sugar Ray Robinson guy. I’ve seen countless clips of his fights. Of everyone I’ve seen, I would take Joe Louis. Strong,fast,aggressive and had a serious killer instinct. Boxing and baseball are the only two sports I can think of that have regressed as the years have gone on.[/quote]
No way! That’s why this is a great question though, because boxing has changed so little that you can still pit guys from now against guys from back then.
It’s not like football where the lineman used to weigh 220 and ran 6 second 40s, and now the guys are monsters. Fighters are equal across time because there’s so much heart involved.
Again, as much as I agree Sugar Ray Robinson was great, as well as Joe Louis, I would still go out on a limb and say that RJJ in his prime could beat anyone.
[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:
WhiteFlash wrote:
It’s not like football where the lineman used to weigh 220 and ran 6 second 40s, and now the guys are monsters. Fighters are equal across time because there’s so much heart involved.
[/quote]
I would just have to say that I don’t think heart is the reason boxing hasn’t changed much (they have heart in spades, please don’t misunderstand).
I would argue it has more to do with weightclass restrictions and the anaerobic/aerobic combination of the sport. Not really that important why, I suppose, I’m just saying. [/hijack]
[quote]I would just have to say that I don’t think heart is the reason boxing hasn’t changed much (they have heart in spades, please don’t misunderstand). I would argue it has more to do with weightclass restrictions and the anaerobic/aerobic combination of the sport. Not really that important why, I suppose, I’m just saying. [/hijack]
[/quote]
Agreed. And the aversion to weight training. And supplementation. And who says “I’d love to go pro- but really, ya gotta take steroids”.
I don’t think linebackers got bigger because there is so little heart involved…
[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:
No way! That’s why this is a great question though, because boxing has changed so little that you can still pit guys from now against guys from back then.
It’s not like football where the lineman used to weigh 220 and ran 6 second 40s, and now the guys are monsters. Fighters are equal across time because there’s so much heart involved.
Again, as much as I agree Sugar Ray Robinson was great, as well as Joe Louis, I would still go out on a limb and say that RJJ in his prime could beat anyone. [/quote]
Your definately right about boxing being comparable. The great thing about this question is also that everybodies opinion and personalised on what they’ve seen themselves.
I’d say the same as you said about RJJ fr Sugar Ray in his prime. But then again I consider RJJ’s chin to be suspect and Sugar ray’s to be granite. Thats what separates it for me at their prime.
OMC
surprised theres been no mention of ali yet kinda shocking.
[quote]Agressive Napkin wrote:
FightinIrish26 wrote:
WhiteFlash wrote:
It’s not like football where the lineman used to weigh 220 and ran 6 second 40s, and now the guys are monsters. Fighters are equal across time because there’s so much heart involved.
I would just have to say that I don’t think heart is the reason boxing hasn’t changed much (they have heart in spades, please don’t misunderstand).
I would argue it has more to do with weightclass restrictions and the anaerobic/aerobic combination of the sport. Not really that important why, I suppose, I’m just saying. [/hijack]
[/quote]
While I agree with what your saying, there’s a lot of genetic factors involved, namely that if a guy has a glass jaw, that can’t be fixed.
I don’t think there’s anything in football that you can’t improve on- with enough hard work, a top athlete can get faster, stronger, etc. But you can’t fix a guy who can’t take a punch.
As far as power- can you improve it? Yes. But to a large extent, power punchers are born that way. You can’t teach a Paulie Malignaggi how to hit like a Diego Corrales. It just will never happen.
Guys get into rhytyms with how they fight, and once they learn a certain way it’s very hard to deviate. Its not like Tiki Barber training with the dude from Jersey so he fumbles less, or a player coming back bigger and faster. Boxing, I think, is something that boxers are very much born into.
Fighting is also different than every other sport in the world because the express purpose is to hurt your opponent as badly as you can. To me, that means that your psychological state of mind is more important than anything else. I’ve played all sports, but nothing is so much a mindfuck as getting hit.
Forgive me if I’m rambling and not making sense, it’s been a long weekend.
[quote]duffyj2 wrote:
I would just have to say that I don’t think heart is the reason boxing hasn’t changed much (they have heart in spades, please don’t misunderstand).
I would argue it has more to do with weightclass restrictions and the anaerobic/aerobic combination of the sport. Not really that important why, I suppose, I’m just saying. [/hijack]
Agreed. And the aversion to weight training. And supplementation. And who says “I’d love to go pro- but really, ya gotta take steroids”.
