End of Boxing V MMA Debates

mickoo

This was took of sherdog and is a good read, also puts this debate into perspective..

How about just one more Boxing/MMA post ?

Boxing is dead…..Oh, Noooo!

The first highly critical death sentence for professional boxing as we know it today came in 1750 from the Anglican church and was supported by the Duke of Cumberland, and there have been many attempts to kill the sport and/or proclaim it’s demise since, yet it just keeps on rolling along.

Sportswriters who cannot absorb such a rough sport today carry on the sophomoric tradition of ringing the death knoll for Boxing, but the public simply isn’t buying.

Featured on the cover of ESPN magazine for the May 7 issue, it’s just like old times again.

Before last weekend, De La Hoya's 17 fights on HBO PPV had generated 10.4 million buys and $492 million in revenue.
In recent years Tyson and Holyfield did even better with 12 fights/12.4 million buys/545 million and 14 fights/12.6 million buys/534 million respectively.

This of course doesn’t even include HBO/Showtime non-PPV revenue, which is large, nor rebroadcast revenue, nor does it take into account live gate, which also adds up; 19 million for last week’s fight, for example.

This is the work of just 3 fighters.
And De La Hoya…. He’s a star, and he’s proof that Boxing can produce a star any time it wants, including now, and tomorrow.
Ali, then Leonard, Duran, Hearns, Hagler, Tyson, Holyfield, De La Hoya, and the next guy always just around the next corner.

For this fight, big sponsorship advertising money came in, and international buys outside the U.S. were staggering.

Couple that with the incredible geographical range and frequency of live fight cards on the world’s seven continents, and you’ve got a sport that dwarfs any other ‘combat sport’, by far.

I am amazed, always and forever, at the power of PR, and the gullibility of the public, an idea alive & well as you look at Sherdog and the other top MMA sites and listen to how the kids perceive the information they receive.

If you want to know what’s happening outside the PC monitor in your bedroom, think about this:

Boxing’s current pulse is measured by it’s big event of the season, and for that, Oscar and Floyd provided the attraction of this year.

MMA’s pulse, likewise is measured in it’s big event of the season, and that, as we all know, was not an event featuring 1993 stars Gracie or Shamrock, but was the addition of superstar Mirko Cro Cop to the ranks of UFC.

Comparing these events side by side is simple, and cuts through all the smokescreen, opinion and hype, and gets right down to the brass tacks of payroll.

Mirko, for his long awaited 2nd fight debut in Zuffa’s UFC, now the only promotional company putting on major shows left in MMA, received a gross payday of $350,000.00.
(Gonzaga got just 60,000.00)

There were no bonuses registered with the athletic commission for Mirko.
After federal and state taxes, training expenses, payroll deductions, transportation and lodging costs and other assorted tips, fees and gratuities, Mirko would be lucky to have actually pocketed $190,000 for his Knockout loss.

Oscar, for his part in the big fight last weekend, received a guaranteed purse of 24.4 million, plus a percentage of PPV, a piece of the promotional rights, and residuals, which will net him approximately 32.3 million dollars U.S., at a minimum.

$32,300,000.00 to be a star in Boxing.
Vs.
$190,000.00 to be a star in MMA.

Oscar gets 170 times what Mirko gets !

That’s where it stands today, and everything else is the bull**** spin.

What’s a stellar natural fighting machine to do here ? Which skills should he choose to work on ? What direction should he develop himself in ?

From a knowing Boxing fan’s perspective, the beauty of MMA’s recent emergence, and something entirely overlooked in print to date, is the fact that MMA is perceived by those who don’t understand it or want to understand it, which is most people, as "ultra violent".

I don’t think it’s ultra violent because like most sherdoggers, I love fight sports, and furthermore, I like the added facets that MMA brings to pro fight sports in the form of grappling and kick strikes, and all of the layers of strategy that go with that.

But the mainstream, they see it as evil, and what this does, is it takes the heat off of Boxing.

I’ve read Boxing lately being described as “a real sport, graceful, artistic, a sweet science….not like that other thing, that barbaric cage fighting”

Always the bad-boy of sports, to the mainstream, Boxing is now being portrayed as outright dignified in the presence of MMA and it’s growing youth appeal.

For the first time in 257 years of being vilified, the mainstream is cuddling up to Boxing now that there's an even bigger slut in town !

