A couple of questions for ya....

Got a few questions for you:

1. Boxing gloves.

I once read about the difference in effect that boxing gloves and MMA gloves have on opponents. From memory, the article I read is that due to the bigger surface area of boxing gloves, they distribute the damage over a larger area. This has the effect that boxers take more damage than an equivalent punch from a MMA style glove (as the boxer is more likely to take more punches before going down and cause more lasting damage).

Conversely, MMA gloves offer more of a one punch knock out which is better for the fighter long term.

Does anyone know any more on this subject?

2. Punching power

I read on here (I think) that when a fighter moves up in weight, they get stronger neck muscles and therefore can take a punch better (I think it was with regards to Khan moving up). Also, punching power would obviously increase at the same time as well but speed would potentially diminish (both hand speed and movement generally).

So my question is, what do you think is the optimum weight class for the most effective fighter.

3. Who would you not like to face?

Following on from the previous question, who would you least like to face in a fight (and for the purpose of this, lets make it a street fight). Would you fancy your chances against a heavyweight more due to a lack of speed or would you prefer to fight a smaller fighter due to size advantage.

Cheers guys

The distribution of power over a larger surface area inflicts less damage than a punch distributed over a smaller area.

Try throwing a flat object into a dartboard as opposed to say a dart

imperialghosty wrote:The distribution of power over a larger surface area inflicts less damage than a punch distributed over a smaller area.

Try throwing a flat object into a dartboard as opposed to say a dart

I know that - the point I was making is that due to less damage being inflicted by one punch, the boxer takes more punches to go down - this is what makes it more dangerous in the long term for boxers.

Alternatively put bricks in your gloves and it would make both sports safer

Gloves are designed to protect the hands, therefore bigger gloves mean you can punch hard areas like the skull with less risk. Depends what you mean by damage, but for knockouts the force of a punch is more important than the pressure so gloves don't impact that too much, and the power isn't spread to the outer padding. They would have a big affect on things like cuts though as a sharper object is hitting the target.

Heavyweights are the most effective or other guys would fight there and take the big money.

Didn't a fighter die when his opponent had the padding removed from his gloves? Not sure it would be the best idea to have that going on on a regular basis.

Boxers usually opt for 10 ounce gloves where MMA fighters use 4 ounces.

I thinks it more to do with repeated blows to the head rather than surface area. It's safer in MMA due to the fact that a sharp blow will knock you out due to the less padding whearas in boxing the extra padding will take some of the sting out of the blow - but you brain still shakes.

As a result of this boxers get hit a hell of a lot more hence why boxing is more dangerous for you than MMA.

Dazstarr wrote:Boxers usually opt for 10 ounce gloves where MMA fighters use 4 ounces.

I thinks it more to do with repeated blows to the head rather than surface area. It's safer in MMA due to the fact that a sharp blow will knock you out due to the less padding whearas in boxing the extra padding will take some of the sting out of the blow - but you brain still shakes.

As a result of this boxers get hit a hell of a lot more hence why boxing is more dangerous for you than MMA.

thanks for that - thats what I had heard as well.

what about the other questions?

I think the immediate danger is smaller with gloves, but the long term effects are more dangerous. According to (http://ejmas.com/jcs/jcsart_svinth_a_0700.htm) bareknuckle boxing had 14k deaths per million whereas we have 76 today. Although you have to consider that medical supervision is much better today, and fights are stopped much earlier rather than being to the finish. So those figures are perhaps useless. The British Medical Assossiation believe the long term effects of gloved boxing are higher (brain damage etc) as you can punch harder with gloves without damage to your hands (http://www.bma.org/ap.nsf/AttachmentsByTitle/PDFboxingdebate/$FILE/TheBoxingDebate.pdf).

