size and strengh do not matter

[Enforcer-]

Someone in my other thread mentioned that no matter how much weigfht they lift, how strong they are or mascular this will not mean they have a stronger punch or can manhandle you in the clinch. I think size does matter, or else the David vs Goliath myth wouldn't mean anything.

[CaptinPickAxe]

David vs Goliath myth

Myth....

meaning not real...BB, you really need to get a life.

[Waxwood rod]

If two fighters of the same style and skill were to fight, my money would be on the larger, stonger of the two. Of course endurance is a factor as well.

[blooming lotus]

This argument has been thrashed out so many times here, and general concenus is that it ( size) matters.

I personally don't agree, and because of different personal traits and stregnths and weaknesses , outside influences etc, don't also buy that " same skill level" even exists.

BL

[Ray Pina]

I'll post some footage this week of a fight I had on Sat. It's an argument for both sides.

I was paired up with a guy who had 42 lbs on me, weight in at 240.

The first 1/3 of the fight he was moving me all over the place. He had a ton of power and fast too.

I changed and adopted and was able to losen him up and I believe I turned the tide (you can judge for youself when I post the vid.) I eventually got disqualified.

So, I think I was able to over come the guys size by changing tactics and saving energy in the beginning and not fighting back right away (learned that the hard way at my last San Da fight.)

At the same time, give me 42 lbs and make it even, that would have been interesting.

Give me 84 lbs, to where I have a 42 lbs advatange, I'd kick that guy out just like that.

Size matters! If you're the small guy, you better be smart .... and a little dirty doesn't hurt either.

[Icewater]

It's quite simple. Newton's second law of motion teaches us that force = mass X acceleration. So, given a greater mass (i.e. - the bigger person) with the same accelertaion will create greater force. Therefore size does matter.

The bigger they are, the harder they hit.

[David Jamieson]

size matters if the skeelz are there to go with it.

Having said that, I have outsparred, outboxed and plain beaten guys who were bigger than me on more than one occasion. some by over 50 pounds and some close to 100lbs larger with more time in learning kf than me.

I have also been beaten by guys who were both bigger and smaller than me.

It's in your head. Get over the suppositions and concentrate on your own skills.

[blooming lotus]

Originally posted by EvolutionFist

If you're the small guy, you better be smart .... and a little dirty doesn't hurt either.

so it doesn't matter then ?? :confused:

[blooming lotus]

Originally posted by Icewater
It's quite simple. Newton's second law of motion teaches us that force = mass X acceleration. So, given a greater mass (i.e. - the bigger person) with the same accelertaion will create greater force. Therefore size does matter.

The bigger they are, the harder they hit.

right, but if the small guy has the speed and accuracy, they shouldn't get to land enough to matter.

[Icewater]

BL - I never said that the smaller fella can't win, just that size makes a difference. Just like speed makes a difference, practise, halitosis, etc...

[lxtruong]

I'll chip in on this one. As a small light guy, I have to indeed say that I think size does matter. Is it an unsurmoutable obstacle? No. But when someone tops you by 6" and 70 lbs (my average opponent), they have a hell of a head start before you even start sparring. Perhaps in a street fight, where the number of potential targets is increased it's a different case, but that doesn't change the fact that they're at an advantage. I'd say that being at a disadvantage in height/weight requires a much greater amount of skill to win the match. As a rough estimate, for every 5-6 inches and/or 50 lbs, you need to be 25-50% better/more experienced/luckier than the other guy.

Oh, and don't give me a bunch of bull about "blah blah blah, but you're faster!" Faster means that you run into their fist/foot at a greater speed. Speed means nothing if you don't know where to go with it.

Haha. Or at least that's what I tell myself when I get tossed around by those aforementioned bigger guys.

[Ray Pina]

Size matters!

Would you rather fight a guy at 5'5 140lbs or a guy at 6'3 280? Enough said.

As for mass and speed, actually speed is more important when it comes to killing power. How big is a bawling ball? How big is a bullet?

Why does one hurt and the other kill? SPEED!!!!!!!!

E=MV^2 .... velocity is squared. That's where you want to put your money.

[Shaolinlueb]

when the smaller guy possesses no skill at all the larger guy will man handle him like his bihatch. when the smaller guy is very skilled in a martial art and compentant in warding off attackers then size might not matter.

[SevenStar]

Originally posted by blooming lotus
right, but if the small guy has the speed and accuracy, they shouldn't get to land enough to matter.

chances are the little guy won't be so fast that he NEVER gets hit...it will always matter. the little guy needs to be prepared for that.

[SevenStar]

Originally posted by EvolutionFist

As for mass and speed, actually speed is more important when it comes to killing power. How big is a bawling ball? How big is a bullet?

Why does one hurt and the other kill? SPEED!!!!!!!!

E=MV^2 .... velocity is squared. That's where you want to put your money.

yeah, but that's a mechanically produced speed vs. human produced. Put a bowling ball in a shotgun and shoot someone with it...

[blooming lotus]

no but learning how and where to take the hit , then having something to follow through with, makes a difference

[Ray Pina]

But if you shoot the bawling ball out of the shotgun, the killing power of it has increased now because of its change in velocity ... it has the same mass.

You can take a bullet and hammer it into the side of my car, it will smush flat like a pizza. Shoot that same buller, and it will go through the door.

Of course, this is a different argumenet. I think we both agree size matters. That's why you never see the featherweight box the super heavy weight.

[Mr Punch]

Originally posted by blooming lotus
right, but if the small guy has the speed and accuracy, they shouldn't get to land enough to matter. The implication here being that big guys (to quote Kungfu Cowboy) go to the Lumbering Oafs' University. I know some very very fast big guys (in the public realm anyone seen Semmy Schilt fight? Cro-cop?... Silva's no midget either... and these guys are very very fast). I also know some slow small guys.

Neither does accuracy have any relationship to size.

On a purely practical level, small guys simply have further to go in relation to their size, to cut the angles, to get out the way, even to get inside, when the bigger guy always has less far to go, to turn, to stretch. So any speed advantage they may have would be negated by distance needed to travel, duck etc.

On a biomechanical level surely big guys have more leverage, allowing for more power exerted through each joint link, musculature notwithstanding.

I'm assuming in the above model that we are talking reasonably fit, lean fighters. But that's just an assumption. There are so many variables there are always going to be some assumptions, but that doesn't mean that there is any evidence to suggest that being smaller has any possible advantages.

[MonkeySlap Too]

First courage, then strength, then technique.

2,000 years of crazy kung fu masters going at each other craftsman axes disagree that size and strength don't matter.

The ONLY time it pretty much doesn't matter is if the bigger/stronger guy has been trained in OYD or some such thing that renders even his most basic self-defense instincts useless.

This is not to say a smaller guy can't beat a bigger/stronger guy, but he's got to work harder to maximize his skills and attributes, as strength is the great compensator.

[IronFist]

Pretty much anyone who says it doesn't matter has never sparred, except for BL, who has knocked out a 400lb Samoan boxer while weighing only 100lbs herself. But for the rest of us mere mortals, size and strength make a huge difference.

Take anyone with any given skill level, add 40lbs of muscle to them and keep them at the same skill level and you've just created a better fighter.

Sorry, but that's how it works.

[IronFist]

Now qi blasts are another story.

[SevenStar]

Originally posted by EvolutionFist
But if you shoot the bawling ball out of the shotgun, the killing power of it has increased now because of its change in velocity ... it has the same mass.

You can take a bullet and hammer it into the side of my car, it will smush flat like a pizza. Shoot that same buller, and it will go through the door.

Of course, this is a different argumenet. I think we both agree size matters. That's why you never see the featherweight box the super heavy weight.

sure, it has the same mass - and will produce a much bigger hole in your body than the bullet will. sticking with the human produced speed example, if you throw a bowling ball at someone, how much damage will it do? If you throw a bullet at someone, how much damage will it do?

yeah, we both agree on the fact that size matters.

[SevenStar]

Originally posted by blooming lotus
no but learning how and where to take the hit , then having something to follow through with, makes a difference

you are still assuming slowness on the big guy's part. you may not be able to hit him in those areas. even if he is slow, his defense may be that good.

[wall]

LOL I never understand why people question this ...

Have they ever noticed that in every combat sport ... there are weight classes? There is a reason for that: size and strenght matter.

Of course, a far more skilled smaller guy can and will perhaps beat an out of shape unskilled big guy ... but assuming similar levels of skill and fitness then the size and strenght difference is a clear advantage ... thus weight classes :)

Even istinctively we know size matters: would you rather fight a 5'5" 60kg professional fighter or a 6'5" 120kg professional fighter? Or for that matter, a 5'5" 60kg average Joe or a 6'5" 120kg average Joe?


PS: about 15 years ago my 5'4" teacher fought off 2 x 6' attackers trying to rob him, so it can work, but he was extremely skilled and trained whilst they were some random bag snatchers.

[Reggie1]

What he said. Size and strength are definitely factors. I know this is nerdy, but it's a lot like a mathmatical equation. There are lots of things that go into a fight. Size, strength, experience, natural skill/ability, training, luck, etc. Even though a smaller man can beat a bigger man, the size is still a factor. Odds are when the smaller guy does win, it's because he is a more skilled fighter.

I'm a small guy (5'10", 160lbs), and I know I used to hate getting into it with bigger guys because you had to be that much better or you could get really hurt.

[FngSaiYuk]

Of course size matters... so does speed... so does skill... so does adaptability... so does knowledge... so does intelligence... etc etc etc

There is no such thing as 'all else being equal', the physics precludes that. Pound for pound, you'll find lighter guys w/the same body composition to be able to attain greater acceleration. The muscle mass, acceleration, force output curve draws a uUuish shape where there are points of lower and greater mass that have the highest output of force.

Anyways, throw into that genetics, food, rest, training focus, training time, etc and there's no way you'll ever come up with an 'all else being equal' scenario.

Personally, I'm a smaller guy... Given the same skill level, I tend to have the most difficult fighting someone just a little bit larger than I.

Also I stay away from little guys w/no necks and muscled thighs as thick as their waists... they fight dirty.... I can run from bigger guys...

[FatherDog]

I liken a fight to a scale. One of those old style ones where you put weights on each side.

You have a weight for strength, a weight for size, a weight for skill, a weight for agility, a weight for endurance, a weight for luck, etc, etc, etc.

Just because the "strength" or "size" weights on the other guy's side are heavier than yours doesn't mean he'll win... but if they are, the other weights on your side had better be heavier than his.

Anyone who says the "strength" and "size" weights don't matter has never done any significant amounts of sparring or fighting.

[blooming lotus]

Originally posted by Mat
The implication here being that big guys (to quote Kungfu Cowboy) go to the Lumbering Oafs' University. I know some very very fast big guys (in the public realm anyone seen Semmy Schilt fight? Cro-cop?... Silva's no midget either... and these guys are very very fast). I also know some slow small guys.

Neither does accuracy have any relationship to size.

On a purely practical level, small guys simply have further to go in relation to their size, to cut the angles, to get out the way, even to get inside, when the bigger guy always has less far to go, to turn, to stretch. So any speed advantage they may have would be negated by distance needed to travel, duck etc.

On a biomechanical level surely big guys have more leverage, allowing for more power exerted through each joint link, musculature notwithstanding.

