Best Within

[Jonathan]

Since you apparently think you could hold your own against Kimbo

I think you guys are being more than a bit hard on Virginia. Taking care of one's self on the street against the average mugger doesn't require that one be able to "hold your own against Kimbo". The average man is 5'8".

I've been basing my comments on Virginia's claim:

"If I fight properly, I won't get hurt -- even against a guy three times my size."

Kimbo is less than three times her size. And it's not just a world-class bas-ass like Kimbo who would hurt Virginia very badly. It's almost any physically healthy male close to that size.

Look, I don't doubt that Virginia's got some skills. The point is simply that her hubris crosses over into fantasy.

There are a lot of variables here and you're kind of assuming the worst here: You're putting Virginia up against a huge, world-class fighter with a personal grudge against her and the will to fight to the death. Is THAT realistic?

Again, I'm putting Virginia up against bad-assed opponents based on her comparing the effort put in by some of her male karate opponents to "a REAL attack, by a very eager, angry man," which is bullshit.

J

[rush242]

Hmmmmmmmmmmmm...

I get the impression that her toe is IN that guys nose!! Pull out Virginia, pull out!!

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

I get the impression that her toe is IN that guys nose!! Pull out Virginia, pull out!!

Rush,

Kimbo certainly is staring that toe down and ready to rock and roll.

(Virginia: I am just horsing around, so please don't be offended. Besides, you look pretty damn good beside Kimbo. )

Michael

[Judith]

I've been basing my comments on Virginia's claim:

"If I fight properly, I won't get hurt -- even against a guy three times my size."

That claim was made in the context of a tournament if I recall correctly.

Kimbo is less than three times her size. And it's not just a world-class bas-ass like Kimbo who would hurt Virginia very badly. It's almost any physically healthy male close to that size.

Look, I don't doubt that Virginia's got some skills. The point is simply that her hubris crosses over into fantasy.

"Some skills"? Jesus fucking christ, man, the woman has a black belt. Show a little respect.

"any physically healthy male close to that size". Now it's male hubris that YOU are showing. In fact, I believe that you are assuming that you and Kimbo and any other male of comparable size would do a comparable job pitted against a small woman simply because of size, with skill having little to do with the matter.

Guess what? There are numerous police reports out there of rather large men having been knocked unconscious by rather small women who had skills they gained in a single weekend self-defense course. Reports of women who woke in their own beds to find a would-be rapist on top of them, straddling them and holding their arms, with the full weight of the man on top of the woman, and the woman fought her way free, knocked out the man, got to safety, and called the police, who apprehended the guy. Reports of guys with grudges against women, with real motivation to do them harm, who were successfully fought off by tiny women with a few skills and the will to win. Not one or two, not freak occasions, but numerous reports.

Check out something called Impact Model Mugging. Check out a book called "Defend Yourself" by a man named Matt Thomas. If you can't be bothered to follow up, I can't be bothered to discuss the matter further. Virginia's already given up, and I will too after this post. It's not our job to enlighten the world. And, frankly, it's to the advantage of all women that men continue to believe that their size is all they need; heaven forbid that muggers and rapists begin to train and learn serious fighting techniques.

Judith

[Jonathan]

"Some skills"? Jesus fucking christ, man, the woman has a black belt.

My comment was meant to be something of an intentional understatement. It's like saying I'm sure Michael's got some game, or I'm sure Jack has got some whoop-ass, etc.

Show a little respect.

How much respect?

I've never played against a woman who is in the WNBA, but I've beaten a high school boy who easily beat a WNBA player in a one-on-one game. I respect the fact that WNBA players are very talented within the context of women's sports, and I love watching them play, but does the fact that they have the title of being WNBA players mean that I should respect them more than I respect the boy who I beat, who beat one of them, and who has no prestigious professional sports title?

I'm curious -- do my minor, everyday, high school sports medals, ribbons, trophies and other trinkets earn me the same respect that I'm supposed to give to someone who has a black belt but who wouldn't be able to earn the same trinkets herself by facing the same opponents that I faced to earn them?

