dealing with someone much bigger

[Kembudo-Kai Kempoka]

Keeping in mind that I've been drilled by instructors and senior students who were smaller than I...I've been big, and I've been small; big is better.

 

[moving target]

With this view, you are assuming that one of the equal components is also style/art/system of fighting. I think we have all seen small, light fighters who are far more adept and effective within an art than some of the largest fighters in the same school - both under the same instructor/with the same system of power delivery/speed training....

I agree. But I am not simply saying that they both have trained in the same system but they both have equal skill. I agree that in many cases bigger people don’t end up with the same level of skill as a smaller person just because they can overcome people by strength. But there are some bigger people who have excellent skill.

I am saying that there seems to be an implication, or more to the point I am inferring, in your posts that size will be the decisive factor between fighters.

This wasn’t really my intent. I think size is a factor, not necessarily decisive but a factor that must be weighed. It’s relevance in any given fight depend on the relative differences in size between the two fighters. That’s why I think if all things are equal (except mass) the more massive fighter will win. Granted this statement doesn’t hold true in many situations, if the more massive fighter does not take advantage of his mass than he will loose. But I could only see this happening if he didn’t know how to take advantage of his mass.

I disagree with this point because even if the fighters are 'equal' in all ways, except system (heck, even within the same style/art) as well as mass, the person with more experience controlling the tactics and outcomes of fighting will have the advantage, not the larger fighter.

I do agree that if you can make someone fight your fight you have an advantage over them. But if both have equal experience than I’m going with the bigger one.

Experience, intelligence, blind luck.... even equal in potential and development will be individual in application so I would say that they are more decisive factors than simply the physical attribute of size.

I disagree there. Definitely disagree about blind luck. Luck will always be a factor, but the only time I think it would outweigh any other factor is if that other factor has a relatively low difference between the two fighters.
I don’t think application of intelligence and experience will outweigh size unless there is a relatively small size difference. I view all these attributes as variables that a fighter may have a higher or lower value attributed to, I don’t think any one can outweigh the others but a greater value in any one may out weigh a lesser value in any other.

Size doesn't matter if I take/have the initiative on the street againsts an experimentally equal fighter, with larger mass, and jab him in the eye or create a disfunction of a part of the body that will not benefit because of extra mass (any 'soft' target) therefore cannot absorb force better (groin, throat, eyes, soft tissue of the gums, ear drum pops), these types of soft targets cannot absorb more force because of mass, but there are some schools that train in Iron Body conditioning that claim to develop these targets based on yielding and chi enhancement as apposed to making them bigger... of course if they could make a certain soft target bigger they would be rich

In my opinion initiative/surprise is possibly the largest factor in a fight, most definitely so if there is a weapon involved. I agree that there are a lot of targets on the human body that do not acquire added protection from mass, there are also a lot of targets that gain a small amount of protection but not much from increased mass (like the liver). The disadvantage I am stating is that unless both fighters limit all their attacks to such targets than the bigger fighter has an advantage in as much as he can attack the targets that do benefit from increased mass to greater effect than the smaller fighter.

The power or force equation you are using does have a realistic terminus of application because larger massed things have to fight gravity harder, therefore will fatigue faster. Fatigue will happen faster, especially if the larger/smaller fighters are only equal in endurance conditioning training. In the category of conditioning, the larger fighter would need to be 'fitter' than the smaller fighter to extend his endurance survival.

This isn’t necessarily true. This is the case in many situations because of the type of endurance relative to the distribution of muscle mass. If a body builder tries to run a marathon, they are at a huge disadvantage not just because their muscles aren’t built for aerobic activity as much as anaerobic activity, but also because their distribution of mass on the upper body is greater than a marathon runner. All that extra muscle up top is useless for that particular event. If the size difference is relatively proportional between two people (one person is just all around bigger, nut simply a more built up version of the other) and the strength of there muscles is also proportionally greater, than that isn’t true. But even if it is, we appear to be talking about a no techniques barred street fight, it isn’t going to last long at all, If the big guy can last 15 seconds at full speed he probably has enough juice to finish the fight.

Again, these points are made based on my perception that you are saying that mass will be the deciding factor between two 'equal' fighters. If that isn't the case.... oops

Well I am saying that however I did not mean that it was necessarily a deciding factor in any given situation, the statement is not really intended to be taken in a real life situation because there can be no real life situation where two fighters are identical, never mind a real life situation where two fighters are identical except for mass. The argument I am trying to make is simply that size is a factor in a fight, of greater or lesser importance depending on the discrepancy.

This is based on the idea that a knock out is required to win a boxing match. Boxing is a sport based on points and scoring power shots on certain targets while keeping the other fighter from scoring the same or more points on you.