I'm assuming in the above model that we are talking reasonably fit, lean fighters. But that's just an assumption. There are so many variables there are always going to be some assumptions, but that doesn't mean that there is any evidence to suggest that being smaller has any possible advantages.

when we add the speed can expect in the trade off on size, the equation changes again. Can we stick to the argumement pls??

[blooming lotus]

Ps: on the last post, i've done both and stick to my argument.

[SevenStar]

he is sticking to it.

[FatherDog]

Originally posted by FatherDog

Anyone who says the "strength" and "size" weights don't matter has never done any significant amounts of sparring or fighting.


Originally posted by blooming lotus
This argument has been thrashed out so many times here, and general concenus is that it ( size) matters.

I personally don't agree

[Serpent]

This is actually quite a useful litmus test. In general, if blooming lotus doesn't agree with something then it's mostly likely to be absolutely correct. If bl does agree with it, then it's most likely complete bollocks.

[Mr Punch]

Originally posted by blooming lotus
when we add the speed can expect in the trade off on size, the equation changes again. Can we stick to the argumement pls?? You quote my whole post, and seem to completely miss the main point... which was there is nothing to suggest small guys are going to be faster than big guys given their proportional musculature in relation to their frame size. At least, I assume that's what you're objecting to, but from your above post you seem to have missed out a word or two, resulting in a lack of comprehensibility.

And apart from that, would you like to point out specifically where my post deviates from the point of this thread?

[Mr Punch]

Originally posted by blooming lotus
Ps: on the last post, i've done both and stick to my argument. Done what?

And what was your argument?

First you stated your opinion which was different to that of most of the people on the board. Fair enough.

Then you stated:
right, but if the small guy has the speed and accuracy, they shouldn't get to land enough to matter.Which is a hypothetical position when
(a) nobody was absolutely denying the assumption, but did question it, by suggesting that most fast people will get hit once or twice anyway.
(b) although there is nothing to refute this position (as it is hypothetical) there is nothing concrete to back it up either. It is not an argument.

The whole point about there being many variables is that your above assumption is just one of those variables... and in general those variables are not affected positively by being of smaller stature.

And then:
no but learning how and where to take the hit , then having something to follow through with, makes a differencewhich is also fine but there is nothing to prevent large people from doing this either.

I'm not picking on you but since you are the only person presenting a case for the smaller person having an advantage, in the interest of discussion I'm interested to see why you believe this.

[blooming lotus]

generally speaking, the larger fighter will not be as fast as your av smaller trainee putting in the same speed training hrs because he is resricted in rom, especially when we are not talking directly lateral striking. I'm sure someone will find a bs reason the argue about that, but either way. As long as my skills are keeping me alive, I'm sweet.

cheers

[Serpent]

Originally posted by blooming lotus
generally speaking, the larger fighter will not be as fast as your av smaller trainee putting in the same speed training hrs because he is resricted in rom, especially when we are not talking directly lateral striking. I'm sure someone will find a bs reason the argue about that, but either way. As long as my skills are keeping me alive, I'm sweet.

cheers
You see? Complete bollocks.

[cerebus]

Her basic argument for EVERYTHING is something like: "As long as I believe what I believe, I'm going to keep believing what I believe, 'cause that's what I believe."

As you can see, she's the master of logical and deductive thinking (NOT! :p ).

Peace on you, Michelle! :p

[blooming lotus]

Originally posted by Serpent
You see? Complete bollocks.


:rolleyes: another of your fields of expertise I see . You know, the longer I ride these boards, and the more of your posts I read, the more I see how little you yourself actually know.

Peace

[cerebus]

Peace on you, michelle. :p :p :p

[Mr Punch]

Originally posted by blooming lotus
generally speaking, the larger fighter will not be as fast as your av smaller trainee putting in the same speed training hrs because he is resricted in rom, especially when we are not talking directly lateral striking. I'm sure someone will find a bs reason the argue about that, but either way. As long as my skills are keeping me alive, I'm sweet.

cheers No bs here, just want to know, as I did before why you think that a bigger person's rate of movement is lower, and now I' d like to know esp why this applies esp to direct lateral striking...

When you have time, cheers.

[blooming lotus]

not rate, range. But on speed , if you look at the science of muscle fibes and what capacities and characteristics they posses, you will understand my point

[scotty1]

Or not.

[blooming lotus]

( heavy sigh) :rolleyes:

or not

[Serpent]

Originally posted by blooming lotus
not rate, range. But on speed , if you look at the science of muscle fibes and what capacities and characteristics they posses, you will understand my point
OK, I'm going out on a limb here. bl, are you suggesting that bigger people have a higher percentage of slow twitch muscle fibres? I'm just trying to decipher the blooming lotusese here.

[Icewater]

Originally posted by Mat
No bs here, just want to know, as I did before why you think that a bigger person's rate of movement is lower, and now I' d like to know esp why this applies esp to direct lateral striking...

When you have time, cheers.

Actually the troll is correct about larger people being pre-disposed to being slower although I think her opinion will be based in less fact. You see, the body is composed of 2 types of muscle fiber, fast-twitch and slow-twitch. Slow twitch fibers are the larger muscles in the body and are typically used for maintaining posture and provide most of our muscle endurance. Fast twitch muscles are the ones used in quick contractions and relaxations that give a person speed. When fast twitch muscles are larger, they naturally take longer to contract and relax because there are simply more fibers to pull and relax. Bigger or stronger people naturally have more muscle mass, which means they have larger fast twitch fiber, which means they are typically slower than a smaller person.

To keep it in perspective, when you throw a punch or kick you use about 1/2 fast twitch and 1/2 slow twitch. So your speed muscles make up a great deal of your movement.

Now that being said, people have different genetic makeup. And even larger fast twitch muscles can contract faster if they are trained to become lean.

Also as an FYI - fast twitch muscles do not use oxygen and sugar as much as the slow twitch muscles. Typically they use Glycogen which is stored in muscles and the liver and generated by the breakdown of carbohydrates. So if you want to have a longer burst of speed, stay away from Atkins! But I digress...

[lxtruong]

And I just thought that big people tended to be slower because they had more body mass to move. :) It seems easier to move your leg really fast when it's short and skinny and harder when he's large and long. But that might be too much common sense.

[scotty1]

But equally there is more muscle there to move it!

[FngSaiYuk]

Originally posted by scotty1
But equally there is more muscle there to move it!

Yes, but the amount of power you gain compared to the amount of mass you gain ends up reducing the top accelaration attainable.

Just look around at other animals. The smaller animals are faster than the larger animals. Hunting carnivores tend to be the fastest animals. In general, the smaller ones are faster than the larger ones. It's basic physics.

Although, if you do want to reduce everything to calculation, there's an enormous amount of variables to consider. But in general the amount of energy required to move the larger mass at the same accleration is far greater than the smaller mass, and the graph curve of the amount of force to additional muscle mass is on a downward slope.

Again, this is JUST for raw power to mass. There are a LOT of other variables, and your genetics and training will affect these variables. Even if you take identical twins, the amount of energy and time involved in 'bulking' up one of them for power is time and energy which the other one will be using for advancing skill, knowledge, speed, etc. Who will be a better fighter? Honestly, I dont know... just like which style is the 'best' or produces the best fighters.

It would REALLY be intersting to have an army of clones to carry out controlled experiments on what really would be the ideal training, muscle mass, fighting style, etc.

[Toby]

Icewater, I dunno where you got your information from, but there's not much fact in there. There are three predominant muscle fiber types: Type I (slow twitch), Type IIa (fast twitch oxidative glycolytic) and Type IIb (fast twitch glycolytic). There aren't Type I muscles, Type IIa muscles and Type IIb muscles, there are different fibers within muscles.

I can't be bothered replying to the rest of the stuff in your post, but suffice it to say that fast twitch fibers are responsible for fast, short duration movements. The shorter the duration, the more recruitment of Type IIb fibers. Big people aren't going to have slower Type IIb fibers than small people. Also, you want more IIb fibers in order to move faster. Gah, lots of mistakes, too much to correct.

People, search the training forum for more info on muscle composition topics. A good one is probably "Muscle basics" :D. It also documents the rise to fame of our own Eyebrows.

[Icewater]

Originally posted by Toby
Icewater, I dunno where you got your information from, but there's not much fact in there. There are three predominant muscle fiber types: Type I (slow twitch), Type IIa (fast twitch oxidative glycolytic) and Type IIb (fast twitch glycolytic). There aren't Type I muscles, Type IIa muscles and Type IIb muscles, there are different fibers within muscles.

Flame debunk #1: Muscles consist of fibers, so obviously when I say 'muscle' I mean 'muscle fiber' please don't argue semantics when you know what I mean. For those that did not put that together, I apologize.

Flame debunk #2: You are correct. I was lumping the type i and ii fast twitch 'muscle fibers' into the same category for simplicity sake. But if you want to get into it...

Slow twitch muscle is technically Type I, and Fast Twitch is broken into Types IIa and IIb. Whats the difference?

Well, Type IIa muscle is red and does not fatigue quickly. It is useful for quick contractions, but not as quick or powerful as Type IIb is capable of. If you do endurance training, you will actually build up this type of muscle.

Type IIb muscle is white and is prone to fatigue but has extremely fast contraction velocity. A comparatitive majority of these muscles can be found in the arms. These type muscles are used for explosiveness.


I can't be bothered replying to the rest of the stuff in your post, but suffice it to say that fast twitch fibers are responsible for fast, short duration movements.

Isn't that what I said? "Fast twitch muscles are the ones used in quick contractions and relaxations that give a person speed."


The shorter the duration, the more recruitment of Type IIb fibers. Big people aren't going to have slower Type IIb fibers than small people.

I didn't say big people had slower muscles, I said they had MORE muscle. "Bigger or stronger people naturally have more muscle mass, which means they have larger fast twitch fiber"


Also, you want more IIb fibers in order to move faster.

Actually, you want more IIb muscle to move more powerfully. Larger amounts of IIb will simply not exaust as quickly gathered to move more mass because they are not asked to exhaust their supply of ATP (muscle energy juice) as quickly. However, the entire muscle will still contract meaning that having more type IIb muscle to gather simply takes longer than gathering less type IIb muscle.


Gah, lots of mistakes, too much to correct.
I work in a cube, I got time :P


People, search the training forum for more info on muscle composition topics. A good one is probably "Muscle basics" :D. It also documents the rise to fame of our own Eyebrows. [/B]

Yup. Research is a wonderful thing.

[IronFist]

Wait, when you guys say "bigger people" are you talking about fat people, or large, trained, muscular people?

[IronFist]

Also, I don't know about speed, but generally speaking, as you get bigger your absolute strength goes up but your relative strength to your bodyweight goes down. This is why there are 120lb people that can squat like 400 lbs (over 3x their bodyweight), but there are no 400lb people that can squat 1200lbs.

I don't know how speed changes with size, and there are some people who say "speed training" is BS because you can't measure it or something. I don't remember the argument. I'll have to look it up.

