# Are women disadvantaged in striking arts/styles?



## Hanzou

This video was very interesting to me. It shows women going for their black belt test in Taekwondo and having to spar against a male black belt.






What struck me more than anything else is how the man's size and strength advantage completely dominated the women's abilities. Certainly he was a high rank, but the fact that their were parts where he literally dropped his hands showcased just how little fear he had against his female classmates. So this leads me to propose this question;

Are women inherently disadvantaged in striking styles against their male peers?


----------



## Tez3

Are you sure he was dropping his hands because he was sure he had nothing to fear? A good many TKDists spar with hands down. You see it in the Olympics all the time.

Showing one man and one woman sparring in one style actually doesn't mean anything other than that one man and that woman spar like that.


----------



## ballen0351

Tez3 said:


> Are you sure he was dropping his hands because he was sure he had nothing to fear? A good many TKDists spar with hands down. You see it in the Olympics all the time.
> 
> Showing one man and one woman sparring in one style actually doesn't mean anything other than that one man and that woman spar like that.


If it's on YouTube it's gospel to some around here


----------



## Dinkydoo

Not sure it has anything to do with gender. He has a good reach advantage, superior head movement and striking ability than the women he's fighting against. He might be showboating a bit but the same could be said if he was fighting a smaller, less skilled man. He looks like someone who has confidence in thier skill against these sparring partners and with it being a grading (not his) I think he's trying to encourage his opponents to attack him.

I dont do TKD but to me the punches and guards were quite sloppy from the female students in this one example of thier sparring. Nerves and fighting somone much better than yourself can have a bit of an impact too.


----------



## hussaf

Yes.  I practiced karate for many years, but I've only been practicing judo, jujitsu, and aikido for the last 14 years (not karate, except the occasional combined martial art seminar).  So my percussion skills are not very tuned up.  There's a girl at our dojo that's on the US Karate Team, is sponsored by Mizuno (i think Mizuno), and has won several sparring gold medals at national and Pan Am competitions.  I regularly control full speed sparing with her by over powering her.  She generated a ton of power for being a petite girl, and her timing and speed is better than mine, but she still has a hard time controlling a non-point style match with me, even though she's clearly more skilled.


----------



## Tez3

Well no, not necessarily. Too many variables to actually say women are at a disadvantage. Are small men less able than tall men, are big men too slow, are tall women weaker etc etc etc.  
You simply cannot determine that women are at a particular disadvantage based on gender.


----------



## hussaf

Tez3 said:


> Well no, not necessarily. Too many variables to actually say women are at a disadvantage. Are small men less able than tall men, are big men too slow, are tall women weaker etc etc etc.
> You simply cannot determine that women are at a particular disadvantage based on gender.



Except science.  But if you are saying you can't always say a man will always have the advantage over a female...that's true, but it's do obvious I don't think it should be part of the discussion.  But generally, yes, a less skilled man can get away with a lot more due to physiological differences.


----------



## Hanzou

Tez3 said:


> Are you sure he was dropping his hands because he was sure he had nothing to fear? A good many TKDists spar with hands down. You see it in the Olympics all the time.
> 
> Showing one man and one woman sparring in one style actually doesn't mean anything other than that one man and that woman spar like that.



The reason I chose this video for the topic is because some commentators on YouTube felt that it was unfair that these women had to go against a man. I found that point of view very interesting, considering that the reason many women take martial arts is to defend themselves against a larger and stronger attacker.


----------



## Mephisto

Great topic! I've always looked at women relatively the same as men in the context of martial arts, being that they vary in size and strength. Some are bigger and stronger than me and some are smaller. While on the whole women may tend to be smaller, their are plenty of small men too. A bigger stronger, more athletic person will always have the advantage that's no reason not to train.


----------



## drop bear

Our coach just did a Kudo grading which includes full contact sparring. So our coach. Current nitro title holder. Ian bone pro fighter and title holder, Paul Cale general huge scary man and some guys who do Kudo.

The grading is not allways about winning the fight. Sometimes it is about showing heart. Smaller people in general are beat up a bit more. 

So I suppose yes and no. Yes if you consider that if you are not the best fighter in the room you get bashed in sparring/grading.

No in that if you are not the best fighter in the room. You have better fighters to improve your game.


----------



## clfsean

Not really. A woman has the same striking weapons as I do. She has the same targets to choose from as I do with a few obvious differences for both to allow for reproductive organs. We share same structural weakpoints. 

However the difference is I don't see that guy "fighting" a woman. She definitely shouldn't be "fighting" a man. That was a "sparring match" where the man wasn't scared of the woman & the woman was out to prove skill against a better skilled & physically larger opponent. That wasn't a fight. A fight could've been very different.

Nature is more than likely in favor of the male over the female in terms of the amount of damage that can be dealt & absorbed. However that being said, nothing is written in stone guaranteeing that & there are exceptions to every rule in most every circumstance.

Just my $.00005


----------



## hussaf

drop bear said:


> Our coach just did a Kudo grading which includes full contact sparring. So our coach. Current nitro title holder. Ian bone pro fighter and title holder, Paul Cale general huge scary man and some guys who do Kudo.
> 
> The grading is not allways about winning the fight. Sometimes it is about showing heart. Smaller people in general are beat up a bit more.
> 
> So I suppose yes and no. Yes if you consider that if you are not the best fighter in the room you get bashed in sparring/grading.
> 
> No in that if you are not the best fighter in the room. You have better fighters to improve your game.



that's kind of a different subject, though not an uninteresting one.


----------



## drop bear

hussaf said:


> that's kind of a different subject, though not an uninteresting one.



I am making a kind of different point. It is not uncommon to spar with the top gun of your club. And it generally sucks balls. I don't think it is necessarily a woman thing being identified here. But just she was outclassed.

Last night I am sparring a 16 year old kid boxer. I only go for I minute of a round that two other people share. Going in the advice to me is try to keep up.


----------



## Steve

Are some here asserting that men don't have an inherent physiological advantage over women?  That just makes no sense to me, if so.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD


----------



## Tony Dismukes

You've got a few different issues here.

In the video, strength wasn't much of an issue because they were doing friendly, controlled sparring. The black belt guy was just a lot more skilled and experienced than the women who were testing. (His reach did give him an advantage.) In a real fight, his size and strength would have made a big difference.

Size and strength (regardless of gender) do make a difference - but not just in the striking arts. You should know that they make a big difference in grappling as well.

Women, on average, are smaller than men. This is a disadvantage in fighting*. (It's also a disadvantage for small guys.)

All other factors being equal, women will typically have less upper body strength than men of equal size. This is also a disadvantage.

Therefore, if you are a woman wanting the ability to handle herself against a male attacker you need to *not *let all other factors be equal. You need some combination of superior technique, superior conditioning, superior fighting spirit, superior tactics, and/or superior weaponry.

I'm a pretty decent martial artist, but I would not want to get into a fight with either Ronda Rousey or Lucia Rijker, even though I'm much bigger than either one.

*(Fighting in this context includes both striking and grappling, but perhaps not so much the use of knives and firearms. Those tools can do a lot to equalize for discrepancies in size and strength.)


----------



## drop bear

Steve said:


> Are some here asserting that men don't have an inherent physiological advantage over women?  That just makes no sense to me, if so.
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD



Inherent can come apart a bit at the seams.
Nature vs nurture.

So nature. And bear in mind we are talking averages not individuals.

Men can pack more bulk muscle on than women so if we are talking out right body mass then generally Guys have it.

Functional strength is a bit more blurred in that women seem to manage bodyweight a bit closer to the men's average.

Nurture 

Women have been pushed towards craptastic aerobics a lot longer and a lot harder than men. Functional muscle takes years to develop so are generally behind the 8 ball a bit when it comes to fighting and physicality.

Like asking Richard Simmons to jump in the ring.


----------



## drop bear

We look at something like cross fit and the lines of natural male physical superiority can be seriously tested.

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=XRNBw3w1K_8


----------



## Hanzou

Steve said:


> Are some here asserting that men don't have an inherent physiological advantage over women?  That just makes no sense to me, if so.
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD




Yeah, its pretty strange to hear some people arguing that biology isn't true. I would say that even smaller men have an edge on women of the same weight/height simply because men have more muscle mass by default. Despite the philosophies of many martial arts, size and strength does matter.

Tony makes some interesting points about grappling though. I'm an above average sized person (5'10, 210 lbs) with an athletic build due to playing sports my entire life. When I started Bjj, I ran through a lot of white belts simply because I had a strength and athleticism advantage, and could muscle my way through a lot of holds and pins. However, I hit a brick wall when I went up against advanced white belts and no stripe blue belts. This included women of those ranks who were able to use skill and technique to overcome my strength advantage. 

Going against Purple and above was like a group of cats toying with a mouse. :lol:

I can't say I had the same experience with karate and TKD though. My experience is very similar to Hussaf's in that I could out-strike more advanced female (and smaller male) peers even at beginning rank.

Why? I think women simply have more weapons in grappling than striking.

BTW Drop Bear should be banned for posting pictures of Richard Simmons.


----------



## Tez3

So basically this is a stand up v grappling argument....again.  Women can't fight stand up because men are too strong/big/just naturally better but in grappling women have more weapons so stand up yet again is found wanting..................... :uhoh:


----------



## Cirdan

Seems to me men can have a disadvantage against women because of overconfidence, ego (can`t let a gurl beat me!!) and relying on muscle...


----------



## hussaf

drop bear said:


> Inherent can come apart a bit at the seams.
> Nature vs nurture.
> 
> So nature. And bear in mind we are talking averages not individuals.
> 
> Men can pack more bulk muscle on than women so if we are talking out right body mass then generally Guys have it.
> 
> Functional strength is a bit more blurred in that women seem to manage bodyweight a bit closer to the men's average.
> 
> Nurture
> 
> Women have been pushed towards craptastic aerobics a lot longer and a lot harder than men. Functional muscle takes years to develop so are generally behind the 8 ball a bit when it comes to fighting and physicality.
> 
> Like asking Richard Simmons to jump in the ring.



that's not what really nature vs nurture references, but it think I get the point you want to make

I don't think I can accept that women can "manage?" their body weight better than guys, if you mean to suggest strength to weight ratio.  The average female can't lift , via push or pull, their own weight.


----------



## Buka

A man has more muscle mass in the chest and shoulders, which comes into play with the transference of power from the legs and hips in punching. And men are usually larger overall, which also comes into play. So, as a general rule, I'd say men have the advantage. But that's in a general sense, there are exceptions. 

I've trained with Linda Denley and Arlene Lamas (we were team mates) and both are beasts when it comes to fighting, both punching and kicking wise. I don't care who they fight, it's going to be a fight. I'm married to a woman who punches as hard as anyone I know, especially with a left hook and right cross (more of an overhand right, actually) In that clip shown I feel the guy was dropping his hands because he was a dick. He might do that once against my wife, but I can almost guarantee he wouldn't do it a second time. Fighters go to sleep dreaming about people who drop their hands.

As for grappling - I think everyone should have the experience of grappling with an advanced female in a grappling art. It's one of the ways to truly appreciate what a a martial art can actually be.


----------



## ballen0351

Im not sure how this youtube clip showcases any strength advantage?  It certainly demonstrates a difference in skill level  the male was clearly had better TKD. But to say it shows Size and strength advantage not so much since neither the male or female were going full power.  Is there a difference between men and woman of course.  Better technique can and does make up some for a lack of size and strength.  At some point however the strength difference can overcome better technique no matter what art striking or grappling.


----------



## ballen0351

Buka said:


> In that clip shown I feel the guy was dropping his hands because he was a dick. .


I agree he was being very disrespectful and his teacher should have lined up next and put him in his place


----------



## Hanzou

Tez3 said:


> So basically this is a stand up v grappling argument....again.  Women can't fight stand up because men are too strong/big/just naturally better but in grappling women have more weapons so stand up yet again is found wanting..................... :uhoh:



Small person has more weapons in grappling. Example;


----------



## drop bear

hussaf said:


> that's not what really nature vs nurture references, but it think I get the point you want to make
> 
> I don't think I can accept that women can "manage?" their body weight better than guys, if you mean to suggest strength to weight ratio.  The average female can't lift , via push or pull, their own weight.



It is not about better. We have to remember that we are talking about averages. So on average men are stronger than women. But we are also covering this huge variable when we look at the strongest guy,the weakest guy vs the strongest girl,the weakest girl.

This is also about gradings and not competitions.

Otherwise a woman who has trained to push/pull their own weight can.


----------



## Cirdan

Who are these mythical averagerages.. this couple maybe? I honestly don`t know which one to bet on.


----------



## drop bear

Cirdan said:


> Who are these mythical averagerages.. this couple maybe? I honestly don`t know which one to bet on.



Marge would beat homer to death.

It is fairly generally accepted guys are stronger than girls.

Studies done?

No idea.

Here we go.
http://www.livestrong.com/article/246036-how-much-more-muscle-mass-does-a-male-have-than-a-female/


----------



## Tez3

Hanzou said:


> Small person has more weapons in grappling. Example;



So you posted the OP to make the point yet again the BJJ is better than stand up arts. And more videos. Are you on commission with You Tube?


----------



## Tony Dismukes

Hanzou said:


> Small person has more weapons in grappling. Example;



For those who are interested, the little guy is Estevan Martinez, 4'11", 125 pounds out of Clube De Jiu Jitsu Pitbull, Albuquerque, New Mexico. He's also overdue for a promotion in my opinion. 

The reason that footage of Mr. Martinez's matches has been making the rounds is that it is so unusual, even in BJJ, to see someone be so dominant against much larger opponents of comparable experience. Mr. Martinez exemplifies the advice I gave earlier - if you are much smaller then you need to make all the other factors not equal in your favor.

I still say that overcoming vastly superior size and strength can be just as challenging in grappling as in striking. I do have some theories as to why Hanzou may have found it less of an issue in BJJ than in Karate ...

1) In order to develop the necessary skill to overcome much larger and stronger opponents, you need to spend the long, hard, painful, discouraging hours actually training live against larger, stronger resisting opponents and generally getting crushed until you develop the skill necessary to counter the size disadvantage.  In a striking art, this process can be even more painful, since it involves getting actually beat on by someone bigger.  This means you are likely to find fewer women maintaining the course through the process. (It can be done. I know for a fact that I don't hit as hard as Lucia Rijker.)

2) BJJ takes advantage of the fact that most people don't have good instincts for how to handle themselves on the ground.  That means big, strong white belts can often be schooled by much smaller blue belts_ in the beginning._ Once they learn the basics of how not to do stupid stuff on the ground, the big guys become much more challenging to deal with. An average 125 pound purple belt is not at all guaranteed to have an easy time with a 225 pound athletic blue belt. We repost videos of guys like Mr. Martinez because he's remarkable, not because he's typical.


----------



## ballen0351

Tony Dismukes said:


> For those who are interested, the little guy is Estevan Martinez, 4'11", 125 pounds out of Clube De Jiu Jitsu Pitbull, Albuquerque, New Mexico. He's also overdue for a promotion in my opinion.
> 
> The reason that footage of Mr. Martinez's matches has been making the rounds is that it is so unusual, even in BJJ, to see someone be so dominant against much larger opponents of comparable experience. Mr. Martinez exemplifies the advice I gave earlier - if you are much smaller then you need to make all the other factors not equal in your favor.
> 
> I still say that overcoming vastly superior size and strength can be just as challenging in grappling as in striking. I do have some theories as to why Hanzou may have found it less of an issue in BJJ than in Karate ...
> 
> 1) In order to develop the necessary skill to overcome much larger and stronger opponents, you need to spend the long, hard, painful, discouraging hours actually training live against larger, stronger resisting opponents and generally getting crushed until you develop the skill necessary to counter the size disadvantage.  In a striking art, this process can be even more painful, since it involves getting actually beat on by someone bigger.  This means you are likely to find fewer women maintaining the course through the process. (It can be done. I know for a fact that I don't hit as hard as Lucia Rijker.)
> 
> 2) BJJ takes advantage of the fact that most people don't have good instincts for how to handle themselves on the ground.  That means big, strong white belts can often be schooled by much smaller blue belts_ in the beginning._ Once they learn the basics of how not to do stupid stuff on the ground, the big guys become much more challenging to deal with. An average 125 pound purple belt is not at all guaranteed to have an easy time with a 225 pound athletic blue belt. We repost videos of guys like Mr. Martinez because he's remarkable, not because he's typical.


which is great but his topic was about woman in striking arts.  That video contains neither a woman or a striking art so.........


----------



## drop bear

Tez3 said:


> So you posted the OP to make the point yet again the BJJ is better than stand up arts. And more videos. Are you on commission with You Tube?




Why is he wrong?

Really. I am not messing with you. Counter argue.


----------



## drop bear

Tony Dismukes said:


> For those who are interested, the little guy is Estevan Martinez, 4'11", 125 pounds out of Clube De Jiu Jitsu Pitbull, Albuquerque, New Mexico. He's also overdue for a promotion in my opinion.
> 
> The reason that footage of Mr. Martinez's matches has been making the rounds is that it is so unusual, even in BJJ, to see someone be so dominant against much larger opponents of comparable experience. Mr. Martinez exemplifies the advice I gave earlier - if you are much smaller then you need to make all the other factors not equal in your favor.
> 
> I still say that overcoming vastly superior size and strength can be just as challenging in grappling as in striking. I do have some theories as to why Hanzou may have found it less of an issue in BJJ than in Karate ...
> 
> 1) In order to develop the necessary skill to overcome much larger and stronger opponents, you need to spend the long, hard, painful, discouraging hours actually training live against larger, stronger resisting opponents and generally getting crushed until you develop the skill necessary to counter the size disadvantage.  In a striking art, this process can be even more painful, since it involves getting actually beat on by someone bigger.  This means you are likely to find fewer women maintaining the course through the process. (It can be done. I know for a fact that I don't hit as hard as Lucia Rijker.)
> 
> 2) BJJ takes advantage of the fact that most people don't have good instincts for how to handle themselves on the ground.  That means big, strong white belts can often be schooled by much smaller blue belts_ in the beginning._ Once they learn the basics of how not to do stupid stuff on the ground, the big guys become much more challenging to deal with. An average 125 pound purple belt is not at all guaranteed to have an easy time with a 225 pound athletic blue belt. We repost videos of guys like Mr. Martinez because he's remarkable, not because he's typical.



I have struggled to find a comparable striker. I was going in with the idea that a gun fighter is a gun fighter regardless of style. Haven't really found an example.

Having said that striking styles are less likely to match people up like that.


----------



## Buka

To me - I think Tony and Hanzou were continuing the conversation about women (basically being smaller then men) against larger sized fighters being equally difficult in all aspects of fighting. I also think it's a natural continuation in the conversation that small men sometimes face the same dilemma. I'm a small man, have weighed 142 pounds since fourteen years old. Although my strength is usually superior to women of the same weight, it's not always.

When I read the OP, after I gave it some thought, I then thought, "I know how that is."  
To me, one of the more obvious differences between men and women is in take downs. I think the average male creates far more power in a take down than the average female. Then I watch Ronda Rousey and I say, "Holy cow!" (I say that from the safety of hiding behind the couch.)


----------



## Tez3

drop bear said:


> Why is he wrong?
> 
> Really. I am not messing with you. Counter argue.



I'm not saying that women aren't given more weapons to use in BJJ, I'm saying that the whole idea of the OP was to 'point out' to us yet again that he considers striking arts inferior to BJJ. I'm *not* saying it's style bashing I'm saying it's tiresome. 
I train BJJ, I train stand up, there's merits in both, disadvantages in both for all sorts of people but, really, posting an OP so that you can look how good BJJ over other styles is just getting boring. 
I know men who can't punch their way out of a wet paper bag, I know women who can KO an ox but its all about the individual. Martial arts gives you the tools, it's up to you how you use them and nobody says that you have to play fair, I never do when sparring with people bigger/stronger than myself but I use what martial arts taught me. If you like point sparring comps that's great, if you have to actually fight well anything goes. I have observed though that in certain TKD sparring the hands are down most of the time with mostly kicks being utilised. In many comps I don't think a hand strike is ever used.
Oh and the lifting weights thing, I know several women including my daughter who can lift their own weight.


----------



## drop bear

Buka said:


> To me - I think Tony and Hanzou were continuing the conversation about women (basically being smaller then men) against larger sized fighters being equally difficult in all aspects of fighting. I also think it's a natural continuation in the conversation that small men sometimes face the same dilemma. I'm a small man, have weighed 142 pounds since fourteen years old. Although my strength is usually superior to women of the same weight, it's not always.
> 
> When I read the OP, after I gave it some thought, I then thought, "I know how that is."
> To me, one of the more obvious differences between men and women is in take downs. I think the average male creates far more power in a take down than the average female. Then I watch Ronda Rousey and I say, "Holy cow!" (I say that from the safety of hiding behind the couch.)



A small person can throw a guy and if they get them they are hitting the ground at pretty much the same speed as if somone big threw them. Punching power relies on mass.

Then again you eat something big like a spinning heel and even a small person will knock you.


----------



## Tez3

So no techniques needed to punch just body mass?


----------



## Buka

*I have a question for everyone.....

Where you train - when it's time for sparring/rolling, are people matched up by size? By gender? By ability? I know everyone eventually spars/rolls with everyone else, but I mean in a general "usually" sense?*


----------



## Xue Sheng

Hanzou said:


> This video was very interesting to me. It shows women going for their black belt test in Taekwondo and having to spar against a male black belt.
> 
> What struck me more than anything else is how the man's size and strength advantage completely dominated the women's abilities. Certainly he was a high rank, but the fact that their were parts where he literally dropped his hands showcased just how little fear he had against his female classmates. So this leads me to propose this question;
> 
> Are women inherently disadvantaged in striking styles against their male peers?



Real late to this conversation and it is likely I will not have much to say beyond this, but it depends on the style or technique being used. Mrs Xue Sheng is not a martial artist but she has extensive training in Traditional Chinese Medicine and can look at anyone and tell exactly where any points are she needs to use for her profession. She also knows many (not all, some, in China, are reserved for MA) that will cause you great deals of pain and they do not take a whole lot of strength to use..... And yes, I know from experience...I was the guy dumb enough to ask about that and then ask for proof....:erg: :duh:


----------



## Tony Dismukes

ballen0351 said:


> which is great but his topic was about woman in striking arts.  That video contains neither a woman or a striking art so.........



The primary basis for arguing that women are at a disadvantage compared to men is the average discrepancy in size and strength.  The video_ did _demonstrate a substantial size discrepancy. (If Hanzou had looked a little further he could have found another video from later in that same tournament where Mr. Martinez defeated an even larger opponent who had to be at least 250 pounds.)

The video did not address the topic of striking arts. I believe it was meant as a response to folks like me who pointed out that size and strength make a difference in grappling as well as striking.


----------



## Tony Dismukes

drop bear said:


> I have struggled to find a comparable striker. I was going in with the idea that a gun fighter is a gun fighter regardless of style. Haven't really found an example.
> 
> Having said that striking styles are less likely to match people up like that.



Yeah, you can have absolute divisions in grappling tournaments without so much danger of someone getting seriously hurt. If you want to see that sort of mismatch in striking you have to look to the early days of MMA, before they instituted weight classes. Keith Hackney vs Emmanuel Yarborough is an example of a striker beating a much larger opponent.


----------



## Tony Dismukes

Buka said:


> *I have a question for everyone.....
> 
> Where you train - when it's time for sparring/rolling, are people matched up by size? By gender? By ability? I know everyone eventually spars/rolls with everyone else, but I mean in a general "usually" sense?*



It's mostly pretty random, anybody with anybody. I do try to make sure female students go with more experienced partners that I trust to have control and not go balls to the wall. We had one of our more promising female students injured and out of training for a few weeks recently because she was rolling with a kid who thought it was a good idea to slam on an armbar full speed. We're trying to make sure that doesn't happen again.


----------



## ballen0351

Tony Dismukes said:


> If you want to see that sort of mismatch in striking you have to look to the early days of MMA, before they instituted weight classes.


Or countless clips on youtube( martial talk holy Bible) of woman knocking out men or little guys knocking out big guys or teenagers knocking out adults ect.


----------



## Tony Dismukes

Tez3 said:


> So no techniques needed to punch just body mass?



Effectiveness = Size x Technique. If I'm twice as big as you and our technique is equal, then I'm probably going to be hitting twice as hard. (I'm also probably going to be significantly harder to knock out. This may as big a factor as who hits harder.)

The smaller you are, the more technique you are going to need in order to punch effectively.


----------



## drop bear

Tez3 said:


> So no techniques needed to punch just body mass?



Technique is needed as well but at some stage body mass plays a part. Gravity effects everybody equally.