"any physically healthy male close to that size". Now it's male hubris that YOU are showing. In fact, I believe that you are assuming that you and Kimbo and any other male of comparable size would do a comparable job pitted against a small woman simply because of size, with skill having little to do with the matter.

No, I'm not making that assumption. I think that each male my size would have different skill levels, and there are probably some who were never athletic, so, sure, my comment was a bit of an exaggeration, since "any" physically healthy male wouldn't necessarily be able to hurt Virginia in a fight. So, to be more precise, my view is that most males my size who have some experiences similar to mine, like fighting against males my size, or playing contact sports, would pretty quickly overpower someone of Virginia's size and fighting skills. I think that most such males, if they went full throttle, would very likely hurt her badly in a fight (and I'm generally trying to refer here to consensual fights -- I don't want to leave the impression that I'm salivating at the prospect of Virginia or anyone else being put into situations where they have to try to fend off rights-violating attacks).

Judith, have you ever suited up in football gear and been tackled head-on, full-force by a 150 to 250 pound opponent? Have you ever taken multiple punches to the head from someone in either a street fight or boxing match, and remained standing? Have you ever hit an opponent so hard that you broke your hand on their skull and gave them an egg the size of a softball? If not, I would suggest that you can't fathom the perspective that a large male has on the relevance of size, strength and speed.

As I mentioned earlier, I've been in a lot of athletic situations in which small women, who were quite talented in the context of playing against other athletic women or small, novice males, thought quite a lot of their own abilities. I've played against them, and, much more often than not, their notions of their skill levels, strength and speed, in comparison to large males, turned out to be very mistaken.

So, this isn't about male hubris or a fragile male ego. It's about having heard the same sort of claims many times in the past.

Btw, I think that most males one hundred pounds heavier than me, and with at least some minimal athletic experience, would kick my ass in a fight. There are reasons that combative sports generally adhere pretty strictly to weight classes.

Guess what? There are numerous police reports out there of rather large men having been knocked unconscious by rather small women who had skills they gained in a single weekend self-defense course.

I think you're missing the context of my comments. I'm not claiming that small women can't do damage to large men -- I think they can, especially when taking advantage of the element of surprise -- I'm disagreeing with Virginia's claim that she would not get hurt in a fight against a man three times her size if she just keeps her hands up, is careful to maintain her balance when striking, and otherwise fights properly.

I've seen strong, talented women, who were larger than Virginia, sparring against men who were smaller than I am, and, despite keeping their hands up, the women got pummeled. They didn't have enough bulk and upper body strength to block or deflect the blows -- they basically ended up getting punched in the head with their own hands. I just don't think that you or Virginia are comprehending how much force is involved when being hit by someone two or three times your size. Adding mass to velocity has significant effects.

Reports of women who woke in their own beds to find a would-be rapist on top of them, straddling them and holding their arms, with the full weight of the man on top of the woman, and the woman fought her way free, knocked out the man, got to safety, and called the police, who apprehended the guy. Reports of guys with grudges against women, with real motivation to do them harm, who were successfully fought off by tiny women with a few skills and the will to win. Not one or two, not freak occasions, but numerous reports.

There are two types of fights: a consensual, planned bout, and a surprise, rights-violating attack. We've been talking about both. I think any smaller person would do better when trying to fend off the second type because the attacker may not expect much resistance. But remember, when talking about "REAL" rights-violating attacks, Virginia's proposed scenario was one in which the attacker was "very eager" and "angry," which, to me, implies a high degree of persistence which may not have been present in the cases upon which you're basing your opinions.

Anyway, there certainly are many circumstances in which a smaller person has fended off a larger one, but that's not the issue. The issue is that Virginia claimed that she would not get hurt in a fight against a male three times her size. Now, did she mean that she wouldn't get hurt against an aging, chubby accountant who never did anything athletic in his life? If so, okay. But I was under the impression that she was talking about males who would have at least some experience with fighting or wrestling, and that she wasn't talking only about right-violating attacks, but consensual, planned bouts as well.