[Mutant]

size does matter (maybe your gal's been lying to you?)

because comparing different people brings in so many variables that it clouds the arguement, consider it like this:
if were able to take an exact relplica of yourself and multiply its size by a factor of 1.25, would it be a fair fight if you had to fight it? if youre 200 and suddenly had to fight a clone of yourself that was scaled up to weigh in at 250, i think you'd be in for a world of hurt, whether fast-twitch muscles factored in to your advantage or not.

but the real question is this: if your fast-twitch muscles were decreased by 50%, would you be half-fast? ;)

[Icewater]

Originally posted by MutantWarrior
but the real question is this: if your fast-twitch muscles were decreased by 50%, would you be half-fast? ;)


Hahaha....

[GunnedDownAtrocity]

im as little as they come and ill stab you in the throat. (http://www.knife-depot.com/images/product/3_752.jpg)

i win.

[delibandit]

I agree, size matters, but size can be overcome with timing, precision, coordination, and whole body force. Of course it's not easy, but it's why little Chinese Taiji masters can beat a much larger and stronger opponent.

[Serpent]

Hey Icewater, you should listen to Toby. There is so much wrong in your posts that I can't be bothered to go through it all, but please go and re-educate yourself on the subject and get back to us.

Here's some food for thought: Compare the Ethiopian marathon runner and the Olympic sprinter. One is large, extremely muscular and very fast. The other is very small, slim and has a great capacity for endurance, but he's not very good with explosiveness and speed.

Which is which?

[Royal Dragon]

Ok, this may have been said, but like the "internal/External" argument, this one is also very simple.

If you have two fighters, the one who has more over all will win.


See, simple. Add skill, speed, strength, size or what have you all into a box, and compare that box to the box your opponent is carrying. If his box is bigger, you're goi'n down.

End of discussion.


Royal Dragon has spoken.


















:p

[FngSaiYuk]

Originally posted by Serpent
Here's some food for thought: Compare the Ethiopian marathon runner and the Olympic sprinter. One is large, extremely muscular and very fast. The other is very small, slim and has a great capacity for endurance, but he's not very good with explosiveness and speed.

Which is which?

Better food for thought... Which basketball players are the QUICKEST... the small guys or the big guys?

[FngSaiYuk]

And yes... everyone here basically agrees... size DOES MATTER.

It's just that size is not the ONLY thing that matters.

Every argument here concedes that size matters.

[IronFist]

Originally posted by delibandit
I agree, size matters, but size can be overcome with timing, precision, coordination, and whole body force. Of course it's not easy, but it's why little Chinese Taiji masters can beat a much larger and stronger opponent.

They can overcome big bumbling n00bs that go to their seminars, but can they overcome bigger, trained opponents?

[Serpent]

Originally posted by FngSaiYuk
And yes... everyone here basically agrees... size DOES MATTER.

It's just that size is not the ONLY thing that matters.

Every argument here concedes that size matters.
Except bl, of course. ;)

[blooming lotus]

Originally posted by Serpent
Hey Icewater, you should listen to Toby. There is so much wrong in your posts that I can't be bothered to go through it all, but please go and re-educate yourself on the subject and get back to us.

Here's some food for thought: Compare the Ethiopian marathon runner and the Olympic sprinter. One is large, extremely muscular and very fast. The other is very small, slim and has a great capacity for endurance, but he's not very good with explosiveness and speed.

Which is which?

To begin with Serpie , you've already declared you're not even qualified to talk, so stfu and the informed folk hash it out! ;) :rolleyes:

Secondly Toby: larger fibre nothing, I'm talking amount of particular fibre making up that muscle.

AS for fat ppl : larger more muscular ,
either way science says they're hitting harder and slower and us little folk are faster and more accurate.

either way, know your weakness and exploit your strength,

or then again, pretend you're invincible and get your as* kicked outta stupidty ;)

[Serpent]

Originally posted by blooming lotus
To begin with Serpie , you've already declared you're not even qualified to talk, so stfu and the informed folk hash it out! ;) :rolleyes:
You want to point out where I've declared that?


AS for fat ppl : larger more muscular ,
either way science says they're hitting harder and slower and us little folk are faster and more accurate.

Wrong!


or then again, pretend you're invincible and get your as* kicked outta stupidty ;)
Sounds like you.

[Toby]

Icewater, I wasn't flaming.

In your original post, the 1st paragraph implied that there are type I and type II muscles as opposed to fibers. It might be semantic, but it's an important distinction. If you had e.g. all the leg muscles being type I then you'd never get any benefit from strength or speed training of them. You might as well go for a walk. Just thought I'd point it out.

The 1st paragraph also implied that more fast twitch fibers makes a person move slower. I don't get this at all. So you're saying that in order to maximise speed you should have no fast twitch fibers at all, only slow twitch fibers? IIRC there is some evidence that endurance training causes IIa fibers to take on I characteristics (and also obviously detrains IIb fibers). So why don't all speed athletes train endurance to increase their speed (by effectively reducing the number of II fibers)? Doesn't make sense.


Originally posted by Icewater
Also as an FYI - fast twitch muscles do not use oxygen and sugar as much as the slow twitch muscles. Typically they use Glycogen which is stored in muscles and the liver and generated by the breakdown of carbohydrates. So if you want to have a longer burst of speed, stay away from Atkins! But I digress... Here's where the three fiber model is important. As an example, IIb fibers don't use glycogen at all. They use ATP (Adeno Tri-something phosphate IIRC). Once the muscle's limited supply of ATP is used up, more can be quickly synthesized by CP (Creatine Phosphate) combining with ADP (Adeno Di (?)-something phosphate). Creatine comes from either supplements or the ingestion of other muscle, i.e. eating meat, which Atkins is famous for. So eating Atkins-style might help IIb fiber performance. Of course, IIb fibers are typically used in exercises lasting < 20s, so your comment about "longer burst of speed" and avoiding Atkins was correct since IIa fibers use glycogen and IIa are important for longer duration contractions (20-60s IIRC).

[The Willow Sword]

the initial question was does size and strength matter?

i am yawning at all this "muscle fiber" biology nonsense. whereas the statements are well thought out or copied and pasted to make it seem like one has knowledge in some areas it still does not address the initial question "DOES Size and strength matter"?

well yes it does as a matter of fact. in general it really does,,no matter what size you are and what strength level you are it really does matter the size and the strength. because if you dont have size then you dont have strength and if you dont have strength but you still have size then you are really fuked now arent you? well what about strength and no size? did you ever think of THAT? no size but strength,,now there is an issue that needs to be discussed here. i think that should be the new topic

"Strength but no size" :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:



















































hehehe im not really serious,,just bored its late here,,,peace,,TWS:p

[GunnedDownAtrocity]

nah ... its a valid topic but one that can be answered concisely and with little thought.

and then everyone will say the same exact thing over and over for five pages disagreeing on everything they agree on.

[blooming lotus]

Originally posted by Toby
Icewater, I wasn't flaming.

So you're saying that in order to maximise speed you should have no fast twitch fibers at all, only slow twitch fibers?

you know that is a ludicrous statement and not what he's saying at all. As usual, you twist everyone's words for entertainment and to he*l with the topic :rolleyes:

[blooming lotus]

Originally posted by Toby
Icewater, I wasn't flaming.


Here's where the three fiber model is important. As an example, IIb fibers don't use glycogen at all.

isn't is funny how my books and even the site I recently posted seem to think that muscles and cells in general need glycogen present at all times??? lol.Guess the trick waas that we all need a half finished phd to make half near entertaining comments. you don't make sense, not in your first paragraph, not in your second and definately not in your third. hold up, that first, satirical as it was, made sense. that one I'll pay ;)

[blooming lotus]

Originally posted by Toby
Icewater, I wasn't flaming.

ATP (Adeno Tri-something phosphate IIRC).

obviously an informed piece of information !! :rolleyes:

[blooming lotus]

Originally posted by Toby
Icewater, I wasn't flaming.
So eating Atkins-style might help IIb fiber performance. Of course, IIb fibers are typically used in exercises lasting < 20s, so your comment about "longer burst of speed" and avoiding Atkins was correct since IIa fibers use glycogen and IIa are important for longer duration contractions (20-60s IIRC).

and apparently , protein, especially from animal scources in definately of no benifit what so ever to any other muscle fibre, or bodily cell, even though when you look at models on cell building, repair and so forth, broken down protein is what binds together with our broken down carb to join and create new tissue ;)

nice comment einstein

[blooming lotus]

and as we know, aikins diets are void of glycogen... and still ( even though created by doctor ( :- IE , other qualified health student) don't permit good health and advocate that all your protein should be dried egg whites ( of the only sources w/out sugar) and gylcogen is neglegant........


:rolleyes:

what do you say to that??

[Toby]

Sorry Eyebrows, I was going by memory. ATP == adenosine triphosphate. ADP == adenosine diphosphate. CP == creatine phosphate. I thought most "health professionals" like you would know what ATP is anyway ;).

[Toby]

Originally posted by blooming lotus
isn't is funny how my books and even the site I recently posted seem to think that muscles and cells in general need glycogen present at all times??? lol."When muscle contracts, ATP provides energy by being broken down to ADP in the following reaction with the help of an enzyme called an ATPase:

ATP -> ADP + Pi + energy

Within a muscle, there is about 6 seconds worth of ATP stored which can be used for immediate energy. For activity to continue past 6 seconds, ATP must be generated through various other reactions. The first of these is through the creatine phosphate system.

"... stored in the muscle is a substance called creatine phosphate (CP). This provides a phosphate molecule to ADP to regenerate ATP so that muscular activity can continue. CP donates its high energy phosphate molecule to ADP to regenerate ATP via an enzyme called creatine kinase as shown:

ADP + CP -> ATP + creatine

There is enough stored CP in a normal muscle to provide energy for approximately the first 20 seconds of muscular activity at which time intramuscular CP is depleted. The CP system operates in the absence of oxygen (it is anaerobic) and can provide energy very quickly during exercise. ... The ATP-CP system is used to fuel maximal intensity activities of a duration of 20 seconds or less such as low rep weight training or sprinting.

"For activity to continue past 20 seconds, the body must rely on other fuel sources to generate ATP. One of these is the breakdown of blood glucose or glycogen ..., which is called glycolysis." (McDonald, L. 1998. The Ketogenic Diet)

Maybe your books neglect to discuss strength training. That's no surprise. It took you a long time to understand the whole PTP training protocol when you first came here. The above quotation directly relates to my training methods. Energy comes not from glycogen, but from ATP and creatine. Hence my comment that a ketogenic diet (typically high in meat and hence creatine phosphate) can provide "energy" by synthesizing ATP in the absence of glycogen. Glycogen only becomes important in activity lasting longer than 20s.

Any other comments Eyebrows?

[Icewater]

Holy mother of posts BL. Give the guy a break. He's got some good points in there.

And a quick clarification about ATP, because all fat people should know this...

ATP is the source of energy for muscle contraction and I admit that I am not exactly sure how that energy is spent, but I'm sure of how it is created.

Different muscle groups use different energy sources to create ATP. The way you use these muscles depend on how ATP is generated.

When you are heavy lifting ATP is created quickly by burning CP (Creatine Phosphate) but is used up quickly. This is why you can't maintain max power for more than a few seconds.

Once the CP is used up you start burning pure glucose which is stored in your liver and muscles. You burn this up in a short period of time (a few seconds to a couple of minutes).