----------



## ballen0351

Tony Dismukes said:


> Effectiveness = Size x Technique. If I'm twice as big as you and our technique is equal, then I'm probably going to be hitting twice as hard. (I'm also probably going to be significantly harder to knock out. This may as big a factor as who hits harder.)
> 
> The smaller you are, the more technique you are going to need in order to punch effectively.


You leaving out speed in your math.  bullets are small but very effective


----------



## drop bear

Buka said:


> *I have a question for everyone.....
> 
> Where you train - when it's time for sparring/rolling, are people matched up by size? By gender? By ability? I know everyone eventually spars/rolls with everyone else, but I mean in a general "usually" sense?*



In general during technique we are matched up by weight. But rolling/sparring is everybody.


----------



## Tony Dismukes

ballen0351 said:


> You leaving out speed in your math.  bullets are small but very effective



Yeah, I was grossly simplifying the equation in order to just address the elements (size and technique) that Tez mentioned in her comment. I considered adding more elements, but decided that I would be overcomplicating my point.


----------



## Xue Sheng

Tony Dismukes said:


> Effectiveness = Size x Technique.



Not exactly, F = (m)(a)

Force = Mass X Acceleration

Therefore by Newton's second law if you have less Mass but increase the Acceleration you increase force and thereby have the ability to hit as hard or harder than someone with greater mass


----------



## Hanzou

Tez3 said:


> So you posted the OP to make the point yet again the BJJ is better than stand up arts.


 
I posted the OP because I was curious. However, I would be lying if I said that my own experiences didn't enhance that curiosity. Getting manhandled by a woman half your size will do that to you. 

Further, if my wife and daughter were looking for a martial art to take, I don't know if I could recommend a style dedicated to striking.



> And more videos. Are you on commission with You Tube?



I use Youtube to illustrate my point and to provide evidence. Sorry if you don't approve, but I think providing objective examples enhances the discussion.


----------



## drop bear

Xue Sheng said:


> Not exactly, F = (m)(a)
> 
> Force = Mass X Acceleration
> 
> Therefore by Newton's second law if you have less Mass but increase the Acceleration you increase force and thereby have the ability to hit as hard or harder than someone with greater mass



If we were a stick which we are not. Achieving a hard damaging punch is a lot more complicated.


----------



## ballen0351

Tony Dismukes said:


> Yeah, I was grossly simplifying the equation in order to just address the elements (size and technique) that Tez mentioned in her comment. I considered adding more elements, but decided that I would be overcomplicating my point.


I understand but speed is usually a much more important factor then mass.  However I doubt humans can generate enough speed to make a real difference


----------



## ballen0351

Hanzou said:


> Sorry if you don't approve, but I think providing objective examples enhances the discussion.


except its not objective.  I could make a video claiming anything I want and post it as proof you have no iead of the context or training level or circumstances of what you post.


----------



## Hanzou

ballen0351 said:


> except its not objective.  I could make a video claiming anything I want and post it as proof you have no iead of the context or training level or circumstances of what you post.



The OP vid was a black belt test. The more recent vid shows two purple belts in Bjj in competition.

You're really trying to argue that we have no idea what the context or training level are in those vids? :uhoh:


----------



## Xue Sheng

drop bear said:


> If we were a stick which we are not. Achieving a hard damaging punch is a lot more complicated.




If the fact we were not a stick meant that we were beyond the laws of physics then you might be right...but we are not beyond the laws of physics. That my friend is basic physics and it applies no matter how much you may, or may not, like it...sorry that is scientific fact F = ma... and it is no more complicated than that.


----------



## ballen0351

Hanzou said:


> The OP vid was a black belt test. The more recent vid shows two purple belts in Bjj in competition
> 
> You're really trying to argue that we have no idea what the context or training level are in those vids? :uhoh:


Yep Ill post a vid tommorrow of me in a BJJ black belt and have my wife knock me out and post it as proof BJJ black belt gets KOed by Soccer Mom.  You have no idea who these girls where, where they train, how they train, what they did before they filmed the video, ect.  
When I went to Swat School you had to pass a strength and agility test.  Well You take it at the end of the first day it consisted of many things including Push ups, Pull Ups, sprints, sit ups.  Guess what They KILLED us all day for 10 hours then said ok lets take the test.  EVERYONE failed I did 2 push ups for the test If you filmed my test put it on youtube your impressions of my physical conditioning would be very poor.  You would have no idea I had gotten my but killed for hours prior.  A 3 min clip has ZERO context.  You believe its proof I believe it means nothing.


----------



## drop bear

Xue Sheng said:


> If the fact we were not a stick meant that we were beyond the laws of physics then you might be right...but we are not beyond the laws of physics. That my friend is basic physics and it applies no matter how much you may, or may not, like it...sorry that is scientific fact F = ma... and it is no more complicated than that.



So if I punch with one foot off the ground but at the same speed and mass I will hit as hard as if I had both feet on the ground.

More involved.

http://www.physicsclassroom.com/class/momentum/Lesson-1/Real-World-Applications

Wow really more involved.
https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/the-physics-behind-a-punch.771726/


----------



## geezer

Xue Sheng said:


> If the fact we were not a stick meant that we were beyond the laws of physics then you might be right...but we are not beyond the laws of physics. That my friend is basic physics and it applies no matter how much you may, or may not, like it...sorry that is scientific fact *F = ma... and it is no more complicated than that.*



F=ma is a good start but... _No more complicated?_ I'm no physicist, but I think it_ is._  Although "force is force", *impact* or the transfer of force is a good deal more complicated. The target you hit is very important, and especially the degree of softness or flexibility of that target will affect the rate of deceleration of the punch, and so will affect the impact. Other factors such as how you release the power, how small is the contact area ( a palm, three knuckles, or two, or one, etc.) and a bunch of other factors come into play.

http://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/impact-force-d_1780.html 


 Xue, you and I have spent a lot of time in CMA. Now I don't know about you, but personally, I'm nowhere near figuring out everything about punching power.


----------



## drop bear

geezer said:


> F=ma is a good start but... _No more complicated?_ I'm no physicist, but I think it_ is._  Although "force is force" impact, or the transfer of force is a good deal more complicated. The target you hit is very important, and especially the degree of softness or flexibility of that target will affect the rate of deceleration of the punch, and so will affect the impact. Other factors such as how you release the power, how small is the contact area ( a palm, three knuckles, or two, or one, etc.) and a bunch of other factors come into play.
> 
> I mean really Xue. You and I have spent a lot of time in CMA. Now I don't know about you, but personally, I'm nowhere near figuring out everything about punching power.




And I think punching power is measured in pressure. Which I have no real idea about as a physics term.


----------



## Hanzou

ballen0351 said:


> Yep Ill post a vid tommorrow of me in a BJJ black belt and have my wife knock me out and post it as proof BJJ black belt gets KOed by Soccer Mom.


 
And the purpose behind that vid would be what exactly?



> You have no idea who these girls where,


 
Their names are in the description.



> where they train,



Cross reference their instructor's names (in the comment section) with style (TSD). Google is your friend (or stalker :ticked



> how they train, what they did before they filmed the video, ect.



I can get a lot of that information from the video provided.


----------



## ballen0351

Hanzou said:


> Their names are in the description.
> 
> 
> 
> Cross reference their instructor's names (in the comment section) with style (TSD). Google is your friend (or stalker :ticked
> 
> 
> 
> I can get a lot of that information from the video provided.


Nonsense Like I said you still have no idea the context of what happened before.  If thats proof for you well good luck


----------



## Hanzou

ballen0351 said:


> Nonsense Like I said you still have no idea the context of what happened before.  If thats proof for you well good luck



The women are red belts and they are testing for their black belts in TSD. Again, the person who posted the vid is one of the women in the video, and she describes her background in her art, and who she is sparring against. Furthermore, we have people in the background of the vid clearly grading her and the other girl in a backdrop that heavily resembles a school that teaches Korean martial arts.

What more context are you looking for?

The POINT in posting that vid was to show the large disadvantage both women had sparring against the man. While the man is of superior rank, I don't believe that difference in skill from BOTH ladies should have been that large. As someone else stated, if they were really going at it, that guy probably could have demolished both women at the same time. The comments in that video bear that out. I'm personally surprised the poster of that video has taken the video down based on the negative reaction it generated.


----------



## jks9199

geezer said:


> F=ma is a good start but... _No more complicated?_ I'm no physicist, but I think it_ is._  Although "force is force", *impact* or the transfer of force is a good deal more complicated. The target you hit is very important, and especially the degree of softness or flexibility of that target will affect the rate of deceleration of the punch, and so will affect the impact. Other factors such as how you release the power, how small is the contact area ( a palm, three knuckles, or two, or one, etc.) and a bunch of other factors come into play.
> 
> Impact Force
> 
> 
> Xue, you and I have spent a lot of time in CMA. Now I don't know about you, but personally, I'm nowhere near figuring out everything about punching power.



It's much more complicated, as a few posts have shown.  In fact, I seem to recall a thread (maybe this one?) about that a few years ago, maybe pstarr figured into it.  I know he wrote a book about the mechanics of the martial arts.


----------



## ballen0351

Hanzou said:


> The women are red belts and they are testing for their black belts in TSD. Again, the person who posted the vid is one of the women in the video, and she describes her background in her art, and who she is sparring against.
> 
> The POINT in posting that vid was to show the large disadvantage both women had sparring against the man. While the man is of superior rank, I don't believe that difference in skill from BOTH ladies should have been that large. As someone else stated, if they were really going at it, that guy probably could have demolished both women at the same time. The comments in that video bear that out. I'm personally surprised the poster of that video has taken the video down based on the negative reaction it generated.


So if the point was to talk about sparring why do you keep bringing up grapping?


----------



## Hanzou

ballen0351 said:


> So if the point was to talk about sparring why do you keep bringing up grapping?



Look at the title of the thread. That's the point.


----------



## Stac3y

Buka said:


> *I have a question for everyone.....
> 
> Where you train - when it's time for sparring/rolling, are people matched up by size? By gender? By ability? I know everyone eventually spars/rolls with everyone else, but I mean in a general "usually" sense?*



Nope. We all fight each other. Bigger, stronger, more skilled fighters control their level of contact with the little guys (children, that is). In my experience, I fare well against men of similar size and rank. Bigger guys can be a problem with reach. We don't fight full contact, though.


----------



## Stac3y

One of the women I regularly fight in competition sparring is 6 inches taller than me and outweighs me by about 60 pounds. In karate sparring competition, there are HUGE size discrepancies among competitors, especially in women's divisions, which have fewer weight classes--usually just fly & light, or light and middle.


----------



## drop bear

Hanzou said:


> The women are red belts and they are testing for their black belts in TSD. Again, the person who posted the vid is one of the women in the video, and she describes her background in her art, and who she is sparring against. Furthermore, we have people in the background of the vid clearly grading her and the other girl in a backdrop that heavily resembles a school that teaches Korean martial arts.
> 
> What more context are you looking for?
> 
> The POINT in posting that vid was to show the large disadvantage both women had sparring against the man. While the man is of superior rank, I don't believe that difference in skill from BOTH ladies should have been that large. As someone else stated, if they were really going at it, that guy probably could have demolished both women at the same time. The comments in that video bear that out. I'm personally surprised the poster of that video has taken the video down based on the negative reaction it generated.



The second wrestle where the guy has his hands on his knees just waiting there. Sometimes the difference in skill is that large.

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ogrcvjVPOOs


----------



## Xue Sheng

drop bear said:


> So if I punch with one foot off the ground but at the same speed and mass I will hit as hard as if I had both feet on the ground.



Nope, you are using speed and that is not the same as acceleration so your premise is just plain wrong. 

You are trying to change the equation to look right and you are not right. The equation is "Force equals Mass time Acceleration (F=ma)". It does not matter one foot or two foot on the ground same mass, same acceleration same force, anything you post that says that is not the truth is incredibly faulty physics or in other words, just plain wrong. Try as you might you cannot change Newton's Second law and you are always subject to the laws of physics..... next


----------



## Tony Dismukes

Xue Sheng said:


> If the fact we were not a stick meant that we were beyond the laws of physics then you might be right...but we are not beyond the laws of physics. That my friend is basic physics and it applies no matter how much you may, or may not, like it...sorry that is scientific fact F = ma... and it is no more complicated than that.



People writing books or articles about martial arts sometimes include equations like F = MA and KE = 1/2MV^2 in an attempt to put a scientific gloss on what they are saying. Once you are beyond high-school physics with equations built around point masses it gets quite a bit more complicated.

For example ...

Which of the above equations is more relevant to striking? A bullet can carry a lethal dose of kinetic energy (Kinetic Energy = 1/2MV^2) but apply relatively little total force to a target. A powerful shove may apply a strong force to a target, but do little actual damage. On the other hand, most knockouts come from rapid acceleration of the skull causing trauma to the brain, so force is relevant somehow. 

Kinetic Energy = 1/2 Mass x Velocity x Velocity. Once you are no longer dealing with abstracted point masses you have to ask _what _mass, _what _velocity? Suppose you have a 60 kg boxer throwing a punch and you use a high-speed camera to find out that his fist is travelling 22 meters/sec. Does that mean his punch is carrying 14520 joules of kinetic energy? Nope.  His fist may be moving at 22 meters/sec, but it doesn't mass 60 kg by itself. His shoulder might only be moving 5 meters per sec. His hip might only be moving 3 meters/sec. Just calculating the mass & velocity of each body part gets to be a nearly intractable task.

It doesn't stop there, though. Velocity isn't just speed, it contains a directional component. Not all those body parts are travelling in the same direction, so you can't just sum their kinetic energies and think that total KE will apply to the impact of the punch.

Now how do you account for the situation where two fighters have the same mass and punch about the same speed, yet one hits much harder than the other? Now we're getting into technique. The one fighter has learned to coordinate his/her body movement and align his/her structure in such a way that more of his/her mass feeds into the impact and transfers into the target. This affects both force and kinetic energy, yet we don't have a convenient equation to easily analyze it.


----------



## drop bear

Xue Sheng said:


> Nope, you are using speed and that is not the same as acceleration so your premise is just plain wrong.
> 
> You are trying to change the equation to look right and you are not right. The equation is "Force equals Mass time Acceleration (F=ma)". It does not matter one foot or two foot on the ground same mass, same acceleration same force, anything you post that says that is not the truth is incredibly faulty physics or in other words, just plain wrong. Try as you might you cannot change Newton's Second law and you are always subject to the laws of physics..... next



I am not changing newtons laws I am suggesting that it is not the only thing that applies. Punching power is not really measured in force apparently. And that changes the equation.


----------



## Tony Dismukes

Hanzou said:


> The POINT in posting that vid was to show the large disadvantage both women had sparring against the man. While the man is of superior rank,_ I don't believe that difference in skill from BOTH ladies should have been that large._



Why don't you believe it?

Whether or not you think he _should _have been that much more skilled than the ladies taking the test, he clearly _was_. He was not dominating the women with superior size and strength, He was dominating them with timing, distancing, footwork, head movement and obviously much more experience. (Not to mention he wasn't the one testing, so he wasn't already tired at this point.) If these ladies were TKD red belts testing for black, they may have had only 2-3 years experience, while the guy looks like he might easily have 10+ years experience. In BJJ terms, that's like a student testing for her blue belt and rolling with a black belt instructor. Gender doesn't have to enter into it.


----------



## Xue Sheng

Tony Dismukes said:


> People writing books or articles about martial arts sometimes include equations like F = MA and KE = 1/2MV^2 in an attempt to put a scientific gloss on what they are saying. Once you are beyond high-school physics with equations built around point masses it gets quite a bit more complicated.
> 
> For example ...
> 
> Which of the above equations is more relevant to striking? A bullet can carry a lethal dose of kinetic energy (Kinetic Energy = 1/2MV^2) but apply relatively little total force to a target. A powerful shove may apply a strong force to a target, but do little actual damage. On the other hand, most knockouts come from rapid acceleration of the skull causing trauma to the brain, so force is relevant somehow.
> 
> Kinetic Energy = 1/2 Mass x Velocity x Velocity. Once you are no longer dealing with abstracted point masses you have to ask _what _mass, _what _velocity? Suppose you have a 60 kg boxer throwing a punch and you use a high-speed camera to find out that his fist is travelling 22 meters/sec. Does that mean his punch is carrying 14520 joules of kinetic energy? Nope.  His fist may be moving at 22 meters/sec, but it doesn't mass 60 kg by itself. His shoulder might only be moving 5 meters per sec. His hip might only be moving 3 meters/sec. Just calculating the mass & velocity of each body part gets to be a nearly intractable task.
> 
> It doesn't stop there, though. Velocity isn't just speed, it contains a directional component. Not all those body parts are travelling in the same direction, so you can't just sum their kinetic energies and think that total KE will apply to the impact of the punch.
> 
> Now how do you account for the situation where two fighters have the same mass and punch about the same speed, yet one hits much harder than the other? Now we're getting into technique. The one fighter has learned to coordinate his/her body movement and align his/her structure in such a way that more of his/her mass feeds into the impact and transfers into the target. This affects both force and kinetic energy, yet we don't have a convenient equation to easily analyze it.



kinetic as opposed to potential energy are nice and all but they do not change F = ma, sorry they just don't. You are flipping terms that are not the same in order to make your case and it still does not change the equation F = ma velocity, speed and acceleration are not the same thing... I am drawing form way back in college physics but no matter how any of you put it F = ma is F = ma and it will not change and if a fighter of less mass has greater acceleration they can hit harder than a fighter of greater mass with less acceleration....nothing...absolutely nothing any of you are saying changes that. Sorry.... Newton's second law applies no matter what anyone says

Speed is the distance traveled divided by the time taken to travel the distance 

Velocity is a measure of the displacement of an object divided by the time it took to travel that distance.Which means Velocity is a vector quantity the rate at which an object changes its position.And that is not speed.

Now Acceleration is defined as the rate of change (or derivative with respect to time) of velocity. It is thus a vector quantity with dimension length/time².

mass is the property of matter that measures its resistance to acceleration. Roughly, the mass of an object is a measure of the number of atoms in it. 

which means none of what you are talking about changes the equation F = ma

What you are looking at are those things that effect acceleration&#8230; go there and you might have an argument but the fact is two fighters of different mass can hit equally as hard because of F=ma or one of less mass can hit harder because of F=ma

Now we are rapidly approaching the point of your other post "Some thoughts about discussing the martial arts" accept this is physics and it is not as subjective as martial arts discussions, opinion does not enter into it at all and there is no place for semantics&#8230;sorry F = ma is F = ma and that will not change&#8230;. 




drop bear said:


> I am not changing newtons laws I am suggesting that it is not the only thing that applies. Punching power is not really measured in force apparently. And that changes the equation.



You did change Newton's second law when you used the terminology "speed" that is not acceleration. And you are now saying that "Punching power is not really measured in force apparently. And that changes the equation" so you are saying you are not changing Newton's second law but it changes...... nope sorry

bottom-line... that is what it is... I am sorry you do not like it, but that is scientific fact and you cannot change it..

So then...how is "Punching power" really measured....

 I know how power is measured I am interested to know how "punching power" is measured though.....and it still does not change F=ma.... however there is more to it than that as it applies to power


----------



## Xue Sheng

ok, here.... I'll tell you

You need calculate the *work *

Work results when a force acts upon an object to cause a displacement (or a motion) or, in some instances, to hinder a motion.

note displacement in this equation is not distance

 Work = Force  Displacement  Cosine(theta) [W = F  d  cos(theta)]

But youre not at power yet

Power is defined as the rate at which work is done upon an object.

Power = Work / time [P = W / t]


And now I am pushing the limits of my college physics memory, even with the help of the internet, but if you have a greater force you can show greater work and if you show greater work you can have greater power..... So you are still at a smaller opponent can hit as hard or harder than a larger opponent.... now is that the norm....likely not..... Bruce lee was small and hit hard and that was from acceleration.... could a woman do it to...hell yeah.... but there are physical factors that will come into play.... and if the mass is too small, or there is too much difference in mass (90lbs vs 250lbs) is there any amount of acceleration (based in reality and musculoskeletal limitations) that can make up for it..... You will need to do that math on that Im done


----------



## Hanzou

Tony Dismukes said:


> Why don't you believe it?
> 
> Whether or not you think he _should _have been that much more skilled than the ladies taking the test, he clearly _was_. He was not dominating the women with superior size and strength, He was dominating them with timing, distancing, footwork, head movement and obviously much more experience. (Not to mention he wasn't the one testing, so he wasn't already tired at this point.) If these ladies were TKD red belts testing for black, they may have had only 2-3 years experience, while the guy looks like he might easily have 10+ years experience. In BJJ terms, that's like a student testing for her blue belt and rolling with a black belt instructor. Gender doesn't have to enter into it.



Well, he was a first stripe black, which is the belt they were going for. So I seriously doubt the experience discrepancy was that large. So in Bjj terms, it's like a 4 stripe brown going against a black belt.


----------



## Tez3

drop bear said:


> Technique is needed as well but at some stage body mass plays a part. Gravity effects everybody equally.




that's not what you said before though, you said you just needed body mass.


----------



## ballen0351

Hanzou said:


> Well, he was a first stripe black, which is the belt they were going for. So I seriously doubt the experience discrepancy was that large. So in Bjj terms, it's like a 4 stripe brown going against a black belt.



Or he chooses not to test.  And just trains and doesn't care about rank.  Or he has several years in another art.  If you can't see there was a huge difference in skill lvl I question your claims of over a decade in martial arts training


----------



## Hanzou

ballen0351 said:


> Or he chooses not to test.  And just trains and doesn't care about rank.  Or he has several years in another art.  If you can't see there was a huge difference in skill lvl I question your claims of over a decade in martial arts training



That there is a huge difference in skill is beyond question. What is the question is what is behind that huge difference in skill. Is it purely martial training, or is it more natural abilities?

When you test for black belt rank, you should be at least somewhat the skill level of the black belts in your school. Further, if this guy is some sort of phenom, I highly doubt that the testers would put these women up against him just to make them feel bad about their abilities. It's very possible that the black belt is a typical black belt at this school. The reason he looks so much more superior to these two women could be the very question of this thread; Are these women at a natural disadvantage?


----------



## Dinkydoo

Apologies, I realise that I am really late in the day to join this discussion but reading through the incorrect application of Newton's second law to the 'power' in which a punch can generate has forced me to respond. 

It is much more accurate to describe the power generated by a punch by the kinetic energy equation:

Kinetic Energy = 1/2 mass x velocity ^ 2

A good reference:

http://www.martiallife.com/index.ph...er-why-is-speed-more-important-than-mass.html


----------



## Hong Kong Pooey

Hanzou said:


> That there is a huge difference in skill is beyond question. What is the question is what is behind that huge difference in skill. Is it purely martial training, or is it more natural abilities?
> 
> When you test for black belt rank, you should be at least somewhat the skill level of the black belts in your school. Further, if this guy is some sort of phenom, I highly doubt that the testers would put these women up against him just to make them feel bad about their abilities. It's very possible that the black belt is a typical black belt at this school. The reason he looks so much more superior to these two women could be the very question of this thread; Are these women at a natural disadvantage?



Good thread!

I can't really add too much to it, just re-iterate what's already been said by others but I'll try and sum up the points I agree with.

In general yes, women do have a disadvantage due to being smaller and weaker, but that applies to any competitive art, not just striking based ones. But the same also applies to male vs male matches, that's why they have weight divisions. Boxing being the obvious example.

And again in general, a man will be stronger than a women of equal size and weight.

So if you are at a physical disadvantage then you need to be superior in other areas to overcome it, be it speed, technique, cunning, heart, ruthlessness, whatever. 

I'd also suggest that when you're sparring/competing/fighting in the same style with whatever rules are in place then any physical advantage is potentially greater than in a real fight, or to put it another way, it removes a lot of 'dirty tricks' the smaller person may wish to employ to get around that disadvantage.

Obviously there are exceptions and some women are stronger than some men, but the strongest man is stronger than the strongest woman, and overall men's average size and strength is greater than women's average size and strength.


----------



## Hanzou

I think part of the issue here is that the goal behind this and other similar styles is that you're essentially trading blows with someone. What if the person you're trading blows with is physically stronger than you are? This is where boxers tend to clinch in order to avoid getting hit too much. This is also where MMA fighters tend to go for takedowns if they're not able to stand toe to toe with who they're fighting against. It was never against the rules to clinch with someone or take them down in my karate class. We simply were never taught how to do it. It's probably the same case here.

Another issue that bothers me about this is that the women are turning their heads away as they punch. Essentially flinching while throwing punches and kicks. Am I the only one who recognizes how dangerous that is when you're trading blows with someone larger than you are?


----------



## Hong Kong Pooey

To you physicists arguing with your fancy equations over what determines how hard someone can hit I'm going to try and address it in layman's terms for the rest of us to undertand and you guys can tell me if/why I'm wrong...