Virginia may have done well against some dude who is two or three times her size. That doesn't mean that she wouldn't get her ass kicked by the majority of other dudes who are two or three times her size.

Check out something called Impact Model Mugging. Check out a book called "Defend Yourself" by a man named Matt Thomas. If you can't be bothered to follow up, I can't be bothered to discuss the matter further. Virginia's already given up, and I will too after this post. It's not our job to enlighten the world. And, frankly, it's to the advantage of all women that men continue to believe that their size is all they need; heaven forbid that muggers and rapists begin to train and learn serious fighting techniques.

I'm open to evidence and to changing my opinion. Video clips on youtube of bouts in which Virginia went up against males three times her size -- and not aging, chubby, non-athletic accountants -- in which the males were giving their all, and in which Virginia didn't tap out or get KO'd, would suffice. Perhaps a bout in which Virginia and a male opponent both agreed to equally fund a sizable winner-take-all prize would be incentive enough to make the male give it his all and set aside any worries about hurting a much smaller female.

J

Edited June 25, 2008 by Jonathan

[Jonathan]

Here's another picture to give some perspective:

http://www.nbaobsessed.com/wp-content/uplo...007/12/shaq.jpg

It's an image of Earl Boykins, 5'5", 133 lbs., next to Shaquille O'Neal, 7'1", 325 lbs.

That would mean that Boykins (who can bench press 300 lbs., btw) is about Virginia's size (he's a mere 2 inches taller and 18 pounds heavier), and that Shaq is basically three times the size of Virginia. That's the size of man who Virginia is claiming would not be able to hurt her in a fight.

J

[Brant Gaede]

Here's another picture to give some perspective:

http://www.nbaobsessed.com/wp-content/uplo...007/12/shaq.jpg

It's an image of Earl Boykins, 5'5", 133 lbs., next to Shaquille O'Neal, 7'1", 325 lbs.

That would mean that Boykins (who can bench press 300 lbs., btw) is about Virginia's size (he's a mere 2 inches taller and 18 pounds heavier), and that Shaq is basically three times the size of Virginia. That's the size of man who Virginia is claiming would not be able to hurt her in a fight.

She might be right. Hit and run. But there seems to be a distortion, for it looks like more than 20 inches difference.

--Brant

edit: No, there's no distortion. But is Shaq going to mug the little fellow?

Edited June 25, 2008 by Brant Gaede

[Matus1976]

Interesting Discussion, though I think the response to Virginia is a bit harsh. Some comments -

Even if being skilled in Karate gives her a false sense of being able to defeat a much larger opponent in a street fight, I seriously doubt she'd hang around long enough to find out. As I understand, most self defense orientated classes first teach you how to avoid perilous situtaitons as much as reasonably possible, I doubt they teach you to search out a fight. And no person with a modicum of self respect would do that.

Having any skills in martial arts should give her some statistical advantage in surviving any hostile encounter. Merely being in good shape will help her body live through serious injuries, she will have the endurance to fight longer and strength to fight harder than non-trained women. Knowing the most vulnerable places to strike, regardless of size, will give her another statistical advantage.

You asked her to hang around, and not run off, as an effort to demonstrate her likelyhood of surviving a street encounter. This is entirely unrealistic, no 'street fight' has rules which forbid you to run off. If running is not an immediate option, she would probably serve a debilitating strike to a critical area (throat, groin, knee) disabling the attacker, and run off. Have significant martial arts training would make such a strike much more likely to be successfull. An attacker, even a big one, would tend to go for more 'durable' targets, so to speak, head, chest, etc. Even if you're a big guy, it's not easy to break through bones with a punch, bones have the tensile strength of cast iron, and bones which have been routinely worked out can be significantly stronger as bones respond to stresses applied to them by strengthening.

