Krav-Maga??

[punisher73]

that was doing bench pressing at a gym wasnt it. that got a high selection bias as well, not to mention all those steroids that young Male weight lifter are fond of attend. you need a study where they were screened for drugs for it to have even remote relevance to " average" otherwise your just proving that steroids increase both muscle mass and strength, which isn't in dispute

That particular data was posted (it covers more than bench press if you look at it) because of the question about women training in regards to an untrained male. It was given as a comparative to show different levels of training and strength levels of both men and women. Which someone had posted that a trained female can be as strong or stronger than certain males.

But, once again, you have missed the point entirely. People are trying to find and have a meaningful dialog and all you are interested in is finding the "i" that is not dotted and focusing on that. What is the purpose of your disagreement, other than to just disagree? Can a reasonable person look at the data posted and come to the conclusion that, the average male is stronger than the average female? Can they come to the conclusion that a female can train herself and become stronger than males who remain untrained? Based on those, can you design a training methodology for your students to help tip the odds in favor of your female martial art students? All the rest is just smoke and mirror just to argue and doesn't matter to what the original topic was.

In NLP, they have a saying that is very appropriate in discussions like this. "The map is not the territory". A map is useful in navigating you where you want to go and to get where you need to be, but it is not the actual thing. People on here are navigating the territory just fine and getting to where they need to go and you are looking at the map and arguing if it is a stream or a creek and demanding to prove that it is really a creek. It misses the whole point of using the map to get where you need to go.

 

[jobo]

That particular data was posted (it covers more than bench press if you look at it) because of the question about women training in regards to an untrained male. It was given as a comparative to show different levels of training and strength levels of both men and women. Which someone had posted that a trained female can be as strong or stronger than certain males.

But, once again, you have missed the point entirely. People are trying to find and have a meaningful dialog and all you are interested in is finding the "i" that is not dotted and focusing on that. What is the purpose of your disagreement, other than to just disagree? Can a reasonable person look at the data posted and come to the conclusion that, the average male is stronger than the average female? Can they come to the conclusion that a female can train herself and become stronger than males who remain untrained? Based on those, can you design a training methodology for your students to help tip the odds in favor of your female martial art students? All the rest is just smoke and mirror just to argue and doesn't matter to what the original topic was.

In NLP, they have a saying that is very appropriate in discussions like this. "The map is not the territory". A map is useful in navigating you where you want to go and to get where you need to be, but it is not the actual thing. People on here are navigating the territory just fine and getting to where they need to go and you are looking at the map and arguing if it is a stream or a creek and demanding to prove that it is really a creek. It misses the whole point of using the map to get where you need to go.

no a reasonable person cant look at the very iffy data you've posted and come to that conclusion. nb, I'm defining a reasonable person as one who can critically apply reason. not people searching the web for any half baked nonsense that vaguely support their point

if the study hasn't taken account of steroid use, then its meaningless when applied to the wider population, that ignoring for now the very obvious selection bias.

 

[jobo]

How is that a response to the link, which contained actual data? You're being argumentative for the sake of argument at this point. You apparently don't have a point to make, nor any information to contribute.

I can't see how anyone would benefit from continuing this discussion.

all the people who cant critically analyse data, which seems to be most, would benifit greatly from having their gender stereo types challenged.

I've clearly challenged his data for a) selection bias
and b) not taking account of steroid use

the median average American Male is 36 and obese, how many of the selected population met that critia, and how does that result apply to the average Male when adjusted for age life style issues. I'm willing to hazard a guess that Mr average fat middle aged USA is not pumping iron and injecting steriods, unless someone has data that he is ?

with out that its meaning less for establishing the average that every one keeps telling me they know, but wont reveal

 

[jobo]

The statement I made was that a woman starts with a disadvantage of not being able to hit as hard. I haven't gone back to my original post on that thought, so I'm not sure if I was clear on the implication: it would take more skill to overcome that disadvantage. Meaning that an average untrained woman, compared to an average untrained man, will need more skill to be able to fight against an average man.m pretty sure you understood all that, though.

ok, apart from needing some strengh to move the arm, punching power has little to do with how strong you are and much to do with accelerating the arm which is in the most part a neurological skill,and transfer of body weight. so, what advantage if any are you claim a allergy stronger Male beginner has over a female beginner based on this alleged strenth benifit and not including any of the above ?, an answer in jewels or a psi will do fine

 

[Gerry Seymour]

all the people who cant critically analyse data, which seems to be most, would benifit greatly from having their gender stereo types challenged.