As I understand it technique is the major factor at play, and it comes down to how quickly you can get your fist from where the punch begins to the target and how much of your weight/mass you can get behind it.

So if you take 2 guys of equal size and proportions and one has good technique and one doesn't, the guy with the good technique hits harder.

Conversely if you take 2 guys who are identical in every way including technique, then make one of them 50% larger, the larger one will hit harder.

If the above is correct, and I believe it is, then with regards to the OP this would put most women at a disadvantage because they have to get their technique to a higher level than most of the male opponents they are likely to face just to be able to hit as hard as them.


----------



## Xue Sheng

Dinkydoo said:


> Apologies, I realise that I am really late in the day to join this discussion but reading through the incorrect application of Newton's second law to the 'power' in which a punch can generate has forced me to respond.
> 
> It is much more accurate to describe the power generated by a punch by the kinetic energy equation:
> 
> Kinetic Energy = 1/2 mass x velocity ^ 2
> 
> A good reference:
> 
> The science of punching harder: why is speed more important than mass? (And why having the force won't help you)



The problem with that is .... I never said power.... I said force and that is not power therefore it is not incorrect and the use of "Power" with Newton's 2nd law is incorrect. You really need to read through all my posts on that. and the formula for Kinetic energy is still not talking about power.

Power = Work / time [P = W / t]

Sorry, nope, not wrong...never applied Newton's second law to power, although it does play a part in coming up with the variables to calculate Power....read more carefully


----------



## jks9199

drop bear said:


> I am not changing newtons laws I am suggesting that it is not the only thing that applies. Punching power is not really measured in force apparently. And that changes the equation.



There's a lot more involved than simple force.  Impact, work... I'm not enough of a physicist to break it all down, but you have to think about the deceleration of the fist on impact, how long the contact takes place (it takes the same amount of energy and work to move a car 40 feet -- but there's a world of difference in the effects if it's done in 1/10th of a second or 2 minutes!)...  I know folks with the real educational background to do it have broken it down, and you can probably find it somewhere on the web.


----------



## jks9199

Xue Sheng said:


> You did change Newton's second law when you used the terminology "speed" that is not acceleration. And you are now saying that "Punching power is not really measured in force apparently. And that changes the equation" so you are saying you are not changing Newton's second law but it changes...... nope sorry
> 
> bottom-line... that is what it is... I am sorry you do not like it, but that is scientific fact and you cannot change it..
> 
> So then...how is "Punching power" really measured....
> 
> I know how power is measured I am interested to know how "punching power" is measured though.....and it still does not change F=ma.... however there is more to it than that as it applies to power



How to measure punching power?  That's a tough question.  We can measure the force generated at impact, or the work down by the punch.  We can look at the effects or damage caused.  Or figure out how far the energy of the punch penetrated into the target.  But there are things that are beyond the raw physics, by which I mean don't easily translate into those numbers.  You're an internal stylist; I'm sure you've had the experience of someone hitting in a way that goes through you much more powerfully than the apparent force of the strike.  (Not saying that effect is limited to internal, but it's where I've seen it the most.)  I'm not saying someone couldn't take it apart and figure it out, just that when we start trying to measure "punching power", it's like "knockdown power" of a bullet.  No easy way to do it...


----------



## jks9199

Hong Kong Pooey said:


> To you physicists arguing with your fancy equations over what determines how hard someone can hit I'm going to try and address it in layman's terms for the rest of us to undertand and you guys can tell me if/why I'm wrong...
> 
> As I understand it technique is the major factor at play, and it comes down to how quickly you can get your fist from where the punch begins to the target and how much of your weight/mass you can get behind it.
> 
> So if you take 2 guys of equal size and proportions and one has good technique and one doesn't, the guy with the good technique hits harder.
> 
> Conversely if you take 2 guys who are identical in every way including technique, then make one of them 50% larger, the larger one will hit harder.
> 
> If the above is correct, and I believe it is, then with regards to the OP this would put most women at a disadvantage because they have to get their technique to a higher level than most of the male opponents they are likely to face just to be able to hit as hard as them.



OK -- returning to the original topic after a digression to physics...

Women generally are smaller and weaker then men.  Whether they are striking or grappling, they have to compensate for that with better and more effective technique, including things like targeting, more efficient recruitment of the body and muscles into the technique, timing, positioning...

I don't know that I'd say that a woman is inherently disadvantaged in a striking art.  To say that would be to say that a smaller person, or someone weaker is inherently disadvantaged.  At that point, the argue moves just as easily into grappling arts.  They simply bring a different stack of benefits and weaknesses to the table.


----------



## Brian King

"Are women disadvantaged in striking arts/styles?"

Every advantage can become a disadvantage while every disadvantage can become an advantage depending on circumstances and circumstances can be manipulated. 

All else being equal, size matters, but all else is never equal. 

Regards
Brian King


----------



## ballen0351

Hanzou said:


> That there is a huge difference in skill is beyond question. What is the question is what is behind that huge difference in skill. Is it purely martial training, or is it more natural abilities?


It's probably both.  That wasn't your original question.  You questioned strength and size not natural abilities.  To me natural ability or natural athleticism has nothing to do with gender.  Your just born that way.  Some people are just better period regardless of size or strength and ability 


> When you test for black belt rank, you should be at least somewhat the skill level of the black belts in your school. Further, if this guy is some sort of phenom, I highly doubt that the testers would put these women up against him just to make them feel bad about their abilities. It's very possible that the black belt is a typical black belt at this school. The reason he looks so much more superior to these two women could be the very question of this thread; Are these women at a natural disadvantage?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No your thread was about size and strength.  These woman were not out muscled they were out classed.  Perhaps that was the point to let them get their butts kicked to see if they quit or had the heart to keep fighting and they did
Click to expand...


----------



## Xue Sheng

jks9199 said:


> OK -- returning to the original topic after a digression to physics...
> 
> Women generally are smaller and weaker then men.  Whether they are striking or grappling, they have to compensate for that with better and more effective technique, including things like targeting, more efficient recruitment of the body and muscles into the technique, timing, positioning...
> 
> I don't know that I'd say that a woman is inherently disadvantaged in a striking art.  To say that would be to say that a smaller person, or someone weaker is inherently disadvantaged.  At that point, the argue moves just as easily into grappling arts.  They simply bring a different stack of benefits and weaknesses to the table.



Exactly... that was my point with post #39... my wife is a little over 100 lbs. I have 100lbs on her easy and she is 10 inches shorter than me.... and can drop me like a sack of potatoes.....targeting is exactly what she is doing


----------



## RTKDCMB

drop bear said:


> Technique is needed as well but at some stage body mass plays a part. Gravity effects everybody equally.



Technique involves utilizing your body mass efficiently.


----------



## WaterGal

Tony Dismukes said:


> Why don't you believe it?
> 
> Whether or not you think he _should _have been that much more skilled than the ladies taking the test, he clearly _was_. He was not dominating the women with superior size and strength, He was dominating them with timing, distancing, footwork, head movement and obviously much more experience. (Not to mention he wasn't the one testing, so he wasn't already tired at this point.) If these ladies were TKD red belts testing for black, they may have had only 2-3 years experience, while the guy looks like he might easily have 10+ years experience. In BJJ terms, that's like a student testing for her blue belt and rolling with a black belt instructor. Gender doesn't have to enter into it.



Yeah, he's definitely more skilled than them at sparring.  He's also taller, so he's got longer arms and legs, which does give him _some _advantage, and like you say he's not testing, so he's probably starting with more energy/stamina and a clearer head.  That first woman looked really worn out.

I think saying "women have a disadvantage" is too simple a conclusion to draw from that video, or even life.


----------



## Hanzou

ballen0351 said:


> It's probably both.  That wasn't your original question.  You questioned strength and size not natural abilities.  To me natural ability or natural athleticism has nothing to do with gender.  Your just born that way.  Some people are just better period regardless of size or strength and ability



Except men tend to be larger and stronger than women on average. 



> No your thread was about size and strength.  These woman were not out muscled they were out classed.  Perhaps that was the point to let them get their butts kicked to see if they quit or had the heart to keep fighting and they did



Except they are out muscled. The guy is taller than they are, and hitting them with a lot more power. His blows are doing more damage than their blows. Additionally, his height advantage gives him a better vantage point for targeting his opponent's weak point, causing even more damage.

His technical superiority probably arose because of those advantages, while those women's technical ability stayed the same because of their disadvantages. You can see it via their reactions to his striking. I repeat, there shouldn't be that large a gap in technical ability between two black belts at the same school. Granted, you're going to have a black belt who is better than another black belt, but the disparity in ability shown here is far larger than that.

But hey, I'm sure their katas are fantastic.


----------



## drop bear

Hanzou said:


> Except men tend to be larger and stronger than women on average.
> 
> 
> 
> Except they are out muscled. The guy is taller than they are, and hitting them with a lot more power. His blows are doing more damage than their blows. Additionally, his height advantage gives him a better vantage point for targeting his opponent's weak point, causing even more damage.
> 
> His technical superiority probably arose because of those advantages, while those women's technical ability stayed the same because of their disadvantages. You can see it via their reactions to his striking. I repeat, there shouldn't be that large a gap in technical ability between two black belts at the same school. Granted, you're going to have a black belt who is better than another black belt, but the disparity in ability shown here is far larger than that.
> 
> But hey, I'm sure their katas are fantastic.




You have black belts that are better than other black belts. Some people train harder or are more naturally gifted. Some are bigger. Some have been training longer.

That wrestling I showed the guy getting manhandled by a wrestler that could not be bothered to take his hands off his knees was Adrian pang.
Adrian "The Hunter" Pang MMA Stats, Pictures, News, Videos, Biography - Sherdog.com

The guy is no slouch.

So why don't you think there can be big differences in a black belts abilities?


----------



## drop bear

Hanzou said:


> That there is a huge difference in skill is beyond question. What is the question is what is behind that huge difference in skill. Is it purely martial training, or is it more natural abilities?
> 
> When you test for black belt rank, you should be at least somewhat the skill level of the black belts in your school. Further, if this guy is some sort of phenom, I highly doubt that the testers would put these women up against him just to make them feel bad about their abilities. It's very possible that the black belt is a typical black belt at this school. The reason he looks so much more superior to these two women could be the very question of this thread; Are these women at a natural disadvantage?




No. 

You test against the gun fighter of your school to test them.to grade you don't necessarily have to mash everybody in the room. Have you trained in a competition or fight gym?

There are guys who come through that are serious business. Well above the standard of the class.

Like that Kudo grading I mentioned. They were never going to beat the pro mmaers who are competing with the best in Australia. And now in Japan competing with the best in the world.

An average black belt won't be at that level ever.


----------



## Dinkydoo

Xue Sheng said:


> The problem with that is .... I never said power.... I said force and that is not power therefore it is not incorrect and the use of "Power" with Newton's 2nd law is incorrect. You really need to read through all my posts on that. and the formula for Kinetic energy is still not talking about power.
> 
> Power = Work / time [P = W / t]
> 
> Sorry, nope, not wrong...never applied Newton's second law to power, although it does play a part in coming up with the variables to calculate Power....read more carefully



No, but you were using the force equation to explain how hard someone can hit and therefore implying that the dependants of that force equation are indeed the dependants of 'punching power' too. How hard someone can hit is what generally martial artists refer to as 'power'. I havent ever done physics and whenever I need to apply an equation to a piece of code I'm writing I look it up, so we're in danger of going a bit above my head here however I still think its more appropriate to apply the kinetic energy equation when talking about 'punching power' because it takes into account the energy required to move the striking instrument - which is actually quite important. You might be more clued up on the low level details but I'm going to have to insist that how hard one strikes is more complicated than Newtons 2nd Law.

Edit: it looks like that is what you were getting at, from your latest post. Sorry, it seemed like you were over simplifying things from the initial comments in this digression.


----------



## RTKDCMB

Hanzou said:


> I can't say I had the same experience with karate and TKD though. My experience is very similar to Hussaf's in that I could out-strike more advanced female (and smaller male) peers even at beginning rank.



Are you sure that's what actually happened? When sparring students of limited experience more advanced students will take it easy on them, maybe let them get a few shots through their defences every now and then to build their confidence and give them a chance to get the targets they are aiming for. A beginning student might not necessarily recognize that is happening.


----------



## Tez3

A small point, in the OP it says that it's TKD then later on Hanzou says it's Tang Soo Do. Two different styles.

A big point. Why should women bother training martial arts? All this women are smaller, weaker and all round more useless than men so why the hell should we even think we can do martial arts? women can't punch hard enough, are too weak to lift their own body weight, too small to stand up to men. Yep thanks for the vote of confidence guys, nothing like pointing out all the flaws for making women feel it's worth their while training. yeah, I know it's all just facts but really talk about sounding superior.

And the only 'good news' is that BJJ is a bit better for women...........................


----------



## Cirdan

Tez3 said:


> A big point. Why should women bother training martial arts? All this women are smaller, weaker and all round more useless than men so why the hell should we even think we can do martial arts? women can't punch hard enough, are too weak to lift their own body weight, too small to stand up to men. Yep thanks for the vote of confidence guys, nothing like pointing out all the flaws for making women feel it's worth their while training. yeah, I know it's all just facts but really talk about sounding superior.
> 
> And the only 'good news' is that BJJ is a bit better for women...........................



Yes we should all stay in the couch munching cheesy poofs because unless we can out muscle Bobb Sapp any training we do won`t be worth squat.

Actually I find a lot of women around blue and brown belt are technically better than men. Likely that is in part because they will be paired with bigger male partners in the dojo much of the time. A woman can have an advantage, wow!


----------



## Tez3

I don't have to punch hard to make a liver shot drop you. :moon:


----------



## Hanzou

drop bear said:


> So why don't you think there can be big differences in a black belts abilities?



How big are we talking? The problem is that the guy looked like what you expect a black belt to look like. The women did not.


----------



## RTKDCMB

Xue Sheng said:


> If the fact we were not a stick meant that we were beyond the laws of physics then you might be right...but we are not beyond the laws of physics. That my friend is basic physics and it applies no matter how much you may, or may not, like it...sorry that is scientific fact F = ma... and *it is no more complicated than that*.



It's a little more complicated than that. There are other factors involved: 

1) The impulse (the change in acceleration over time), which is the difference between a push and a strike.
2) The type of collision (elastic or inelastic collision), which is the difference between punching a soccer ball held in your hand and punching a brick wall.
3) The applied pressure (the smaller the surface area, the greater the applied pressure for the same amount of force), which is the difference between a slap and a back fist. A knife will stick into someone because of the extreme amount of pressure applied by the tip.
4) The contact angle, which is the difference between a glancing blow and a full on hit.
5) And of course weakness of the target.

All of these factors are interrelated, for example the rigidity of the striking tool and the target determines the type collision (most collisions are a combination of elastic and inelastic collisions) and the amount of impulse imparted to the target.

It is not so much how much force you can generate but how that force is applied to the target and the selection of target that matters.


----------



## Hanzou

Tez3 said:


> A small point, in the OP it says that it's TKD then later on Hanzou says it's Tang Soo Do. Two different styles.



I assumed it was TKD, that was my mistake. In the comment section, the poster stated that they practice TSD.



> And the only 'good news' is that BJJ is a bit better for women...........................


----------



## Tez3

so, women when attacked should always take it to the ground? Well they are obviously crap at stand up and BJJ is the only style they can do so.......


----------



## Hanzou

Tez3 said:


> so, women when attacked should always take it to the ground? ..



Women should assess the situation and respond accordingly.


----------



## Cirdan

Honi the Horrible recomends Viking Berzerker Arts since it works for everybody in all circumstances everywhere.


----------



## ballen0351

Hanzou said:


> Except men tend to be larger and stronger than women on average.


Great but that has nothing to do with the clip.  He wasn't using his "superior" strength.  He wasn't hitting very hard at all.  He was using his skill and superior training which isn't gender specific.  If he just walked up shoved then against a wall pinned them and started bashing them in the face I'd agree he out muscled them but he didnt.  


> Except they are out muscled. The guy is taller than they are, and hitting them with a lot more power. His blows are doing more damage than their blows. Additionally, his height advantage gives him a better vantage point for targeting his opponent's weak point, causing even more damage.


Oh stop he wasn't doing any damage he wasn't hitting them any harder then they were hitting him.  He was just taking better shots.  At most he used his height and reach advantage but even that's stretching it.  Fave it you picked a poor clip to post as your proof guys and stinger then woman.  All you have proven is for those 45 second fights that guy out skilled the females.  But he was fresh, not under the stress of testing, and was clearly higher trained then them.  If that was his best however I wasn't that impressed.  Drop your hands like that against a few female fighters I know he would be picking his teeth off the floor.


> His technical superiority probably arose because of those advantages, while those women's technical ability stayed the same because of their disadvantages. You can see it via their reactions to his striking. I repeat, there shouldn't be that large a gap in technical ability between two black belts at the same school. Granted, you're going to have a black belt who is better than another black belt, but the disparity in ability shown here is far larger than that.
> 
> 
> 
> Again you have no idea what your talking about.  You have no idea about the "quality" of black belts in that school.  You have no idea if that guy even goes to that school.  When we do black belt testing it's normally at national seminars with students from all over.  Some school are much better then others.  Some people train for different reasons some people take training more serious then others.  Some people cross train and have more experience in general.  None of that has to do with gender.  We for example only put cheap white medical tape around a black belt to show that student has a black belt in another style and he hasn't meet the requirements in our style yet.  We also don't wear stripes period so an 8th deg belt looks just like a brand new just promoted black belt.  That is the problem with out of context YouTube clips you don't know the real story.
> 
> 
> 
> But hey, I'm sure their katas are fantastic.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yeah and I'd let you know how I feel about that smug comment but sadly it's against the rules here
Click to expand...


----------



## ballen0351

Tez3 said:


> so, women when attacked should always take it to the ground? Well they are obviously crap at stand up and BJJ is the only style they can do so.......



Yes and the quicker you learn that we can all go home.  Now go make me a sandwich


----------



## RTKDCMB

Hanzou said:


> Women should assess the situation and respond accordingly.



Shouldn't everyone?


----------



## Hanzou

ballen0351 said:


> Great but that has nothing to do with the clip.  He wasn't using his "superior" strength.  He wasn't hitting very hard at all.  He was using his skill and superior training which isn't gender specific.  If he just walked up shoved then against a wall pinned them and started bashing them in the face I'd agree he out muscled them but he didnt.



I recommend you watch the clip again. He was using his superior strength to the point that it caused the females to recoil backwards several times throughout the fight. There was one point (when he had both his hands down of course), that he straight punched the girl in the face. Was it a hard blow? I can't tell, but her face was red after the impact. 

You're also assuming that he had superior training. Under the circumstances, its very likely he had the same training as the women, and that training benefited him more than it did the women. 



> Oh stop he wasn't doing any damage he wasn't hitting them any harder then they were hitting him.  He was just taking better shots.


 
He wasn't hitting them any hard than they were hitting him, yet he didn't recoil from impact a single time, while those women recoiled from impact constantly?

 :hmm:



> Fave it you picked a poor clip to post as your proof guys and stinger then woman.  All you have proven is for those 45 second fights that guy out skilled the females.  But he was fresh, not under the stress of testing, and was clearly higher trained then them.  If that was his best however I wasn't that impressed.  Drop your hands like that against a few female fighters I know he would be picking his teeth off the floor.



I wasn't impressed either. However, if the guy isn't an impressive black belt, what does that say about the fresh women black belts he just manhandled?



> Again you have no idea what your talking about.  You have no idea about the "quality" of black belts in that school.


 
I'm observing the quality of their black belts through that video.



> You have no idea if that guy even goes to that school.



Your assumptions are getting more and more loony. Why would you bring in an outside black belt in to embarrass your female red belts who are testing for black? Wouldn't that make them and your school look worse? :lol:


----------



## Hanzou

RTKDCMB said:


> Shouldn't everyone?



Certainly. However we were talking about women.

Also, women tend to be taken to the ground when attacked. Thus learning to fight from the ground is a valuable skill for a woman to have.


----------



## ballen0351

Hanzou said:


> Certainly. However we were talking about women.
> 
> Also, women tend to be taken to the ground when attacked. Thus learning to fight from the ground is a valuable skill for a woman to have.


Says who?  Where are your facts to back this up.  Most attacks or assaults on woman happen in the home by a spouse or boyfriend.  Most attacks involve a smack, punch, grab and shove into a wal, or shake.  Most of these woman won't fight back due to tremendous emotional beatings they have been taking long before the physical attack ever started.


----------



## ballen0351

Hanzou said:


> I recommend you watch the clip again. He was using his superior strength to the point that it caused the females to recoil backwards several times throughout the fight. There was one point (when he had both his hands down of course), that he straight punched the girl in the face. Was it a hard blow? I can't tell, but her face was red after the impact.
> 
> You're also assuming that he had superior training. Under the circumstances, its very likely he had the same training as the women, and that training benefited him more than it did the women.


I'm not assuming anything.  I have no idea as to the context of anything.  Your the one making assumptions I'm just not buying your BS


> He wasn't hitting them any hard than they were hitting him, yet he didn't recoil from impact a single time, while those women recoiled from impact constantly?
> 
> :hmm:


They were not recoiling  they were flinching.  Thats what most people do that are not use to being hit in the face.  I can walk up and flick someone in the nose and they will "recoil" back.  The few good shots he got in he wasn't hitting hard.  If you think he's got any kind of power behind those punches you need to spend less time on your back


> I wasn't impressed either. However, if the guy isn't an impressive black belt, what does that say about the fresh women black belts he just manhandled?


Doesn't say anything to me about them.  I don't know them or the situation.  I don't know if they had to do 300 pushup before the test and if this was their 10th fight of the day.  I don't known enough about them to say anything other the in this clip the guy was more skilled.



> I'm observing the quality of their black belts through that video.


No your not your observing a short clip with no context you can't Judge the quality.  Hell you cold even figure out what style it was at first.



> Your assumptions are getting more and more loony. Why would you bring in an outside black belt in to embarrass your female red belts who are testing for black? Wouldn't that make them and your school look worse? :lol:


Like I said we do black belt test in front of the head of the organization usually in a national seminar.  The Dojo head can't promote to black belt in our organization.  So you have people from all over the world attend these seminars from schools all over the world.  When I tested I flew to Canada to take my test because that was the closest seminar.  I spared a guy from Alaska and 2 from japan.  So i have no idea from your little clip who this guy is where he came from or his experience lvl.  

Again you choose a poor clip to showcase the strength differences between the sexes


----------



## Hanzou

ballen0351 said:


> Says who?  Where are your facts to back this up.



http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/15/h...-in-us-survey-report-sexual-assault.html?_r=0





> Most attacks or assaults on woman happen in the home by a spouse or boyfriend.  Most attacks involve a smack, punch, grab and shove into a wal, or shake.  Most of these woman won't fight back due to tremendous emotional beatings they have been taking long before the physical attack ever started.



Which in turn can lead to a situation where their significant other is on top of them, dealing more harm.


----------



## ballen0351

Hanzou said:


> http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/15/h...-in-us-survey-report-sexual-assault.html?_r=0


You do understand sexual assaulted doesn't mean taken to the ground and raped right?  You also missed the part where most are done by someone your in a relationship with.  Also regular old assaults FAR outnumber sexual assaults and rapes.  This far out BJJ rape defense fantasy gets tiresome.  Most of these woman are raped or assaulted by someone they are  in a relationship with and AGAIN that has nothing to do with  your topic.  These woman are not assaulted because the man is physically stronger.  It's far more mental then that.  It's not about physical power it's emotional control.  Unlike you I've actually investigated rapes and sex assaults and domestic violence.  I've talked to the victims and the suspects it has nothing to do with brute strength.  This fantasy land that there is a dude waiting in the bushes for the lone woman to walk by to snatch her up and drag her off to rape her and only BJJ can save her isn't reality.  I've personally investigated 17 rapes (I only know this because I just looked it up last week for an upcoming job interview)  Of the 17 only 3 were stranger rapes where the victim didn't know the attacker.  2 the male had a weapon broke into the home at night and threatened to kill the woman's children if she fought or screamed.  1 was this stranger in the bushes well an alley actually that grabbed a woman off the street.  She wasn't raped however because she did fight back.  She had zero training and basically dug her nails into his face and his groin when he exposes it.  He punched her and ran.  The rest were all spouses/boyfriends or an ex.  All had many prior history of physical domestic violence and none of the woman were at an emotional place where fighting back even crossed their minds.


> Which in turn can lead to a situation where their significant other is on top of them, dealing more harm.


Again you have crossed into an area where you have zero idea what your talking about.  I suggest you go back to g u s have bigger biceps then girls because this has nothing to do with strength or size


----------



## ballen0351

That study also has some flaws in the way they included data and question selection


----------



## Hanzou

ballen0351 said:


> You do understand sexual assaulted doesn't mean taken to the ground and raped right?