I don't think the gloves make too much difference with regards to actual knockouts, the force, power and impact is the same but physical things like cuts, bruises, broken bones etc. are more likely with smaller gloves. I heard that deaths in bareknuckle boxing were very low for the reason that you don't commit fully to the punches because it damages your hands to much.

imperialghosty wrote:I don't think the gloves make too much difference with regards to actual knockouts, the force, power and impact is the same but physical things like cuts, bruises, broken bones etc. are more likely with smaller gloves. I heard that deaths in bareknuckle boxing were very low for the reason that you don't commit fully to the punches because it damages your hands to much.

Not sure about that mate - if you take a punch with a 10oz glove and then one with the 4 oz - im sure you will feel the difference. Thats why there are so many more KO's in MMA. Catch em flush and they will be out and just drop to the floor.

Hardly see that in boxing these days - if you catch someone in boxing - you hardly ever see an instant KO - more of a chicken dance/wobble and then the opponent will swing hell for leather until the ref stops it. You do occasionally see an instant KO but its more a matter of timing i think in boxing.

If you take Judah fight for example - he caught Mabuza with a perfectly timed left hand and had him in all sorts of trouble. If that fight was in the UFC - that same punch would have KO'ed him there and then.

I'd guess that's more to do with the boxer's ability to anticipate a punch, brace themselves, roll with it and a lot of them train on building neck muscles etc. As well as not hanging their chin out.

Dazstarr

It's because MMA fighters are Cat's who's "technical prowess" when standing on their own 2 feet is akin to watching two drunkards slug it out over some tart who had them both in the toilets.. twice.

Ok the swear filter doesn't allow for Puussey... so replaces it with "cat"

How rubbish if i wanted to talk about cats and use the term "puussy"

I thought you were being ghetto.

Scottrf wrote:I thought you were being ghetto.

I thought we had slipped back in time so im slightly relieved

Not necessarily Coxy mate - there are some outstanding boxers in the UFC.

Daz

I would've hoped for that Randy Mandy to give Toney a rematch inside a boxing ring. Would be funny to see what an overweight, completely shot version of Toney would do to him in a reversal.

And i'd like to know which UFC fighters who are successful have had any sort of decorative boxing career/successes, be it amateur or pro etc etc. Didn't Ray Mercer, another fat and shot fighter, spark one of the big guys a few years back with what was a short little chopping pitt patt punch? There's one you can leave off your list, and i wouldn't label him "excellent" either.

Fact is if any MMA star got in with any top 10 fighter around his respective weight he'd get his head taken off.

coxy0001 wrote:Ok the swear filter doesn't allow for Puussey... so replaces it with "cat"

How rubbish if i wanted to talk about cats and use the term "puussy"

Do you often want to talk about felines Coxy? Shall I make a special Coxy's cat corner for you?

You will feel a difference between different gloves but the effect it has on the brain would be fairly similar I would assume. The defence against punches in MMA would be a signigicant reason why there are more knock outs, it's one thing defending against a takedown but from what i've seen there defence against punches isn't great.

coxy0001 wrote:Daz

I would've hoped for that Randy Mandy to give Toney a rematch inside a boxing ring. Would be funny to see what an overweight, completely shot version of Toney would do to him in a reversal.

And i'd like to know which UFC fighters who are successful have had any sort of decorative boxing career/successes, be it amateur or pro etc etc. Didn't Ray Mercer, another fat and shot fighter, spark one of the big guys a few years back with what was a short little chopping pitt patt punch? There's one you can leave off your list, and i wouldn't label him "excellent" either.

Fact is if any MMA star got in with any top 10 fighter around his respective weight he'd get his head taken off.

Thats a different argument all together.

BJ Penn in his day
Anderson Silva
Rampage Jackson
Rashad Evans
Junior Dos Santos
Matt Serra
Alessio Sakara
Marcus Davis
Vitor Belfort

These are all good boxers who ply their trade in the UFC.

You say that MMA guys will have there head taken off, in a boxing ring yes, but in the Octagon - they wouldnt last 2 mins. Their front leg would be kicked off and then taken down and punished.

We are getting off topic - the point I was making earlier if the effect of smaller gloves vs bigger gloves, not UFC vs Boxing. We had more than enough of them articles on 606!

Would the size of the gloves make it harder to defend effectively as well?