I've clearly challenged his data for a) selection bias
and b) not taking account of steroid use

the median average American Male is 36 and obese, how many of the selected population met that critia, and how does that result apply to the average Male when adjusted for age life style issues. I'm willing to hazard a guess that Mr average fat middle aged USA is not pumping iron and injecting steriods, unless someone has data that he is ?

with out that its meaning less for establishing the average that every one keeps telling me they know, but wont reveal

You say you're challenging a bias, but have presented nothing to show that it is, in fact, a bias. Show some data that even suggests the conclusion isn't true. See, you're making a claim, so...

 

[Gerry Seymour]

ok, apart from needing some strengh to move the arm, punching power has little to do with how strong you are and much to do with accelerating the arm which is in the most part a neurological skill,and transfer of body weight. so, what advantage if any are you claim a allergy stronger Male beginner has over a female beginner based on this alleged strenth benifit and not including any of the above ?, an answer in jewels or a psi will do fine

Yeah. Take two people who are untrained (both for strength and skill) of roughly equal strength and mass train them both for skill, and one also for strength. We both know what happens. You're making claims without evidence.

 

[punisher73]

ok, apart from needing some strengh to move the arm, punching power has little to do with how strong you are and much to do with accelerating the arm which is in the most part a neurological skill,and transfer of body weight. so, what advantage if any are you claim a allergy stronger Male beginner has over a female beginner based on this alleged strenth benifit and not including any of the above ?, an answer in jewels or a psi will do fine

Predicting Straight Punch Force of Impact | House | Journal of the Oklahoma Association for Health, Physical Education, Recreation, and Dance

Baseline for discussion; from the abstract "Thus, it would appear that the greatest factors that determine the straight punch force of impact in untrained subjects are hand speed and 1RM strength in a movement pattern that emulates the straight punch."

I will point out and agree that it is a small sample size, but a good starting point.

 

[jobo]

You say you're challenging a bias, but have presented nothing to show that it is, in fact, a bias. Show some data that even suggests the conclusion isn't true. See, you're making a claim, so...

which claim is that ? the one were I said I was guessing ? , I declare my guess not pass them off as fact

 

[jobo]

Predicting Straight Punch Force of Impact | House | Journal of the Oklahoma Association for Health, Physical Education, Recreation, and Dance

Baseline for discussion; from the abstract "Thus, it would appear that the greatest factors that determine the straight punch force of impact in untrained subjects are hand speed and 1RM strength in a movement pattern that emulates the straight punch."

I will point out and agree that it is a small sample size, but a good starting point.

so what about round punches, dont those count as punches? so which excersise other than punching emulates a stpunches punch, dont say bench pressing as it nothing like the same movement

 

[Deleted member 39746]

Strength seems like it should reflect on how fast you can make a punch and how much force you can put behind it.

I cant remember but isnt speed(*see below) measured by how heavy and fast something is going? (i have speed/velocity in my head and i cant think of the right term)

So the mass of your fist isn't likely to change (significantly) but how fast you can move it would generate more force, and how fast is partially connected to how strong you are.

Its also kind of why relatively fat people can get more mass behind their punch/swing it faster as they have more mass around their stomach than relatively thin people. As we know muscle is denser than fat and muscle actually moves you.

Im not stating mass cant make up for lack of good technique to get good power or the reverse just both are factors and if you can do both well, you are better than one with good technique and not much strength and vice versa. Soley in the how much power you can give.

I may have totally neglected putting more body weight behind something but i never claimed to be good at sports science or body mechanics, just apply the formula of how to work out force to this discussion. I also had a TL;DR moment so excuse if it was covered.


*Addendum: Its force, so replace speed/velocity with force/power when appropriate. Whats what i forgot the name of.