If you want to discuss this further, feel free to go here;

http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/90-general-self-defense/115945-ground-fighting.html

So that we can keep this thread on track.


----------



## Xue Sheng

RTKDCMB said:


> It's a little more complicated than that. There are other factors involved:
> 
> 1) The impulse (the change in acceleration over time), which is the difference between a push and a strike.
> 2) The type of collision (elastic or inelastic collision), which is the difference between punching a soccer ball held in your hand and punching a brick wall.
> 3) The applied pressure (the smaller the surface area, the greater the applied pressure for the same amount of force), which is the difference between a slap and a back fist. A knife will stick into someone because of the extreme amount of pressure applied by the tip.
> 4) The contact angle, which is the difference between a glancing blow and a full on hit.
> 5) And of course weakness of the target.
> 
> All of these factors are interrelated, for example the rigidity of the striking tool and the target determines the type collision (most collisions are a combination of elastic and inelastic collisions) and the amount of impulse imparted to the target.
> 
> It is not so much how much force you can generate but how that force is applied to the target and the selection of target that matters.



Did you read all my posts on this or just this one? I don't give a hoot about any of this bottom-line there is no more to it than physics. sorry you don't agree...we, as humans...are governed by the laws of physics... With the formula F = ma I am "ONLY" talking about Force....not power. not speed, not velocity, not weak or strong or any other interrelated factors you can come up with. Now you want all the rest of this read the rest of my posts on the topic you will see that...maybe.


And now a note to all others that come at me on this, with the exception of a few on the site that are by far better educated in physics than I....

It is all physics folks and you can come up with all the variables you want to say it isn't but NEWS FLASH!!! that is all it is "Physics". without F=ma you cannot get to "Power"..... any more would be a pointless repetition of what I have already said and I have had enough of this sillienss.

What I do find interesting is that nobody, absolutely nobody, commented on post #39..... and I can only guess that is because it flies in the face of all those trying to prove that men are by far superior fighters to woman..... lord knows a woman a little more than 100lbs having the capability to drop a guy around 250 must be a myth right  Would you all have liked it better if I used my late 70s Taiji shifu who I have a hundred pounds on as an example, he is the best I have ever seen, of felt and qinna, redirection and pressure point strikes... I mean he is a guy after all so it is less of a threat to our collective manhood 

OK...I'm off the soapbox and out of this silliness.


----------



## Hanzou

Xue Sheng said:


> What I do find interesting is that nobody, absolutely nobody, commented on post #39..... and I can only guess that is because it flies in the face of all those trying to prove that men are by far superior fighters to woman..... lord knows a woman a little more than 100lbs having the capability to drop a guy around 250 must be a myth right  Would you all have liked it better if I used my late 70s Taiji shifu who I have a hundred pounds on as an example, he is the best I have ever seen, of felt and qinna, redirection and pressure point strikes... I mean he is a guy after all so it is less of a threat to our collective manhood
> 
> OK...I'm off the soapbox and out of this silliness.



I think most people didn't respond to it because its anecdotal. I'm sure your wife is a strong lady, mine is as well. However, how would she handle herself if a larger male assailant really desired to do her harm?

I think we need to remove the notion that size and strength doesn't matter in physical conflict or the martial arts. It most certainly does.


----------



## Xue Sheng

Hanzou said:


> I think most people didn't respond to it because its anecdotal. I'm sure your wife is a strong lady, mine is as well. However, how would she handle herself if a larger male assailant really desired to do her harm?
> 
> I think we need to remove the notion that size and strength doesn't matter in physical conflict or the martial arts. It most certainly does.



I know how she would respond, much the same way, it is how she is wired.... and it ain't strength bubba...its skill... now take a look at post #39 and show me anywhere in there I said anything about "Strength" being the reason

You want to say it is "not necessarily true or reliable, because based on personal accounts rather than facts or research.".... I'm ok with that..... I want to believe no one responded because it was a threat to their testosterone.... I'm ok with that too..... you have a nice day


----------



## Hanzou

Xue Sheng said:


> I know how she would respond, much the same way, it is how she is wired.... and it ain't strength bubba...its skill... now take a look at post #39 and show me anywhere in there I said anything about "Strength" being the reason



I never said you did. I said that there's a notion in martial arts that skill can always overcome strength or that strength "doesn't matter". The first part is not necessarily true, and the second part isn't true at all. Your skill needs to be at a certain point to overcome the strength advantage of an opponent. Believe it or not, that's a disadvantage, because if they're skilled in turn, you're in a lot of trouble.


----------



## Xue Sheng

Hanzou said:


> I never said you did. I said that there's a notion in martial arts that skill can always overcome strength or that strength "doesn't matter". The first part is not necessarily true, and the second part isn't true at all. Your skill needs to be at a certain point to overcome the strength advantage of an opponent. Believe it or not, that's a disadvantage, because if they're skilled in turn, you're in a lot of trouble.



But you used "strength" in your response which implies that I did talk about strength in post #39.... now...without further adieu.... I am tired of this silliness.... you guys want to be strong macho martial arts he men...more power to you....

From the book - Zen in the Martial Arts by Joe Hyams
 Chapter Title Do Not Disturb

This is from a conversation between Joe Hyams, Sterling Silliphant and Bruce Lee



> On one such occasion we talked about the difference between wasting time and spending time. Bruce was the first to speak.
> 
> To spend time is to pass it in a specific manner he said. We are spending it during lessons just as we are spending it now in conversation. To waste time is to expend it thoughtlessly or carelessly. We all have time to either spend or waste and it is our decision what to do with it. But once passed, it is gone forever.
> 
> It is the most precious commodity we have, agreed Sterling. I always view my time as divided into infinite moments or transactions or contacts. Anyone who steals my time is stealing my life because they are taking my existence from me. As I get older, I realize that time is the only thing I have left. So when someone comes to me with a project, I estimate the time it will take me to do it and then ask myself, Do I want to spend weeks or months of what little time I have on this project? Is it worth it or is it wasting my time? If I consider the project time-worthy I do it.
> 
> I apply this same yardstick to my social relations. I will not permit people to steal my time. I have limited my friends to those people with whom time passes happily. There are moments in my life - necessary moments - when I dont do anything but what is my choice. The choice of how I spend my time is mine, and it is not dictated by social convention
> 
> After Sterling finished talking, Bruce looked into space for a few moments. When he finally spoke, it was to ask if he could make a telephone call.
> 
> When he came back, Bruce was smiling. I just cancelled an appointment. he said. It was with someone who wanted to waste my time and not help me spend it



You, and pretty much this thread at this point, is   wasting mine so......:wavey:


----------



## ballen0351

Hanzou said:


> If you want to discuss this further, feel free to go here;
> 
> http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/90-general-self-defense/115945-ground-fighting.html
> 
> So that we can keep this thread on track.


I dont actually because you have shown you have no idea what your talking about.  Good Day sir:2xbird:


----------



## Cirdan

All I can say is that the female martial artists I know don`t give a flying crap about so called inherent disadvantages or that they statistically are supposed to be weak. When you show up at the dojo day after day year after year you are no longer Ms.Average Marge Simpson.


----------



## donald1

Cirdan said:


> All I can say is that the female martial artists I know don`t give a flying crap about so called inherent disadvantages or that they statistically are supposed to be weak. When you show up at the dojo day after day year after year you are no longer *Ms.Average Marge Simpson*.


----------



## RTKDCMB

Xue Sheng said:


> Did you read all my posts on this or just this one? I don't give a hoot about any of this bottom-line there is no more to it than physics. sorry you don't agree...we, as humans...are governed by the laws of physics... With the formula F = ma I am "ONLY" talking about Force....not power. not speed, not velocity, not weak or strong or any other interrelated factors you can come up with. Now you want all the rest of this read the rest of my posts on the topic you will see that...maybe.
> 
> 
> And now a note to all others that come at me on this, with the exception of a few on the site that are by far better educated in physics than I....
> 
> It is all physics folks and you can come up with all the variables you want to say it isn't but NEWS FLASH!!! that is all it is "Physics". without F=ma you cannot get to "Power"..... any more would be a pointless repetition of what I have already said and I have had enough of this sillienss.
> 
> What I do find interesting is that nobody, absolutely nobody, commented on post #39..... and I can only guess that is because it flies in the face of all those trying to prove that men are by far superior fighters to woman..... lord knows a woman a little more than 100lbs having the capability to drop a guy around 250 must be a myth right  Would you all have liked it better if I used my late 70s Taiji shifu who I have a hundred pounds on as an example, he is the best I have ever seen, of felt and qinna, redirection and pressure point strikes... I mean he is a guy after all so it is less of a threat to our collective manhood
> 
> OK...I'm off the soapbox and out of this silliness.



Ok, a couple of things:

1) Where in any of my posts did I even suggest that men are superior fighters or even mention women at all?
2) There is a lady in my organization (one of our 6th Dans) I have absolutely no doubt she could kick my butt.
3) There are about a hundred or so posts I didn't comment on.
4) Post #39 was some vagueish comment on the fact that a medical practitioner knows human anatomy didn't need much of a response since, as martial artists, we all know there are vulnerable spots on the human body that are more effective to strike at and yes the effectiveness of a strike depends on the technique being used is not exactly a revelation.
5) My manhood is not under any kind of threat (unless I get kicked there) because my ego does not run my life.
6) If you are going to mention physics and over simplify things then someone with a physics degree is going to call you on it eventually.
7) Physics is what a smaller person uses to overcome a larger, stronger opponent.


----------



## Xue Sheng

RTKDCMB said:


> Ok, a couple of things:
> 
> 1) Where in any of my posts did I even suggest that men are superior fighters or even mention women at all?
> 2) There is a lady in my organization (one of our 6th Dans) I have absolutely no doubt she could kick my butt.
> 3) There are about a hundred or so posts I didn't comment on.
> 4) Post #39 was some vagueish comment on the fact that a medical practitioner knows human anatomy didn't need much of a response since, as martial artists, we all know there are vulnerable spots on the human body that are more effective to strike at and yes the effectiveness of a strike depends on the technique being used is not exactly a revelation.
> 5) My manhood is not under any kind of threat (unless I get kicked there) because my ego does not run my life.
> 6) If you are going to mention physics and over simplify things then someone with a physics degree is going to call you on it eventually.
> 7) Physics is what a smaller person uses to overcome a larger, stronger opponent.



I over simplified...interesting..... I was using basics to make it easier...do you have a physics degree? 

Now

This part was in response to your post to me



> Did you read all my posts on this or just this one? I don't give a hoot about any of this bottom-line there is no more to it than physics. sorry you don't agree...we, as humans...are governed by the laws of physics... With the formula F = ma I am "ONLY" talking about Force....not power. not speed, not velocity, not weak or strong or any other interrelated factors you can come up with. Now you want all the rest of this read the rest of my posts on the topic you will see that...maybe.



Did you read the posts after that that were also on the topic of physics?

Now...

This part was general to all it applied that is why it started with "And now a *note to all others *that come at me on this, with the exception of a few on the site that are by far better educated in physics than I...."



> It is all physics folks and you can come up with all the variables you want to say it isn't but NEWS FLASH!!! that is all it is "Physics". without F=ma you cannot get to "Power"..... any more would be a pointless repetition of what I have already said and I have had enough of this sillienss.
> 
> What I do find interesting is that nobody, absolutely nobody, commented on post #39..... and I can only guess that is because it flies in the face of all those trying to prove that men are by far superior fighters to woman..... lord knows a woman a little more than 100lbs having the capability to drop a guy around 250 must be a myth right  Would you all have liked it better if I used my late 70s Taiji shifu who I have a hundred pounds on as an example, he is the best I have ever seen, of felt and qinna, redirection and pressure point strikes... I mean he is a guy after all so it is less of a threat to our collective manhood
> 
> OK...I'm off the soapbox and out of this silliness.



you want to include yourself in that...I'm ok with that...but I did not name names and from this point on...to all in this thread...quote me, argue with me all you want but please... before you do...refer to post #121....


----------



## drop bear

Hanzou said:


> How big are we talking? The problem is that the guy looked like what you expect a black belt to look like. The women did not.



The difference can be pretty big.

A good striker can mess with your mojo a bit because if you make a mistake you get smashed for it. So a good striker can wind up making you look like a bad one. You wind up second guessing yourself and throwing worse.

Something we haven't mentioned is you get more gains where you are training with people who are better. So the girls are getting more out of that training than that guy.


----------



## Hanzou

drop bear said:


> Something we haven't mentioned is you get more gains where you are training with people who are better. So the girls are getting more out of that training than that guy.



You really think either one of those girls are going to improve significantly? You're supposed to be somewhat proficient in your art before you reach black belt. Assuming they passed this black belt test, they're one grade away from instructor level.


----------



## Hanzou

Xue Sheng said:


> But you used "strength" in your response which implies that I did talk about strength in post #39.... now...without further adieu.... I am tired of this silliness.... you guys want to be strong macho martial arts he men...more power to you....



I'm curious where you get the notion that anyone here is trying to be "macho". I agree that this discussion isn't politically correct, but no one here is saying that women have no place in the martial arts. I'm simply pointing out I've pattern I and others have noticed in the martial arts. Nothing more, nothing less.


----------



## Tez3

Hanzou said:


> You really think either one of those girls are going to improve significantly? You're supposed to be somewhat proficient in your art before you reach black belt. Assuming they passed this black belt test, they're one grade away from instructor level.



However proficient they are or are not they only represent their club and instructors, they don't constitute the whole of TSD nor do they represent female martial artists. All that the videos proves is how *they* spar on that particular day with that particular opponent.. Perhaps they are a McDojo perhaps not, we don't know. You cannot take anything meaningful from viewing that video as far as women in martial arts are concerned, nothing at all.


----------



## drop bear

Hanzou said:


> You really think either one of those girls are going to improve significantly? You're supposed to be somewhat proficient in your art before you reach black belt. Assuming they passed this black belt test, they're one grade away from instructor level.



That is moving in to a different argument though. How good a fighter has to be to grade. And that is up to the club.

Let's look at your vid of the bjj the guy who got subbed. He obviously did not earn his belt because he just got manhandled buy a guy half his size?

Is that a fair statement?


----------



## Hanzou

drop bear said:


> That is moving in to a different argument though. How good a fighter has to be to grade. And that is up to the club.
> 
> Let's look at your vid of the bjj the guy who got subbed. He obviously did not earn his belt because he just got manhandled buy a guy half his size?
> 
> Is that a fair statement?



No because the two in the Bjj vid were from different schools. Different schools have different standards.

Would it be fair to say that the fighting ability of the females in question was considered acceptable because they're women? Would a man with that sheer lack of fighting ability be promoted to black belt?


----------



## ballen0351

Hanzou said:


> No because the two in the Bjj vid were from different schools. Different schools have different standards.
> 
> Would it be fair to say that the fighting ability of the females in question was considered acceptable because they're women? Would a man with that sheer lack of fighting ability be promoted to black belt?



How long have those ladies been training?  How long has he been training?


----------



## Hanzou

Tez3 said:


> However proficient they are or are not they only represent their club and instructors, they don't constitute the whole of TSD nor do they represent female martial artists. All that the videos proves is how *they* spar on that particular day with that particular opponent.. Perhaps they are a McDojo perhaps not, we don't know. You cannot take anything meaningful from viewing that video as far as women in martial arts are concerned, nothing at all.



You can take the fact that the man was far more skilled than the women in that video, despite them testing for the same rank he was. 

That's very meaningful.


----------



## ballen0351

Hanzou said:


> You can take the fact that the man was far more skilled than the women in that video, despite them testing for the same rank he was.
> 
> That's very meaningful.



How do you know what rank he is?


----------



## Hanzou

ballen0351 said:


> How do you know what rank he is?



By looking at his belt. :uhoh:


----------



## ballen0351

I suggest you stop bashing these ladies that went out there and did their thing. Then  Had the guts to post it online.  They did a fine job and don't need to be used as your punchline and treated like a joke.  You have no idea what was going on and have turned a 3 min clip taken from unknown context and have used it to bash these girls skills and abilities.  Post up some videos of your amazing skills or back off these ladies


----------



## Steve

Hanzou said:


> You really think either one of those girls are going to improve significantly? You're supposed to be somewhat proficient in your art before you reach black belt. Assuming they passed this black belt test, they're one grade away from instructor level.



The standard for black belt in one art is different in another.  Makes no sense to apply a Bjj standard for black belt to any other style.  Apples to oranges.  


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## jks9199

drop bear said:


> No.
> 
> An average black belt won't be at that level ever.



I think a competitive MMA fighter -- especially apro in international fighting -- is at least arguably comparable to a black belt in their chosen "style".  So, rather by definition, an " average black belt " is not going tho be at their level of strength and conditioning. Unless their in Lake Woebegone...

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk


----------



## Hanzou

Steve said:


> The standard for black belt in one art is different in another.  Makes no sense to apply a Bjj standard for black belt to any other style.  Apples to oranges.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk



Well I have a black belt in Shotokan, which is quite similar to TSD. In TSD, second degree black is instructor level, just like it is in Shotokan. These women were one step away from that ranking.


----------



## Tez3

Hanzou said:


> Well I have a black belt in Shotokan, which is quite similar to TSD. In TSD, second degree black is instructor level, just like it is in Shotokan. These women were one step away from that ranking.



These women were one step away from that ranking in their club under their instructor.
In some TSD clubs, 1st Dan is instructor, in others I've seen you have to wait until 3rd. All up to the instructors really. One video proves nothing.


----------



## Hong Kong Pooey

As there seems to be a somewhat shrill response from some of the feminists on here I'd like to clarify my own position on the subject as I don't wish to be tarred with any particular brush...

Overall, on average, generally speaking, however you prefer to phrase it, women are physically weaker and smaller in stature than men. That is accepted as fact by pretty much every rational person.

That is why they are separated for almost all Olympic events and why men hold the most world records in those events, and why professional sports are not unisex, including combat sports et cetera et cetera.

Given the physical nature of fighting then logic dictates women are at a disadvantage. There is also all of human history to back it up.

There is nothing remotely sexist about any of that.

It doesn't mean that there aren't exceptions, or women can't fight, or some women can't beat some men, or that some women couldn't beat the crap out of most men. There must be thousands that could wipe the floor with me!

Whenever there is a distinct mismatch in size and strength in a fight, the smaller person has be of a higher skill level, smarter, or both in order to win.

If anyone still thinks I'm a terrible misogynist for recognizing these facts then please bear in mind I am a student of Wing Chun which we're taught was designed by a woman in order for a smaller person (woman) to defeat a larger, stronger opponent (man) and does not rely on physical strength in order to do so (smarter)


----------



## Tez3

Hong Kong Pooey said:


> As there seems to be a somewhat shrill response from some of the feminists on here I'd like to clarify my own position on the subject as I don't wish to be tarred with any particular brush...
> 
> 
> 
> Overall, on average, generally speaking, however you prefer to phrase it, women are physically weaker and smaller in stature than men. That is accepted as fact by pretty much every rational person.
> 
> That is why they are separated for almost all Olympic events and why men hold the most world records in those events, and why professional sports are not unisex, including combat sports et cetera et cetera.
> 
> Given the physical nature of fighting then logic dictates women are at a disadvantage. There is also all of human history to back it up.
> 
> There is nothing remotely sexist about any of that.
> 
> It doesn't mean that there aren't exceptions, or women can't fight, or some women can't beat some men, or that some women couldn't beat the crap out of most men. There must be thousands that could wipe the floor with me!
> 
> Whenever there is a distinct mismatch in size and strength in a fight, the smaller person has be of a higher skill level, smarter, or both in order to win.
> 
> If anyone still thinks I'm a terrible misogynist for recognizing these facts then please bear in mind I am a student of Wing Chun which we're taught was designed by a woman in order for a smaller person (woman) to defeat a larger, stronger opponent (man) and does not rely on physical strength in order to do so (smarter)




There is no shrill response from anyone on here let alone 'feminists'.

The whole premise of the OP is that women being weaker can't really do stand up but guess what, they can do BJJ because that is the magic style that gives them 'the weapons to fight'.

The video was posted so that it could be pointed out that that women who were 'obviously not doing well' against a man, should instead train BJJ. 

No one is making sexist remarks, no one is disputing the generally smaller build of females as opposed to men. I think you have the wrong end of the stick.


----------



## Hong Kong Pooey

Tez3 said:


> No one is making sexist remarks, no one is disputing the generally smaller build of females as opposed to men. I think you have the wrong end of the stick.



Wouldn't be the first time!


----------



## Hanzou

Tez3 said:


> There is no shrill response from anyone on here let alone 'feminists'.
> 
> The whole premise of the OP is that women being weaker can't really do stand up but guess what, they can do BJJ because that is the magic style that gives them 'the weapons to fight'.



It has nothing to do with magic. It's simply that grappling grants you more tools to utilize than striking does. Bjj is hardly alone in that benefit.



> The video was posted so that it could be pointed out that that women who were 'obviously not doing well' against a man, should instead train BJJ.



No, it was posted because of its content and the strong reaponse it generated in the comment section, with some saying that women shouldn't spar men in class.


----------



## ballen0351

Hanzou said:


> It has nothing to do with magic. It's simply that grappling grants you more tools to utilize than striking does. Bjj is hardly alone in that benefit



LOL utter nonsense


----------



## Tez3

Hanzou said:


> It has nothing to do with magic. It's simply that grappling grants you more tools to utilize than striking does. Bjj is hardly alone in that benefit.
> 
> 
> 
> No, it was posted because of its content and the strong response it generated in the comment section, with some saying that women shouldn't spar men in class.



Such comments are made by trolls looking to either insult those in the video or to draw attention to themselves. They really aren't worth taking any notice of. I very much doubt they were members of the same club, they will be random idiots. Who cares what they think.

I don't think any martial art 'grants' you anything, ever. You have to work for everything you get. The best weapon you will ever have is your brain regardless of what you train.


----------



## Brian R. VanCise

*Interesting thread* and I have not read the whole thing but Hanzou did you take into account that the women in the video probably had been testing for and hour to three hours?  During that time they would typically be going through forms, 1 steps, 2 steps, self defense, breaking, etc.  By the time this sparring video was taken they would have pushed their bodies extensively.  Where as the male black belt who came in to spar with them was not drained by exhaustion, has more experience and at this stage substantially more skill set.  Not to mention size, strength and reach on his side?  Did you take all of that into account?

Now the video you posted of the smaller BJJ practitioner in a competition beating a larger competitor is pretty cool.  However, I would gather that they were on the same playing field.  Ie. had the same amount of matches if any and neither were drained substantially more than the other person.  

*
If your objective is to say that BJJ is better for smaller*, weaker people then you need to come up with better comparisons. ie. more comparable videos.  However, before you do think about this.  A larger, stronger person will by default always have an attribute advantage unless their is a skill discrepancy or some one is lucky.  Size does matter.  It matters in all athletics.  It certainly matters in BJJ because if you put anyone on the mat with someone who has superior size and equal ability then in general the bigger person will win.  *Though of course not always*.  Just like a smaller person will not always lose to a bigger person in a striking match.  Yet, that size, reach, etc. is a big advantage!!!

BJJ is a great martial system but.... it is just one martial system.  Good at what it does but not the end all be all of everything. (spoken by someone who practices it)


----------



## Hanzou

Brian R. VanCise said:


> *Interesting thread* and I have not read the whole thing but Hanzou did you take into account that the women in the video probably had been testing for and hour to three hours?  During that time they would typically be going through forms, 1 steps, 2 steps, self defense, breaking, etc.  By the time this sparring video was taken they would have pushed their bodies extensively.  Where as the male black belt who came in to spar with them was not drained by exhaustion, has more experience and at this stage substantially more skill set.  Not to mention size, strength and reach on his side?  Did you take all of that into account?



Absolutely. Again, what prompted me to post this video was not only its contents, but the responses in the comment section. The main comments being that it was unfair for the testers to put a man against a woman in a sparring contest. I found such comments interesting, along with the video contents, and decided to make a thread about it.

As to the tiredness of the two women, nothing from their performance indicated to me at least that they were tired. They were going for their attacks pretty vigorously. In my experience, when you're tired, you tend to play a bit more defensive in order to conserve energy. The women in that vid were still performing pretty explosive movements.