And I am an MMA fan and I agree that any top 10 boxer would destroy a MMA fighter in a boxing match.

Some of them do have boxing backgrounds - I think Anderson Silva and Aronovski both have fought in boxing matches (dont know to what level mind)

It's a relevant point with regards to the ability to take a punch in each discipline

I don't think there's a huge difference myself, long term boxers take far more punches so the likelihood of things like pugilistic dementia is far increased but whether that's down to the gloves is up for debate.

I thought part of the reason MMA fighters wore smaller gloves was to do with the fact that they use their hands in other ways than simply for punching. Saying that though, I'd now like to see a MMA fight with both guys wearing boxing gloves, just for the comedy value.

Agreed Ghosty - it's not black and white. Interesting topic though!

Dazstarr wrote:Agreed Ghosty - it's not black and white. Interesting topic though!

An admin posting an interesting topic? Demote him!!!!

BALTIMORA wrote:I thought part of the reason MMA fighters wore smaller gloves was to do with the fact that they use their hands in other ways than simply for punching. Saying that though, I'd now like to see a MMA fight with both guys wearing boxing gloves, just for the comedy value.

Haha!! Can you imagine someone trying to choke someone out with big 10oz gloves on!! Haha!! Class.

I am sure there was an MMA fighter (in the early days) who wore one boxing glove - I will try and find the link!

cant find a link but here is a pic!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Art_Jimmerson,_UFC_1.jpg

You also have to consider kicks in MMA which most probably carry far more power than a punch, i'm sitting on the fence

Dont get a splinter on your bum Ghosty!! Haha!!

Hobo - you are demoted to Forum Moderator!! Oh the shame!!

I thought the moderators were liked on the forum - its the admin who arent!

Daz that's exactly the mental image I had!

here is the link for the mma guy with a boxing glove
https://www.dailymotion.com/video/x3j2wd_01-royce-garcie-vs-art-jimmerson_sport

I'll have to watch that link at home tonight hobo - thanks for sharing it. Might raise a few eye brows at work!

Great minds Balitmora!!

That fight had less action than Haye vs Harrison

It was from the first UFC - it was also his only ever MMA fight. He tapped out after being taken down - out of frustration more than anything.

Its the perfect reason why MMA guys dont wear boxing gloves!

imperialghosty wrote:It's a relevant point with regards to the ability to take a punch in each discipline

.... long term boxers take far more punches so the likelihood of things like pugilistic dementia is far increased but whether that's down to the gloves is up for debate.

Agreed.

With boxing you must remember that most of the combat is concentrated around a small window for the head. They do mix it up with body shot but its the head which will always take the most damage.

MMA being what is its opens up all types of ways to stop your opponent so in any fight they will take a lot less punches in a match compared to a boxers.

The only true way to tell the impact of gloves would be to get boxers to adopt the smaller 5oz versions. Of course that could never happen as they would spend more time out the game with broken hands ala calzaghe.

kevchadders wrote:The only true way to tell the impact of gloves would be to get boxers to adopt the smaller 5oz versions. Of course that could never happen as they would spend more time out the game with broken hands ala calzaghe.

Gloves weren't 10oz in the days of Jack Dempsey etc. His gloves were 4/5 oz or so.

Wouldn't say smaller gloves results in a knock out after the first punch, or even guarantee less damager per fight. Four to six rounds of very hard punches, could be much worse than 12 rounds of milder ones. Knock out blows and huge punches are more damaging long term than standard jabs.

Boxing does at the end of the day come down to skill, with small gloves punches will be harder and cuts are far more likely, but that doesn't necessary affect who would win or result in significantly greater punishment. In the bare knuckle era early knock outs were not particularly more common, nor were they in the 1900-1930 era when gloves were much smaller. In that era 20+ round fights were common, fights still went the distance. Boxing involves dodging punchers and rolling to reduce the effects, you shouldn't get hit that much anyway.