 

[jobo]

Yeah. Take two people who are untrained (both for strength and skill) of roughly equal strength and mass train them both for skill, and one also for strength. We both know what happens. You're making claims without evidence.

well what will happen, they will both get better at punching, but are unlikely to develop at the same rate, or have the same outcome, unless you have some identical twins in mind and even then! so it will be impossible to tell 8n advance who will be the better puncher, and if it turns out the one who trained strengh is better, it's impossible to know he wouldn't have been better anyway and then theres the issue that our weight trainer may out on more body mass, so we cant tell if its strengh or extra mass that helping

all in all very inconclusive

 

[Gerry Seymour]

which claim is that ? the one were I said I was guessing ? , I declare my guess not pass them off as fact

Try again.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

well what will happen, they will both get better at punching, but are unlikely to develop at the same rate, or have the same outcome, unless you have some identical twins in mind and even then! so it will be impossible to tell 8n advance who will be the better puncher, and if it turns out the one who trained strengh is better, it's impossible to know he wouldn't have been better anyway and then theres the issue that our weight trainer may out on more body mass, so we cant tell if its strengh or extra mass that helping

all in all very inconclusive

So, you're entirely incapable of thought experiments, hypotheticals (the basis of hypotheses), and drawing conclusions from broad data. That's useful to know.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

I think I'll step out of this before it escalates again. This discussion is producing nothing useful anymore, for anyone on this forum.

 

[punisher73]

so what about round punches, dont those count as punches? so which excersise other than punching emulates a stpunches punch, dont say bench pressing as it nothing like the same movement

Prove that dumbbell bench pressing is nothing like a straight punch chambered at your side, since it is YOUR claim. You keep making all these little snide "what ifs" and add NOTHING to a discussion.

 

[jobo]

Prove that dumbbell bench pressing is nothing like a straight punch chambered at your side, since it is YOUR claim. You keep making all these little snide "what ifs" and add NOTHING to a discussion.

I didn't say DUMBELL bench press I said bench prese.

so just to be clear are you claiming the study cites dumbell bench presses as emulating a chambered punch. or is that a claim your making independently ? and are you claiming the study dealt with chambered punches at all, as i can see no reference to it ?

 

[punisher73]

I didn't say DUMBELL bench press I said bench prese.

so just to be clear are you claiming the study cites dumbell bench presses as emulating a chambered punch. or is that a claim your making independently ? and are you claiming the study dealt with chambered punches at all, as i can see no reference to it ?

Don't like the game do you? You said that bench press is nothing like the same movement. There are multiple variations of the "bench press", barbell bench press and dumbbell bench press just being two of them. So now it is on YOU to prove how it doesn't mimic a punch and prove it.

 

[jobo]

Don't like the game do you? You said that bench press is nothing like the same movement. There are multiple variations of the "bench press", barbell bench press and dumbbell bench press just being two of them. So now it is on YOU to prove how it doesn't mimic a punch and prove it.

yes I know and I said bench press that precludes any of the variation, that have another word in front of bench press. it doesn't mimic a punch coz your lay on a bench, a highly unlikely position to have to punch from and as mimic means to imitate, then you would have had to see someone else punch something from lay on a bench in order to imitate them ?

 

[punisher73]

yes I know and I said bench press that precludes any of the variation, that have another word in front of bench press. it doesn't mimic a punch coz your lay on a bench, a highly unlikely position to have to punch from

It doesn't preclude it. You are just lazy and said bench press and weren't descriptive of what you really meant. Or do you mean like other people do when they use commonly accepted terms as a point of reference? This is exactly what you do to other people and why people get so frustrated.

SO, if you want to change your premise that the strength shown in the standard barbell bench press doesn't translate to punching power, then prove your premise.

 

[jobo]

It doesn't preclude it. You are just lazy and said bench press and weren't descriptive of what you really meant. Or do you mean like other people do when they use commonly accepted terms as a point of reference? This is exactly what you do to other people and why people get so frustrated.

SO, if you want to change your premise that the strength shown in the standard barbell bench press doesn't translate to punching power, then prove your premise.

I didn't say that , I said the movement pattern was nothing like the same, to your unproven premise that 1 rm max translates to punching power.