No its not. I didn’t just choose Lewis because he’s the heavyweight champion. I chose him because he’s a tall fighter with very long reach who’s game depends on keeping people outside. He is exceptionally fast for a heavyweight and he has gone the distance in a number of point decision matches. I tend to think of Lewis as a fighter who scores points first and knocks people out second. That is to say his fighting style is not based on a KO.

If the two fighters are equal in training and skill as well as physically measurable attributes, the heavy weight would be at a tactical disadvantage because he will not be able to read and react at the same speed as a light weight fighter. Light wt fighters may not have the power, but they do have faster punches and faster combination speed. I know this argument moves us out of the 'all things equal' but disparity in size/mass limits what 'all' means. Speed is the advantage of the lighter fighter.

I agree.

That said, the light fighter will not be able to withstand the power of the hvy wt, BUT the heavy wt, still has to connect.

Again, I would say that the experience and luck of the fighter is more decisive to the outcome than mass

I do not think there is a light weight fighter in the world that could avoid all the blows of a world class heavyweight. I think if there was a fight like this the little guy probably would land more hits, but would go down fast.

As to experience and luck., in a boxing match, I disagree. If there is a large discrepancy in mass, luck doesn’t matter as much. The big guy can quite probably walk into a bunch of power blows, especially to the body with no real consequence. If the little guy gets “unlucky” once he could be out. Experience is a big factor if there isn’t as much of a size difference, but in that heavyweight vs flyweight situation, I don’t think experience will matter as much. Obviously you couldn’t just throw any heavyweight in and expect them to beat any flyweight, but I do think if you had two world class fighters, the heavyweight would end up winning. And I do think that a less experienced heavyweight could beat a more experienced flyweight.

 

[loki09789]

"This wasn’t really my intent. I think size is a factor, not necessarily decisive but a factor that must be weighed."

Was that pun intentional, too funny

"That’s why I think if all things are equal (except mass) the more massive fighter will win."

Then, at 5/4", 179 lbs, why should I bother trying? I have cut down my fair share of "trees," training only based on the discussion terms.
Or a woman? Wouldn't a successful street criminal have equivalent if not equal experience to a well trained martial artist? Why would a woman bother to train if size were the only disparity between her and her attacker?

"Granted this statement doesn’t hold true in many situations, if the more massive fighter does not take advantage of his mass than he will loose. But I could only see this happening if he didn’t know how to take advantage of his mass."

If it doesn't hold true, we are back to your original disclaimer that it is impossible to establish. Also, if they are equal in every way accept mass, the heavier fighter, I would assume would know how to take advantage/maximize his genetic advantage of mass to his favor - the same way that the smaller fighter would know how to take advantage of any speed/endurance advantages he might have...

"I chose him because he’s a tall fighter with very long reach who’s game depends on keeping people outside. He is exceptionally fast for a heavyweight and he has gone the distance in a number of point decision matches."

Qualifying his speed with 'for a heavy wt.' is too limiting, he is fast period . But, mass doesn't automatically mean short, thin and long could also be the case. If so, reach could be equal even if mass isn't. I would agree that any boxer couldn't avoid all shots, not just a lt. wt. But, the mental/reaction speed of a lt. wt. would help him avoid the majority or most damaging. Whereas, Lewis - use to fighting relatively 'slower' fighters, might not have equal experience at facing the speed of the lt. wt. boxers speed. This could lead to a point win for the lt. wt.

I like your point about initiative as a really decisive advantage. Action is mechanically/mentally faster than reaction.

I get where you are coming from, don't agree totally, but understand. The problem is that it is a 'vacuum' discussion because it can not exist in reality so it is hard to support either way. We keep 'qualifying' our statements and limiting examples and such because when one thing is out of 'equal' it really throws the rest of the factors out of 'equal' as well.... oh well, at least we didn't start calling each other names or telling each other to F&&& off

 

[7starmantis]

Man this thread is getting long winded! I think the bottom line to this whole discussion is that a fight is never cut and dry. There is no set recipe to follow that will garauntee success in any true self defense situation. Alot depends on the fighters, the surroundings, the weather, the attackers buddies, weapons, and so on and so forth. Weight or mass is a factor in fighting, it is not a deciding factor by any means. If you say the two have been training the same amount of time, even in the same art, do you think by their difference in mass they are going to be at the same skill level? They will be completely different fighters, utilizing completely different techniques. I don't believe (because I practice an art that doesn't rely on pure strength) that strength or mass has much to do with the final outcome. In fact, I don't think there are many things going into a fight that truly effect the outcome except the performance of techniques during the encounter. Your training is useless if you cannot perform in that split second it is needed. All things considered, I think mass is probably one of the least of the factors in determining the outcome of an encounter.