> Now the video you posted of the smaller BJJ practitioner in a competition beating a larger competitor is pretty cool.  However, I would gather that they were on the same playing field.  Ie. had the same amount of matches if any and neither were drained substantially more than the other person.
> 
> *
> If your objective is to say that BJJ is better for smaller*, weaker people then you need to come up with better comparisons. ie. more comparable videos.  However, before you do think about this.  A larger, stronger person will by default always have an attribute advantage unless their is a skill discrepancy or some one is lucky.  Size does matter.  It matters in all athletics.  It certainly matters in BJJ because if you put anyone on the mat with someone who has superior size and equal ability then in general the bigger person will win.  *Though of course not always*.  Just like a smaller person will not always lose to a bigger person in a striking match.  Yet, that size, reach, etc. is a big advantage!!!
> 
> BJJ is a great martial system but.... it is just one martial system.  Good at what it does but not the end all be all of everything. (spoken by someone who practices it)



I posted the Bjj video in response to another poster. Said poster has continued to make sarcastic remarks about Bjj being beneficial for smaller practitioners or women, and I've responded in kind with simply pictures  and videos. My statement on the matter has only been that *grappling* provides more tools than striking does for smaller people. Grappling doesn't begin and end with Bjj.


----------



## Brian R. VanCise

*I agree with you that grappling doesn't begin and end with BJJ.*


I do not feel that grappling provides more tools than striking just different tools.  As a matter of speaking in self-defense grappling with a man of superior size would probably not be on anyone's fun list.  Whether it be a man or a woman!


----------



## Tez3

Who actually reads the comments under You Tube videos? Really who does?. They are never interesting, often insulting, frequently illiterate and never written by people who actually know anything about the subject matter in the video. 
I do BJJ, I grapple and I train MMA. I still don't read the comments under You Tube videos. And the 'sarcastic' remarks hit true though didn't they, the whole point of putting the videos on *was* to 'prove' that stand up isn't as good as BJJ/grappling so I am vindicated (posh way of saying I told you so) :rofl:


----------



## Hanzou

Brian R. VanCise said:


> *I agree with you that grappling doesn't begin and end with BJJ.*


*

*




> I do not feel that grappling provides more tools than striking just different tools.  As a matter of speaking in self-defense grappling with a man of superior size would probably not be on anyone's fun list.  Whether it be a man or a woman!



Depends on the situation. Trading blows with someone of superior size wouldn't be on anyone's fun list either. If given the choice, I'd grapple.


----------



## Brian R. VanCise

Absolutely and that is why as a martial practitioner one should not be one dimensional!


----------



## Hanzou

Tez3 said:


> Who actually reads the comments under You Tube videos? Really who does?. They are never interesting, often insulting, frequently illiterate and never written by people who actually know anything about the subject matter in the video.



I read the comments because I wanted more info. The interesting comments were the first couple of comments. Kind of hard to miss.

Also this vid spawned a duplicate video that was even more focused on the mixed sparring portion.








> I do BJJ, I grapple and I train MMA. I still don't read the comments under You Tube videos. And the 'sarcastic' remarks hit true though didn't they, the whole point of putting the videos on *was* to 'prove' that stand up isn't as good as BJJ/grappling...



For smaller and/or weaker people? I'm forced to agree. However that isn't the entire point of this thread. Merely an outgrowth of it.


----------



## Tez3

Hanzou said:


> I read the comments because I wanted more info. The interesting comments were the first couple of comments. Kind of hard to miss.
> 
> Also this vid spawned a duplicate video that was even more focused on the mixed sparring portion.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> For smaller and/or weaker people? I'm forced to agree. However that isn't the entire point of this thread. Merely an outgrowth of it.



Of course it was. So why were you looking for videos of people sparring when your interest doesn't lie that way?


----------



## Hanzou

Tez3 said:


> Of course it was. So why were you looking for videos of people sparring when your interest doesn't lie that way?



I actually found this vid because of the kata discussion in the karate forum. I had posted it there as well.


----------



## Tez3

Hanzou said:


> I actually found this vidthan some
> of the kata discussion in the karate forum. I had posted it there as well.[/QUOTE
> 
> Videos still aren't evidence of anything other than some peoples need to post pictures and videos online. It's a type of vanity, to regard such videos as being proof of something other than that would be unwise.


----------



## drop bear

jks9199 said:


> I think a competitive MMA fighter -- especially apro in international fighting -- is at least arguably comparable to a black belt in their chosen "style".  So, rather by definition, an " average black belt " is not going tho be at their level of strength and conditioning. Unless their in Lake Woebegone...
> 
> Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk



Yeah but both of those guys have domolished top competitive black belts to get where they are. This is sort of what I am saying. That you can be a black belt but not expected to be the best fighter in the room.


----------



## drop bear

Hanzou said:


> No because the two in the Bjj vid were from different schools. Different schools have different standards.
> 
> Would it be fair to say that the fighting ability of the females in question was considered acceptable because they're women? Would a man with that sheer lack of fighting ability be promoted to black belt?



Should the standard be that large in bjj? Is one of the schools deficient?

Men Yeah depending on the circumstances. I don't think they were ever expected to win. 

Ronda rousy looking like a chump sparring. Skill difference not a size difference.
http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=27vO8FdbQzk

It is not that striking is inherently unfair.just she has really good sparring partners.


----------



## Hanzou

drop bear said:


> Should the standard be that large in bjj? Is one of the schools deficient?



I did view some of his other matches, and some of the purple belt skills showcased were questionable. Especially when he went up against that really large purple belt who just tried to lay on him and not do anything. However, that was probably because he was used to subbing people by moving his weight around. 



> Men Yeah depending on the circumstances. I don't think they were ever expected to win.
> 
> Ronda rousy looking like a chump sparring. Skill difference not a size difference.
> http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=27vO8FdbQzk
> 
> It is not that striking is inherently unfair.just she has really good sparring partners.



No offense to Ronda, but I don't think she could do well against a man with equal level striking.

However, I have no doubt that she could outgrapple a lot of men out there. I've seen many occasions when she's taken down, and arm barred male professional MMA fighters at will. Some of them were quite a bit larger than she was. Uriah Hall immediately comes to mind. He outweighs her by about 50 lbs.


----------



## jks9199

Hanzou said:


> It has nothing to do with magic. It's simply that grappling grants you more tools to utilize than striking does. Bjj is hardly alone in that benefit.


Not more.  Different tools.  Different is not the same as  more.  You can use leverage, positioning, and so on whether striking or  wrestling.


----------



## drop bear

Hanzou said:


> I did view some of his other matches, and some of the purple belt skills showcased were questionable. Especially when he went up against that really large purple belt who just tried to lay on him and not do anything. However, that was probably because he was used to subbing people by moving his weight around.
> 
> 
> 
> No offense to Ronda, but I don't think she could do well against a man with equal level striking.
> 
> However, I have no doubt that she could outgrapple a lot of men out there. I've seen many occasions when she's taken down, and arm barred male professional MMA fighters at will. Some of them were quite a bit larger than she was. Uriah Hall immediately comes to mind. He outweighs her by about 50 lbs.



Well if I doubled somonone body weight I would lay on them as well. I mean use your advantage there.

I have seen Ronda dominated in grappling by guys as well. But she picks top guys to spar with.

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=o9xjs2fWJEs

Grappling must be unfair for girls?

We could make the same argument that bjj is more suited to Brazilians because they dominate in it. So it is unfair for Americans to train in bjj because they don't have the right physicality.


----------



## Hanzou

jks9199 said:


> Not more. Different tools. Different is not the same as more. You can use leverage, positioning, and so on whether striking or wrestling.



Fair point. 



drop bear said:


> Well if I doubled somonone body weight I would lay on them as well. I mean use your advantage there.
> 
> I have seen Ronda dominated in grappling by guys as well. But she picks top guys to spar with.
> 
> http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=o9xjs2fWJEs
> 
> Grappling must be unfair for girls?



I wouldn't call that dominated. I've seen plenty of women getting tossed to the ground, only to end up subbing the guy. C'mon Drop Bear, you know better than that. 



> We could make the same argument that bjj is more suited to Brazilians because they dominate in it. So it is unfair for Americans to train in bjj because they don't have the right physicality.



That has little to do with physicality. It has everything to do with Brazilians learning Bjj earlier on average than their American counterparts.


----------



## drop bear

Tez3 said:


> Hanzou said:
> 
> 
> 
> I actually found this vidthan some
> of the kata discussion in the karate forum. I had posted it there as well.[/QUOTE
> 
> Videos still aren't evidence of anything other than some peoples need to post pictures and videos online. It's a type of vanity, to regard such videos as being proof of something other than that would be unwise.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> As compared to people saying I am right with no evidence and if you disagree you don't understand.
> 
> The issue with YouTube is you set yourself up for a person to pick flaws in it which I would class as less vain. I am picking flaws and not once has hanzou replied with the butt hurt.
> 
> Takes it looks at it and argues my flaws.
> 
> Like a normal discussion.
Click to expand...


----------



## drop bear

Hanzou said:


> Fair point.
> 
> 
> 
> I wouldn't call that dominated. I've seen plenty of women getting tossed to the ground, only to end up subbing the guy. C'mon Drop Bear, you know better than that.
> 
> 
> 
> That has little to do with physicality. It has everything to do with Brazilians learning Bjj earlier on average than their American counterparts.




Did she sub the guy?

What she could have done if only she could eyegouge? Who are you sounding like?

So with a greater pool of people learning martial art at an earlier age you get a better martial artist.

Do more women tend to learn martial arts than men?


----------



## Hanzou

drop bear said:


> Did she sub the guy?



They were resetting after the takedown. They never got far enough to do ground fighting.

It would have been interesting to see them do some ground work, since Ronda is so good at it.



> What she could have done if only she could eyegouge? Who are you sounding like?



LoL! No, I'm not going that far. I'm merely pointing out that you can't really say he was dominating her when they were only doing one half of the grappling equation. Again, I've seen plenty of occasions when someone gets taken down in a dominant fashion, only to end up winning via submission from the ground.



> So with a greater pool of people learning martial art at an earlier age you get a better martial artist.
> 
> Do more women tend to learn martial arts than men?



I think part of the problem with Bjj in the states is the price. Most people can't afford to do it until they're adults. From what I hear, its WAY cheaper in Brazil due to the strong competition it has against Judo and other arts.


----------



## drop bear

Hanzou said:


> They were resetting after the takedown. They never got far enough to do ground fighting.
> 
> It would have been interesting to see them do some ground work, since Ronda is so good at it.
> 
> 
> 
> LoL! No, I'm not going that far. I'm merely pointing out that you can't really say he was dominating her when they were only doing one half of the grappling equation. Again, I've seen plenty of occasions when someone gets taken down in a dominant fashion, only to end up winning via submission from the ground.
> 
> 
> 
> I think part of the problem with Bjj in the states is the price. Most people can't afford to do it until they're adults. From what I hear, its WAY cheaper in Brazil due to the strong competition it has against Judo and other arts.




OK my rule one as a mmaer is there are no imaginary victories if only I could have used my whole skill set. You get owned you get owned fair and square. For a girl who is best in the world at judo. Resetting after the takedown doesn't count.

So I can say it.

Less people in america do bjj so they are not as good. Less girls do ma so they are not as good.

It is a factor we haven't considered regarding this black belt test. The guy is a product of sorting through a hundred guys until he rises to the top and gets his black.

The girl is a product of sorting through ten.

So it is more likely you will find the top fighter in a gym be a guy.

Same reason it is allways sunnier when you are working than on weekends. You are comparing five days to two.


----------



## ballen0351

Hanzou said:


> I think part of the problem with Bjj in the states is the price. Most people can't afford to do it until they're adults. From what I hear, its WAY cheaper in Brazil due to the strong competition it has against Judo and other arts.



I agree with this I was paying 30 a month for judo.  Other guys at work are paying 200+ a month for BJJ.  It's insane


----------



## Tez3

drop bear said:


> OK my rule one as a mmaer is there are no imaginary victories if only I could have used my whole skill set. You get owned you get owned fair and square. For a girl who is best in the world at judo. Resetting after the takedown doesn't count.
> 
> So I can say it.
> 
> Less people in america do bjj so they are not as good. Less girls do ma so they are not as good.
> 
> It is a factor we haven't considered regarding this black belt test. The guy is a product of sorting through a hundred guys until he rises to the top and gets his black.
> 
> The girl is a product of sorting through ten.
> 
> So it is more likely you will find the top fighter in a gym be a guy.
> 
> Same reason it is allways sunnier when you are working than on weekends. You are comparing five days to two.



To be fair she's not the best in the world at Judo, the girl who got the gold medal at the Olympics by beating her would be the best.


----------



## RTKDCMB

Xue Sheng said:


> I over simplified...interesting..... I was using basics to make it easier...do you have a physics degree?



My university education is BSc in Chemistry and Physics (double major) + Bachelor of Extractive Metallurgy (4 year degree with a thesis) + currently doing a PhD in Mineral science (Extractive Metallurgy).


----------



## Tez3

RTKDCMB said:


> My university education is BSc in Chemistry and Physics (double major) + Bachelor of Extractive Metallurgy (4 year degree with a thesis) + currently doing a PhD in Mineral science (Extractive Metallurgy).



You two may need to continue this conversation by message as  it's definitely getting too academic LOL!


----------



## RTKDCMB

Tez3 said:


> You two may need to continue this conversation by message as  it's definitely getting too academic LOL!



He asked a question and I answered, I feel no need to continue along those lines. Now back to the subject at hand.


----------



## Tez3

After her last UFC fight Rosi Sexton got a lot of attention from trolls, nasty buggers. A few were saying she hadn't really even been to university let alone got degrees and a doctorate so she posted up her thesis etc and told them to knock themselves out. I didn't even understand the titles!

http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~hsimmons/ROSI-SEXTON/rosi-sexton.html  all that and she fights like a boss!


----------



## Prostar

_I actually liked the women's sparring.  Having said that, there are a couple of things I would love to work on with them.  

I had the same height, weight and strength disadvantage with one of my instructors.
My other instructor was a Golden Gloves boxer and then an All Marines boxer before starting in martial arts.  I had to learn some things to be able to deal with them without getting bounced off the walls all the time.

1. I would also encourage them to keep the hands up.
2. Move.  Work the angles more.  Standing in front of someone that big is a losing proposition.
3. Learn to kick at a range where other people would only punch.  That knee has to chamber higher to have an effective side kick close in.

Could they learn to be effective against a guy that big and talented?  Probably not, but they are way along the road to being very good martial artists.
_


----------



## Tez3




----------



## ballen0351

Tez3 said:


>



YOOOOOOOOOOOOUUUUUUUUUUUUUU can doooooooooooo ittttttttttt


----------



## mcmoon

Tony Dismukes said:


> Therefore, if you are a woman wanting the ability to handle herself against a male attacker you need to *not let all other factors be equal*. You need some combination of superior technique, superior conditioning, superior fighting spirit, superior tactics, and/or superior weaponry.
> 
> I'm a pretty decent martial artist, but I would not want to get into a fight with either Ronda Rousey or Lucia Rijker, even though I'm much bigger than either one.
> 
> *(Fighting in this context includes both striking and grappling, but perhaps not so much the use of knives and firearms. Those tools can do a lot to equalize for discrepancies in size and strength.)




If you ever find yourself in a fair fight somebody f$#ked up.


----------



## Hong Kong Pooey

mcmoon said:


> If you ever find yourself in a fair fight somebody f$#ked up.



Not necessarily, bad luck can happen to anyone


----------



## Tez3

Hong Kong Pooey said:


> Not necessarily, bad luck can happen to anyone



How did you know my nickname is 'bad luck'?


----------



## tonyjw86

Yes women are disadvantage because of muscle mass and strength but also because of the way most (not all) are babied in class. Men hold back because they don't actually wan't to hurt a women. Women also don't want to hurt each other. This holds them back from training their full potential. It sounds bad but making a women mad by striking her really helps her come out of her shell and use some force.


----------



## ballen0351

tonyjw86 said:


> Yes women are disadvantage because of muscle mass and strength but also because of the way most (not all) are babied in class. Men hold back because they don't actually wan't to hurt a women. Women also don't want to hurt each other. This holds them back from training their full potential. It sounds bad but making a women mad by striking her really helps her come out of her shell and use some force.




Where is the popcorn?  Great 1st post lol


----------



## Tames D

Are women disadvantaged in striking arts/styles?  No way. After spending some time with Kathy Long last week, I can say NO Way! But I already knew that.


----------



## Cirdan

tonyjw86 said:


> Yes women are disadvantage because of muscle mass and strength but also because of the way most (not all) are babied in class. Men hold back because they don't actually wan't to hurt a women. Women also don't want to hurt each other. This holds them back from training their full potential. It sounds bad but making a women mad by striking her really helps her come out of her shell and use some force.


----------



## Tez3

Anyone who advocates hitting a woman hard to make her 'come out of her shell' needs actually to be put back into his.


----------



## Tez3

tonyjw86 said:


> Yes women are disadvantage because of muscle mass and strength but also because of the way most (not all) are babied in class. Men hold back because they don't actually wan't to hurt a women. Women also don't want to hurt each other. This holds them back from training their full potential. It sounds bad but making a women mad by striking her really helps her come out of her shell and use some force.




This is one of the most profoundly stupid posts I've read for a long time assuming this isn't a troll.

So a woman is weaker than a man but beating her up will make her mad...to do what? Firstly one should never fight/spar when angry, easiest way to lose. To put a woman up against a man who is stronger and who is hitting hard is only going to end up with an injured woman who will be put off martial arts for life. Teaching men to beat up women is a stupidity in a class of it's own.

Students who are weaker, male and female, need to be taught techniques to spar/fight. Funnily enough that's why we have martial arts classes. 

I've been in martial arts a long time, I've not seen anyone 'babied' let alone women. No one in their right mind _wants_ to hurt people, again we teach people how to spar not just throw them into a sparring class with no instruction. Beginners in martial arts, and I notice that's exactly what you are often have unrealistic ideas of what we do. If you want to hurt people go to a place specialising in that, it will cost you I imagine.


Hurting people and full potential shouldn't even be in the same sentence, the two have nothing to do with each other. Instruction, training and mind-set help you reach your full potential, bashing people recklessly is useless and pointless. In a good martial arts club if a senior grade see you just thumping someone who is a lower grade/beginner/weaker than you they will often mete out the same treatment to you, and rightly so.  

If you aren't a troll you need to look at your perceptions of martial arts, what they are, who we are and what we do. If people, not just women, are weaker then proper instruction and training is needed, getting people 'mad' is dangerous and incredibly moronic. To even suggest it is at the very least naïve, at worst provocative trolling.


----------



## RTKDCMB

Tez3 said:


> If you want to hurt people go to a place specialising in that, it will cost you I imagine.



That place is called prison.


----------



## RTKDCMB

tonyjw86 said:


> Yes women are disadvantage because of muscle mass and strength but also because of the way most (not all) are babied in class. Men hold back because they don't actually wan't to hurt a women. Women also don't want to hurt each other. This holds them back from training their full potential. It sounds bad but making a women mad by striking her really helps her come out of her shell and use some force.



Should we use the same tactic with children? After all men don't want to hurt children in class either.

Believe it or not but martial arts are not actually about hurting people. Self defence arts are about preventing harm, sport arts are about competing safely. If you are in a martial art to hurt people then you are doing it for the wrong reasons.


----------



## Hanzou

RTKDCMB said:


> Should we use the same tactic with children? After all men don't want to hurt children in class either.
> 
> Believe it or not but martial arts are not actually about hurting people. Self defence arts are about preventing harm, sport arts are about competing safely. If you are in a martial art to hurt people then you are doing it for the wrong reasons.



But at what point does someone in the martial arts learn to take a hit, and to hit larger/stronger individuals? That's who is likely to attack a woman; someone significantly bigger and larger than she is.

I don't necessarily agree with Tonyjw86, but he does have a point. There are MA schools out there that coddle women in order to keep them coming to class and paying the dues, lulling them into a false sense of security. We shouldn't go out of our way to hurt our training partners, but a black belt in any striking art shouldn't be flinching or completely turning her head away when she's getting hit either.


----------



## Tez3

Hanzou said:


> But at what point does someone in the martial arts learn to take a hit, and to hit larger/stronger individuals? That's who is likely to attack a woman; someone significantly bigger and larger than she is.
> 
> I don't necessarily agree with Tonyjw86, but he does have a point. There are MA schools out there that coddle women in order to keep them coming to class and paying the dues, lulling them into a false sense of security. We shouldn't go out of our way to hurt our training partners, but a black belt in any striking art shouldn't be flinching or completely turning her head away when she's getting hit either.



 If they are 'coddling' women to keep them in martial arts and paying it's not the women's fault nor is it about not wanting to hurt people, it's a cynical move designed to make money. It has nothing to do with gender strength, weight or size, they will be doing that to everyone they can. 

A black belt shouldn't be flinching, you are right but again that's nothing to do with gender etc it's to do with bad instruction. 

None of these should be reason to strike someone forcefully until they break down either into anger or in injury mental or physical.


----------



## Dirty Dog

tonyjw86 said:


> Yes women are disadvantage because of muscle mass and strength but also because of the way most (not all) are babied in class. Men hold back because they don't actually wan't to hurt a women. Women also don't want to hurt each other. This holds them back from training their full potential. It sounds bad but making a women mad by striking her really helps her come out of her shell and use some force.



If I, as an instructor, strike with a given level of force, then it is reasonable to assume that the student will accept this as being an example of the appropriate level of force for the exercise. I don't "actually want to hurt" *anyone*, especially in a training environment. The level of force used in striking will depend on the particular exercise, the particular student, and the particular preferences of the people involved. The idea that an instructor would intentionally hurt a student is reprehensible.

Perhaps you'd care to expand on your statements a little, because I really hope you didn't mean this the way some are reading it.


----------



## Dirty Dog

Hanzou said:


> But at what point does someone in the martial arts learn to take a hit, and to hit larger/stronger individuals? That's who is likely to attack a woman; someone significantly bigger and larger than she is.  .



Not everybody trains for the same reason, and there are plenty of people who have absolutely zero interest in full contact sparring. They can still benefit from training.


----------



## Hanzou

Tez3 said:


> If they are 'coddling' women to keep them in martial arts and paying it's not the women's fault nor is it about not wanting to hurt people, it's a cynical move designed to make money. It has nothing to do with gender strength, weight or size, they will be doing that to everyone they can.
> 
> A black belt shouldn't be flinching, you are right but again that's nothing to do with gender etc it's to do with bad instruction.
> 
> None of these should be reason to strike someone forcefully until they break down either into anger or in injury mental or physical.



I agree. 

I think its a larger cultural issue more than anything else. Heck, even in my gym I instinctively go easier on my female partners.


----------



## Hanzou

Dirty Dog said:


> Not everybody trains for the same reason, and there are plenty of people who have absolutely zero interest in full contact sparring. They can still benefit from training.



Aren't most women participating in martial arts for self protection and exercise?


----------



## Tez3

If someone new comes into a class with no knowledge of martial arts, they may well be 'in their shell' and may well be frightened to hurt someone, this has nothing to do with gender or strength, it's a lack of knowledge of martial arts. No amount of striking them forcefully is going to teach them anything other than they don't like martial arts and that we are all thugs.
IF someone is learning because they want to be able to defend themselves then the appropriate techniques are taught and as Dirty Dog said an appropriate use of force is used. *No one* likes being hit, not even pro fighters! they tolerate it and try not to be hit but that doesn't mean they _like_ it. Same as hurting people, even pro fighters don't _like_ to hurt people, that they can do it is part of the training, it's not done for enjoyment but to win. 
As for hitting someone hard until they lose their temper that is just moronically  ludicrous, what does that teach?


----------



## Dirty Dog

Hanzou said:


> Aren't most women participating in martial arts for self protection and exercise?



I don't know, and I really doubt you do either. I've only met, talked, or trained with a tiny fraction of the women involved in the Martial Arts. Certainly not a large enough subset to qualify as a statistically valid sampling.

But training for exercise (which is a perfectly valid reason for training) does not in any way require full contact sparring.


----------



## Tez3

Hanzou said:


> I agree.
> 
> I think its a larger cultural issue more than anything else. Heck, even in my gym I instinctively go easier on my female partners.




Would you hit them hard to make them lose their temper or would you teach them to defend themselves? going 'soft' on women is demeaning to the women and cheating them out f learning to defend themselves properly. 
I had one student who insisted he didn't hit women even when sparring, he wouldn't defend either to give me 'a chance' I said fine I have no compunction about hitting men. I broke his nose.


----------



## RTKDCMB

Hanzou said:


> But at what point does someone in the martial arts learn to take a hit, and to hit larger/stronger individuals? That's who is likely to attack a woman; someone significantly bigger and larger than she is.



I can't speak for sporting martial arts but the object of a self defence art is to not get hit. Learning how to take a hit can its own set of problems, such as the tendency to want to exchange blows in a 'fight' or get a false sense of security because they have only have ever been hit with padded gloves on their body armour and therefore think getting hit skin on skin is the same. In a self defence situation you can not afford to get hit even once. There is a big difference in getting hit in sparring and getting hit by an attacker in the proverbial street. Exactly how does a small man or woman, or child learn to take a hit from a 300 pound street thug or someone with a weapon? How do you learn to take a hit in the groin, throat or spine?