Pay attention because here is where Atkins/MA and some good weight control vs. exercise stuff comes in....

For most other exercises ATP is generated by (in this order) by carbohydrates, metabolized fat, and amino acids. This is why your body stores fat so that it can have reserves after your supply of carbohydrate ATP (glycogen) is gone. The body burns glycogen first because it is more efficient than fat or amino acids and stores enough in your system for a couple of hours of aerobic activity. Once depleted, your body uses stored fat and amino for energy. This is why Atkins is so effective. By eliminating your carb intake you effectively eliminate your most efficient process for making ATP until your body supply of glycogen is diminished. This causes your body to burn fat instead. While this is a good weight loss program, it is not the greatest for a martial artist who needs the more efficient glycogen ATP process to endure more aerobic exercise.

[Meat Shake]

"that we all need a half finished phd to make half near entertaining comments."

Followed by...

"you don't make sense,"


:rolleyes: :o

[FngSaiYuk]

Originally posted by blooming lotus
and as we know, aikins diets are void of glycogen... and still ( even though created by doctor ( :- IE , other qualified health student) don't permit good health and advocate that all your protein should be dried egg whites ( of the only sources w/out sugar) and gylcogen is neglegant........


:rolleyes:

what do you say to that??

Really, the Atkins & other low carb diets are for people with fat stores who want to reduce their fat stores efficiently. They are NOT for martial artists in heavy training - or really, ANY athlete in heavy training.

Low carb diets limit the primary source of long term energy which your body would use up. Once your body uses up it's immediate sugar supply, it uses carbs as its energy source... if carbs have been exhausted it then uses up the stored energy - fat. Finally, if there's little fat available, it'll start using available aminos and begin converting protein into aminos, ultimately your muscles (if you're starving yourself).

Anyways, in a high physical activity forum (such as...hmmm... martial arts forums?), these low carb diets really should only be brought up when someone is asking about losing large amounts of fat stores quickly so that they can begin their physical training, if the large amounts of fat stores are a hindrance - some people have a very difficult time when their frame supports excess amounts of fat storage ... their muscles and joints just can't handle the stress of heavy activity.

[FngSaiYuk]

Originally posted by Icewater
Pay attention because here is where Atkins/MA and some good weight control vs. exercise stuff comes in....

...



Yah, what he said...

::grin::

[Ray Pina]

Blooming Lotus, one of your posts talked about how you "survived" or are still hear, and another talked about kicking butt, which raised this question:

How big are you (weight)? How big is the biggest person you have beaten (weight)? Want to know how far you can stretch it.

Otherwise, these claims that smaller people are faster and more accurate sounds like talk from a small person trying to convince themself that everything will be alright when that time comes. Has it come? What was the outcome?

This is not to say that if a guy is bigger he will win, otherwise we don't need to train, just step on a scale and hand the guy your money. But you almost make it sound like being 50lbs lighter is an advantage.

[Toby]

Originally posted by Icewater
Holy mother of posts BL. Give the guy a break.:D Don't worry Icewater. I can handle Eyebrows as well as anyone can. I've got a long history of correcting her crap. She, OTOH, has a long history of insanity and incorrect information.

Thanks for the info about other methods of ATP synthesis. I only mentioned the short term one because it served my argument. I couldn't be bothered trying to describe all of them.

[Toby]

Originally posted by EvolutionFist
How big are you (weight)? How big is the biggest person you have beaten (weight)?E-fist, she is around 90lb. She has beaten a 450lb Samoan boxer.















Excuse me while I roflmao :p.

[Ego_Extrodinaire]

Boys,

No hard and fast rules on this one. Its true the larger you are the more inertia you have to overcome. However, potentially you can carry more muscle mass to move efficiently. Small does not always mean you can move fast, depends on things like power to weight ratio although you have the benefit of less initia.

What it does suggest is a difference in strategy one would apply if you're a smaller person taking on someone larger in a street fight.

If it is in a ring contest, then most likely the bigger guy will win. Say a boxing match which restricts the contest to a frontal confrontation disadvantages the smaller guy even if he has better mobility.

[SevenStar]

Originally posted by Toby
"When muscle contracts, ATP provides energy by being broken down to ADP in the following reaction with the help of an enzyme called an ATPase:

ATP -> ADP + Pi + energy

Within a muscle, there is about 6 seconds worth of ATP stored which can be used for immediate energy. For activity to continue past 6 seconds, ATP must be generated through various other reactions. The first of these is through the creatine phosphate system.

"... stored in the muscle is a substance called creatine phosphate (CP). This provides a phosphate molecule to ADP to regenerate ATP so that muscular activity can continue. CP donates its high energy phosphate molecule to ADP to regenerate ATP via an enzyme called creatine kinase as shown:

ADP + CP -> ATP + creatine

There is enough stored CP in a normal muscle to provide energy for approximately the first 20 seconds of muscular activity at which time intramuscular CP is depleted. The CP system operates in the absence of oxygen (it is anaerobic) and can provide energy very quickly during exercise. ... The ATP-CP system is used to fuel maximal intensity activities of a duration of 20 seconds or less such as low rep weight training or sprinting.

"For activity to continue past 20 seconds, the body must rely on other fuel sources to generate ATP. One of these is the breakdown of blood glucose or glycogen ..., which is called glycolysis." (McDonald, L. 1998. The Ketogenic Diet)

Maybe your books neglect to discuss strength training. That's no surprise. It took you a long time to understand the whole PTP training protocol when you first came here. The above quotation directly relates to my training methods. Energy comes not from glycogen, but from ATP and creatine. Hence my comment that a ketogenic diet (typically high in meat and hence creatine phosphate) can provide "energy" by synthesizing ATP in the absence of glycogen. Glycogen only becomes important in activity lasting longer than 20s.

Any other comments Eyebrows?


0wn3d

[Meat Shake]

BL is even better than Bush at ignoring facts.

[Serpent]

All the recent posts by Fong Sai Yuk, Toby and even Icewater this time are excellent. This is all scientific fact, verifiable by published evidence from research studies. Well done guys - great work.

blooming lotus seems to have gone very quiet.... ;)

[blooming lotus]

Originally posted by Toby
Sorry Eyebrows, I was going by memory. ATP == adenosine triphosphate. ADP == adenosine diphosphate. CP == creatine phosphate. I thought most "health professionals" like you would know what ATP is anyway ;).

I know what atp is, and I know how phosphates contibute to anabolism of proteined enzemes. Fact is though, like yourself on this matter, not everyone else has the same information, but if we walk through step by step, maybe we can come back to "group interest" and learnings. :cool:

[blooming lotus]

Originally posted by Toby
"When muscle contracts, ATP provides energy by being broken down to ADP in the following reaction with the help of an enzyme called an ATPase:

ATP -> ADP + Pi + energy



Any other comments Eyebrows?

as a matter of fact yes! and your "theories on the respective cartb / protein to muscle bonding/repair and growth processes??

[blooming lotus]

Originally posted by Icewater
Holy mother of posts BL. Give the guy a break. He's got some good points in there.

And a quick clarification about ATP, because all fat people should know this...

ATP is the source of energy for muscle contraction and I admit that I am not exactly sure how that energy is spent, but I'm sure of how it is created.

Different muscle groups use different energy sources to create ATP. The way you use these muscles depend on how ATP is generated.

When you are heavy lifting ATP is created quickly by burning CP (Creatine Phosphate) but is used up quickly. This is why you can't maintain max power for more than a few seconds.

Once the CP is used up you start burning pure glucose which is stored in your liver and muscles. You burn this up in a short period of time (a few seconds to a couple of minutes).

Pay attention because here is where Atkins/MA and some good weight control vs. exercise stuff comes in....

For most other exercises ATP is generated by (in this order) by carbohydrates, metabolized fat, and amino acids. This is why your body stores fat so that it can have reserves after your supply of carbohydrate ATP (glycogen) is gone. The body burns glycogen first because it is more efficient than fat or amino acids and stores enough in your system for a couple of hours of aerobic activity. Once depleted, your body uses stored fat and amino for energy. This is why Atkins is so effective. By eliminating your carb intake you effectively eliminate your most efficient process for making ATP until your body supply of glycogen is diminished. This causes your body to burn fat instead. While this is a good weight loss program, it is not the greatest for a martial artist who needs the more efficient glycogen ATP process to endure more aerobic exercise.

that's not exactly true either because depending on the gi of your carbs, your body's using what's in it's most brokendown/ bioavailable high content source/state first and unfortunately for your statement, if your protein is broken down, and you've delpteted the bulk of your simple carbs, you're using your protein sorce then comming back for the rest when it's ready.

[blooming lotus]

Originally posted by FngSaiYuk
Really, the Atkins & other low carb diets are for people with fat stores who want to reduce their fat stores efficiently. They are NOT for martial artists in heavy training - or really, ANY athlete in heavy training.

.

even that statement has been refuted with bs uneducated arguments, but I'm dexterous, so let's continue ........

[Serpent]

Originally posted by blooming lotus
that's not exactly true either because depending on the gi of your carbs, your body's using what's in it's most brokendown/ bioavailable high content source/state first and unfortunately for your statement, if your protein is broken down, and you've delpteted the bulk of your simple carbs, you're using your protein sorce then comming back for the rest when it's ready.
Bull****.

[blooming lotus]

Originally posted by EvolutionFist
Blooming Lotus, one of your posts talked about how you "survived" or are still hear, and another talked about kicking butt, which raised this question:

How big are you (weight)? How big is the biggest person you have beaten (weight)? Want to know how far you can stretch it.

Otherwise, these claims that smaller people are faster and more accurate sounds like talk from a small person trying to convince themself that everything will be alright when that time comes. Has it come? What was the outcome?

This is not to say that if a guy is bigger he will win, otherwise we don't need to train, just step on a scale and hand the guy your money. But you almost make it sound like being 50lbs lighter is an advantage.

today 45 - 44 1/2 kgs..... by the time i get home maybe 46.

the biggest person or heaviest was my 200 ish kg ( 150 at most conservative ) uncle.and yah .it's true, but like a mother possed , he was sexing my little sister and I had beef.

it has come , over and over and over.I'm still here and the most damage ever done, were chipped teeth , cracked faces , and a lost eye (none of which were mine).

Ps: 45 kgs : 200kgs = ratio of 4 : 1 +.........

[blooming lotus]

Originally posted by SevenStar
0wn3d

say the folks who forgot to study what they wre claiming to know about! :rolleyes:

Of course you don't understand......... you would needed to've gone to school on it or accepted teaching ( new and most likely different information) min for that one!

( heavy sigh)

[blooming lotus]

finally, it's becomming apparent I am the only one who is qualified to give the correct on this topic so maintain your ignorance or consider a fact and what makes it true for a few mos ;)

[Toby]

Originally posted by blooming lotus
... your "theories on the respective cartb / protein to muscle bonding/repair and growth processes?? My other post wasn't a theory. It was a quotation from a book that is itself a summation of research papers and books. I posted that because you implied I didn't now what I was talking about because I didn't remember the full name for the abbreviation ATP. Like you so frequently do :rolleyes:, I thought I might book lern everyone else.