JMHO,
7sm

 

[moving target]

to Loki,

Was that pun intentional, too funny

It just came out that way : )

Then, at 5/4", 179 lbs, why should I bother trying? I have cut down my fair share of "trees," training only based on the discussion terms.
Or a woman? Wouldn't a successful street criminal have equivalent if not equal experience to a well trained martial artist? Why would a woman bother to train if size were the only disparity between her and her attacker?

A successful street criminal may or may not know how to fight. I really doubt that there are many that put in the amount of time a lot of martial artists do. A lot of people train around 3 hours a day/21 hours a week. I think successful criminals practice what they need (if they practice) which isn’t necessarily fighting unarmed. Further having the same amount of time in training does not mean that there is an equality in skill(s). A different skill set in fighting changes everything around. And as to the “why bother” If you train for a fight, you are aware it is coming, you very well may have the upper hand simply because your opponent doesn’t know your hand as well as you know his. If someone picks a fight, usually they think they can win. So right off the bat they probably have underestimated you which may give you initiative in some way. And of course I never argued that mass will override skill 100% of the time or in all situations. I don’t agree with that at all.

if they are equal in every way accept mass, the heavier fighter, I would assume would know how to take advantage/maximize his genetic advantage of mass to his favor - the same way that the smaller fighter would know how to take advantage of any speed/endurance advantages he might have...

What I meant was if the skill set that is in question (the one they both have) is a skill set of a person who does not know how to leverage their natural attributes, than those attributes will probably get in the way. For example if the skill set is of a person who trained in a style/school that ignored all the aspects of fighting where mass can give an advantage.

Qualifying his speed with 'for a heavy wt.' is too limiting, he is fast period . But, mass doesn't automatically mean short, thin and long could also be the case. If so, reach could be equal even if mass isn't. I would agree that any boxer couldn't avoid all shots, not just a lt. wt. But, the mental/reaction speed of a lt. wt. would help him avoid the majority or most damaging. Whereas, Lewis - use to fighting relatively 'slower' fighters, might not have equal experience at facing the speed of the lt. wt. boxers speed. This could lead to a point win for the lt. wt.

Well I didn’t know if there was a flyweight out there somewhere that was faster.. I don’t see to much of the flyweights : ). As to mass. Lewis is 6’5” with an arm span of 84” Try finding a flyweight (112-115 pounds) with a 7 foot arm span. Even if you find one I doubt they will have enough muscle to move and throw a punch. Definitely would be hard to find one as fast as Lewis. I don’t think there’s a flyweight in the world with that reach. Any boxer trains to fight the boxer they are facing in the ring. If someone’s fighting someone who is small fast and light, they are probably gona find someone like that. Also a heavyweights reaction time isn’t necessarily any slower than the lighter weight.

To 7*,

Man this thread is getting long winded! I think the bottom line to this whole discussion is that a fight is never cut and dry. There is no set recipe to follow that will garauntee success in any true self defense situation. Alot depends on the fighters, the surroundings, the weather, the attackers buddies, weapons, and so on and so forth. Weight or mass is a factor in fighting, it is not a deciding factor by any means.

I agree with that.

If you say the two have been training the same amount of time, even in the same art, do you think by their difference in mass they are going to be at the same skill level? They will be completely different fighters, utilizing completely different techniques.

I agree with this in any real life situation with one exception. When two fighters have similar builds. Mentalities, and aptitudes, neither weight trains, than one starts lifting for strength and size and ends up adding a lot of weight.

I don't believe (because I practice an art that doesn't rely on pure strength) that strength or mass has much to do with the final outcome.

This is the only point in your post I disagree with. I do agree that any fight with weapons, mass has little if any relevance. But I do think mass can effect the outcome of a fight if there is a great enough proportional difference. I do agree in most cases mass won’t be much of a factor.

In fact, I don't think there are many things going into a fight that truly effect the outcome except the performance of techniques during the encounter. Your training is useless if you cannot perform in that split second it is needed. All things considered, I think mass is probably one of the least of the factors in determining the outcome of an encounter.

Well I agree with the latter part, but the former,. Concerning factors in a fight, I have the opposite view. I think everything matters going into a fight. Everything adds up to a set of tools that each fighter can pick from. From there it is all in the mind. What tools the fighter chooses to use in what order and in what way determine the outcome (plus luck) The most experienced, or the most creative or the most well rounded will win.
I do agree that mass is probably one of the least factors determining the outcome of a fight with a martial artist But not necessarily any other fight. Out side of martial arts, Most of what I have seen in fighting in north America is some combination of boxing and wrestling at a low skill level. Usually when there is a decisive win, it’s because of a sucker punch. In this situation mass has an advantage in my opinion.