There are boxers in MMA, but general the standard isn't that high, hence they are dropped relatively easy. This has never been the case in any era of boxing. Being whacked on the head while on the ground, or kicked isn't that good for you either. With contact sports there is always a slight risk of permenant injuries. Is there much of a difference? Don't be a boxer or MMA fighter, if you are that concerned by it. Getting whacked in the head long term doesn't do you any favours, the end.

i thought the main reason for gloves in the first place was to protect a fighters hands not the oppents face.

the reason for a low death rate in bare knuckle boxing (in the old days) is because the majority of the punches were throwen to the chest to avoid breaking the hands of the fighter

Boxing gloves make brain injuries more likely. I think no one ever died in the ring before the induction of gloves.

But what is fact is that introduction of gloves increased the amount deaths in boxing.

It's not possible to state conclusively that an increase of deaths in the ring was because of the introduction of gloves. Coincided with it, yes, but caused by it? Not conclusively.

BALTIMORA wrote:It's not possible to state conclusively that an increase of deaths in the ring was because of the introduction of gloves. Coincided with it, yes, but caused by it? Not conclusively.

Yes it is, it is backed up by the stats and the reasoning and the science, what more do you want.

Each case is different from the next. Gloves may be a contributory faster, but they're not necessarily the out-and-out conclusive cause. And besides which, when have you ever bothered letting facts and reasoning get in the way..?

BALTIMORA wrote:Each case is different from the next. Gloves may be a contributory faster, but they're not necessarily the out-and-out conclusive cause. And besides which, when have you ever bothered letting facts and reasoning get in the way..?

Take a read.

http://www.murphybrothers.org/Spartaca/Bareknuckle.htm

I said for many a year that they should reduce glove sizes, not only will this improve the safety of the sport but will make the sport more entertaining.

First, a brief look at death toll:

In 100 years of bare-knuckle fighting in the United States, which terminated around 1897 with a John L Sullivan heavyweight championship fight, there wasn’t a single ring fatality.Today, there are three or four every year in the US, and around 15 per cent of professional fighters suffer some form of permanent brain damage during their career.

As of December, 2006, more than 1,300 boxers have died as a result of fighting injuries.

So why would, in 100 years of bare knuckle boxing, not a single death been recorded? Simple: The gloves.

http://www.fighttips.com/forum/general-discussion/16128-bare-knuckle-boxing-not-bad-thing-fact-safer-than-modern-boxing.html

Big gloves are bad for the sport, in safety and in entertainment.

D4, you're a horse's handbrake. In some of those cases (Paret, Owen) there are other circumstances which affected the consequences. In the case of Paret he took a large number of unanswered blows when the ref should have intervened. In the case of Owen he was discovered to have had a thinner than usual skull. What I'm saying is fairly simple, but as per usual you choose to ignore that and push buttons.

Let's not forget that you're the guy who all but advocated the use of loaded gloves in the name of making boxing safer. While I can see where you'd get that ridiculous idea, I think I'm right in saying that Billy Collins may disagree with your assertion that loaded gloves means less cumulative damage.

Given that records for the bare-knuckle era are sketchy at best I think it's incredibly difficult to ascertain a complete picture of comparable statistics. You can try to belittle people all you like, but you are the only person on here who has been consistently shown up as a buffoon.

To reiterate: I did not disagree with the statement that evidence shows boxing related deaths to have increased since the introduction of gloves, but given the dearth of conclusive scientific evidence from the pre-gloved era of the sport it is difficult to judge with complete accuracy that any one thing has been the definitive cause of every single one of those deaths since boxers began wearing gloves in the ring.

Continue this discussion all you like, but you will be talking to yourself. I have had enough of your stone-headed ignorance.

I never said no such thing Baltimora, so stop saying so.

I not saying that gloves are solely responsible for deaths in the ring but they do nothing to prevent brain injuries.

How do you think brain injuries occurs in the ring?

Many fatalities prior to the introduction of gloves :

http://ejmas.com/jcs/jcsart_svinth_b_0700.htm

Thank you. I had neither the requisite knowledge neither the bottomless patience required to prove my point so well.