MMA may turn out to be the best thing to happen to Boxing since Television…….Mark my words.

Broughton, by the way, despite his loss to Jack Slack serving as the catalyst for the first big push to ban Boxing 257 years ago, lived a very long life, served as Yeomen of the Guard (head of security for the British monarch), and was interred at Westminster Abbey alongside royalty………so, let history serve here as a lesson, as it always should.

Nothingcompares

So the main point is boxing generates more revenue than MMA therefore it's happy days?

cowzerp

It just makes a mockery of mma fans argument that mma is bigger than boxing-boxing is around for a long time and will remain around for longer than any of us, mma is just a new sensation and people are mis reading this.
The competition will only make the boxing promoters work harder which can only be a good thing for boxing fans, maybe boxing promoters had it to comfortable before mma became a contender, its all good.

ThatBloke

The MMA - Boxing debate is pointless, they're two different sports. It's like comparing rugby and football.

Marathon Man

mickoo wrote:

$32,300,000.00 to be a star in Boxing.
Vs.
$190,000.00 to be a star in MMA.

Oscar gets 170 times what Mirko gets !

Doesn't matter because Oscar is 170 times more likely to suffer brain damage. What good then is his millions of dollars.

cowzerp

Marathon Man wrote:

Doesn't matter because Oscar is 170 times more likely to suffer brain damage. What good then is his millions of dollars.

This is a stupid post, cop onto yourself-if you fight you put your body at risk and oscar like tito or anyone else puts themselves at risk, there is no need for this sort of smart comment. plus i never seen oscar getting knocked out like mirko did last time out.

dlofnep

Including sponsorship, Mirko makes over a million per fight..

Not that payment is an indication of anything. PBF v DLH was a once in a decade type of fight. Those buildups are few and far between.

Secondly, nobody said MMA is bigger than boxing. MMA fans are still talking about MMA just turning mainstream.

This is a stupid post, cop onto yourself-if you fight you put your body at risk and oscar like tito or anyone else puts themselves at risk, there is no need for this sort of smart comment.

It's an honest comment, just look at Freddie Roach who trained DLH and tell me boxing doesn't have an adverse effect on people's brains.

roo1981

The main problem I see with using Mirkos purse in that argument is that its not a reflection of how much the UFC made off the entire card. MMA is still in its infancy and as yet, its the organisations (Pride, UFC, Cage Rage) that people tend to identify with, not the fighters themselves (which sucks but hey...). Just for interests sake, how many fights did the Oscar\Mayweather show have on the card, and how much did each of the fighters on the undercard make? It probably holds up as pretty close to most of what the UFC mid-card fighters would be on.

Also, wasn’t the fight promoted by Oscar through his company? That would explain why he made off with most of the purse, I think Mayweather made around 14-15 million from his part of the deal...if you consider that Chuck, Randy and Tito are now getting percentages of the PPVs their probably up to earning between 1-3 million for the bigger events-which are held more frequently than boxing, so if Chuck for instance fights 3 times a year, he could potentially make up to 10 million a year...

For instance, imagine Chuck v Randy, Chuck v Wanderlai and Chuck v Crocop in one year-all card toppers, all would have large PPV audiences. Chances are not going to happen, but its not entirely out of the question...Chuck wouldn’t exactly be crying into his purse at the end of the year...

As regards boxing dying, well, it doesn’t necessarily come down to how much they can make off one big event, but how frequently they can put on the big events, and even more importantly, how well the smaller shows that feed the sport at grass roots level are doing. Just for interests sake, how about comparing the ticket sales figures for the Cage Rage Contenders show coming up to the Bernard Dunne show in the Point earlier this year?

But I suppose the easiest way to sum this up...compare Oscars purse for that fight (which was boxings BIG event of the last year or two) to Dana White and the Ferretas yearly earnings from the UFC and Pride and I think you'll have a far more accurate gauge of how MMA is doing compared to boxing at the minute-and then go compare those figures in around 10 years time

Nothingcompares

I wonder how many people at the big boxing fights like DLH and MFW are genuine boxing fans as opposed to rich celebrities? How many of them are boxers?

Then look at the biggest MMA events in America. How many of the people in the venue are genuine MMA fans and how many are rich celebrities? How many of them compete/train in MMA?

henryb

Nothingcompares wrote:

I wonder how many people at the big boxing fights like DLH and MFW are genuine boxing fans as opposed to rich celebrities? How many of them are boxers?