On this carb/protein topic of yours, I'm unsure. For my purposes it's enough to know that protein is used to repair and build muscle and carbs are used to fuel (longer than 20s) muscle activity. Like the difference between a mechanic and petrol with respect to a car. I don't think that carbohydrates are used for growth at all, but I don't know for sure. Obviously you (a) think carbs are used for growth and (b) think you know for sure. Repair? Only insofar as muscle glycogen is replenished. Bonding? See growth.

[Toby]

Originally posted by blooming lotus
finally, it's becomming apparent I am the only one who is qualified to give the correct on this topic so maintain your ignorance or consider a fact and what makes it true for a few mos ;) You wonder why you're so unpopular. The height of your arrogance occasionally surprises even me. Conversely, the depths of your stupidity rarely does.

[blooming lotus]

food is much more than petrol, but also building block for the engine and structure you're running.

just returning your maturity on your first comment of last post and yah, I knew your point, but clarity is good thing, so no harm.

[FngSaiYuk]

OK, now to everyone else, we're all in agreement, right? Size, strength and many other factors matter in a fight - and low carb diets aren't for high performance athletes.

The rest of us can now safely ignore and unsubscribe this thread so it too can become a BL flame fest.

[blooming lotus]

all uneducated and arrogant trolls pls proceed :rolleyes:

[blooming lotus]

Originally posted by FngSaiYuk
OK, now to everyone else, we're all in agreement, right? Size, strength and many other factors matter in a fight - and low carb diets aren't for high performance athletes.
.

Ps: do 12 hrs training a day, with the formal knowledge I have, then tell me you're performing highly !!:rolleyes: ;)

Ps: has anyone done that load before.. as in ever??!!??

[Toby]

Originally posted by FngSaiYuk
OK, now to everyone else, we're all in agreement, right? Size, strength and many other factors matter in a fight - and low carb diets aren't for high performance athletes.Word.

[blooming lotus]

and what kind of carbs are we talking anyway??

simple or complex??

[FngSaiYuk]

Originally posted by blooming lotus
Ps: do 12 hrs training a day, with the formal knowledge I have, then tell me you're performing highly !!:rolleyes: ;)

Ps: has anyone done that load before.. as in ever??!!??

OK, just this one LAST one... then that's it...

Yes, *I* have... and I'm sure others here may currently be able to, or have done so in the past.

This was back when I was young, had no responsibilities, lived with my parents and had a part time job and my social life was all health & fitness nuts.

'K, have fun!

[blooming lotus]

very cool.....


I'm 29 ( 30 in china ) have a kid, study frequently and did it as recently as last yr......

and about the carbs???


can someone with a similar degree answer this one, or is it going to be all armchair expert advice vs my own??

Ps: you are wrong! everyone tells me my regime is / was ott CRAZY!!!!!!! particualry here where most folks are elsewhere committed!

[Toby]

Originally posted by blooming lotus
... have a kid ...Lucky you have nothing to do with your kid or she might get in the way of your training ...


Originally posted by blooming lotus
... someone with a similar degree ...To what? I asked in another thread what bachelor's degrees you have from your two university stints. You didn't answer.

[Serpent]

Tobes, just to clarify, protein is the building block for muscle growth, but you need carbs to provide the fuel for that growth, same as you need them to provide fuel for the muscles to work. So, in essence, carbs are a part of building muscle.

blooming lotus - you are the only person here that thinks you have all the answers. you are the only person here that thinks you are qualified in any way to talk about this stuff. Please, STFU.

[SevenStar]

Originally posted by blooming lotus
say the folks who forgot to study what they wre claiming to know about! :rolleyes:

Of course you don't understand......... you would needed to've gone to school on it or accepted teaching ( new and most likely different information) min for that one!

( heavy sigh)

I can't believe that ms. grammatically incorrect herself is talking about education. Go read a chapter on apostrophe usage or something...

[SevenStar]

Originally posted by blooming lotus
very cool.....


I'm 29 ( 30 in china ) have a kid, study frequently and did it as recently as last yr......

yeah, 12 hours a day staring at your dim mak charts...


can someone with a similar degree answer this one, or is it going to be all armchair expert advice vs my own??

not only is your advice armchair, it's effed up. Two words - muscle basics (http://martial.best.vwh.net/forum/showthread.php?threadid=29190&highlight=muscle+basics)

Ps: you are wrong! everyone tells me my regime is / was ott CRAZY!!!!!!! particualry here where most folks are elsewhere committed!

No, they tell you that YOU are crazy...

[SevenStar]

Originally posted by blooming lotus
all uneducated and arrogant trolls pls proceed :rolleyes:


Originally posted by blooming lotus
finally, it's becomming apparent I am the only one who is qualified to give the correct on this topic so maintain your ignorance or consider a fact and what makes it true for a few mos

but WE'RE arrogant? Why don't you tell us yet again about your modeling career? Or how about how you were almost the lead singer of savage garden? Matter of fact, reiterate that according to the tickle quiz you took, you are a genius. While you're at it, talk about your relatives who are olympic level athletes, or how great you are with your dim mak and ninjutsu...

[Royal Dragon]

Is this thread still going on??

Jheeeesh, I thought I answered it all on page 3!!!!

[blooming lotus]

Toby : firstly your comment on Ally was in really bad taste ( given my current situation) and a poor troll at best.




Originally posted by Serpent
Tobes, just to clarify, protein is the building block for muscle growth, but you need carbs to provide the fuel for that growth, same as you need them to provide fuel for the muscles to work. So, in essence, carbs are a part of building muscle.

blooming lotus - you are the only person here that thinks you have all the answers. you are the only person here that thinks you are qualified in any way to talk about this stuff. Please, STFU.

Actually, protein is the mortar and your carbs are the bricks. Protein is a fuel source of its' own accord ( as is fat) and when you break it down in the way I sugested , you skip a few process that anoblism provides and it is available almost immediately.

re 2nd paragraph : - as opposed to you on yourself who knows you're not qualified.


7 *. my dimmak is acceptable, and my ninjutsu is rudimentary at best, but of the few moves I have, I work them well enough to know they're on call if I need them.


the rest of your idiocy and trash talk you can have

later

[Toby]

Originally posted by Toby
I asked in another thread what bachelor's degrees you have from your two university stints. You didn't answer. Any answer yet?

[Toby]

Originally posted by blooming lotus
... your comment on Ally was in really bad taste ( given my current situation) ...Your current situation? You mean how you abandoned her to go and become a shaolin nun and teach English? English like apostrophe usage and words like "comming" and "anoblism"? Don't pretend you're in a hurry to see your daughter. You've had a year (apparently) in China. You've never felt any urgency to go back to her before.

[blooming lotus]

hom many times would you like me to state my quals and institutions to have you say it's bs before you all come good on some of your own??


As I said before, I have been trying to get home since June....... ( total 6 - 7 weeks away) . Ignore what ever you like and just troll a little on the rest ;) :rolleyes:

really long sig, but don't worry, not keepers, just making a point

[Toby]

Originally posted by blooming lotus
hom many times would you like me to state my quals and institutions to have you say it's bs before you all come good on some of your own??Once. What bachelor's degrees do you hold? I don't care what TAFE stuff you did. I recently did a welding workshop through TAFE. Does that make me a welder? TAFE is a trade school.

Originally posted by blooming lotus
really long sig, but don't worry, not keepers, just making a point Wow. And the point is what? Let me just address the 2nd point - I sit at a computer all day because that's what my research involves - computer simulation of numerical algorithms. Funnily enough, you signed up at kfm a few months after me and yet you've managed to post twice as much as me. What does that say about you? Considering I spend 8hrs a day in front of a computer, how do you fit it around your 12hrs a day training?

[blooming lotus]

it says I'm committed to my research which unfortunately for all of us, this forum is part of.

lol @ your justification :rolleyes:

welding is a trade right?? so really , if you wanted to be a welder , you'd have something to base it on.

As it you know, up to three yrs of ANY tafe course is equivelant to any degree and UWA is satifisied enough to accept it for rpl entry to PHD in Human Movement. No , besides some communication, maths, and English and my PHD ( when I pay some fees), I have no uni qual.. only equivelants. You can get all pedantic about this, but you'd be being trite.

And where I said they were quals from a uni , I'd also like to show me ( considering I've never told you before what I was even studying apparently)

Rally on

and yourselves???

[Toby]

Originally posted by blooming lotus
it says I'm committed to my research which unfortunately for all of us, this forum is part of.It says you've attended a lot of places. It says you spent 6yrs at university and (now you've told me) didn't get a degree.

Originally posted by blooming lotus
welding is a trade right?? so really , if you wanted to be a welder , you'd have something to base it on.It says I had to pay my $50 and I got to play with some welders. It doesn't say I have any expertise at all in welding (which I don't).

Originally posted by blooming lotus
As it you know, up to three yrs of ANY tafe course is equivelant to any degree and UWA is satifisied enough to accept it for rpl entry to PHD in Human Movement. No , besides some communication, maths, and English and my PHD ( when I pay some fees), I have no uni qual.. only equivelants. You can get all pedantic about this, but you'd be being trite.3 yrs of TAFE is equivalent to any degree? Not even close. There is no way in the world that a university degree compares with a TAFE certificate. And I'm not being pedantic here. They're not even close. For starters, I've got friends who are in TAFE courses who didn't sit final exams at school. They're as dumb as a box full of hammers. They would never get into university.

Originally posted by blooming lotus
And where I said they were quals from a uni , I'd also like to show me ( considering I've never told you before what I was even studying apparently)You wrote two stints of 3yrs each at different universities, so I was curious what degrees you'd obtained.

[blooming lotus]

If you go to the UWA website, look under HM faculty , go to phd and check entry reqs. I think you'll find it does, as with any other degree in the country.

Like when I studied diploma of bus mgmnt for 2 yr course duration. If you go to the tafe web site vs a uni web site for the same thing/ branch just more in depth , you'll find the same thing.

Yah many yrs of study, no degree, just a bunch of diplomas and certs ...... jack of all, expert in some but master of none, but working on it, so for now sweet with compling pre requ modules and go from there.

[Toby]

Originally posted by blooming lotus
If you go to the UWA website, look under HM faculty , go to phd and check entry reqs. I think you'll find it does, as with any other degree in the country.You're pretty funny :D. I found this (http://www.hmes.uwa.edu.au/for/prospective_students/postgraduates/phd), which includes information such as:

"... candidates within the following categories will normally be permitted to enrol in the PhD programme -

1. those who hold a Bachelor’s degree with 2A Honours or better (or an equivalent qualification) from an approved university;
2. those who hold a Masters degree by research from an approved university;
3. those who hold a Masters degree by coursework which has a substantial research component from an approved university;
4. those who have satisfactorily completed a PhD (preliminary) from this or another approved university, in the area of study to be undertaken for the PhD;
5. those who have been awarded a scholarship to study towards a PhD at this University by the Scholarships Committee.

Applicants who have a Bachelor’s degree only but who have subsequent wide research experience may be considered for admission."

Which of those categories do you fall under?

More bad news for you:

"Applicants should note that acceptance by the Head of the relevant School implies the candidate’s English language proficiency is adequate."

Sorry :(.

Or was that the wrong webpage? That's the School of Human Movement and Exercise Science Doctor of Philosophy page for prospective students.