Comparing the relative sizes in competitive sports is not necessarily relevant, especially football strikes, where momentum is the only thing that matters (size times speed)

The biological laws of scaling should also be considered. Muscle strength increased with the cross sectional area of a muscle, while weight increases with the VOLUME of the muscle, so relative to ones own mass, the bulkier a person is the LESS STRONG they are compared to their own weight. In other words, smaller, very fit people, can accelerate much faster than larger muscle bound people. They can change directions, swerve, etc. This is why even small men can be excellent basketball players. While Virginia maybe could not block an outright blow from that big guy, she could dodge it with much less effort than it would take him to dodge a kick to the groin from her. The bigger you are, the harder it is for you to move yourself out of your own way.

The IDF uses as many women as it does men in it's armed services, and routinely places them into the same combat situations with men. Their training, Krav Maga, seems to allow them to hold their own in combat. I'll take a female IDF trained person as a partner in a fight any day over my untrained large male friends.

And I'd place my bets on Bruce Lee over Shaq any day.

Edited June 25, 2008 by Matus1976

[Jonathan]

And I'd place my bets on Bruce Lee over Shaq any day.

Here's what it might look like - Bruce Lee vs Kareem Abdul-Jabbar in the film Game of Death:

J

"I've been hearing that crap ever since I was at UCLA. I'm out there busting my buns every night. Tell your old man to drag Walton and Lanier up and down the court for 48 minutes." – Abdul-Jabbar as "Roger Murdock" in Airplane!

[merjet]

the bulkier a person is the LESS STRONG they are compared to their own weight.

Obviously speed is also a factor in fighting, but this point is illustrated by Olympics weightlifting records. A score is the sum of two lifts, the snatch and the clean and jerk. For the lowest men's weight class (max body weight 56 kg) the record is 305 kg. 305/56 = 5.45. For the highest men's weight class (body weight 105+ kg) the record is 472 kg. The record-holder weighed 156.6 kg. 472/156.6 = 3.01.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weightlifting

[Matus1976]

And I'd place my bets on Bruce Lee over Shaq any day.

Here's what it might look like - Bruce Lee vs Kareem Abdul-Jabbar in the film Game of Death:

That was exactly what came to my mind. ;)

Lee is one of the most admirable people for his sheer physical perfection, flexibility, strength, speed, balance, endurance, etc. He seemed to be top percentile in every catagory. I took a Kung Fu class for some time, and the most advanced student in the class could launch into a spinning jump kick in the blink of an eye, it was absolutely fast enough to take someone completely off guard and deal a devastating blow to someone's head. He was a relatively short guy as well, but he could have taken me out before I had the chance to raise my arm to block. I can not fathom how fast Lee was probably able to move, though I've read reports of it and have seen some of the rare demonstration videos (he slowed down his moves for film because they were so quick as to be too blurry) I think someone with that kind of speed and strength could certainly take out someone much larger than he.

A score is the sum of two lifts, the snatch and the clean and jerk. For the lowest men's weight class (max body weight 56 kg) the record is 305 kg. 305/56 = 5.45. For the highest men's weight class (body weight 105+ kg) the record is 472 kg. The record-holder weighed 156.6 kg. 472/156.6 = 3.01.

Great example, and very interesting "power to weight" ratio differences. Honestly I didn't realize the difference was that extreme, the smaller fella almost has twice the strength to weight ratio of the larger.

Also, physiologically, as I understand so far, the kinds of muscle cells which facilitate outright strength are different that those for endurance, and both are different than those for explosive speed. The seems to be evidence of varying degrees that for the most part the ratio of these cells is fixed genetically (hence the large number long distance runner records coming from a small village in Kenya) but some evidence suggests that with training one kind of cell can change into another. So it could be that the kind of working out you do will also effect your strength / speed capabilities.

And 472 kg = 1,040.58 pounds. wow. just wow.

[merjet]

The seems to be evidence of varying degrees that for the most part the ratio of these cells is fixed genetically (hence the large number long distance runner records coming from a small village in Kenya) but some evidence suggests that with training one kind of cell can change into another. So it could be that the kind of working out you do will also effect your strength / speed capabilities.

For the Kenyan marathoners, there is another factor, too. They live in a high altitude region (6,000 to 7,000 feet) which has less oxygen than lower altitudes. So when they run at much lower altitudes, the extra oxygen is a fuel boost.

