MMA fighters have similar age to pro golfers, similar athletes?

Golf and mma require minimal athleticism which is why you see pros in both those sports dominate for longer periods of time. Bowlers, golfers, mixed martial artists, pool players, poker players, etc are all the same really.
 
As stated in the title, it's not uncommon for many champs in MMA to be competitive in their late 30s, even mid to late 40s similar to professional golfers and bowlers.

Is this because each sport requires similar levels of athleticism, or because the talent pool for each has middling at best average levels of athleticism where they can get away with it.

For instance, if LeBron James played golf from a young age we know his drives would be > than Phil Mickelson's in terms of distance (although Phil would still likely often be #1 in scrambles). Similarly we know he would mop up the Ngannou's (who last 3 minutes at best) and Mark Hunts of the world.
Are you fucking with me, kid???
 
One plays outside on grass, the other inside in a cage, but everything else is virtually identical...

110316_ms_john_daly_ice_cream.jpg
roy_nelson_4.jpg
 
One plays outside on grass, the other inside in a cage, but everything else is virtually identical...

110316_ms_john_daly_ice_cream.jpg
roy_nelson_4.jpg

You should give this MMA thing, maybe you can get a 20 million dollar pay cheque from the UFC like Connor McGregor.
 
Joking apart, I think a lot of people would be surprised at how powerful and athletic a lot of top golfers are. Regardless of skill and technique, it's still a big reason for why they hit the ball so far.
 
You should give this MMA thing, maybe you can get a 20 million dollar pay cheque from the UFC like Connor McGregor.

Conor would gas before he got to the back 9 if he attempted to take on the A level athletes in golf.
 
Another thing is how a lot of golfers miss a few years because of injuries and most players are playing with some sort of nagging injury. If you can get seriously injured playing pro golf I think people should be more accepting of fighters getting injured. People on here act like every injury that happens could have been avoided but if pro golfers get injured just from playing golf..
 
As stated in the title, it's not uncommon for many champs in MMA to be competitive in their late 30s, even mid to late 40s similar to professional golfers and bowlers.

Is this because each sport requires similar levels of athleticism, or because the talent pool for each has middling at best average levels of athleticism where they can get away with it.

For instance, if LeBron James played golf from a young age we know his drives would be > than Phil Mickelson's in terms of distance (although Phil would still likely often be #1 in scrambles). Similarly we know he would mop up the Ngannou's (who last 3 minutes at best) and Mark Hunts of the world.




ZR90_f-maxage-0.gif

You fuking suck bro.

Go back to shopping.
 
You ever play a sport that requires as much concentration as golf and tee off in front of a large crow without getting unnerved?

Sitting there in silence waiting for everyone to jump on your weakness and laugh at your misfortune.. You telling me that doesn't take balls of steel? These guys play for MILLIONS on the line, they aren't fighting for 5k to show 5k to win.






7M4aq.gif






<mma3>
 
it's not the talent, its that in mma most don't start training early. so you continue to evolve and improve at more advanced ages. golfers don't rely on athleticism so they don't lose their game from aging as quickly as other sports. aren't these things obvious?
 
As stated in the title, it's not uncommon for many champs in MMA to be competitive in their late 30s, even mid to late 40s similar to professional golfers and bowlers.

Is this because each sport requires similar levels of athleticism, or because the talent pool for each has middling at best average levels of athleticism where they can get away with it.

For instance, if LeBron James played golf from a young age we know his drives would be > than Phil Mickelson's in terms of distance (although Phil would still likely often be #1 in scrambles). Similarly we know he would mop up the Ngannou's (who last 3 minutes at best) and Mark Hunts of the world.
It's because both sports, arts, require years of experience to become "great" and technically proficient at. The best Martial Artists are always old sensei's, kru's, etc etc.. Look in mma: DJ, TJ, Tony, Woodley, Romero, DC, Stipe.. All in their 30s and just reached, or just now hitting prime in mma.
 