As for your assertion that completion of a TAFE course is equivalent to a bachelor's degree - that's laughable and not worth comment. They are completely different and serve different purposes.

[Ray Pina]

F_ck the degrees. This is a martial arts board .... too much talking already.

Let's assume that you are right, BL. Being smaller is a super advantage in speed and accuracy ..... show us the footage .... Show us you competing against another female who outweights you by 10lbs, 15lbs, 20lbs and you running circles around her and dim making her to death with the speed and accuracy.

Of course a smaller person can beat a larger person. I've beaten larger and have been quick kicked by smaller guys I've tried to chase down.

But we don't want to hear about standing on the moon theory, we want to hear standing on the moon facts by Mr. Armstrong.

Less yapping and more slapping .... show us.

[Ego_Extrodinaire]

Toby,

You could complete enough modules which qualify you for the degree but had not gone to the ceremony to collect the piece of paper. It doesn't mean that you're not qualified. It's just a matter of turning up to Uni and saying hey, here are my marks and degree please...... there you go that simple.

As for the Phd, you can do research in the area of interest, have most of the facts together even before enrolling for the Phd.

You're confusing the substance behind the degree versus the form of the degree which is only a piece of paper in the end.

[cerebus]

So, it's official. bl, who has repeatedly called everyone on this forum "uneducated" and who has claimed to be the only person qualified to speak on the subject of this thread........ has no real education!!! Gee, THAT'S a big surprise, NOT!

A few vocational school certificates do NOT equal being a university graduate (as she has constantly implied she is).

And get this! I checked the actual universities she claimed to have studied with and they have NO record of her having been a student during the time frames she claims......

In other words..........OWNED!!!

[CaptinPickAxe]

Untill you get "that little piece of paper" its the word of a stranger going, "Hey, I got a PhD in blahblahblah." You need that ledger saying you've completed your hours with satsifactory grades at a University.

[blooming lotus]

1stly Tobes: I suggest you take another look.when I get time, i'mposting the link to show where you are playing the poor folks and speaking through your as*!!!

AS for the clips EF : unfortunately the only time I've used my smallness over larger folk is in real life. Never competed EVA!!

I don't care... .you're giving me a head-ache!!!!!!

[blooming lotus]

Ps: Cerebus: I thought you were hacking my records ( which I generously gave you info to find) and were sending me the copies???!!!!!! :confused:

[blooming lotus]

Pls see link re:- ENTRY REQUIREMENTS
Acceptance into the PhD program depends upon the applicant¡¯s qualifications and the ability of the designated school to provide the facilities and supervision required to support the proposed research. Although entrance requirements are subject to variation



those who hold a Masters degree by coursework which has a substantial research component from an approved university


Applicants who have a Bachelor¡¯s degree only ( or its' equivilant ) but who have subsequent wide research experience may be considered for admission



PhD (PRELIMINARY)
A COURSE OF SUPERVISED RESEARCH PREPARATION
If an applicant does not meet the normal entrance requirements for the PhD program (listed above) they may be permitted to enrol in a PhD (Preliminary) program on the recommendation of the Head of School and with the approval of the Board of Postgraduate Research Studies.

The course of study and research for the PhD (Preliminary) is determined by the Head of School and usually involves a combination of coursework units and research projects over a period of one year full-time and eighteen months part-time.

TRANSFER OF CANDIDATURE
Masters by Research
Students who have completed outstanding work during the first year of their Masters and have not yet been awarded the degree, may be considered for transfer to PhD candidature with appropriate credit for work done as part of their Master¡¯s degree. (Credit will not normally exceed ONE YEAR FULL-TIME or TWO YEARS PART-TIME). In order to have a transfer considered by the Board of Postgraduate Research Studies, the following information must be submitted through your Head of School:

a PhD Research Proposal (following the Board¡¯s Guidelines).

a statement from the relevant Head of School (of the Master¡¯s degree) which sets out:

the nature, duration and quality of the work already done

the supervisor

status (full or part-time)

the relevance of the work to the proposed PhD thesis

the recommended amount of time credit.



Jammit!!!!

[Mr Punch]

Me
No bs here, just want to know, as I did before why you think that a bigger person's rate of movement is lower, and now I' d like to know esp why this applies esp to direct lateral striking...

When you have time, cheers.
Originally posted by blooming lotus
not rate, range. But on speed , if you look at the science of muscle fibes and what capacities and characteristics they posses, you will understand my point Thanks for your time. :rolleyes:

Anyway, to the growed up posters on this thread (Toby, Icewater etc), thanks for your detailed explanations.

But all of these biologically correct details aside (the summary of which is that bigger people are naturally going to have a predisposition to be a little slower) I think we can safely say that among trained people, size is usually gong to be an advantageous factor.

Admittedly, the hypothesis that 'all other things being equal' is an impossibility itself, as all other things will probably not be equal, in a realistic framework in many situations, all variables taken into account, bigger people are going to kick proportionally more ass than scrunties... er shortarses... er, fanatic midget ozzie strippers with Napoleon Complex... er, smaller people.

This is, as Ego pointed out, even more likely in a ring situation. This is because outside there are more and less-controlled variables to take into account, so Ego's choice of boxing was rather one-sided (if you forgive the pun) as there are a lot more ring sports where attacks are permitted from all sides.

And apart form all that, the original question was:
no matter how much weigfht they lift, how strong they are or mascular this will not mean they have a stronger punch or can manhandle you in the clinch. I think size does matter which is although frankly, a **** silly question I think I'd be right in saying that not even Ass Lotus would agree.

END OF THREAD

[Toby]

Originally posted by blooming lotus
those who hold a Masters degree by coursework which has a substantial research component from an approved universityYou don't have this.

Originally posted by blooming lotus
Applicants who have a Bachelor¡¯s degree only ( or its' equivilant ) but who have subsequent wide research experience may be considered for admissionYou misquoted. Here it is again, cut and pasted:

"those who hold a Bachelor’s degree with 2A Honours or better (or an equivalent qualification) from an approved university;
...
Applicants who have a Bachelor’s degree only but who have subsequent wide research experience may be considered for admission."

There's no "(or its' equivilant)" qualifier in the 2nd paragraph. The 2nd paragraph is in reference to the 1st. I'm pretty sure that TAFE isn't an approved university.

Originally posted by blooming lotus
PhD (PRELIMINARY) ...This isn't a PhD. You forgot to quote this bit:

"The PhD (Preliminary) course is not considered a qualification in itself and no certificate of completion will be awarded."


Originally posted by blooming lotus
TRANSFER OF CANDIDATURE
Masters by Research ...This is for students who have started a Masters in a particular research project and want to extend it into a PhD. This isn't you either.

Have you actually talked to anyone at the university or just looked on the website? Heads of schools will usually discuss things with prospective students. As will potential supervisors. Did they give you the impression that you will be accepted? I'd be surprised. Anyway, good luck to you if you are. Things may be different if you were a full-fee paying student - they're always after money.

[Mr Punch]

Originally posted by blooming lotus
PhD (PRELIMINARY)
A COURSE OF SUPERVISED RESEARCH PREPARATION
If an applicant does not meet the normal entrance requirements for the PhD program (listed above) they may be permitted to enrol in a PhD (Preliminary) program on the recommendation of the Head of School and with the approval of the Board of Postgraduate Research Studies.

The course of study and research for the PhD (Preliminary) is determined by the Head of School and usually involves a combination of coursework units and research projects over a period of one year full-time and eighteen months part-time...

a PhD Research Proposal (following the Board¡¯s Guidelines).

a statement from the relevant Head of School (of the Master¡¯s degree) which sets out:

the nature, duration and quality of the work already done

the supervisor

status (full or part-time)

the relevance of the work to the proposed PhD thesis

the recommended amount of time credit.BTW, what you actually have from the above recs Lotus, is ... a research proposal, and ...? If you don't at least have a supervisor, you are not doing a PhD. Sorry to break it to you, I know it's a niggling little piece of bureaucratic red-tapery, but what you have (at best, to be charitable) is a load of 'research' (tho at risk of not sounding charitable, I don't think ranting over an internet forum and reading a couple of books constitutes research in most establishments) which you hope to turn into a PhD... you are not doing a PhD!... are you now honey?

Plus of course, the overriding factor which prevents you from doing one, is that no institutions allow Ass Turnips to do research. Sorry. It's a rule.

[Toby]

Originally posted by Mat
you are not doing a PhD.Then why does her profile say: "Occupation: english teacher, double phd student"? :D

[Mr Punch]

Originally posted by Toby
This is for students who have started a Masters in a particular research project and want to extend it into a PhD. This isn't you either.You spoilsport Toby, I was ignoring that.
"Applicants who have a Bachelors degree only but who have subsequent wide research experience may be considered for admission."And Lotus, wide research experience almost invariably means

papers published in a known peer-reviewed journal,
professional papers published in a (related) professional journal,
years of related research with approved methodology in a related career... etc.

Reading books (even if you scribble some notes about them) and surfing the internet are not included.
"The PhD (Preliminary) course is not considered a qualification in itself and no certificate of completion will be awarded."See, nor do half-finished qualifications count... not intheir own programme and certainly not in any other programme. Bureaucracy it may be, but it's their bueaucracy and they wanna see paper.

You may want to apply properly before you waste any more time on your so important 'research'.

[Mr Punch]

Originally posted by Toby
Then why does her profile say: "Occupation: english teacher, double phd student"? :D Coudn't tell you mate!

[blooming lotus]

Originally posted by Toby
Then why does her profile say: "Occupation: english teacher, double phd student"? :D

I am at least doing my ch'an phd and course work or equivilant modules are enough to suffice.........somewhere in there is also a section on credit through work experience in same field........



yrs matt?? I've been studying health and fitness formally for over 12 yrs!! gee , do think I'm in??!! :rolleyes:



Ps: half finished quals were only ever in business and hospitality, but considering practoical experience and work related of same: I think I'm good.

And yourself matt??


In fact , lets make a new thread :- what are your quals : nb:- RTB , I expect you show ;)

[Toby]

Originally posted by blooming lotus
I am at least doing my ch'an phd and course work or equivilant modules are enough to suffice...No they're not. What does ch'an have to do with human movement? Nothing. You can't get credit for a completely different field. That's assuming you are actually doing a "ch'an phd". And why did you say double PhD student in your profile?

Originally posted by blooming lotus
...somewhere in there is also a section on credit through work experience in same field...No there's not. Work experience can count for credit towards some undergraduate degrees. TAFE certifications can count for credit towards some undergraduate degrees. But not a Masters or PhD.

Originally posted by Toby
Have you actually talked to anyone at the university or just looked on the website? Heads of schools will usually discuss things with prospective students. As will potential supervisors. Did they give you the impression that you will be accepted?Any answers?