Hanzou said:


> There are MA schools out there that coddle women in order to keep them coming to class and paying the dues, lulling them into a false sense of security. We shouldn't go out of our way to hurt our training partners, but a black belt in any striking art shouldn't be flinching or completely turning her head away when she's getting hit either.



There is a difference between looking after students and coddling them, but you are right about black belts not flinching or completely turning her head away.


----------



## Hanzou

Tez3 said:


> Would you hit them hard to make them lose their temper....



No, that's the part I don't agree with.



> going 'soft' on women is demeaning to the women and cheating them out f learning to defend themselves properly.



I agree, which is why going easier on my female partners is something I need to work on. Not hurting women is simply how I was raised, so its very hard for me to deprogram myself to go full blast on my female partners.



> I had one student who insisted he didn't hit women even when sparring, he wouldn't defend either to give me 'a chance' I said fine I have no compunction about hitting men. I broke his nose.



Well that's just a dumb move on his part. I would never not defend myself from a woman partner. Good way to get choked out.


----------



## Tez3

Hanzou said:


> No, that's the part I don't agree with.
> 
> 
> 
> I agree, which is why going easier on my female partners is something I need to work on. Not hurting women is simply how I was raised, so its very hard for me to deprogram myself to go full blast on my female partners.
> 
> 
> 
> Well that's just a dumb move on his part. I would never not defend myself from a woman partner. Good way to get choked out.



Had to do that as well, the guy said he wouldn't tap to a woman so when I got the choke on he wouldn't tap. He came from kick boxing, had never done grappling before ( it's gay he said) and was supremely confident I wouldn't take him down or tap him out. It wasn't difficult to be honest so little credit to me. We don't often get idiots in, most are used to working with females in Afghan etc so know better than to disrespect women's strengths, most come from training. If they are also arrogant in the battalion they get smacked.


----------



## RTKDCMB

Hanzou said:


> Aren't most women participating in martial arts for self protection and exercise?



Despite what some people might think, learning self defence does not require full contact sparring to be effective. It is certainly an option but is is not essential. I know plenty of people who have not done full contact sparring that are perfectly capable of defending themselves.


----------



## Hanzou

RTKDCMB said:


> Despite what some people might think, learning self defence does not require full contact sparring to be effective. It is certainly an option but is is not essential. I know plenty of people who have not done full contact sparring that are perfectly capable of defending themselves.



Yeah, we have to agree to disagree on that one. Its like saying a woman who grapples with a mannequin would be as proficient as a woman who grappled with large men who were all trying to submit her. I just don't buy that.


----------



## RTKDCMB

Hanzou said:


> Yeah, we have to agree to disagree on that one. Its like saying a woman who grapples with a mannequin would be as proficient as a woman who grappled with large men who were all trying to submit her. I just don't buy that.



And again, not the same thing.


----------



## Zero

Hanzou said:


> Aren't most women participating in martial arts for self protection and exercise?



Doubt it (particularly these days), perhaps not even on the exercise level, there's more fun and probably more fitness to be gained from a Zumba workout.  
Most of the gals at my old club were training to collect medals in tournaments and were focused on competition and more so re kumite than kata.

The higher levels were bloody good kickers and I used to get popped in the head by them.   

That said, and despite what has been said by others previously on this post, in general when you put an average sized male against an average sized female of equal skill and experience and other key factors against each other, I would say 8.5 - 9 out of 10 times, the male will win.  Why is it hard to accept that a stronger opponent of equal ability will generally defeat a weaker opponent.  I am of course keeping mental conditioning or desire/drive out of the equation. 

There are differing views on the subject but most studies these days seem to indicate that overall, male and female muscle is the same, ie in itself male muscle is not denser than female muscle. That said, males do have a greater percentage of skeletal muscle mass and so that in itself makes a man of equivalent height, stronger and with greater power output.  I have seen other studies indicating that men are better at producing power and increasing strength under training but that females recover from training quicker and better and may be able to perform longer (I mean that in a plutonic context).  That's why all us fellas and sheilas out there gotta quit all this fighting nonsense and just work on stuff together and be friends, we complement each other perfectly.


----------



## Tez3

Zero said:


> Doubt it (particularly these days), perhaps not even on the exercise level, there's more fun and probably more fitness to be gained from a Zumba workout.
> Most of the gals at my old club were training to collect medals in tournaments and were focused on competition and more so re kumite than kata.
> 
> The higher levels were bloody good kickers and I used to get popped in the head by them.
> 
> That said, and despite what has been said by others previously on this post, in general when you put an average sized male against an average sized female of equal skill and experience and other key factors against each other, I would say 8.5 - 9 out of 10 times, the male will win.  Why is it hard to accept that a stronger opponent of equal ability will generally defeat a weaker opponent.  I am of course keeping mental conditioning or desire/drive out of the equation. and cheating! I don't fight fair, it's what makes me equal LOL!
> 
> There are differing views on the subject but most studies these days seem to indicate that overall, male and female muscle is the same, ie in itself male muscle is not denser than female muscle. That said, males do have a greater percentage of skeletal muscle mass and so that in itself makes a man of equivalent height, stronger and with greater power output.  I have seen other studies indicating that men are better at producing power and increasing strength under training but that females recover from training quicker and better and may be able to perform longer (I mean that in a plutonic context).  That's why all us fellas and sheilas out there gotta quit all this fighting nonsense and just work on stuff together and be friends, we complement each other perfectly.



Most often though it isn't like for like ie a 14st man against a 14st woman of equal height, it's all so variable. We can easily accept that on paper a larger person should win but then we see the smaller person win. It shows probably that the old saying it's not the size of the dog in the fight etc. Smaller people learn techniques that give them a bit of an edge, they get crafty. It depends on what style you study, how you study it, how often. How confident you are, whether you lift weights, whether you are a runner, so many things to take into consideration before you can really think who will win a fight. There's more that other people will think of, those are just of the top of my head.


----------



## Touch Of Death

Tez3 said:


> Would you hit them hard to make them lose their temper or would you teach them to defend themselves? going 'soft' on women is demeaning to the women and cheating them out f learning to defend themselves properly.
> I had one student who insisted he didn't hit women even when sparring, he wouldn't defend either to give me 'a chance' I said fine I have no compunction about hitting men. I broke his nose.


I'm late on this conversation, but I have to walk a fine line when training with women. The rules are, I get to cause all the pain I want, but I can't hurt them. As I progressed through the art that rule now extends to everybody!


----------



## Dirty Dog

Hanzou said:


> Yeah, we have to agree to disagree on that one. Its like saying a woman who grapples with a mannequin would be as proficient as a woman who grappled with large men who were all trying to submit her. I just don't buy that.



If you can't see the difference between full contact sparring, controlled sparring, and a mannequin, then I'm not surprised that you don't buy it.


----------



## Steve

Tez3 said:


> Would you hit them hard to make them lose their temper or would you teach them to defend themselves? going 'soft' on women is demeaning to the women and cheating them out f learning to defend themselves properly.
> I had one student who insisted he didn't hit women even when sparring, he wouldn't defend either to give me 'a chance' I said fine I have no compunction about hitting men. I broke his nose.



You intentionally injured a training partner?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Touch Of Death

Steve said:


> You intentionally injured a training partner?
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


I broke a guys arm to test his guard. It happens, but they asked for it to stop just happening. LOL


----------



## Tez3

Steve said:


> You intentionally injured a training partner?
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk



 No I* did not intentionally *injure a training partner, he refused to try to hit me and insisted he didn't need to keep his guard up because as a female I couldn't touch him, I punched him, his nose broke. If it were intentionally I would have followed through with a few more punches. You play the idiot and you get arrogant, this is what happens. He wasn't a training partner he was a student I was attempting to teach but for his attitude of 'no woman can teach me anything'.


----------



## Steve

RTKDCMB said:


> Should we use the same tactic with children? After all men don't want to hurt children in class either.
> 
> Believe it or not but martial arts are not actually about hurting people. Self defence arts are about preventing harm, sport arts are about competing safely. If you are in a martial art to hurt people then you are doing it for the wrong reasons.


We have an obligation to ensure that we are training in a safe manner.  But, I would say yes.  In a contact sport, kids should experience contact.  On a wrestling team, kids experience pain and frustration.  Same for any other contact sport or activity.  Football, soccer, baseball, basketball.  There should be a lot of sweat, a little blood, some tears of frustration from time to time, and a lot of joy and satisfaction.  Balancing all of that is our obligation as coaches, teachers and mentors. 

i think that tonyjw86 makes an excellent point, if poorly worded.  There is a difference between coddling, pushing and bullying our training partners.  Intentionally injuring a training partner, such as by breaking his nose, should never be condoned in a school.  Accidents happen, of course.  I broke my nose sparring with a guy at class (I took a knee to the nose as I was passing guard in sparring).  But injuring people to teach them a lesson is pretty bad.


----------



## Steve

Tez3 said:


> No I* did not intentionally *injure a training partner, he refused to try to hit me and insisted he didn't need to keep his guard up because as a female I couldn't touch him, I punched him, his nose broke. If it were intentionally I would have followed through with a few more punches. You play the idiot and you get arrogant, this is what happens. He wasn't a training partner he was a student I was attempting to teach but for his attitude of 'no woman can teach me anything'.


So, you lost your temper and broke a student's nose.  Even after this explanation, it sure sounds like you had some intention of teaching this arrogant idiot a lesson.


----------



## Tez3

Steve said:


> We have an obligation to ensure that we are training in a safe manner.  But, I would say yes.  In a contact sport, kids should experience contact.  On a wrestling team, kids experience pain and frustration.  Same for any other contact sport or activity.  Football, soccer, baseball, basketball.  There should be a lot of sweat, a little blood, some tears of frustration from time to time, and a lot of joy and satisfaction.  Balancing all of that is our obligation as coaches, teachers and mentors.
> 
> i think that tonyjw86 makes an excellent point, if poorly worded.  There is a difference between coddling, pushing and bullying our training partners.  Intentionally injuring a training partner, such as by breaking his nose, should never be condoned in a school.  Accidents happen, of course.  I broke my nose sparring with a guy at class (I took a knee to the nose as I was passing guard in sparring).



Do not have a go at me, I didn't intentionally break his nose, it was his pride and his arrogance that made him not defend himself, who on earth doesn't defend themselves when sparring in a sparring class? I did not imagine that when he saw that I was punching he would actually stand there and allow a punch hit him, what sort of idiot would do that? His behaviour wasn't condoned, he was asked to leave by the chief instructor.

There is no 'excellent point' made by tonywhatsisface at all, he suggests that bashing a female until she loses her temper is the ideal way to teach a woman to fight, frankly that's bollocks.


----------



## Touch Of Death

Steve said:


> So, you lost your temper and broke a student's nose.  Even after this explanation, it sure sounds like you had some intention of teaching this arrogant idiot a lesson.


he wasn't protecting his face.


----------



## ballen0351

Steve said:


> So, you lost your temper and broke a student's nose.  Even after this explanation, it sure sounds like you had some intention of teaching this arrogant idiot a lesson.



Sounds to me like they were sparing he dropped his hands and caught one in the face and his nose broke.  I didnt see anything to suggest she lost her temper. Perhaps your reading to much into things


----------



## Tez3

Steve said:


> So, you lost your temper and broke a student's nose.  Even after this explanation, it sure sounds like you had some intention of teaching this arrogant idiot a lesson.




Putting words into my mouth again? NO I did not lose my temper, I did not plan to teach him a lesson so wrong again mate. I frankly didn't give a rat's bum one way or another about him, I was asked to spar with him, he said he would spar but would neither hit nor defend, he was good enough he said that he could do that, so fine crack on sunshine, no skin off my nose to have an easy session. I threw the punch, he wasn't as good as he thought or had told me, end result a broken nose. If you chose to take my economy of words to describe something as meaning something it doesn't that's your problem, you weren't there, you aren't my chief instructor who saw everything and knew I hadn't done it on purpose so frankly.... up yours. sweetheart.


----------



## Steve

Tez3 said:


> Do not have a go at me, I didn't intentionally break his nose, it was his pride and his arrogance that made him not defend himself, who on earth doesn't defend themselves when sparring in a sparring class? I did not imagine that when he saw that I was punching he would actually stand there and allow a punch hit him, what sort of idiot would do that? His behaviour wasn't condoned, he was asked to leave by the chief instructor.
> 
> There is no 'excellent point' made by tonywhatsisface at all, he suggests that bashing a female until she loses her temper is the ideal way to teach a woman to fight, frankly that's bollocks.


I think I understand you much better now, Tez.  Your initial post was poorly worded, and open to being misunderstood.  But now that you've explained what happened, I understand what you meant.   I still think you bear some measure of responsibility, but I get that you didn't mean to break his nose.  

I think we owe it to tonyjw86 to ask for some clarification.  I don't think he meant what you think he meant, and cutting a new poster some slack isn't too much to ask.  In an informal, written format like this, it's easy to be misunderstood.  You're reading a lot into his post that I don't see at all.  



Touch Of Death said:


> he wasn't protecting his face.


For what it's worth, I see what happened.  Frankly, though, I still think Tez is responsible, particularly as the instructor.  I spar with arrogant idiots a lot, and even though they are idiots, I am still responsible if I damage them.  If they don't have the good sense to tap, I don't just break their elbows.  



ballen0351 said:


> Sounds to me like they were sparing he dropped his hands and caught one in the face and his nose broke.  I didnt see anything to suggest she lost her temper. Perhaps your reading to much into things


Possibly so.


----------



## Steve

Tez3 said:


> Putting words into my mouth again? NO I did not lose my temper, I did not plan to teach him a lesson so wrong again mate. I frankly didn't give a rat's bum one way or another about him, I was asked to spar with him, he said he would spar but would neither hit nor defend, he was good enough he said that he could do that, so fine crack on sunshine, no skin off my nose to have an easy session. I threw the punch, he wasn't as good as he thought or had told me, end result a broken nose. If you chose to take my economy of words to describe something as meaning something it doesn't that's your problem, you weren't there, you aren't my chief instructor who saw everything and knew I hadn't done it on purpose so frankly.... up yours. sweetheart.


Calm down, Tez.  You don't accept any measure of responsibility.  I disagree.  

And also, is it possible that you could cut others some slack for their "economy of words?"  I don't observe you giving others the same consideration you demand for yourself.


----------



## Tony Dismukes

Steve said:


> ...   I still think you bear some measure of responsibility, but I get that you didn't mean to break his nose.
> ...
> 
> For what it's worth, I see what happened.  Frankly, though, I still think Tez is responsible, particularly as the instructor.  I spar with arrogant idiots a lot, and even though they are idiots, I am still responsible if I damage them.  If they don't have the good sense to tap, I don't just break their elbows.



Eh, it's one of the differences between grappling and striking arts. In grappling, we have a lot more precise control we can apply on arrogant idiots. In striking, if someone refuses to keep their guard up in sparring because they don't respect their partner then they're just going to get hit. As long as the guy was an adult and Tez wasn't going harder then the expected standard for that class, then I have no problem with it.


----------



## Tez3

Steve said:


> Calm down, Tez.  You don't accept any measure of respoand nine stonesty.  I disagree.
> 
> And also, is it possible that you could cut others some slack for their "economy of words?"  I don't observe you giving others the same consideration you demand for yourself.



Lol 'calm down' I'm very calm thank you. So I am, at five foot four inches and nine stone wet through as well as being a pensioner am responsible for the fact a six foot tall, fifteen stone soldier in his twenties got his nose broken because he wouldn't put his guard up? You're having a Steffi Graff mate. 
As for the rest....pshaw.


----------



## Steve

Tez3 said:


> Lol 'calm down' I'm very calm thank you. So I am, at five foot four inches and nine stone wet through as well as being a pensioner am responsible for the fact a six foot tall, fifteen stone soldier in his twenties got his nose broken because he wouldn't put his guard up? You're having a Steffi Graff mate.
> As for the rest....pshaw.



I don't know what having a stefi Graf means and saying up yours sweetheart seems a little other than calm.  


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Tez3

thatever





Steve said:


> Calm down, Tez.  You don't accept any measure of responsibility.  I disagree.
> And also, is it possible that you could cut others some slack for their "economy of words?"  I don't observe you giving others the same consideration you demand for yourself.


What happens in your life Steve, that every few weeks you feel the need to have a go at me? You decide what mood I'm in, what I mean when I write something, you criticise everything I say or do. This is a pattern and the threads turn into you making personal attacks on me. It's boring now it's been going on for a long while. I took you off ignore when I came back, I regret that so guess you will have to shimfph about me behind my back, I was 61 last week why should I care if I broke the nose of a soldier last year who was a third my age, twice my size and weight, even by accident.


----------



## Steve

Tez3 said:


> thatever
> What happens in your life Steve, that every few weeks you feel the need to have a go at me? You decide what mood I'm in, what I mean when I write something, you criticise everything I say or do. This is a pattern and the threads turn into you making personal attacks on me. It's boring now it's been going on for a long while. I took you off ignore when I came back, I regret that so guess you will have to shimfph about me behind my back, I was 61 last week why should I care if I broke the nose of a soldier last year who was a third my age, twice my size and weight, even by accident.



I'm sorry you feel I'm having a go at you, tez.  Does "having a go" mean disagreeing with you?  If so, then, what happens every few weeks is you say something I disagree with.  

 I honestly think you like to have a go at the new posters, and hold others to a higher standard for clarity in their writing than you are able to meet yourself.   

Regarding the arrogant idiot, I still maintain that if you injured him, you bear some measure of responsibility.  It's a class, not self defense.   You were the more experienced and more skilled martial artist.  It's on you.  Doesn't mean you meant to do it.  Doesn't mean you're a bad person.  But you should accept the responsibility for it happening.  That's my opinion.  

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD


----------



## Touch Of Death

Steve said:


> I'm sorry you feel I'm having a go at you, tez.  Does "having a go" mean disagreeing with you?  If so, then, what happens every few weeks is you say something I disagree with.
> 
> I honestly think you like to have a go at the new posters, and hold others to a higher standard for clarity in their writing than you are able to meet yourself.
> 
> Regarding the arrogant idiot, I still maintain that if you injured him, you bear some measure of responsibility.  It's a class, not self defense.   You were the more experienced and more skilled martial artist.  It's on you.  Doesn't mean you meant to do it.  Doesn't mean you're a bad person.  But you should accept the responsibility for it happening.  That's my opinion.
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD


If he was owed anything, it was a big punch in the nose. It was her responsibility to pay that respect.


----------



## Steve

Touch Of Death said:


> If he was owed anything, it was a big punch in the nose. It was her responsibility to pay that respect.



Fair enough.  But you're now implying she did it on purpose.   She insists she did not.  

As to whether it was her responsibility to do it, I disagree. I think it was her responsibility to keep everyone safe.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD


----------



## Touch Of Death

I doesn't matter what her intent was, I have my doubts (LOL); the bottom line is that he should learn to protect his face. He was in the wrong.
Sean


----------



## Steve

Touch Of Death said:


> I doesn't matter what her intent was, I have my doubts (LOL); the bottom line is that he should learn to protect his face. He was in the wrong.
> Sean



I disagree.  Intent matters very much, IMO. 


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD


----------



## Touch Of Death

Steve said:


> I disagree.  Intent matters very much, IMO.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD


She taught him a lesson. I'm quite sure she knew it would hurt, but she wasn't trying to disfigure him. I am still on her side. He should have thanked her.


----------



## Steve

Touch Of Death said:


> She taught him a lesson. I'm quite sure she knew it would hurt, but she wasn't trying to disfigure him. I am still on her side. He should have thanked her.


I understand.  Even were it an accident, I would say she's still responsible as an instructor and more skilled practitioner.   But if she intended to "teach him a lesson" it's all on her.  That's ego run amok.  

But I can see how you believe otherwise.  

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD


----------



## ballen0351

Steve said:


> I understand.  Even were it an accident, I would say she's still responsible as an instructor and more skilled practitioner.   But if she intended to "teach him a lesson" it's all on her.  That's ego run amok.
> 
> But I can see how you believe otherwise.
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD



She said it wasn't intentionally done get off her back your getting a little silly with this now.  You made your point.


----------



## Steve

ballen0351 said:


> She said it wasn't intentionally done get off her back your getting a little silly with this now.  You made your point.



I believe her.  Touch of death was suggesting that she was teaching the guy a lesson. 


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD


----------



## Touch Of Death

Not is a mean sense, but a, hey I'm throw punches, you might want to keep your guard up.


----------



## RTKDCMB

Tez3 said:


> no skin off my nose to have an easy session.



I bet there was some skin of his nose though.


----------



## Tez3

So, going back to the OP, it would seem someone believes that a small woman can easily beat up a larger, heavier, younger and fitter man. Even with years of experience and a punch that is the _norm_ for such an experienced woman if the guy had been defending and attacking I would still have beaten him? No I wouldn't, absolutely not. I should not have expected to touch him even if he wasn't defending he can still move his body, no one just moves around a bit, you can move your head for a start. Like adults do when kids are throwing punches. whatever people think,* if I had intended to hurt him, if I had lost my temper I would have faced being badly hurt if he's decided to fight, he was an army boxer.Think on that.*
 From a self defence point of view if it's at all humanly possible I would not get into a fight with a man, it's about distraction and getting away. The worse scenario for me is to get caught up in fighting, it is for women, if all else fails we'd have to fight and bring every technique and every dirty trick we have but yes men are on the whole stronger. There's no getting around that fact but there is a lot that we can do, 'headology' to use a Sir Terry Pratchettism for a start. Flinching or freezing when hit has to be stopped, you can learn that. Sparring with willing partners of different sizes, learn all the techniques you can absorb, do all the 'awareness' learning you can etc etc.


----------



## Steve

Tez3 said:


> So, going back to the OP, it would seem someone believes that a small woman can easily beat up a larger, heavier, younger and fitter man. Even with years of experience and a punch that is the _norm_ for such an experienced woman if the guy had been defending and attacking I would still have beaten him? No I wouldn't, absolutely not. I should not have expected to touch him even if he wasn't defending he can still move his body, no one just moves around a bit, you can move your head for a start. Like adults do when kids are throwing punches. whatever people think,* if I had intended to hurt him, if I had lost my temper I would have faced being badly hurt if he's decided to fight, he was an army boxer.Think on that.*
> From a self defence point of view if it's at all humanly possible I would not get into a fight with a man, it's about distraction and getting away. The worse scenario for me is to get caught up in fighting, it is for women, if all else fails we'd have to fight and bring every technique and every dirty trick we have but yes men are on the whole stronger. There's no getting around that fact but there is a lot that we can do, 'headology' to use a Sir Terry Pratchettism for a start. Flinching or freezing when hit has to be stopped, you can learn that. Sparring with willing partners of different sizes, learn all the techniques you can absorb, do all the 'awareness' learning you can etc etc.


Could you link to the post where someone asserts that a woman can easily beat up a larger, heavier, younger and fitter man?   I must have missed it, and it will really help me better understand your post.  


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD


----------



## Cirdan

Maybe you missed this Steve.



Tez3 said:


> I took you off ignore when I came back, I regret that so guess you will have to shimfph about me behind my back, (..)


----------



## Tez3

Dear A, please understand that I am not in the least outraged so cannot 'disengage', I'm more amused and a little bored by something that has become a pattern. Understand too that I don't actually care what your silly little 'bad rep' says, it just made me laugh that someone would waste their time on me. Like what I write or don't, it's the internet. Making anonymous comments is brave, put your name on them roflmao. :moon:


----------



## Steve

Cirdan said:


> Maybe you missed this Steve.


Thanks, Cirdan.  I saw it.  I think it's a shame that she can't handle someone disagreeing with her.  

I'm not ignoring her, though, and if she raises a question, I'll continue to respond.  What posts she chooses to read and respond to is completely up to her.    

My question in response to her remains out there.  I think she might have created a straw man.  Do you think anyone here as asserted that "a woman can easily beat up a larger, heavier, younger and fitter man?"  I'm thinking not, but my memory fails me sometimes.


----------



## Steve

Tez3 said:


> Dear A, please understand that I am not in the least outraged so cannot 'disengage', I'm more amused and a little bored by something that has become a pattern. Understand too that I don't actually care what your silly little 'bad rep' says, it just made me laugh that someone would waste their time on me. Like what I write or don't, it's the internet. Making anonymous comments is brave, put your name on them roflmao. :moon:


For what it's worth, I'll put my name on any rep I leave, positive or negative.


----------



## Steve

Tony Dismukes said:


> Eh, it's one of the differences between grappling and striking arts. In grappling, we have a lot more precise control we can apply on arrogant idiots. In striking, if someone refuses to keep their guard up in sparring because they don't respect their partner then they're just going to get hit. As long as the guy was an adult and Tez wasn't going harder then the expected standard for that class, then I have no problem with it.