Then look at the biggest MMA events in America. How many of the people in the venue are genuine MMA fans and how many are rich celebrities? How many of them compete/train in MMA?

youre point being ?

SorGan

yawn:rolleyes:

roo1981

SorGan wrote:

yawn:rolleyes:

nice input :rolleyes:

Nothingcompares

henryb wrote:

youre point being ?

My point being is there a difference? And if there is does it have an affect on the future of the two sports? If boxing has no new genuine fans only hypewhores where will it be in 50 years? When the hype around MMA gets bigger (maybe bigger than the hype around boxing) will these pseudo-fans still go to boxing matches?

I'm the first to agree that MMA and boxing have two completely different demographics when it comes to fans and the people that fund these shows. However, the glaring different is boxing fans are aged 30-50+ and MMA fans are aged 15-30+ (these figures are just figures I've come up with...). Will boxing replace the fans it loses to old age? What will happen to the next generation who won't know who Mike Tyson is never mind Muhammed Ali? Boxing is getting smaller, it's undeniable. MMA is getting bigger. The question is will how small will boxing get before levelling off in popularity and how big will MMA get before its popularity plateaus? The second question, a question we won't see answered for a long time, is will MMA interest eclipse boxing interest. Why not? I hope it does.

henryb

Nothingcompares wrote:

My point being is there a difference? And if there is does it have an affect on the future of the two sports? If boxing has no new genuine fans only hypewhores where will it be in 50 years? When the hype around MMA gets bigger (maybe bigger than the hype around boxing) will these pseudo-fans still go to boxing matches?

I'm the first to agree that MMA and boxing have two completely different demographics when it comes to fans and the people that fund these shows. However, the glaring different is boxing fans are aged 30-50+ and MMA fans are aged 15-30+ (these figures are just figures I've come up with...). Will boxing replace the fans it loses to old age? What will happen to the next generation who won't know who Mike Tyson is never mind Muhammed Ali? Boxing is getting smaller, it's undeniable. MMA is getting bigger. The question is will how small will boxing get before levelling off in popularity and how big will MMA get before its popularity plateaus? The second question, a question we won't see answered for a long time, is will MMA interest eclipse boxing interest. Why not? I hope it does.

Fair point. But i can see you have major interest in combat sport, but why the dislike so much for boxing. I've noticed you're very quick to knock boxing when you get the chance and dont seem to have any regard for basically anything that has to do with it? Id be genuinely interested in if you think some of todays greats in MMA will be remebered in maybe 25, 50 or even a 100 years time?

bilbo79

Boxing is way more popular than boxing in europe and everywhere else except maybe japan and north america, most boxing clubs are overfull in dublin and this is with kids not adults like most mma clubs are, mma clubs are far from full either. in america they are mad into wrestling and boxing so mma is perfect for americans, japanese are also into grappling such as judo and jiu jitsu so same applies, they love all combat sports anyway.
Also the celebs that go to mma shows are pathetic people looking to get on the big screen as they know they will get on as this is all part of making mma mainstream-paris hilton comes to mind, great fan!!! also boxing is after replacing the ufc on hbo and this is where the exposure is easily 50 times that of ppv events, this was a big blow to mma and big boost to boxing,
the only big player in mma is ufc now and there bills are getting weaker every year..i think mma has peaked in the states and is not that interesting anymore-in ireland its still unknown so i think people will go through this phase of interest also-boxing has remained the most popular fight sport and always will-kickboxing had a similar stint in the late 70's early 80's where people thought it would take over also-what happened? over the next few months there is lots of top class boxing on keeping it on top of the tree.

henryb

But I suppose the easiest way to sum this up...compare Oscars purse for that fight (which was boxings BIG event of the last year or two) to Dana White and the Ferretas yearly earnings from the UFC and Pride and I think you'll have a far more accurate gauge of how MMA is doing compared to boxing at the minute-and then go compare those figures in around 10 years time [/QUOTE]

so your comparing the purse of ONE main boxing event to a full
years earnings of UFC and PRIDE.?
How is that anything to go by?

Nothingcompares

I've nothing against boxing I think it's a great sport and I enjoy it.