[Judith]

Judith, have you ever suited up in football gear and been tackled head-on, full-force by a 150 to 250 pound opponent? Have you ever taken multiple punches to the head from someone in either a street fight or boxing match, and remained standing? Have you ever hit an opponent so hard that you broke your hand on their skull and gave them an egg the size of a softball? If not, I would suggest that you can't fathom the perspective that a large male has on the relevance of size, strength and speed.

I haven't had those experiences, but I have been on the sidelines of a college football game, and believe me, I was awed by what I saw and heard. I do understand what you are saying, and I am quite willing to admit that even though I am a large woman, there is no way I would be up to such an experience. Being a large woman, I understand quite well the advantage that mass conveys. I also understand the advantage that leverage and knowledge convey; I regularly deal with 1500 pound horses and they obey me -- it doesn't happen because of brute strength. If they were smarter, I wouldn't have a chance.

There are two types of fights: a consensual, planned bout, and a surprise, rights-violating attack. We've been talking about both. I think any smaller person would do better when trying to fend off the second type because the attacker may not expect much resistance. But remember, when talking about "REAL" rights-violating attacks, Virginia's proposed scenario was one in which the attacker was "very eager" and "angry," which, to me, implies a high degree of persistence which may not have been present in the cases upon which you're basing your opinions.

Perhaps we have been talking past each other to some extent. I have been thinking for the most part about the second type of fight in my comments. I see no reason for gross mismatching of size and weight in competitive tournaments or consensual, planned bouts. As some of the other people have noted, however, different body types convey different advantages. Not all NFL players are huge -- their sizes vary. There's at least one really short NBA player out there. A number of martial arts masters are elderly and slight. And I've heard that the guys who tend to survive SEALs hell week training tend not to be the big, burly guys but the small to medium sized whippy guys. And in sparring practice, it just might be interesting to mismatch size and weight and see what happens.

Anyway, there certainly are many circumstances in which a smaller person has fended off a larger one, but that's not the issue. The issue is that Virginia claimed that she would not get hurt in a fight against a male three times her size. Now, did she mean that she wouldn't get hurt against an aging, chubby accountant who never did anything athletic in his life? If so, okay. But I was under the impression that she was talking about males who would have at least some experience with fighting or wrestling, and that she wasn't talking only about right-violating attacks, but consensual, planned bouts as well.

We'd have to ask her. Too bad people were so rude to her that she left the discussion.

Judith

[Jonathan]

Interesting Discussion, though I think the response to Virginia is a bit harsh.

Was it harsh? If a little dude had come here claiming that he wouldn't get hurt in a match against an opponent three times his size, would it be harsh or rude to express doubt, and to ask him to provide some evidence other than mentioning that he's attained a black belt? Is it because Viriginia's a woman that people are upset that I've been talking to her in the way that I'd talk to a man who was talking himself up?

I think I've been candid, direct and, at worst, perhaps a little blunt, but I don't think I've been harsh or rude.

Some comments -

Even if being skilled in Karate gives her a false sense of being able to defeat a much larger opponent in a street fight, I seriously doubt she'd hang around long enough to find out. As I understand, most self defense orientated classes first teach you how to avoid perilous situtaitons as much as reasonably possible, I doubt they teach you to search out a fight. And no person with a modicum of self respect would do that.

It would depend on whether or not you looked at it as a sport. If there's been any misunderstanding about what I've been saying on this thread, I think it's probably due to confusions that may have arisen about the differences between consensual fights and nonconsensual ones. If I were to publicly declare that I could beat someone who is Shaq's size in a karate match, and if I implied that controlled karate matches (in which the action is frequently stopped to award points or declare technical infractions) are good indicators of how well a fighter would do in an ultimate fighting cage match, in a consensual street fight, or in a rights-violating attack, I wouldn't storm off because I felt that everyone was poking thorns into me if they expressed skepticism and asked me to provide some evidence of my claims. If it hasn't been clear, I haven't been asking Virginia to put herself in a situation where she might get raped so we can see if she can escape with her life. I'm simply asking her as an athlete if she has demonstrated (or would be willing to demonstrate) her athletic claims in any athletic contests which haven't been stopped every few seconds for one reason or another.