I don’t think linebackers got bigger because there is so little heart involved…[/quote]
Also, as the other guy said, weight class restrictions place a heavy amount on how much bigger a fighter really wants to get. It’s just different sports.
Are boxing trainers still a bit backwards? In regards to weightlifting, sure. But I can see how many of them think, “Why change what works?”
[quote]Jlabs wrote:
surprised theres been no mention of ali yet kinda shocking.[/quote]
I love him. But as far as pound for pound, there were better fighters.
[
We are actually in agreement here. I never said that boxing coaches are backward, period; I said they are uneducated as regards weight training. I honestly don’t believe there is a more effective form of conditioning than the traditional boxing circuit…
By this I mean:
Skipping
Speed bag
Heavy bag
Shadowboxing etc.
Marvelous Marvin Hagler. Strength, power, enough speed, chin, ridiculous heart, stamina and was disciplined like no other. A pure fighter all around.
[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:
One choice. Who you pick? Pound for pound king. Explain your reasoning.
After much analysis, ridiculous amounts of research, and all that other bullshit, I’ve decided I’m going with Roy Jones Jr. [/quote]
sugar ray robinson
/thread.
[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:
I’m talking more boxing. I don’t know that MMA has the rich history yet- you can ask who was the greatest MMA guy in 50 years, and see who comes up and what not, and who’s career really lasted the longest. Not really a conversation you can have just yet.
As for criteria, base it however you like. Some folks go for Marciano’s 49-0, some folks go for Ali based on his famous fights, some will go with Robinson or Mayweather.
I picked Jones because I think pound for pound, he’s the best mix of power and speed I’ve ever seen. Though he has great fundamentals, he fought brawls because that was his nature- he’ll stand toe to toe and still could knock you out. I think he’s underrated in the pantheon of great fighters.
Sugar Ray Robinson is a great answer too. I would have enjoyed seeing the two of them fight at middleweight…would have been incredible.
Muhammad Ali could also be mentioned, as I think his skills were some of the best I’ve ever seen also. [/quote]
got to disagree irish, RJJ does NOT have great fundamentals. i am surprised you say this, as my understanding is you have quite the boxing background, much more than me.
RJJ, Ali, maywether, all are FREAKISH TALENTS, who had lousy fundamentals. there insane amount of talent made up for that. that is why guys like RJJ and Ali, start getting hit very hard and often once a little age catches up with them and they lose a step or two.
while fighters with great fundamentals, like Glen Johnson stay at a top level into their forties, as long as they have their conditioning dialed in.
[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:
Agressive Napkin wrote:
FightinIrish26 wrote:
WhiteFlash wrote:
It’s not like football where the lineman used to weigh 220 and ran 6 second 40s, and now the guys are monsters. Fighters are equal across time because there’s so much heart involved.
I would just have to say that I don’t think heart is the reason boxing hasn’t changed much (they have heart in spades, please don’t misunderstand).
I would argue it has more to do with weightclass restrictions and the anaerobic/aerobic combination of the sport. Not really that important why, I suppose, I’m just saying. [/hijack]
While I agree with what your saying, there’s a lot of genetic factors involved, namely that if a guy has a glass jaw, that can’t be fixed.
I don’t think there’s anything in football that you can’t improve on- with enough hard work, a top athlete can get faster, stronger, etc. But you can’t fix a guy who can’t take a punch.
As far as power- can you improve it? Yes. But to a large extent, power punchers are born that way. You can’t teach a Paulie Malignaggi how to hit like a Diego Corrales. It just will never happen.
Guys get into rhytyms with how they fight, and once they learn a certain way it’s very hard to deviate. Its not like Tiki Barber training with the dude from Jersey so he fumbles less, or a player coming back bigger and faster. Boxing, I think, is something that boxers are very much born into.
Fighting is also different than every other sport in the world because the express purpose is to hurt your opponent as badly as you can. To me, that means that your psychological state of mind is more important than anything else. I’ve played all sports, but nothing is so much a mindfuck as getting hit.
Forgive me if I’m rambling and not making sense, it’s been a long weekend.[/quote]
\
excellent post irish, excellent. mind fuck indeed. so you get beat at a game of basket ball or tennis, or football, so what? somebody hit a little ball a little to fast for you to hit it back, or was a little to quick for you to stop him before he ran accross a white line while holding a ball, or he could throw a ball into a hoop from a greater distance than you. so what?
you get beat in one-one combat sport, that means another man in a fair fight just beat you up, and you were not able to stop him, despite your best efforts. you were helpless against another man and had to take a beating. that really messes with ones psyche. many fighter are never the same after a big loss/KO, just for that reason, no matter what the talent level.