Thanks, Tony.  I hear you, and understand the difference.  I'm not sure I completely agree, but that's okay.  

I was actually making two points.  The more subtle point is that Tez was upset that I didn't immediately understand her post, even though she admits to "an economy of words."  I am suggesting that she offer the same consideration to tonyjw86, whom I believe she misunderstood.  At the very least, he should be asked to clarify before being pounced on.


----------



## ballen0351

Steve said:


> Thanks, Tony.  I hear you, and understand the difference.  I'm not sure I completely agree, but that's okay.
> 
> I was actually making two points.  The more subtle point is that Tez was upset that I didn't immediately understand her post, even though she admits to "an economy of words."  I am suggesting that she offer the same consideration to tonyjw86, whom I believe she misunderstood.  At the very least, he should be asked to clarify before being pounced on.


Seems your the only one that misunderstood TEZ and you appear to be the only one that understands tonyjw.  You decided with no evidence  that Tez got pissed and purposely broke someone's nose and you believe Tony isn't a sexist pig so


----------



## Tez3

Cirdan said:


> Maybe you missed this Steve.



Steve usually doesn't read what I write, he presumes to know what I'm thinking, reads things I don't into what I write and worse to my mind presumes to know what emotions I feel. In fact he makes up a whole different personality for me which simply doesn't fit. It is just so much easier to put him back on ignore, I learnt long ago not to waste getting upset with things one can do nothing about, it's simply not worth it, that includes anything on the internet.
However like a dog with a bone he won't stop picking up on things I say for a while yet.


----------



## Dirty Dog

People, is there any chance we could turn this back to the OP?

Women are not inherently disadvantaged in striking arts. Size and strength carry some advantage, but there are both large/strong women and small/weak men. Training can overcome disparities of size/strength to some extent.


----------



## tshadowchaser

How do I put this politely? Oh I know. Everyone knock of the personal jabs and get back to the main subject of the OP.
If you do not like the other persons comments put them on ignore.
I'm was trying to read this thread but got lost in the back and forth banter from a few of you


----------



## ballen0351

Dirty Dog said:


> People, is there any chance we could turn this back to the OP?
> 
> Women are not inherently disadvantaged in striking arts. Size and strength carry some advantage, but there are both large/strong women and small/weak men. Training can overcome disparities of size/strength to some extent.


Honestly you answered the OPs question right there.  The question was flawed from the start and was answered along time ago.


----------



## Hanzou

Dirty Dog said:


> People, is there any chance we could turn this back to the OP?
> 
> Women are not inherently disadvantaged in striking arts. Size and strength carry some advantage, but there are both large/strong women and small/weak men. Training can overcome disparities of size/strength to some extent.



Well if the average size of an American man is 5'10, 192lbs, and the average size of an American woman is 5'4, 160lbs, and if men naturally have more muscle mass than women, that's definitely an inherent disadvantage. That means that on average, a man can outreach, hit harder, and overpower a woman.


----------



## geezer

Hanzou said:


> Well if the average size of an American man is 5'10, 192lbs, and the average size of an American woman is 5'4, 160lbs, and if men naturally have more muscle mass than women, that's definitely an inherent disadvantage. That means that on average, a man can outreach, hit harder, and overpower a woman.



Correct. So the question is to what degree can technique and attitude overcome this discrepancy? So much depends on the individual. Tez says she's 5'4' tall, 9 stone (126 lbs.) and 61. I'm 5'8", 175 lbs and only 59. But if we sparred, you can be darned sure I'd keep my guard up. Total respect, Tez!


----------



## tonyjw86

Whew boy I didn't mean to offend anyone. I see everyones point here. To clarify striking might not have been the best term maybe something more realistic pressure. Close to what you would with a male partner for the females advantage.


----------



## ballen0351

tonyjw86 said:


> Whew boy I didn't mean to offend anyone. I see everyones point here. To clarify striking might not have been the best term maybe something more realistic pressure. Close to what you would with a male partner for the females advantage.



Why are you going different for a male vs female?  I train police officers at the Academy and on the streets.  I go the same no matter who I'm working with.  And I make sure my students go the same as well.  You go easy on one of my female student you will quickly feel that was a mistake.  If your going light in females in class your doing then a disservice.  I've also been in some nasty fights with woman when I arrest then because I was going easy on them and that was a mistake.  Now everyone is treated the same.


----------



## tonyjw86

My original post was taken a bit out of context. With this I was just trying to clarify that what I meant was women are at a disadvantage in class when not treated like and equal.


----------



## ballen0351

tonyjw86 said:


> My original post was taken a bit out of context. With this I was just trying to clarify that what I meant was women are at a disadvantage in class when not treated like and equal.


The only time I go easy on people I base it on their skill level not their gender or even size.  A new guy or girl I'll go easier on since they are still learning.


----------



## Steve

tonyjw86 said:


> Whew boy I didn't mean to offend anyone. I see everyones point here. To clarify striking might not have been the best term maybe something more realistic pressure. Close to what you would with a male partner for the females advantage.


I think most people understood.  Glad you came back to clear things up.


----------



## tonyjw86

Steve said:


> I think most people understood.  Glad you came back to clear things up.



Thanks Steve.


----------



## seasoned

tonyjw86 said:


> Whew boy I didn't mean to offend anyone. I see everyones point here. To clarify striking might not have been the best term maybe something more realistic pressure. Close to what you would with a male partner for the females advantage.


Thanks tonyjw86 for coming back on and explaining. We also have a meet and greet thread where you can introduce yourself to the martial talk members if you haven't already.


----------



## Tez3

tonyjw86 said:


> My original post was taken a bit out of context. With this I was just trying to clarify that what I meant was women are at a disadvantage in class when not treated like and equal.




Kudos for coming back, however your post was crystal clear in that you advocated hitting women hard until they lost their tempers to make them come out of their shells, no wiggle room there for misunderstandings. I think though you've had time to think since reading the replies so that has to be good. Hopefully you don't still think it's a good idea!


----------



## tonyjw86

Tez3 said:


> Kudos for coming back, however your post was crystal clear in that you advocated hitting women hard until they lost their tempers to make them come out of their shells, no wiggle room there for misunderstandings. I think though you've had time to think since reading the replies so that has to be good. Hopefully you don't still think it's a good idea!



Jeez its called a striking art. I used the term striking as in training. My sister is my training partner. We talk about this all the time. You're taking it out of context, period.


----------



## Tez3

tonyjw86 said:


> Yes women are disadvantage because of muscle mass and strength but also because of the way most (not all) are babied in class. Men hold back because they don't actually wan't to hurt a women. Women also don't want to hurt each other. This holds them back from training their full potential. It sounds bad but *making a women mad by striking her really helps her come out of her shell and use some force*.



Ok so which bit of this am I taking out of context? You advocate hitting a woman hard to make her come out of her shell. You advocate making a woman mad. You advocate using some force.

How is striking anyone hard to make them angry ever going to be a good idea?


----------



## Touch Of Death

Tez3 said:


> Ok so which bit of this am I taking out of context? You advocate hitting a woman hard to make her come out of her shell. You advocate making a woman mad. You advocate using some force.
> 
> How is striking anyone hard to make them angry ever going to be a good idea?


You throw real attacks at wanna be cops, not matter what the sex. They are trying to cops for God's sake.


----------



## Tez3

Touch Of Death said:


> You throw real attacks at wanna be cops, not matter what the sex. They are trying to cops for God's sake.



Ah but dear friend we aren't talking about baby cops but karate beginners, whole different thing. Besides as I can testify the sort of women who join police forces don't tend to the sort who need to be taken out of their shell, they'd fail their first interviews for training if they were.


----------



## Steve

Tez, why are you having a go at the new guy?  He's already explained what he meant. Take everything you said to me and apply it to yourself.  


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## K-man

RTKDCMB said:


> I can't speak for sporting martial arts but the object of a self defence art is to not get hit. Learning how to take a hit can its own set of problems, such as the tendency to want to exchange blows in a 'fight' or get a false sense of security because they have only have ever been hit with padded gloves on their body armour and therefore think getting hit skin on skin is the same. In a self defence situation you can not afford to get hit even once. There is a big difference in getting hit in sparring and getting hit by an attacker in the proverbial street. Exactly how does a small man or woman, or child learn to take a hit from a 300 pound street thug or someone with a weapon? How do you learn to take a hit in the groin, throat or spine?


The objective of self defence might be not to get hit. The first objective of self defence is not to be in that situation in the first place. However, having said that it is totally unrealistic to go into a fight and expect not to get hit. We rarely use gloves and almost never wear padding. I expect people (students) to gradually increase the power of their punches (to the body) until the are pretty much hitting as hard as they can. Someone accidently smacks me in the head, fine, I should have defended myself better even though he wasn't deliberately targeting the head. We need to be able to take reasonably hard hits without being fazed. Now when it comes to smaller guys. Suck it in sunshine, on the street your size won't protect you and that includes sucker punches that you don't see coming. Children, totally different matter. I don't know what you can do about that these days. Back in the 50s we had the 'Police Boys Clubs' where we learned boxing. You learned to hit and be hit but I'm not sure that our 'cotton wool society' takes to kindly to that sort of thing these days. I've given up teaching kids. 

Which brings us back to women and in fact the OP. In training I expect the lower ranked student to control the intensity of any contact. Sexist or not, I would do the same thing with a woman. There are other complications as well like not targeting the chest. I think each case will probably by different but as Tez pointed out, deliberately hitting a woman to make her mad to bring out the best in her is a totally flawed concept. Now I actually do have a female student who is waiting to join the police force. She is training with us because there is very little contact training in the police academy.  Over the next months I will lift the intensity of her training because ultimately her life could depend on it. If a 300 pound thug decides to take her on and she can't reach her gun she may well cop a big hit. Hopefully the conditioning we train might make it less of an issue than if she was not used to being punched.

Training to receive shots to the throat and groin ... not for the normal person but ...
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=pB7gnB31NnI

:asian:


----------



## ballen0351

First day of defensive tactics in the police academy they made us all line up in a line and the teacher walked up and punched each and everyone of us in the face.  If you flinched he hit you again.  I personally don't do this when I teach, but that was that instructors style and we have become friends over the years he's a 7th or 8th Dan now in Isshin Ryu and a retired police officer and all around general bad dude who even at his age now pushing 70 I wouldn't mess with.  He didn't care man or woman he just walked up and punched you in the jaw.  It weeded out a few from the class that refused to get hit and quit.  Served it's purpose I guess.


----------



## Brian R. VanCise

I know when I went through the police academy they made a strong point that everyone could take a hit.  Part of the Defensive Tactics course was boxing and we boxed with everyone men or woman alike.  Full contact.  For me it was great as I had kickboxed and had done hard contact martial arts for years and enjoyed the contact.  For some others it was a wake up call.  However, in a profession where you are going to go hands on this was very, very important.  I would not want to be working with a partner who could not take care of themselves and also provide back up for me!


----------



## Tames D

ballen0351 said:


> First day of defensive tactics in the police academy they made us all line up in a line and the teacher walked up and punched each and everyone of us in the face.  If you flinched he hit you again.  I personally don't do this when I teach, but that was that instructors style and we have become friends over the years he's a 7th or 8th Dan now in Isshin Ryu and a retired police officer and all around general bad dude who even at his age now pushing 70 I wouldn't mess with.  He didn't care man or woman he just walked up and punched you in the jaw.  It weeded out a few from the class that refused to get hit and quit.  Served it's purpose I guess.



Did he allow you to strike back?


----------



## ballen0351

Tames D said:


> Did he allow you to strike back?



Nope.  Stand in a line put your hands behind your back and pow right in the kisser.  That was day one first thing.  Later in the training we got to fight back


----------



## Tames D

ballen0351 said:


> Nope.  Stand in a line put your hands behind your back and pow right in the kisser.  That was day one first thing.  Later in the training we got to fight back


Sounds like sheeple training.


----------



## ballen0351

Tames D said:


> Sounds like sheeple training.



I'm not even sure what that means


----------



## Tames D

ballen0351 said:


> I'm not even sure what that means



Let's see... I allow someone to hit me in the face because they are my instructor, and they say I can't return the favor. Sheeple training.


----------



## Touch Of Death

Tames D said:


> Sounds like sheeple training.


I take it you aren't a cop.


----------



## Tames D

Touch Of Death said:


> I take it you aren't a cop.



No. And I'm also not sheep.


----------



## Touch Of Death

Tames D said:


> No. And I'm also not sheep.


So the female officers that go through real police training are sheeple?


----------



## Tames D

Touch Of Death said:


> So the female officers that go through real police training are sheeple?



Not sure what you're trying to say.


----------



## Touch Of Death

Tames D said:


> Not sure what you're trying to say.


They face the same dangers against the same bad guys,


----------



## RTKDCMB

ballen0351 said:


> I'm not even sure what that means



Sheeple are blind followers.


----------



## Dinkydoo

Brad Pickett isnt the biggest of fighters, but still packs a hell of a punch:

http://m.uk.ufc.com/media/kotw-pickett-kos-jabouin-v2


----------



## Paul_D

K-man said:


> We rarely use gloves and almost never wear padding. I expect people (students) to gradually increase the power of their punches (to the body) until the are pretty much hitting as hard as they can.


Sounds like you are giving your students the sort of violence they are trying to avoid i.e.  being beaten full force with no protection. 

All the conditioning in the world isn't going to stop your floating rib from snapping if a 182cm 127kg man punches a 165cm man 63kg man full force.


----------



## Tez3

RTKDCMB said:


> Sheeple are blind followers.



It always shows the ignorance of people using that word because they don't actually understand that sheep are actually quite bright ( intelligence equal to dogs ) with very good memories, have excellent defence skills and coping strategies under the most extreme conditions. I don't know why people malign sheep just based on what _they think_ sheep do! :miffer:


----------



## ballen0351

Tames D said:


> Let's see... I allow someone to hit me in the face because they are my instructor, and they say I can't return the favor. Sheeple training.



Ok?  I allowed them  to pepper spray me and to
Tase me as well without returning the favor.  Still don't get what your saying.  That has nothing to do with being sheep it's training.  I was actually kinda shocked how many people in my academy class had never been punched before in their entire lives.  Some of them freaked out and quit so it worked I guess


----------



## ballen0351

RTKDCMB said:


> Sheeple are blind followers.



I know what sheeple are just don't understand how it fit the scenario


----------



## Tez3

ballen0351 said:


> Ok?  I allowed them  to pepper spray me and to
> Tase me as well without returning the favor.  Still don't get what your saying.  That has nothing to do with being sheep it's training.  I was actually kinda shocked how many people in my academy class had never been punched before in their entire lives.  Some of them freaked out and quit so it worked I guess




A tad drastic for civvies though lol but policing in many places isn't for the faint hearted. People do freeze when hit for the first time, martial arts instructors work up to this but then they are training for different reasons. In 'martial arts' self defence the idea is to get away, to escape the violence. Police officers have to go forward to meet the violence in order that others may be safe so training will be more vigorous and methods used that one wouldn't find in a martial arts club/school.


----------



## Zero

I stuck this on Tez's post re the Guides but meant to put this here instead:


----------



## K-man

Paul_D said:


> Sounds like you are giving your students the sort of violence they are trying to avoid i.e.  being beaten full force with no protection.
> 
> All the conditioning in the world isn't going to stop your floating rib from snapping if a 182cm 127kg man punches a 165cm man 63kg man full force.


No. Just controlled conditioning. Nothing to do with beating and not above a level that that particular person can tolerate. I think you should look at your understanding of 'violence'. 



> *Definition of Violence.* The intentional use of physical force or power, threatened or actual, against oneself, another person, or against a group or community, that either results in or has a high likelihood of *resulting in injury, death, psychological harm, maldevelopment or deprivation.*



Um! No! We've never had that from conditioning. It is totally controlled. 

 We have always done circle work with punches and kicks, Systema and Krav both have multiple attacker training where you get punched from all directions. Teaches you to relax and absorb. 

So, out of interest, what do you do in your training to prepare you for being hit?
:asian:


----------



## Touch Of Death

Tez3 said:


> It always shows the ignorance of people using that word because they don't actually understand that sheep are actually quite bright ( intelligence equal to dogs ) with very good memories, have excellent defence skills and coping strategies under the most extreme conditions. I don't know why people malign sheep just based on what _they think_ sheep do! :miffer:


Sheep = controlled by, cute but mean, dogs.


----------



## Tez3

Touch Of Death said:


> Sheep = controlled by, cute but mean, dogs.



Where I live the sheep live out on the hills, all through the winter as well, they lamb outside, protect themselves from foxes and army tanks. Once a year they are brought down for shearing and selling. They are tough sheep, a ram killed a farmer not long ago and they have been know to go for walkers in lambing time. Sheep dogs aren't mean but very obedient and controlled so rather than calling people after sheep perhaps sheep dogs would be better. Under the master's thumb, not allowed to do what they want, obedient and only needed sometimes.
these are our sheep , see how much they cost? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swaledale_sheep


----------



## Zero

Tez3 said:


> these are our sheep , see how much they cost? Swaledale sheep - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



That's one strange looking goat you got there.  :uhyeah:


----------



## Brian R. VanCise

The sheep, sheeple, sheep dog terms are so overused and frankly not very accurate and insulting on many levels regardless of which ones you use.  Grossman didn't do anyone a service when he thought them up!


----------



## Touch Of Death

Tez3 said:


> Where I live the sheep live out on the hills, all through the winter as well, they lamb outside, protect themselves from foxes and army tanks. Once a year they are brought down for shearing and selling. They are tough sheep, a ram killed a farmer not long ago and they have been know to go for walkers in lambing time. Sheep dogs aren't mean but very obedient and controlled so rather than calling people after sheep perhaps sheep dogs would be better. Under the master's thumb, not allowed to do what they want, obedient and only needed sometimes.
> these are our sheep , see how much they cost? Swaledale sheep - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


That is brilliant, actually, because the cops are the sheep-dogs, and that just happens to be what we are discussing in this instance.


----------



## Grenadier

*ATTENTION ALL USERS:*

Please keep this discussion on-topic, and civil.  If you want to start another thread with its own topic, feel free to do so, as long as you stay within the guidelines.  

In the meantime, if you don't like what someone has to say on a regular basis, you're welcome to use the "ignore this poster" feature that is built into the vBulletin software.  

If you believe someone is in violation of the rules, then you should click on the triangle with the exclamation mark, to report the post to the moderation team.  

-Ronald Shin
-MT Assistant Administrator


----------



## Tez3

I quite agree we need to back on topic but have to add I've now been left with the vision of police officers having cold, wet noses.........


----------



## RTKDCMB

Tez3 said:


> It always shows the ignorance of people using that word because they don't actually understand that sheep are actually quite bright ( intelligence equal to dogs ) with very good memories, have excellent defence skills and coping strategies under the most extreme conditions. I don't know why people malign sheep just based on what _they think_ sheep do! :miffer:


A lot of people who end up in cults are quite bright as well but that doesn't stop them from being led.


----------



## Zero

RTKDCMB said:


> A lot of people who end up in cults are quite bright as well but that doesn't stop them from being led.



This post is going all over the show, from Tez punching some poor over-sized corn-fed army dude in the snoozle to cults. 
Anyhow, what is wrong with being led and letting someone else take the lead?

I am genuinely interested though, what would have happened if someone in the line had, rather than just stand and take the punch, blocked your police instructor's strike and put him in a rear naked choke or some such.  Would they still have been cut for not making the grade?  It's good to know someone can take a punch...better to know they can avoid one and actually protect themselves and others in the first place.


----------



## RTKDCMB

Zero said:


> Anyhow, what is wrong with being led and letting someone else take the lead?


That depends on how and where you are being led.


----------



## Zero

RTKDCMB said:


> That depends on how and where you are being led.


Ain't that the truth!  I've been led up a few garden paths myself over the years.


----------



## Hanzou

Back to the topic at hand;

I felt that this was a pretty solid (if abrupt) article on the subject;

Martial Arts Jiu-Jitsu and Women Gracie Barra Carlsbad 8211 Brazilian JiuJitsu


----------



## Cirdan

Here is norwegian Cecilia Brækhus, one of those poor weak disadvantaged women.


----------



## Dirty Dog

Cirdan said:


> Here is norwegian Cecilia Brækhus, one of those poor weak disadvantaged women.



An amazing and gifted woman. But it must be admitted that she'd be in trouble if matched against a world class heavyweight. That is why weight classes exist. All other things being equal, sheer size and strength becomes a much more significant factor.
It is inaccurate to say that woman are disadvantaged in combat arts (striking or not). It is, however, accurate to say that size and strength do play a role in determining the outcome of a match, regardless of the plumbing involved.


----------



## kodora81

Dirty Dog said:


> An amazing and gifted woman. But it must be admitted that she'd be in trouble if matched against a world class heavyweight. That is why weight classes exist. All other things being equal, sheer size and strength becomes a much more significant factor.
> It is inaccurate to say that woman are disadvantaged in combat arts (striking or not). It is, however, accurate to say that size and strength do play a role in determining the outcome of a match, regardless of the plumbing involved.


 
^This.

I don't post here very often, but as another female martial artist I felt compelled to reply. 

If we truly follow the premise of the OP, then EVERYONE would be disadvantaged in the striking arts, as there will always be someone bigger/stronger than them.

I'm 5'1" and 110lbs. Am I the smaller sparring partner the majority of the time? Hell yes. Does that stop me from training? Hell no.


----------



## Cirdan

Yes Dirty Dog, I believe that point may have been brought up once or twice before. As has certain things that might actually be to a woman`s advantage believe it or not.

I`d like to ask the other boys around here a question: have you ever lost a sparring match against a woman (disadvantaged as they are) due to overconfidence?

I`ll go first, I have, more than once too, and not only were they women they were also lower ranked than me and I got beaten fair and square due to ego.


----------



## Hanzou

kodora81 said:


> ^This.
> 
> I don't post here very often, but as another female martial artist I felt compelled to reply.
> 
> If we truly follow the premise of the OP, then EVERYONE would be disadvantaged in the striking arts, as there will always be someone bigger/stronger than them.
> 
> I'm 5'1" and 110lbs. Am I the smaller sparring partner the majority of the time? Hell yes. Does that stop me from training? Hell no.



Size wasn't the only consideration. The other was cultural and societal mores that caused men to treat women differently while training.


----------



## kodora81

What about female vs female sparring/grappling? Does this never happen?


----------



## kodora81

Hanzou said:


> Size wasn't the only consideration. The other was cultural and societal mores that caused men to treat women differently while training.


 
I can only speak from personal experience, but at my club male students get over that pretty quickly. When they don't, they learn a pretty quick lesson similar to Tez's student.


----------



## Dirty Dog

Cirdan said:


> Yes Dirty Dog, I believe that point may have been brought up once or twice before. As has certain things that might actually be to a woman`s advantage believe it or not.



Did you have extra snidesauce on your lutefisk this morning?



Cirdan said:


> I`d like to ask the other boys around here a question: have you ever lost a sparring match against a woman (disadvantaged as they are) due to overconfidence?



No. When I did much in the way of competitive sparring Back In The Day, matches were split by gender as well as size. Still are, from my experience, at least insofar as tournaments go. Within the dojang, we mix up partners regardless of size/gender/rank.
Nowadays, if I'm sparring someone (regardless of their chromosomes) I've either trained them, trained with them, or been trained by them. So there's never a reason to be surprised by their level of skill.



Cirdan said:


> I`ll go first, I have, more than once too, and not only were they women they were also lower ranked than me and I got beaten fair and square due to ego.



I can see the possibility of going into a match against someone I didn't know and making a poor assessment of their skills going in, but I'd like to think I'd figure that mistake out pretty quick once the match started. Certainly in less than one round. Was this a one-shot and you're out sort of thing?


----------



## Tez3

Hanzou said:


> Size wasn't the only consideration. The other was cultural and societal mores that caused men to treat women differently while training.




I take it you don't grapple with soldiers then because they treat men and women exactly the same, the women have proved they are up to the mark ( in Iraq and Afghan amongst other places like Sierra Leone) so they get treated exactly the same in sports too, no quarter given in training, besides the men know it doesn't do the women any favours to go 'soft'.


----------



## Hanzou

kodora81 said:


> I can only speak from personal experience, but at my club male students get over that pretty quickly. When they don't, they learn a pretty quick lesson similar to Tez's student.



Cool. 

I simply pointed that out because of the two ladies in the OP vid getting tooled by the male black belt to such a degree that many observers thought it was cruel. Clearly they had been handled with kid gloves throughout their martial journey.


----------



## Cirdan

Dirty Dog said:


> Did you have extra snidesauce on your lutefisk this morning?