Having any skills in martial arts should give her some statistical advantage in surviving any hostile encounter. Merely being in good shape will help her body live through serious injuries, she will have the endurance to fight longer and strength to fight harder than non-trained women. Knowing the most vulnerable places to strike, regardless of size, will give her another statistical advantage.

You asked her to hang around, and not run off, as an effort to demonstrate her likelyhood of surviving a street encounter. This is entirely unrealistic, no 'street fight' has rules which forbid you to run off.

Again, I was thinking of something like a cage match -- an athletic contest with as few rules as possible -- to demonstrate athletic abilities in a situation which allows opponents to instantly benefit from dazing their opponents, and to deliver multiple blows without being stopped by a referee or other official. Stopping and restarting the action after each blow is, in effect, a way of "faking reality" in favor of smaller participants.

If running is not an immediate option, she would probably serve a debilitating strike to a critical area (throat, groin, knee) disabling the attacker, and run off.

Well, then I'm sure that skinny little Kenyan marathon runners could "fight" a bulldozer and not get hurt, and they wouldn't even need a black belt to do so.

Comparing the relative sizes in competitive sports is not necessarily relevant, especially football strikes, where momentum is the only thing that matters (size times speed)

Yeah, well, line up in a typical karate match's ready position against Junior Seau, and I'm pretty sure he'd have enough room to build up enough momentum to make it hurt. That's pretty much his job description currently. It's not as if he needs fifty yards to build up steam.

The biological laws of scaling should also be considered. Muscle strength increased with the cross sectional area of a muscle, while weight increases with the VOLUME of the muscle, so relative to ones own mass, the bulkier a person is the LESS STRONG they are compared to their own weight.

Comparing their strength to their own weight isn't really relevant to how easily they'd be able to throw around a person one third their weight.

In other words, smaller, very fit people, can accelerate much faster than larger muscle bound people. They can change directions, swerve, etc. This is why even small men can be excellent basketball players. While Virginia maybe could not block an outright blow from that big guy, she could dodge it with much less effort than it would take him to dodge a kick to the groin from her. The bigger you are, the harder it is for you to move yourself out of your own way.

You're right that smaller people can often accelerate faster and change directions quicker, but that's also an area where gender seems to play a big role. Take the average 6'9" male athlete and match him up against the average 5'4" female athlete, and the male will usually be much quicker and faster (and I'm not talking here about just combative maneuvers, but things like guarding an opponent in basketball, trying to steal the ball or block a shot, etc.).

The IDF uses as many women as it does men in it's armed services, and routinely places them into the same combat situations with men. Their training, Krav Maga, seems to allow them to hold their own in combat. I'll take a female IDF trained person as a partner in a fight any day over my untrained large male friends.

I'd take a capable person any day over an incapable one, regardless of gender.

J

[Jonathan]

Too bad people were so rude to her that she left the discussion.

As I said in the post above to Matus, I don't think I was rude. I was very direct, but I've been giving reasons for my opinions. It's possbile that Virginia misunderstood some of my views, or those of others here who disagreed with her or doubted her assessment of her own abilities against a much larger opponent, but she didn't stick around long enough to find out. She claims that she offered to prove her ability, we stated what we'd accept as proof, and she stormed off while claiming that we fear confidence.

I don't think that it was really a matter of rudeness as much as one of thin-skinnedness.

Anyway, Judith, thanks for your comments. I'm glad that you and I are understanding each other's views at least a little better now.

J

[Newberry]

At the height of her career Martina Navratilova put it out there that she thought she could beat the #500 ranked male tennis player. A condition would be center court at Wimbledon with all the hype. Her speculation was that in practice the #500 guy might blow her off the court but in an intense limelight, her experience as a world champion could offset a player without such experience. I think she made a good estimate of the situation, unfortunately, neither sponsor nor male opponent took her up on it.