I just think the main advantage boxing has over mma is that it's more established. To use a very dodgy analogy I'd say boxing is like alcohol and mma is like cannabis. Almost everyone drinks alcohol and are fairly aware of its dangers (liver damage, drunk and disorderly behaviour) but nobody really minds. This is like boxing because everyone is aware of it, the recognise it's actually quite dangerous (repetitive head trauma, high conditioning etc.) but people accept it. But cannabis on the other hand is much less widespread. And of course there are people that think it's some kind of demon drug that leads to crime, prostitution and harder drugs. This is all nonsense. Of course it has its genuine faults (lung cancer, lethargy). This is like mma because people don't know what mma is and think it's something violent and dangerous because they don't understand.

I love boxing and mma but say no to drugs.

cowzerp

Nothingcompares wrote:

I've nothing against boxing I think it's a great sport and I enjoy it.

I just think the main advantage boxing has over mma is that it's more established. To use a very dodgy analogy I'd say boxing is like alcohol and mma is like cannabis. Almost everyone drinks alcohol and are fairly aware of its dangers (liver damage, drunk and disorderly behaviour) but nobody really minds. This is like boxing because everyone is aware of it, the recognise it's actually quite dangerous (repetitive head trauma, high conditioning etc.) but people accept it. But cannabis on the other hand is much less widespread. And of course there are people that think it's some kind of demon drug that leads to crime, prostitution and harder drugs. This is all nonsense. Of course it has its genuine faults (lung cancer, lethargy). This is like mma because people don't know what mma is and think it's something violent and dangerous because they don't understand.

I love boxing and mma but say no to drugs.

I like your analogy and think it makes sense but it does not change the fact that boxing's popularity is higher than mma's-the pay days are 1 way of proving this as fans money is what pays for both events, the other is the fact that the de la hoya v mayweather was such a success and it was because 1 fight, some of the last ufc's have had excellent bills and still only matched up to ppv of boxing bills with only 1 big fight on it. the fact that mma is still unknown is part of why people are interested-its the mystery.mma will not die but i do believe its peaked worldwide, not yet in ireland though-boxing is still huge as always and i dont see this changing any time soon-anybody see the miranda v pavlik fight last night-awesome toe to toe war, pavlik was amazing and will want to box jermain taylor next-these are the big fights that will sell tickets..if you did not see it, try to.

Vince135792003

You can use a whole lot of measurements to say which 1 is more popular than the other depending on what side you want to take.

You can use pay days for boxing. You can use the big De La Hoya fight too.

Others can use the average MMA ppv buy rate versus the average boxing buy rate in 2006 if they want to say MMA is more popular. Or they can use tv ratings currently.

Heres a very good article on the debate I think which I've put up before:

Boxing vs. MMA? Everyone can win
By Dave Meltzer, Special to The Times
May 3, 2007

The prevailing news story in this week of Oscar De La Hoya vs. Mayweather, is that this is boxing's last stand, and that MMA, and more particularly, the UFC, is taking over.

Some decry it as savagery replacing sport. Some grudgingly admit it is a more organized promotion serving its fan base better while taking advantage of an industry that has screwed itself up. Some see it as a reality that a real fight entails more than just punching, and once UFC got television, more and more people would figure it out. Some welcome the change. Some refuse to understand anything new. Some hate that a sport that has been a significant part of our culture for more than a century has competition from something that a few years ago wasn't considered a sport, and one that has barely a decade of history, much of it being underground.

But the real story of combat sports over the next year, and the next decade, isn't nearly so simple.

If you attend live boxing and live MMA, they have separate fan bases. Both will live and die based on an ability to produce good television, constantly create new stars, and by presenting the matches people want to see with those stars. But both can thrive, and both can falter, simultaneously. The test if they were truly eating the audience of the other was already proven back on Nov. 18, when both groups presented a major PPV event head-to-head. When Manny Pacquoia vs. Erik Morales and Matt Hughes vs. Georges St. Pierre took place on the same date, both events did the numbers expected.

Boxing, to its detriment, has an older fan base, and aside from the blowout night this week where boxing gets back on the front pages, it has for years been carried by the Latino community in the Southwest. At the grassroots level, when you attend boxing, the characters in the crowd make you feel like you are taking a trip back to the 70s. UFC is stronger with younger viewers, and has made it easier to see bigger name current fighters on television with endless weekly hours of taped fights on Spike TV. It has taken major media strides in the last year, but it has many more to go. Most newspapers won't cover the next UFC even though Chuck Liddell vs. Quinton Jackson will do probably one of the five biggest PPV numbers of 2007 in any genre. Most television stations won't be talking about it the next day in their sportscasts. But things move slowly, as 18 months ago, almost no newspapers or TV stations would get anywhere near it, and slowly, coverage has increased where you can expect the results that night on ESPN.