Just raw tørrfisk but no knife around so breakfast was a mighty battle.

(snip)



> I can see the possibility of going into a match against someone I didn't know and making a poor assessment of their skills going in, but I'd like to think I'd figure that mistake out pretty quick once the match started. Certainly in less than one round. Was this a one-shot and you're out sort of thing?



Do you see that possibility being greater with a female opponent?

One of the times was a one-shot-out, others were not. They were not regular training partners however so poor assessment might be a factor as you say.


----------



## Tez3

Hanzou said:


> Cool.
> 
> I simply pointed that out because of the two ladies in the OP vid getting tooled by the male black belt to such a degree that many observers thought it was cruel. Clearly they had been handled with kid gloves throughout their martial journey.




Oh my days, they weren't getting 'tooled' in that video, if they were, it would make it a porn film.


----------



## Dirty Dog

Cirdan said:


> Do you see that possibility being greater with a female opponent?



Honestly, no. Could it have been a factor when I was young & dumb? Sure, I suppose. I was as stupid and biased as any teenager.



Cirdan said:


> One of the times was a one-shot-out, others were not. They were not regular training partners however so poor assessment might be a factor as you say.



The times that is was not BOOM-WTFJUSTHAPPENED??? what prevented you from realizing you'd misjudged them and correcting yourself? I'm assuming it wasn't just a case of being beaten by a more skilled opponent - that happens to everybody - because if it was, I don't think you'd have said you were beaten by ego.


----------



## Cirdan

Dirty Dog said:


> The times that is was not BOOM-WTFJUSTHAPPENED??? what prevented you from realizing you'd misjudged them and correcting yourself? I'm assuming it wasn't just a case of being beaten by a more skilled opponent - that happens to everybody - because if it was, I don't think you'd have said you were beaten by ego.



Is it not obvious? I used moves which I thought were "sufficient" rather than what would have been optimal. Correcting yourself is not always that easy either if you are on a wrong track while sparring plus it is not like we went several rounds with time to evaluate strategy. Now I dare say I underestimate opponents far less often these days and keep my ego out of sight, but I was by no means a kid when this happened and I refuse to believe I am the only one this could happen to -multiple times no less.


----------



## kodora81

Hanzou said:


> Cool.
> 
> I simply pointed that out because of the two ladies in the OP vid getting tooled by the male black belt to such a degree that many observers thought it was cruel. Clearly they had been handled with kid gloves throughout their martial journey.


 
Cool.

Maybe they *had* been treated with kid gloves. Or maybe they were tired. Or who knows. One video doesn't really make much of a larger point.

I'm not sure why the comments under the video are so important to you, yet you seem so resistant to take any comments from this thread to heart.


----------



## Hanzou

kodora81 said:


> Cool.
> 
> Maybe they *had* been treated with kid gloves. Or maybe they were tired. Or who knows. One video doesn't really make much of a larger point.
> 
> I'm not sure why the comments under the video are so important to you, yet you seem so resistant to take any comments from this thread to heart.



Actually I disagree. You can tell a lot from that video. Fatigue doesn't explain things like poor form/technique, flinching, and other fundamental problems. I have other videos which show similar results involving women in striking arts.

I find the comments under the video a bit more objective than the comments here. Unfortunately some here are quite a bit more biased for a variety of reasons.


----------



## K-man

Hanzou said:


> Actually I disagree. You can tell a lot from that video. Fatigue doesn't explain things like poor form/technique, flinching, and other fundamental problems. I have other videos which show similar results involving women in striking arts.
> 
> I find the comments under the video a bit more objective than the comments here. Unfortunately some here are quite a bit more biased for a variety of reasons.


Really ...


> The higher black belt is obviously way more experienced.  I don't like the way he conducts himself.  How about keeping your hands up and not acting like his opponents are inferior ...  They may not be as good or experienced yet,  but they held their own.  He obviously has a chip on his shoulder ....  They were testing,  let them test...  Make them work hard for it,  but don't belittle them with your actions.





> Hmm, the dude is stronger, faster, has longer range and is CLEARLY more experienced. Sounds like every belt test i've ever been in. Train all day, be really lovely exhausted and then have to fight someone who's fresh and has been training for a decade longer. I can't blame those girls at all, but it would have been nice to see one of them really drill him just once.





> What a bunch of wussies! You guys think that just because she's a female that she OBVIOUSLY can't handle the fight! That's what's wrong with our society! Martial Arts are FIGHTING sports! And personally, given the current violent times we live in, a woman BETTER be able to hold her own against an attacker! I say, kudos to her for giving as good as she's getting! When I was in Shotokan, those women were hardcore. When I was in Shorin Ryu, those women were hardcore. Get over it people, I've seen a LOT worse! Look at BJJ, those guys don't go soft just because it's a woman! They get choked out just like the men. You fight like you train and train like you fight!
> GEEZ!





> This black belt is being a disrespectful arrogant jerk.



There are quite a few objective comments under the video, plus a number from people who think like you.


----------



## ballen0351

kodora81 said:


> Cool.
> 
> Maybe they *had* been treated with kid gloves. Or maybe they were tired. Or who knows. One video doesn't really make much of a larger point.
> 
> I'm not sure why the comments under the video are so important to you, yet you seem so resistant to take any comments from this thread to heart.


I would + Rep the crap out of this on the old system Nice post


----------



## drop bear

Hanzou said:


> Cool.
> 
> I simply pointed that out because of the two ladies in the OP vid getting tooled by the male black belt to such a degree that many observers thought it was cruel. Clearly they had been handled with kid gloves throughout their martial journey.



not really. It could be but it doesn't have to. Look up prince nazeem.

good strikers can frustrate you.


----------



## drop bear

Hanzou said:


> Actually I disagree. You can tell a lot from that video. Fatigue doesn't explain things like poor form/technique, flinching, and other fundamental problems. I have other videos which show similar results involving women in striking arts.
> 
> I find the comments under the video a bit more objective than the comments here. Unfortunately some here are quite a bit more biased for a variety of reasons.



i flinch when sparring my coach in mma when he is in fight prep.

the reason is every time i enter i get cracked in the head hard. Which Sucks. Which makes me second guess my entries.

now normally i could just staunch up and bang. But if I do that i am in real danger of getting knocked out. And he is better at that too.

so i am in this loose loose situation which becomes very mentally challenging. Intuitively i just want to run away. But if I am not progressing the fight then i become a target and get picked off.

long story short. You include striking  with a good fighter you are going to look like that chick as well.

and grappling wont save you.


----------



## drop bear

drop bear said:


> not really. It could be but it doesn't have to. Look up prince nazeem.
> 
> good strikers can frustrate you.



or look up Forrest griffon Anderson silva


----------



## Hanzou

drop bear said:


> You include striking  with a good fighter you are going to look like that chick as well.



Actually, I would never perform a strike with my head completely turned away from my target with my eyes closed.

So no, I wouldn't look like those girls no matter how good my opponent is.


----------



## RTKDCMB

Cirdan said:


> Here is norwegian Cecilia Brækhus, one of those poor weak disadvantaged women.



I like how similar her name is to 'break us'.


----------



## Dinkydoo

drop bear said:


> i flinch when sparring my coach in mma when he is in fight prep.
> 
> the reason is every time i enter i get cracked in the head hard. Which Sucks. Which makes me second guess my entries.
> 
> so i am in this loose loose situation which becomes very mentally challenging. Intuitively i just want to run away. But if I am not progressing the fight then i become a target and get picked off.
> 
> long story short. You include striking  with a good fighter you are going to look like that chick as well



Every. Single. Time - sparring with a friend who's also an instructor. He's bigger than me and much more skilled so its really a case of when I'm going to get hit hard rather than if. It can be very tough mentally. On one hand I'm trying not to be hesitant, commit to my strikes and fight without tension and on the other I know that at some point I'm going to be made to pay for not being quite fast enough or too predictable.

At times my friend probably looks like he's just playing with a beginner with only one months experience but the reality is that I'm actually quite competent when matched up with most other students in classes I attend.

Downside: I look like a rabbit caught in headlights at the time.

Upside: Every time I spar with someone practically the same height as me, mentally, I feel that I have an advantage - and I usually perform well. That and nobody films me getting schooled by an instructor and puts it on YouTube!

I wouldnt be surprised to hear that these two women have a similar experience.


----------



## Tez3

Hanzou said:


> Actually, I would never perform a strike with my head completely turned away from my target with my eyes closed.
> 
> So no, I wouldn't look like those girls no matter how good my opponent is.





ROFLMAO. So, post a video up of you sparring then........prove it!


----------



## Hanzou

drop bear said:


> and grappling wont save you.



I would also like to add that grappling can save you if you're dealing with someone who is unfamiliar with it. Honestly that's a bigger portion of the population than those unfamiliar with striking. Far more people know how to punch and kick than to grapple or throw. Simply the nature of the beast.

The best example I've seen of this was a pretty highly trained security guard going against some untrained thug in a street brawl;






The unskilled striker was still able trade blows significantly well with more skilled striker. Why? Because the principles of striking are simply more familiar to the general population than grappling is.


----------



## Dinkydoo

Hanzou said:


> The unskilled striker was still able trade blows significantly well with more skilled striker. Why? Because the principles of striking are simply more familiar to the general population than grappling is.



Hanzou, the guy got his *** absolutely handed to him. Had it carried on he could and probably would have been seriously injured - going by the strikes landed ratio between the two.

Any untrained fighter with a rough idea of what to do in a confrontation can sometimes get away with being less trained - THAT'S really the nature of the beast. I've been put on the ground when free sparring a few times myself, but I've survived without tapping out occassionally. Okay, not always and I don't look particularly competent on the ground with an experienced grappler but neither did that guy fighting with the police officer.


----------



## kodora81

Hanzou - I forget it it's been already covered, but what's your personal experience sparring with women?


----------



## Tez3

Actually........the principles of grappling are probably more familiar to the 'general population' than 'striking'. Kids roll around with each other all the time, wrestling has been a staple of television for decades, first the 'normal' sort then the WWE type, I believe in North America wrestling is an extremely popular sport. Here we have many regional variations of wrestling, Judo is extremely popular. Rugby more so, very often you will read that a thief/criminal has been taken down with a rugby tackle which will involve more than just a take down. Most men and increasingly women here have played rugby at some time or another.  
This video isn't of 'the general population' at all it's between a security guard and a criminal going toe to toe and you have to ask *why*! Why on earth would a 'highly trained' security guard be going at it like that with a criminal? Lunacy. Again though it proves nothing.
Striking is something that a lot of people aren't confident with, they watch boxers, kick boxers and martial arts films but confidence in their own striking isn't as much as you would think, and that comes from experience of many years teaching beginners.


----------



## kodora81

I agree, Tez. The few times I've dappled with grappling it felt much more natural to me than striking.


----------



## Tez3

Grappling around on the floor for fun is something most parents do with their children ( couples do it too), ends up with tickling of course but it's a more natural thing. We don't go around thumping people just for fun but will wrestle/grapple just for a laugh.


----------



## drop bear

Hanzou said:


> I would also like to add that grappling can save you if you're dealing with someone who is unfamiliar with it. Honestly that's a bigger portion of the population than those unfamiliar with striking. Far more people know how to punch and kick than to grapple or throw. Simply the nature of the beast.
> 
> The best example I've seen of this was a pretty highly trained security guard going against some untrained thug in a street brawl;
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The unskilled striker was still able trade blows significantly well with more skilled striker. Why? Because the principles of striking are simply more familiar to the general population than grappling is.



 it wont save you in sparring because the other guy will also know the grapple.

if you are being disadvantaged by striking. You don't stop throwing strikes.

because at the very least they set up good grappling.


----------



## Hanzou

Dinkydoo said:


> Hanzou, the guy got his *** absolutely handed to him. Had it carried on he could and probably would have been seriously injured - going by the strikes landed ratio between the two.
> 
> Any untrained fighter with a rough idea of what to do in a confrontation can sometimes get away with being less trained - THAT'S really the nature of the beast. I've been put on the ground when free sparring a few times myself, but I've survived without tapping out occassionally. Okay, not always and I don't look particularly competent on the ground with an experienced grappler but neither did that guy fighting with the police officer.



Oh, I never said that the guy didn't get his *** handed to him. However, the more skilled striker didn't put him away either. I was also struck by how many blows the cop simply missed. We don't know what would have happened if the fight had continued. It could have very well continued for several more minutes if people hadn't came in there and separated them.

My point is that striking is simply more familiar to more people than grappling is, and when trading blows with someone of equal or greater size and strength, that familiarity decreases your advantages. In that case, grappling *can* save you.


----------



## Tez3

Hanzou said:


> Oh, I never said that the guy didn't get his *** handed to him. However, the more skilled striker didn't put him away either. I was also struck by how many blows the cop simply missed. We don't know what would have happened if the fight had continued. It could have very well continued for several more minutes if people hadn't came in there and separated them.
> 
> My point is that striking is simply more familiar to more people than grappling is, and when trading blows with someone of equal or greater size and strength, that familiarity decreases your advantages. In that case, grappling *can* save you.




I see my points are ignored lol, guess I've been sent to Coventry. Oh dear how sad never mind.


----------



## kodora81

This doesn't seem to be much of a discussion or debate, apparently.


----------



## Cirdan

I guess this obvious truth that more people are familiar with striking than with grappling comes from the same source that saw fit to inform about 80% of all fights going the the ground...

Must be a fun parallell universe out there somewhere.


----------



## Hanzou

Tez3 said:


> Actually........the principles of grappling are probably more familiar to the 'general population' than 'striking'. Kids roll around with each other all the time, wrestling has been a staple of television for decades, first the 'normal' sort then the WWE type, I believe in North America wrestling is an extremely popular sport. Here we have many regional variations of wrestling, Judo is extremely popular. Rugby more so, very often you will read that a thief/criminal has been taken down with a rugby tackle which will involve more than just a take down. Most men and increasingly women here have played rugby at some time or another.



I disagree. Example:






In this case we have some "backyard wrestlers" going against a Bjj blackbelt. The difference in skill, and the dominating ability of the black belt is readily apparent. So while people may enjoy to roll around with their buddies, that doesn't get you very far against a skilled grappler. 



> Striking is something that a lot of people aren't confident with, they watch boxers, kick boxers and martial arts films but confidence in their own striking isn't as much as you would think, and that comes from experience of many years teaching beginners.



I wasn't talking about confidence. I was talking about familiarity.


----------



## Hanzou

kodora81 said:


> Hanzou - I forget it it's been already covered, but what's your personal experience sparring with women?



I don't have much unfortunately. In my experience women don't feel comfortable with the physical contact level of grappling. This even extends to female family members who were curious about Jiujitsu, yet weren't really comfortable when I showed them standard positions.


----------



## kodora81

Hanzou said:


> I don't have much unfortunately. In my experience women don't feel comfortable with the physical contact level of grappling. This even extends to female family members who were curious about Jiujitsu, yet weren't really comfortable when I showed them standard positions.



No, I'm curious about your 10+ years in Shotokan karate.


----------



## Tez3

Again with the videos and again with the twisting of words.

You stated " _My point is that striking is simply more familiar to more people than grappling is_",
I replied that wrestling/grappling is more familiar to people and explained why.
You come back with a video and saying that with a backyard grappler against a BJJ player the difference is apparent. So, what's that got to do with the price of fish?
then you said _" I wasn't talking about confidence. I was talking about familiarity." _No, you weren't *but I was. *it was a comment I added. It's not all about you.


----------



## Tez3

Hanzou said:


> I don't have much unfortunately. In my experience_ women don't feel comfortable with the physical contact level of grappling_. This even extends to female family members who were curious about Jiujitsu, yet weren't really comfortable when I showed them standard positions.




That's going to be news to the hundreds of thousands or so women who do Judo, BJJ, JJ and wrestling around the world. It may however say something about your methods of teaching.


----------



## Hanzou

kodora81 said:


> No, I'm curious about your 10+ years in Shotokan karate.



Oh, I mistook sparring for grappling. My mistake.

My experience is quite similar to Hussaf's on the first page. I was capable of simply overpowering higher ranked female partners throughout my years in karate.


----------



## kodora81

Hanzou said:


> Oh, I mistook sparring for grappling. My mistake.
> 
> My experience is quite similar to Hussaf's on the first page. I was capable of simply overpowering higher ranked female partners throughout my years in karate.



I'm curious as to why you haven't said this until asked. 

And now I'm curious as to the purpose of this thread. According to you, women suck at striking and at grappling. Other than bashing on women in MA, what is it you're trying to prove?


----------



## ballen0351

kodora81 said:


> I'm curious as to why you haven't said this until asked.
> 
> And now I'm curious as to the purpose of this thread. According to you, women suck at striking and at grappling. Other than bashing on women in MA, what is it you're trying to prove?


Damn there is another +rep I can't give lol


----------



## RTKDCMB

Hanzou said:


> I disagree. Example:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In this case we have some "backyard wrestlers" going against a Bjj blackbelt. The difference in skill, and the dominating ability of the black belt is readily apparent. So while people may enjoy to roll around with their buddies, that doesn't get you very far against a skilled grappler.



Didn't we already go through this in another thread?


----------



## Cirdan

kodora81 said:


> I'm curious as to why you haven't said this until asked.
> 
> And now I'm curious as to the purpose of this thread. According to you, women suck at striking and at grappling. Other than bashing on women in MA, what is it you're trying to prove?



Oh his intent is clear enough and has been for some time, at least to me.



Hanzou said:


> *Sometimes I picture some posters foaming at the mouth while they type their responses. Always gets a little chuckle out of me.*


----------



## Tez3

ballen0351 said:


> Damn there is another +rep I can't give lol



Add mine to that. It was very well said.


----------



## Hanzou

Tez3 said:


> Again with the videos and again with the twisting of words.
> 
> You stated " _My point is that striking is simply more familiar to more people than grappling is_",
> I replied that wrestling/grappling is more familiar to people and explained why.
> You come back with a video and saying that with a backyard grappler against a BJJ player the difference is apparent. So, what's that got to do with the price of fish?



It shows that people are not familiar with grappling, even if they're practicing it consistently.



> then you said _" I wasn't talking about confidence. I was talking about familiarity." _No, you weren't *but I was. *it was a comment I added. It's not all about you.



Why would you respond to my post with something I wasn't even talking about?


----------



## Hanzou

kodora81 said:


> I'm curious as to why you haven't said this until asked.
> 
> And now I'm curious as to the purpose of this thread. According to you, women suck at striking and at grappling. Other than bashing on women in MA, what is it you're trying to prove?



Where did I say that women suck at grappling and striking?

The purpose of this thread is to ask the question of whether or not women are disadvantaged in the striking arts.


----------



## Cirdan

Here is solid proof from the allmighty internet that three girls can beat up seven bigger guys. According to HanzouLogic every other argument or fact ever presented is now rendered not valid.


----------



## Tony Dismukes

Cirdan said:


> Here is solid proof from the allmighty internet that three girls can beat up seven bigger guys. According to HanzouLogic every other argument or fact ever presented is now rendered not valid.


 Yeah, but that's in a sport setting (full-contact beach volleyball). In the street it would be totally different.


----------



## Dinkydoo

Hanzou said:


> Oh, I never said that the guy didn't get his *** handed to him.



No but youu said:





Hanzou said:


> The unskilled striker was still able trade blows significantly well with more skilled striker.



Trade strikes significantly well isn't something that 'getting your *** handed to you' usually entails.



Hanzou said:


> However, the more skilled striker didn't put him away either. I was also struck by how many blows the cop simply missed.



How good the trained striker was is an entirely different issue. 




Hanzou said:


> We don't know what would have happened if the fight had continued. It could have very well continued for several more minutes if people hadn't came in there and separated them.



The police officer was landing more strikes, was the much more aggressive fighter and had better defence. 

I guess we wouldn't know how the next set of rounds would have turned out with the two TKD students fighting the big guy either? 




Hanzou said:


> My point is that striking is simply more familiar to more people than grappling is, and when trading blows with someone of equal or greater size and strength, that familiarity decreases your advantages. In that case, grappling *can* save you.



That's not a point or a fact, it's an opinion.


----------



## Hanzou

Dinkydoo said:


> Trade strikes significantly well isn't something that 'getting your *** handed to you' usually entails.



You can trade strikes significantly well and still get your *** kicked. It happens, and that vid is one of those cases.



> How good the trained striker was is an entirely different issue.



His technique and form looked good.



> The police officer was landing more strikes, was the much more aggressive fighter and had better defence.



And yet the thug still hung with him.



> I guess we wouldn't know how the next set of rounds would have turned out with the two TKD students fighting the big guy either?



The thug actually looked better than the two TSD students (ithey're TSD not TKD) did fighting their senior student. 



> That's not a point or a fact, it's an opinion.



You can get a heavy bag and practice kicks and punches, and watch some vids and actually become a fairly competent striker. Maybe even capable of doing some damage to some karate and kung fu black belts. I know, I've seen it happen several times.

That sort of thing is far more rarer in the grappling arts. Not because grappling arts are superior, but because grappling is far more alien to people than striking is. Hell, just the closeness of physical contact inherent in grappling arts freaks people out.


----------



## Tez3

Hanzou said:


> It shows that people are not familiar with grappling, even if they're practicing it consistently.
> 
> 
> 
> *Why would you respond to my post with something I wasn't even talking about*?



Because it's a discussion board? You know, where you say something, I respond then add something, you respond, add something etc etc etc.

This isn't the testicular monologues.


----------



## drop bear

Hanzou said:


> You can trade strikes significantly well and still get your *** kicked. It happens, and that vid is one of those cases.
> 
> 
> 
> His technique and form looked good.
> 
> 
> 
> And yet the thug still hung with him.
> 
> 
> 
> The thug actually looked better than the two TSD students (ithey're TSD not TKD) did fighting their senior student.
> 
> 
> 
> You can get a heavy bag and practice kicks and punches, and watch some vids and actually become a fairly competent striker. Maybe even capable of doing some damage to some karate and kung fu black belts. I know, I've seen it happen several times.
> 
> That sort of thing is far more rarer in the grappling arts. Not because grappling arts are superior, but because grappling is far more alien to people than striking is. Hell, just the closeness of physical contact inherent in grappling arts freaks people out.



ok but there are also videos of competent strikers cleaning house on the street.

what explains those?


----------



## Tez3

drop bear said:


> ok but there are also videos of competent strikers cleaning house on the street.
> 
> _what explains those_?




they are paid to sweep streets and empty dustbins?


----------



## Dinkydoo

Hanzou said:


> You can trade strikes significantly well and still get your *** kicked. It happens, and that vid is one of those cases.



When is throwing multiple reckless punches, barely landing any of them, ever classified as 'trading strikes significantly well'?

I thought you had experience in multiple striking arts and a black belt in one of them? 

I could keep a good guard after being taken down and fluke a shot in the throat....but I wouldn't call it trading strikes or grappling significantly well. It would be using what little I did know to survive.



Hanzou said:


> His technique and form looked good.



It did. I'm not sure there was much chance at all of the 'thug' in this scenario taking him out. Nice tight guard, quick, calculated, strong strikes that he was quite unlucky to have missed so many in a row. It happens though.



Hanzou said:


> And yet the thug still hung with him.



One example of an untrained guy surviving a fight with a trained opponent. It happens sometimes, I said that before. 




Hanzou said:


> The thug actually looked better than the two TSD students (ithey're TSD not TKD) did fighting their senior student.



Oops, my bad. I'm not sure the style is relevant though. Its still primarily striking based.

Apples and oranges. On one hand we have a grading sparring match between two students, one has already performed any number of forms, line work and sparring rounds before-hand, the other is fresh and much more skilled, then, we have an adrenaline filled fight between presumably a criminal attempting escape and a police officer. In grading you're trying to show skill and technique, in a fight you're trying to take the other guy's head off. Nothing about these two 'fights' are comparable.



Hanzou said:


> You can get a heavy bag and practice kicks and punches, and watch some vids and actually become a fairly competent striker. Maybe even capable of doing some damage to some karate and kung fu black belts. I know, I've seen it happen several times.



If this is even true, which I doubt, I'm not sure how poorly trained 'black belts' are relevant to the discussion. Try to fight one of the black belts I know without proper training and see where it gets you.



Hanzou said:


> That sort of thing is far more rarer in the grappling arts. Not because grappling arts are superior, but because grappling is far more alien to people than striking is. Hell, just the closeness of physical contact inherent in grappling arts freaks people out.



Again, this is an opinion, not a fact. Facts aren't argued, by nature, they are.

Getting punched in the face repeatedly freaks people out too, but I guess you know that, with all the Karate and Kung Fu experience you have.


----------



## K-man

Tez3 said:


> That's going to be news to the hundreds of thousands or so women who do Judo, BJJ, JJ and wrestling around the world. It may however say something about your methods of teaching.


Or understanding.


----------