In a related topic, about 4 years ago my sister and I competed in the Annual Dan Sullivan Christmas tournament in St. Petersburg, Florida. Dan was an old time teaching pro and taught several national champions. Every year his ex-students gather to play this tournament.

The set up is a doubles round robin, you play with every player, 12 points then rotate, keeping track of the points that you won. At the end of the day, the top four point winners play off until in the same format until there is one winner. I think my sister was the only woman playing.

In this tournament about half of the 24 or so players had college scholarships in their youth. My step-brother, Larry Turville was No 1 in 50's and over in the U.S. was playing. My brother-in-law, Ralph Howe, was also playing, and he had been the 55 or 60's national champion in doubles some years before. My sister is about 2 years younger than Larry. Essentially, everyone was between 30-65 years old.

It’s a fun day, exhausting, and as far as I could tell, everyone plays to win and do the best they can.

That year, my sister, Janet, 50 years old and not in competitive shape, made it to the final four. I didn’t, Larry didn’t, and her husband didn’t; and not for lack of trying.

Part of it is that my sister is a super competitor, she is great in doubles, 2nd place at Wimbledon one year (when the top players played doubles), she inspires her partners–but it is fact that she could hold her own with men around her age, younger and older, and many had, or were, competing on national level.

Michael

Edited June 25, 2008 by Newberry

[Jonathan]

I once heard Jeb Bush bragging that he and one of his brothers (not George W., if I'm remembering correctly) beat Chris Evert and Steffi Graf in a tennis match. Maybe about 10 or 12 years ago. Does anyone remember that?

J

[Mikee]

It's embarrassing reading bullshit like this. [ . . . ] You are either a liar or you have been lied to and you believed it. Either way your fantasies are just that, fantasies. Have whatever kind of a day you can manage [ . . . ] Believe me I know how much work and effort goes into learning a martial art. Just stick to reality.

Wow, Mikeee. There is a more than a hint of contempt and disdain for Virginia as a person in your intervention. Of what earthly use is adding that edge to your comments?

Maybe Virginia is a lying, bullshitting fantasist whose self-deceptions will likely lead to death by thug. Maybe she's a strutting maniac of self-delusion regarding her self-defence abilities.

Maybe not. Maybe you are an asshole.

Mr. Scherk,

Virginia had the choice of defending her claims with evidence, corroborating witnesses, or running away. So, given the choice that Virginia made, which of your "maybe's" do you think is most likely to be true? People are conned ever day because they are too "nice" to question what they are being told. People live with delusions because the people around them are too "nice" to shatter them. I'm not that kind of nice, so to you I'm an asshole. So be it. I have little regard for your opinion since the FLDS fiasco.

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

Isn't the fundamental idea of martial arts to exert maximum force on a point of attack, which is chosen from among an opponent's points of weakness?

Believe it or not, I just heard something like that in an Internet marketing video. They always make up phrases like "Ninja Marketing" and crap like that, but the idea I just heard about how to apply force makes a hell of a lot of sense to me.

In that case, I can see brute strength and size bearing a small influence on the outcome, but I see the overwhelming influence being speed and skill in applying maximum force on a point of weakness. The maximum force doesn't have to be crushing, either. All it needs is to be good enough to debilitate the point of weakness and the job is practically done.

Michael

[Brant Gaede]

Isn't the fundamental idea of martial arts to exert maximum force on a point of attack, which is chosen from among an opponent's points of weakness?

Believe it or not, I just heard something like that in an Internet marketing video. They always make up phrases like "Ninja Marketing" and crap like that, but the idea I just heard about how to apply force makes a hell of a lot of sense to me.

In that case, I can see brute strength and size bearing a small influence on the outcome, but I see the overwhelming influence being speed and skill in applying maximum force on a point of weakness. The maximum force doesn't have to be crushing, either. All it needs is to be good enough to debilitate the point of weakness and the job is practically done.