For someone training 5 hours a day he must have taken a full 24 hours to complete it.. Considering he gassed in a mere 3 minutes in a single round. In order for him to spar 20 rounds like a boxer it must have taken him 12-14 hours of gym time NEVERMIND the lifting required for his comic book style physique. The truth is we don't know the break down of road work, sparring, light technique and lifting for most fighters in MMA.

Conor has said he never does road work and openly showed off his "movement" training, or as Nate Diaz called it "Grab ass in the park". Phil Mickelson wouldn't have any problems rolling jits, training movement, hitting pads.

Brock was even a world champ and apparently had rules during his camp of no touching the face and he shot right up into a championship title with a few years of training. To say Phil is incapable of training MMA is crass, he would probably train harder than Cock Chesnar.
noone within his camp has ever supported that about brock, and brock was a champion wrestler and mma fighter you're comparing how hard he trains to a fat golfer?
 
Finally someone who has a legitimate point. Charles Barkley, a top 5 SF all time did prove to have a horrendous golf swing, not all athletes can cross over. This however was a fat Charles and I know little about when he began his acquisition of the beautiful game. We can only infer that Phil would likely have a shot at LHW.

As for evidence of contenders in their later years we can look at Romero, who is 40 and is head and tails above anyone in the division from a physical stand point, or TRT Vitor who was kicking young guys heads off as if he were that old dude with the wispy beard in Kill Bill with the crazy eye brows.

I think with the gradual nancification of modern day society, moving more towards more SJW and soy boy style fear of competition, combining with CTE study coming to the forefront.. The talent pool for MMA is only going to become increasingly shallow. I feel that the amount of contenders in some of the upper weight divisions is already petering out.

We are almost going to have to PRAY some of these athletes start making their way over from the PGA.

Highly competitive 40-year-olds do exist in other sports. Chris Chelios led the NHL in plus/minus at the age of 40. Tom Brady just won the NFL MVP at 40. Nolan Ryan led MLB in ERA and strikeouts at 40, and was still one of the best pitchers up until his mid-forties. He even threw a no-hitter at 43 and another at 44. There are plenty of other 40-year-olds who were very good in those sports. I don't know enough about NBA to name any there.

Those guys were all in physical decline but they had developed enough knowledge by that time to overcome any deficiencies that were creeping up. MMA is new enough and complex enough, and most fighters started late enough, that many are probably still learning a lot of new skills and strategies at 40.

I don't mind if MMA never gets the full talent pool that many other sports get. I loved the early days when it seemed like you'd have to be a bit unhinged to even try such a thing. You get some good characters that way.

Anyway, I think you did pretty good with this thread. You got me thinking. I started out writing an angry rant because it seemed like you were disrespecting MMA fighters, but I concluded that you weren't being unreasonable when I had trouble finding any direct quotes that suggested that they weren't good athletes. Just not as good as Lebron, which isn't an unreasonable thing to say. Griffin was probably one of the best athletes at his high school, but he was no Lebron.

The more I looked at the thread the more it seemed like you were simply defending golfers to MMA fans. Golf's one of those sports that often gets flak for not being a real sport. The physical skills are certainly very limited, but they're also very difficult.
 
I'm gonna reply to this thread simply because...I find so many things wrong + I detect a kind of snobbishness and ignorance which kind of pisses me off.

I've played a bit of golf and have wrassled (a little bit of striking experience) and I am telling you...they are nothing alike.

People who havent put enough thought into things are quick to delve into so-called "similarities" when really they haven't even scratched the surface regarding the core differences. You are seriously gonna compare the mental, physical process involved in setting up a triangle or kimura (which is actually highly dependent on your opponent's skills and body composition) with getting a friggin par or eagle?

The differences are quite substantial...one sport you use a metal rod to swing, there are many environmental factors that come into play (wind, grass condition, course difficulty)..another you use nothing but your bare body .

I cannot say which sport has more complexity, but I can say that they involve different kinds of complexity. The confusion here is that everyone has a different definition of athleticism (and rightfully so).

I believe MMA is a sport that requires an immense amount of training and dedication. Yes shit goes crazy when your dealing with heavyweights, but bring it down to the lightweight, welterweight level, and it really is a game of inches (different kind of inches from putting)
 
Back
Top