My view on mass/size in a skilled fight is basically, a large(ish) difference will allow for a greater range of tactics within the fight. I think it is fairly easy to point to combat sports where mass gives a decisive advantage, now I know that these are after all sports and at best offer very limited sections of a fight, but I do think that combat sports do offer glimpses at aspects of fighting, and if the more massive fighter looks at the situation in this light, they can leverage the tactics not necessarily of that type of fight, but of moving into that type of fight’s range. Where as the smaller fighter risks facing a disadvantage due to mass discrepancy if he moves into these same ranges. Now I realize this doesn’t equate to a decisive advantage by any means, but it does give some advantage in my opinion.

In the context that I originally brought up size (threat evaluation) I do think size/mass is important. I think that for one, it is far less likely to find a person who is picking a fight with you who is trained and a proficient fighter in a style that does not utilize mass yet is on the large side, as opposed to a fighter who prefers to leverage their mass and fights in a style that takes advantage of their size. That being said it says something about what you can expect. Also since most people do consider size to be relevant in a fight most smaller people won’t pick a fight with a bigger person unless they are a good fighter or have a weapon.

 

[7starmantis]

I agree with this in any real life situation with one exception. When two fighters have similar builds. Mentalities, and aptitudes, neither weight trains, than one starts lifting for strength and size and ends up adding a lot of weight.

First lets qualify lifting a bit more. Lifting for strength and lifting for size are two completely seperate training methods, complete with differing techniques and goals. If lifting for size, then your techniques and aptitudes will change from that of not lifting, or change from that of lifting for strength. Here is where I think that lifting for size or even strength if done incorrectly can be a hindrence. If your constently working on strength you are going to revert to using strength in a fight. I will speak from my system (as I don't have alot of expertise in other systems); the minute you start relying on your strength to help you in the fight is the minute I begin to get the upper hand. We work on developing "feel" which mean that if I punch and I feel you really using your strength to push my hand up, or to the side, I "bounce" off of your pressure into another attack. By the time you realize my hand is gone from where your stregnth was holding it, you are allready hit. Thats where relying on strength can be a disadvantage. I will say it is few and far between that you will encounter someone with good feel, but they are out there. The problem with the mentality of my system is that it was created to defend against other systems. To defeat skilled MA practitioners, so some of the things we train in may not come up in a street fight, but then again, they might.

This is the only point in your post I disagree with. I do agree that any fight with weapons, mass has little if any relevance. But I do think mass can effect the outcome of a fight if there is a great enough proportional difference. I do agree in most cases mass won’t be much of a factor.

This is where you lost me. Why would a fight with weapons be any less reliant on the set of skills you use for an unarmed fight? That I simply do not understand. As to weight having an effect on the outcome, it does in many ways, but if you take the positive with the negative, it really isn't that much of a factor at all. Take cardio for one example. How mnay "good" bodybuilders who work hard at it do you know that do 8 hours of cardio a week? Not many. What I'm trying to show is that each fighter contains a set of skills, body type advantages, and mental advantages compiled with disadvantages of each of those. This makes each fighter completely different from the next, thus making it more about the ability to use the set of trained skills in the situation. Mass or weight has little to do with any of that. What I'm really against is the belief that weight alone yields any type of advantage, my belief is that alone, it does not.

Well I agree with the latter part, but the former,. Concerning factors in a fight, I have the opposite view. I think everything matters going into a fight. Everything adds up to a set of tools that each fighter can pick from. From there it is all in the mind. What tools the fighter chooses to use in what order and in what way determine the outcome (plus luck) The most experienced, or the most creative or the most well rounded will win.
I do agree that mass is probably one of the least factors determining the outcome of a fight with a martial artist But not necessarily any other fight. Out side of martial arts, Most of what I have seen in fighting in north America is some combination of boxing and wrestling at a low skill level. Usually when there is a decisive win, it’s because of a sucker punch. In this situation mass has an advantage in my opinion.

This is my point though, all of those things that matter going into the fight, don't matter at all during the fight, unless the fighter has the ability, mental capacity, and steadfastness of mind to use them. The only techniques that matter in a fight are the ones that are used. The weather doesn't factor into a fight unless it causes some advantage/disadvantage. See what I mean, to say that something, anything, gives an immediate advatange is illogical, the fighter has to use it as an advantage.

In the context that I originally brought up size (threat evaluation) I do think size/mass is important. I think that for one, it is far less likely to find a person who is picking a fight with you who is trained and a proficient fighter in a style that does not utilize mass yet is on the large side, as opposed to a fighter who prefers to leverage their mass and fights in a style that takes advantage of their size.

Are you saying it is unlikely to find a person on the larger side practicing an art that doesn't utilize muscle or mass in fighting? I'm 6' 2" 210, I consider that larger than average and I practice a system that does not rely of strength or mass. I think its blanket statements like this that cause people to be incorrect in thier posts most of the time.

7sm