[blooming lotus]

Originally posted by Toby
No they're not. What does ch'an have to do with human movement? Nothing. You can't get credit for a completely different field. That's assuming you are actually doing a "ch'an phd". And why did you say double PhD student in your profile?
No there's not. Work experience can count for credit towards some undergraduate degrees. TAFE certifications can count for credit towards some undergraduate degrees. But not a Masters or PhD.
Any answers?

now you're just speaking poop!!! who said I was applying with my ch'an entry quals??!! :rolleyes:

why did I say double??.when you match the pre-requ modules with experience and rpl ing ( which you , I know you don't fathom nor accept :rolleyes: ).I certainly am, .just unconventionally is all.....


but It's my style and I dig the way I do it ........



besides at the time I think I had an app in to uni I never made it to :( :rolleyes:

You're wrong Toby, you are wrong!! Obviously need to dig some links, and when i have I will show you where you yourself can cash some credits and gain some papers ;)

later
B

[Mr Punch]

Originally posted by blooming lotus
I am at least doing my ch'an phd and course work or equivilant modules are enough to suffice.........somewhere in there is also a section on credit through work experience in same field........So you have talked to somebody (an admissions tutor, a head of department, head of school etc) at a university and had your PhD subject approved and been assigned a supervisor? Great! Sounds good!

Was the work experience in chan? You know you can gain enlightenment through sweeping the floor don't you?! Didn't know you could do a PhD through it to...!
yrs matt?? I've been studying health and fitness formally for over 12 yrs!! gee , do think I'm in??!! :rolleyes:Cool, sounds interesting, what has your formal study involved? By formal, I assume you mean that was through some institution too (educational, mental not included)?
Ps: half finished quals were ... hospitalityYou see, that doesn't surprise me!
And yourself matt??I'm fine thanks Lotussss. When I want to start discussing my educational qualifications on a martial arts board, I'll put a overblown claim in my profile and we can take it from there.

If you wanna ask about my MA qualifications, please go ahead.


In fact , lets make a new thread :- what are your quals : nb:- RTB , I expect you show ;) Grow up.

[blooming lotus]

RtB is our health and fitness forum mod so it's not unfair for me to ask!

on the rest,


My chan phd rpl ing comes fro m counselling and psychology / nlp / communication studies.


Is it just me or do all the other real life ppl get tired of little boys and their circus forum pursuits??

can we just talk some info exchange you think??


ffsake :rolleyes:

[Toby]

Originally posted by blooming lotus
now you're just speaking poop!!! who said I was applying with my ch'an entry quals??!! :rolleyes:
Originally posted by blooming lotus
I am at least doing my ch'an phd and course work or equivilant modules are enough to suffice...I thought this is what you meant - suffice implying your "ch'an phd" was sufficient for entry requirements to human movement. Otherwise what was suffice in reference to?

Originally posted by blooming lotus
why did I say double??.when you match the pre-requ modules with experience and rpl ing ( which you , I know you don't fathom nor accept :rolleyes: ).I certainly am, .just unconventionally is all...You're actually doing no PhDs, but in your mind you're doing two. If you were doing even one, you'd be doing it through a university and have a supervisor. Do you have those? Or like Mat said are you just doing some self-study and trying to tell us that constitutes a PhD?

Originally posted by blooming lotus
but It's my style and I dig the way I do it ...Obviously you dig it, but no-one else will.

Originally posted by blooming lotus
besides at the time I think I had an app in to uni I never made it to :( :rolleyes:You submitted an application? Was it successful? That might help you.

Originally posted by blooming lotus
Obviously need to dig some links, and when i have I will show you where you yourself can cash some credits and gain some papers ;)Ahhh, now it's suddenly clear - you're talking about internet PhDs! I'm not interested in bull**** qualifications.

[Toby]

Originally posted by blooming lotus
My chan phd rpl ing comes fro m counselling and psychology / nlp / communication studies.What does rpl stand for?

Originally posted by blooming lotus
Is it just me or do all the other real life ppl get tired of little boys and their circus forum pursuits??I get tired of your lies. Trying to appeal to authority saying you have all this higher education in fitness and nutrition and you're "pursuing" a PhD in Human Movement when all you have is some TAFE certificates.

[blooming lotus]

ch'an phd through st.regis university, though cert not available in Aust, doing via overseas.......

nothing I say is going to make a diff and you are just going to continue to think you have all the knowledge there is possibley to gain.

rtb said it himself, none of you are experts and we are all here on common ground of pursuit of more information. get off your horse and stop beating the dead one you're dragging !!!!

[SevenStar]

So, we agree that size matters?

[Toby]

Originally posted by blooming lotus
ch'an phd through st.regis university, though cert not available in Aust, doing via overseas...OMFG! I thought I hadn't heard of St Regis University (I'm leery of even capitalising the letters) in Australia but I was going to give you the benefit of the doubt.

St Regis University? I searched google about it. I almost can't believe even you would be so gullible.

Anyway, now I know where you're getting your degree-for-money from, I'm the child of the former president of a central African republic. I have access to bank accounts with US$50 million in my father's name. Unfortunately, the current government ...

Bwahahahaha! This is hilarious! You abandoned your daughter for this?!

[Mr Punch]

Originally posted by SevenStar
So, we agree that size matters? Nah, I'm a skinny ******* and can't put on weight... I'm with Ass Lotus.

[Mr Punch]

Oh OK then, you got me...

[blooming lotus]

Originally posted by Toby
OMFG! I thought I hadn't heard of St Regis University (I'm leery of even capitalising the letters) in Australia but I was going to give you the benefit of the doubt.

St Regis University? I searched google about it. I almost can't believe even you would be so gullible.

Anyway, now I know where you're getting your degree-for-money from, I'm the child of the former president of a central African republic. I have access to bank accounts with US$50 million in my father's name. Unfortunately, the current government ...

Bwahahahaha! This is hilarious! You abandoned your daughter for this?!

It probably isn't the most highly reputed uni, but they are registered and acknowleged world wide. As long as I have an outlet or means to publish my work, I'm sweet on this one. Still doesn't comprimise its' integrity nor invalidate it.

cheers

Matt : thx for the gutter mouth comment but you may want to think about working on some class?? :rolleyes:

[Toby]

Originally posted by blooming lotus
It probably isn't the most highly reputed uni, but they are registered and acknowleged world wide. As long as I have an outlet or means to publish my work, I'm sweet on this one. Still doesn't comprimise its' integrity nor invalidate it.You don't have to publish your work. That's the beauty of it. You can get a degree in "... a few hours to a few days ..." depending on your Prior Learning Assessment :rolleyes:. Seriously Eyebrows, you should look into this. It's a scam and has as much credibility as Nigerian ex-presidents. I would've thought a genious like you would've spotted this one a mile away :confused:.

[blooming lotus]

yes I do. A dissertation is still required and the work is what it's about not the qual.

I even ran it by some friends before signing on, but general consenus was that it'll strengthen my paper regardless. A good degree of this nature is hard to find anywhere at all , which is just all the more reason to increase awarenesss.

while you're all search - happy on my behalf though, search on ch'an phd and tell me what you come up with .

[Toby]

*Sigh*

Good luck with it then. A good degree of "this nature" (pay over the internet?) isn't hard to find - people run scams like this everywhere. A good degree that's actually worth something, from a reputable university, is also easy to find. Most small cities have university campuses. Most medium to large cities have several. Perth's got 5, for example. Of course, a reputable university might not give you "credit for Prior Learning Assessment" :rolleyes:.

[blooming lotus]

if you could find me an in-house phd exactly of this nature and in english, just about anywhere at all .....if it didn't make me puke, I'd kiss you. ( well....maybe not quite, but I would thank you and maybe even send you your own bunch of flowers ; ) )

it's not as easy as you'd think. ppl just don't know about ch'an. Hence the need and my commitment to it.

[Toby]

Well, 2 minutes on the network finds this:

http://www.asianstudies.arts.uwa.edu.au/research
http://www.asianstudies.arts.uwa.edu.au/courses/postgraduate_studies

In order to do a PhD you have to find a supervisor willing to take you on and also satisfy the entry requirements. Looking at those websites I'd imagine a fair amount of freedom of research topic that would allow you to study the topic you're interested in. I imagine most Australian universities would offer similar prospects seeing as we're so close to Asia.

[blooming lotus]

you had me on the edge of my seat for every second I waited for that page to open. Unfortunately, it didn't specify , nor give any indication that ch'an buddhism was one of those phds on offer.

I have physically been into several universities and spent alot of net time searching........ so, there will be no kiss, no flowers and thank you.

Actually, the thank you you can have, but really, I tried searching under religious / philosophical study, but that uni was all I found.

Anything else??...... From anyone for that matter???

[Toby]

You are usually able to approach a supervisor and suggest topics. I suggest you ring or e-mail some of the contact information at the university of your choice. I'm pretty sure that you would find a topic that you can agree on with a supervisor. You won't ever specifically find the exact topic you want.

[blooming lotus]

Ever Tobes?? Not at St.Regis?? If you don't ( or the supervisor ) doesn't have any prior information , I kind of take issue with being subordinate to that. I guess it's something to think about, so cheers and flowers are in the mail ;)

Really though , had no idea so thx, if I get home, I'll give it another try.

B

[Mr Punch]

Originally posted by blooming lotus
Matt : thx for the gutter mouth comment but you may want to think about working on some class?? :rolleyes:
Originally posted by sh*t d*cksucking hypocritical Ass Lotus
you're acting like a little d*ck sh*tted boy wanting attention Teach me some class O Mistress!

[SevenStar]

So, we agree that size matters then?

[Toby]

Originally posted by blooming lotus
Ever Tobes?? Not at St.Regis??Actually, you can probably do whatever you want through St Regis as long as you pay your money.
Originally posted by blooming lotus
If you don't ( or the supervisor ) doesn't have any prior information , I kind of take issue with being subordinate to that.The whole point of PhD research is that you should research a topic that is groundbreaking throughout the world. So you should end up with knowing more about a particular topic than your supervisor. I knew more about my undergraduate thesis than my supervisor. I know more about certain areas of my current research than my current supervisor. Supervisor != teacher. They are there to support you and guide you, not hand you information on a platter.

[Ego_Extrodinaire]

SevenStar,

No. mistresses don't have to be big to give a good teaching.

Toby,

It is quite the norm these days for unis to have correspondance course. i admit, there are heaps of unis around and St Regis is not one that I'd come across. In terms of quality, different universities have different strengths in the subjects they run which is dependent partly on the quality of the teachers as well as the motivation of the students in that particular class. As you can see its transitory, because profs change jobs and students move on - obviously. Ultimately it is the amount of work that one puts in to make the best use of the time in university. I agree many people approach unis though a conventional approach. Just because someone isn't doesn't mean they are lazy or unknowledgeable. In fact, the discovery of new knowledge / techniques may come from challenging the established way of doing things.

Always remeber John Harrison (1693-1776) an "uneducated" but persistant watch maker who stood before the panel of scientists (of which one of them was Issac Newton) and said he solved the longtitude problem. Guess what, he was right! and forms the basis of how our global positioning systems work today.

I know you're all science maths and sh1t. that's great that your Phd involves numerical analysis. But you have to admit in the field of numerical analysis, alot is also an art form, you do by practice because you "feel" the data talking to you, not through reading books and reciting theory.

blooming lotus,

There are heaps of unis trying to attract funds for the wrong reasons, so without being judgemental, but as a friendly advice, just be careful in your quest for higher learning. But one thing's for sure, it comes trhough hard work and perserverence. The piece of paper you get in the end is a "symbol" of something a lot more meaningful - knowledge you'd attain.

None of us are in the position to say yours is the right / wrong way of going about it. Everyone has a different method of learning in the end. As in the story of John Harrison, practical experience has proven to be invaluable.