MMA also has a lot of hurdles. In a perfect world in both sports, there would be true world champions and all the top contenders would be in line. Among MMA's secrets is it's as fractured as boxing. There are countless organizations with countless championships. The UFC titles are the best known, because they have the strongest television coverage and a monopoly on the biggest names known in North America. But not only are there other champions, but the UFC power base of Lorenzo & Frank Fertitta and Dana White are presiding over two other organizations, the Pride Fighting Championships and World Extreme Cagefighting, with separate rosters and their own champions. They have the power to put the champions against each other, and when the other groups are established to the public, Super Bowl-like matches have been talked about.

One of the biggest hurdles is the sport itself. It can be a blessing at times, like when Randy Couture beat Tim Sylvia, or a curse, like when Gabriel Gonzaga beat Mirko Cro Cop, that upsets are going to be more prevalent in this sport than boxing. When you get to the top level, everyone has some aspect of his game better than his opponent, whether it be his wrestling, boxing, kickboxing, submissions, experience or conditioning. As the depth of the talent pool increases, so do the number of upsets. And it's not just imposing your strength. The nature of the beast allows for things to happen that don't in boxing.

In the Georges St. Pierre vs. Matt Serra match on April 7 in Houston, where Serra, an 8-to-1 underdog, won the welterweight championship from someone who many tabbed the perfect modern fighter, he simply connected with a hard punch with small gloves. In a boxing match when St. Pierre went down, he'd have had an eight count to recover. It's not unusual to see an underdog floor a champion early as a wake-up call, and the more skilled champion regains his bearings to win. That can also happen in MMA. But in this instance, there was no recovery time after the knockdown, as Serra continued to hit him and St. Pierre was done in the first round.

But now what on paper figured to be UFC's three biggest money matches of 2007, St. Pierre vs. Matt Hughes, Couture vs. Cro Cop and the winner of that match possibly against Chuck Liddell (provided he were to get past Quinton Jackson, which like every big fight, is hardly a lock) are out the window. For a fan of the sport of MMA, it makes it more exciting. For a fan who waits to see only big matches, the wait just got a lot longer.

The De La Hoya vs. Mayweather dynamic is based partly on the fact that De La Hoya has been on top for years and is facing an ultimate challenge from an unbeaten fighter. You are unlikely to ever get a 37-0 fighter in MMA, and you never will in UFC, where fighters at the main-event level are usually matched up with people who have the ability to beat them. Parity isn't great when you want to do 1,000,000 buys on PPV. But with so many ways to win, and so many ways to lose, parity at the top level is seemingly inevitable. But you can only do those numbers only with superstars and grudge matches.

Whether the audience is willing to accept that St. Pierre or Cro Cop, or Liddell if he gets beat, are still big stars after first-round stoppage losses is, in the long run, one of its biggest long-term tests. Another is whether too much product on television will entice more fans, or burn out the audience. Last year was filled with constant talk of shockingly high numbers when it came to ratings and PPV. This year, with far more hours of programming, plus countless new companies trying to jump on a hot trend, there is no such talk. A major UFC event still can beat the NBA playoffs or NASCAR in Males 18-34, but it's not going to be beating the World Series in October, like it did last year.

If we look at UFC's biggest money players, the conclusion you come to is that its long-term is based on its ability to create a new generation of stars as popular as the one currently on top. For the stars of 2006, Couture is almost 44, and has popularity from his consistent ability to rebound after losses, but he can't be expected to be a factor much longer. Liddell is 37, but his drawing power is based on his knockout power and that the new fan base knows he has lost, but has never actually seen it. Ken Shamrock and Royce Gracie, who drew huge numbers last year, will likely never be back in a UFC main event. Tito Ortiz, St. Pierre, Forrest Griffin, Matt Hughes, Rich Franklin, Diego Sanchez and B.J. Penn, the other stars of last year, are all trying to rebound to reclaim their spot after major losses. Mirko Cro Cop, Japan's human highlight reel, had the style and charisma to make him the best shot to rapidly jump to the head of the class. But now he's best known by U.S. fans as being on the wrong end of someone else's highlight reel. The turnover at the top is quicker than sports fans are used to.