Michael

No. The fundamental idea is to prevail. And it's not points of weakness, but vulnerability. If I poke you in the eye I have hit a point of weakness. If I kick you in the knee, I have hit a point of vulnerability. If I try to poke someone in the eye--it may, BTW, suddenly reveal itself as the way to go--as opposed to say the knee or groin, my oponent is likely to do more against me than I to him.

--Brant

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

Brant,

It sounds to me like what I called point of weakness and what you call vulnerability (in the manner you are using these terms) is merely a matter of degree, not kind.

I agree that prevail is a fundamental part, but I have a hard time imagining it to be an exclusive fundament. If it were exclusive, then shooting someone dead would be martial arts since that is pure prevailing.

Even though I said "fundamental idea of martial arts," I was talking about a specific concept: the one on which the the skill part is based. (So I probably should have been clearer. Also, there is a spiritual component, but I am not addressing this here.)

To illustrate what I am talking about, I see no purpose in applying maximum force against an opponent's greatest strength unless a person is really stronger than the opponent. And in that case, he doesn't need martial arts. He just bashes the opponent and he's done.

In all I have read and seen, I understand that the main purpose of the skill training part is to quickly identify weak points and apply accurate blows to them or leverage an opponent's balance to throw or grip him, exploiting both physical weak points (or vulnerabilities) and mental ones like moments of doubt, distraction or self-congratulations.

Michael

[Mikee]

Michael,

This is another of those things that sound good in theory but is hard in practice. Hitting a home run in baseball is simply a matter of bat speed and getting the fat part of the bat on the ball with perfect timing. Sounds easy. But the greatest hitters in baseball strike out more often than hit a home run. Each time they strike out they've seen at least three pitches, more likely 5-10. The same thing is true about "taking someone out" with one strike. Isn't going to happen very often so don't count on it. Unless you're fighting a total Bambi. Don't count on that either. Most fights are a process of attrition, one fighter wears down before the other. Invariably the smaller or the much less fit fighter.

You must distinguish between the warrior mentality and the self defense oriented fighter. The goal of the warrior indeed is to prevail, regardless of the cost to himself. The self defense oriented fighters goal is to survive. The self defense oriented person is not the aggressor. The aggressor has mistaken him or her for an easy target. Your job is to quickly change his mind about the "easy target" part and get away. It is not to be standing over his body giving Tarzan yells. If someone claims to teach "self defense" and then hypes knocking someone out with one blow find another instructor.

[Jonathan]

In all I have read and seen, I understand that the main purpose of the skill training part is to quickly identify weak points and apply accurate blows to them or leverage an opponent's balance to throw or grip him, exploiting both physical weak points (or vulnerabilities) and mental ones like moments of doubt, distraction or self-congratulations.

In the controlled environment of a typical karate match (I didn't get the impression that Virginia was talking about freewheeling, win-by-knockout matches when boasting that she wouldn't get hurt by a male three times her size), how would one identify the "weak points" of a hardheaded sumbitch like Randall "Tex" Cobb, who was known for being able to take an unbelievable amount of punishment and continue fighting? How would a referee determine which blows should count as being quick or hard enough to count as "points" against a fighter who, in a real fight, would be able to take perhaps hundreds of the same quick, hard blows and not be KO'd?

Cobb once talked about karate's disadvantages:

http://everything2.com/e2node/Randall%2520...x%2522%2520Cobb

Before he began boxing Cobb had earned the World Heavyweight championship in full-contact karate. I remember reading an interview with Cobb before the [Larry] Holmes [November, 1982, WBC heavyweight championhship] fight where he described the difference between boxing and karate.

He described boxing as "has a more realistic handstyle than karate". Karate concentrates too much on the quick knock-out. That's very useful when you're fighting multiple opponents or an angry drunk, but when you get into the ring with a trained, experienced fighter you face someone who knows how to take a punch. They don't fall down after the first punch. And they're very hard to get a good punch into anyway. They know how to "slip a punch", a catchall term for avoiding a square blow. So you have to keep punching. For Cobb the adaptation was difficult, karate having been a part of his life.

-----

J

Edited June 29, 2008 by Jonathan