On paper, you can say Matt Serra is a great talker who can be pushed as an overachiever. Josh Koscheck is a brilliant wrestler, but has to overcome a mentality from wrestling based on winning by points as opposed to being entertaining. Gabriel Gonzaga may be the biggest test of all. He just beat Cro Cop and will be favored against Couture when they meet on Aug. 25. If he becomes champion, the public takes to him as a star, and his title matches prove to be big draws, then UFC can survive and thrive in a world where upsets will become a regular thing.

It doesn't matter what happens to boxing on Saturday, or after Saturday, and whether boxing or pro wrestling (which is probably more legitimate competition with UFC due to their similar target audience) have banner years or terrible years. UFC's role in a changing sports world will live or die based on the company's ability to market new stars, and the public's willingness to accept new stars, and that big stars are going to lose, and not write them off.

Dave Meltzer is the creator and author of the Wrestling Observer Newsletter, a leading publication covering pro wrestling and MMA. For more information: www.wrestlingobserver.com

SorGan

roo1981 wrote:

nice input :rolleyes:

cheers:D

O'Leprosy

For the first time in 257 years of being vilified, the mainstream is cuddling up to Boxing now that there's an even bigger slut in town !

johnathan woss

Nothingcompares wrote:

My point being is there a difference? And if there is does it have an affect on the future of the two sports? If boxing has no new genuine fans only hypewhores where will it be in 50 years? When the hype around MMA gets bigger (maybe bigger than the hype around boxing) will these pseudo-fans still go to boxing matches?

I'm the first to agree that MMA and boxing have two completely different demographics when it comes to fans and the people that fund these shows. However, the glaring different is boxing fans are aged 30-50+ and MMA fans are aged 15-30+ (these figures are just figures I've come up with...). Will boxing replace the fans it loses to old age? What will happen to the next generation who won't know who Mike Tyson is never mind Muhammed Ali? Boxing is getting smaller, it's undeniable. MMA is getting bigger. The question is will how small will boxing get before levelling off in popularity and how big will MMA get before its popularity plateaus? The second question, a question we won't see answered for a long time, is will MMA interest eclipse boxing interest. Why not? I hope it does.

You just love arguing on the internet IMO.
I mean in the above post you've just made stuff up off the top of your head.
If you spent as much time training as you spend on here arguing you could probably be a boxing AND a mma champ!

Marathon Man

cowzerp wrote:

plus i never seen oscar getting knocked out like mirko did last time out.

I knew someone was going to say this. If you fight in MMA and are really good being knocked out is a rarity. Whereas in boxing cumulative damage is a certainty.

Pride Fighter

Boxing sucks, end of thread!!

cowzerp

Pride Fighter wrote:

Boxing sucks, end of thread!!

YOU SUCK. cop onto yourself-your a **** stirrer.

Mark Hamill

Pride Fighter wrote:

Boxing sucks, end of thread!!

Something a little more constructive next time, methinks :rolleyes:

Personnally i find boxing to be pretty boring (if someone can hit you better than you can hit them then take them down and submit them!), but i have no doubts about the skill and conditioning thats required to do it.
Before seeing threads like this it would never had occured to me that Boxing and MMA where "at war" with each other,so to speak, there is no reason why both can't just live together.

cowzerp

Mark Hamill wrote:

Something a little more constructive next time, methinks :rolleyes:
Before seeing threads like this it would never had occured to me that Boxing and MMA where "at war" with each other,so to speak, there is no reason why both can't just live together.

There not but some mma fans who probably only got into combat sports this year are jumping on the dana white bandwagon of trying to knock boxing to get hype for his own business which is starting to peak-if boxing was not so big he would not do this-he an annoying little fecker and a failed boxing promoter-pride fighter just needs to get out of his star trek loving shell!!

henryb

Pride Fighter wrote:

Boxing sucks, end of thread!!

What exactly do you know about boxing anyway???
Ever been in the ring in your life?

dlofnep

Ah lads, where did all this tension come from? Can't we just go one day on this forum without taking the piss out of each other?

Boxing is great.
MMA is great.

The end!