Mat,

Someday you'll get the mistress you're looking for. Becareful of shoddy mistresses on the net.

[Toby]

Originally posted by SevenStar
So, we agree that size matters then? Always have :D.

[Ego_Extrodinaire]

Ego Maximus.

[Toby]

Originally posted by Ego_Extrodinaire
It is quite the norm these days for unis to have correspondance course.I'm not disputing that. But I did a search about St Regis in particular and it smells bad. Also, you're right - a degree is something that is pretty much worthless. You can easily gain equivalent or superior knowledge from self-study. I learnt most of what I consider important in my undergraduate degree on the side - the units I took because I had to, not because I wanted to. Just don't try to pass off the equivalent study as something it's not, i.e. saying you have a Bachelor's, Masters, PhD whatever when you don't.

[SevenStar]

E, teaching isn't what we're discussing. we're talking about fighting.

[Ego_Extrodinaire]

Sevenstar,

I've already answered that afew pages ago. The topic roght now is teaching - conversation has moved on.

Toby,

I don't know enough about St regis to comment, but I know there are heaps of online scams. Even the quality of reasearch papers are not immune to scams.

But I disagree in what you say about equivalent study. I always look at the substance before the form. Even reputable unis give out honorary doctorate degrees - what do they mean in the end.... say you get one from Oxford. substance wise - nothing big fat zero!

[Toby]

Honorary doctorates are something else altogether. But equivalent study isn't the same thing as a degree. Assuming you were after a job and they actually checked your qualifications, most employers are more interested in a formal qualification than equivalent work. Note I said most, not all.

[Ego_Extrodinaire]

Toby,

Nevertheless I can provide you with an example where a piece of paper is meanlingless regardless of the fact that it is issued by a reputible university.

The Hon doc degree has attended the ceremony but not done the work, whereas someone like BL has been doing the work without attending the ceremony.

"I learnt most of what I consider important in my undergraduate degree on the side - the units I took because I had to, not because I wanted to."

Its interesting that you said that, which suggest you are in the same line of thought as BL when it comes to looking for substance in what you do. Granted that you have attended the ceremonies to collect your cert, I think you're being a hypocreit in talking down on BL's approach. Remeber the story of the watch maker - have you read it yet?

I understand why you did what you did, because you were passionate about your topics of research. You're a maths geek who likes the numerical aspects, perhaps as much as BL is passionate about Buddism.

Up to this point we haven't touched on topics that are metaphysical - religious based. In that sense, the piece of paper from whatever institution is even less meaningful. Did Jesus, Mohamad, Buddah need to get a doctorate in theology???? No. it is faith motivated and how it impacts on the individual's life.

BL has expressed that she is not just learning about buddism but how to become a better buddist. There is a difference between knowing all about the buddism through attending course etc to being a buddist which is a way of life.

I do feel that the contribution one can make to buddism once they get the Phd would be considerable if they are fervent belivers in the first place.

[Toby]

You're missing the point - I could've done without any pieces of paper. But I wouldn't have said I had them in that case. Eyebrows isn't doing two PhDs as per her profile so she shouldn't say she is. In fact, I'd say she isn't doing one since a search on St Regis reveals it's a profiteering scam. So I'm quite happy with her doing whatever she wants as long as she doesn't try to pass it off as something else. All this is in response to her recent assertions that she's eminently qualified and therefore correct and no-one else is. I just thought I'd call her on it and I was right all along - a classic case of fallacious appeal to authority.

Eyebrows, take a look at this (http://www.asianstudies.arts.uwa.edu.au/research/postgraduate_research) page. It shows the wide ranging nature of projects that students are undertaking. I'm sure that you could find a supervisor willing to take on your topic. Of course, this is only an example at my particular university. A bit of research on your part should find similar programs at most (all?) Australian universities it that's what you want.

[Ego_Extrodinaire]

Toby,

It's good that you have helped BL in finding those links on Asian Studies.

But I don't think I'm missing the point. In fact taht is my point. I agree you should eventually get the piece of paper at the end, but that should be the result of your presuit as opposed to that being the primary objective. This is the distinction I'm trying to make.

What if a Hon. Doc. came on this forum and said he had a degree from Oxford and started talking about heath when all he is a a alcholoic rock and roll singer. If I take you up on that point, you would say that he is qualified because he's got a piece of paper.

You don't have to have the piece of paper to be competent. Look at gengis Khan (I'm now appealing to Seven Star because this post has drifted away from fighting). He did not go to military academy to do what he did.

As far as I know BL is working towards a Phd, not withstanding the fact that she may not be enrolled yet. Without a degree doesn't mean she isn't qualified to speak about the things she does.

But the links you sent through seem helpful, if anything it could fast track her progress.

[blooming lotus]

Originally posted by Toby
Actually, you can probably do whatever you want through St Regis as long as you pay your money.The whole point of PhD research is that you should research a topic that is groundbreaking throughout the world. So you should end up with knowing more about a particular topic than your supervisor. I knew more about my undergraduate thesis than my supervisor. I know more about certain areas of my current research than my current supervisor. Supervisor != teacher. They are there to support you and guide you, not hand you information on a platter.

As long as I can talk to someone who has some knowledge on the topic or something to add or make me consider either further or differently , I'm happy to pay props........ my information I get on my own, and in a published copy, if a spellcheck is all you're offering, I have my toolbar thx :rolleyes:

Look .you're taking the fun out of it, and how long later , considering dropping the whole thing......... whatever Tobes........feeling sooky and just not in the mood

[blooming lotus]

Originally posted by Ego_Extrodinaire
[B
But the links you sent through seem helpful, if anything it could fast track her progress. [/B]

helpful Ego???? only in confirming what I already knew :rolleyes:

something similar to the links you keep sending me yourself, thinking you're doing me favour in your ignorance !!!

may not be enrolled??? go to hell idiot!!!!!!!

[Serpent]

What's the matter, bl? Are you beginning to realise that your only qualification is a couple of TAFE certs and an expired Cert III from 1992?

[blooming lotus]

I openly admit that I haven't studied health formally for several yrs, but it doesn't mean I 've stoppped studying nor that I can be d*cked with BS disscussions acheiving nothing but to P*ss me off and undermine what I've learnt over some trite and uninformed immature shyte.


Don't worry.......... leaving the mo I get home..........

[cerebus]

Now she admits that she hasn't studied "formally". 'Course we all knew that already, but the fact that she's finally willing to admit it is at least a start.

Of course the only "trite and uninformed immature shyte" around here has come from her. But again, this is something everyone knows except her.

"leaving the mo I get home"
Promises, promises. Like when she was leaving for Africa and then the time she was just "leaving". Never believe a word she says because you can COUNT on it not to be true. ;)

[blooming lotus]

god you're a d*ck.I asked for opinions on my request to come to assist in africa. I said recent formal study on health

believe me..I'm tired of all your crap and if I get home you can breath easy knowing I won't be back ;) :)

[Serpent]

Believe it when I see it.

[SevenStar]

Originally posted by blooming lotus
helpful Ego???? only in confirming what I already knew :rolleyes:

something similar to the links you keep sending me yourself, thinking you're doing me favour in your ignorance !!!

may not be enrolled??? go to hell idiot!!!!!!!

E is the only one here that supports you in any way, and this is how you treat him?

[SevenStar]

Originally posted by Ego_Extrodinaire
Sevenstar,

I've already answered that afew pages ago. The topic roght now is teaching - conversation has moved on.


but the topic will move back, as BL's "education" is a non MA related issue. Quite obviously, my question was an attempt to throw everything back in that direction.


So, we agree that size matters then?

[blooming lotus]

somewhat is as close as I'm getting.

[SevenStar]

that's cool, it's still an agreeance. You do recognize that size does indeed matter.

[Ego_Extrodinaire]

SevenStar,

Size influences strategy. There is no hard and fast rule. Also think about weight distribution, tall with same weight vs stout and short. In a street fight there is no certainty who will come out on top. Of course in a ring environment the bigger person usually come out tops. When controls are put around movement, say in basketball - you see all the players are tall players. Street Fight is different, free for all - no rules, you use what is most suitable to you.

blooming lotus,

What I said to you was in good faith. There's no way I could know what you know about other courses on offer. In the end regardless of what people say, knowledge comes from hard work and perserverience.

[blooming lotus]

Originally posted by Ego_Extrodinaire
SevenStar,

Size influences strategy.



I think that statement is rather poiniant and more to the point.

Ego : - okay , apology. For calling you an idiot if nothing else, because really, I 'm fairly happy to acknowledge most of your knowledge or at min your attempt to find out what you don't know.

If you opened the links and married it to the discussion and previous ones, you'd see why I was pis*ed. No drama, let's stay on track ha ;) :)

[SevenStar]

Originally posted by Ego_Extrodinaire
SevenStar,

Size influences strategy. There is no hard and fast rule. Also think about weight distribution, tall with same weight vs stout and short. In a street fight there is no certainty who will come out on top. Of course in a ring environment the bigger person usually come out tops. When controls are put around movement, say in basketball - you see all the players are tall players. Street Fight is different, free for all - no rules, you use what is most suitable to you.


that's irrelevant. regardless of what strategy you use (naturally, they would differ), size will play a factor. in a fight between a trained big guy and a trained little guy, the little guy will have a much harder time coming out on top. As far as the term "bigger" goes, it doesn't necessarily imply tall. I'm actually reffering to people more like myself - the short to semi-tall, stout fireplug type guys.

[blooming lotus]

but if the littler player is using say ninjutsu style evasion and ( whether you're paying it's viablity or not ) dimmak or short sharp strikes and the big guy is exploiting his own strengths , likely throws and probably more linear stuff, it'd be an interesting match in the least.

[Ego_Extrodinaire]

SevenStar,

Coming out on top does not mean last man standing. Usually it is a bigger guy who picks a fight with the smaller guy than the otherway around.

For the little guy to achieve what he wants is simply to slow down or temporary disable the big guy to get away or stay in long enough for help to arrive.

[blooming lotus]

which it often doesn't on the street nor in the ring, if they were even allowed to compete togther, but the "slow down / temporarily disable " tactic sounds good.

[Ego_Extrodinaire]

Blooming Lotus,

The hardest fights is if you can't run. Having say to protect someone else who is down. Then it comes down to how much you're preapred to go on versus the other person.

If the bigger guy is after some money but the little guy feels he is fighting for his life, then animal instinct will have it that if the target / prey proves too hard, the preditor will disengage and go find another target.

So sometimes, it is not the 'last man standing' but sending the message to the attacker that the cost to him is much higer than the prize.

[SevenStar]

Originally posted by Ego_Extrodinaire
SevenStar,

Coming out on top does not mean last man standing.

For the little guy to achieve what he wants is simply to slow down or temporary disable the big guy to get away or stay in long enough for help to arrive.

I completely agree. However, that is easier said than done, which goes back to the topic that size matters. Some people will come back with "regardless of size, he has kneecaps, nuts, etc" but as you know, it's not as simple as "hit him in the throat, kick him in the nuts."

[SevenStar]

OT for a sec, keep up the quality posts, ego. your recent posts here and on the southern forum have been great.

[TAO YIN]

Seven,

You fight in the ring, entirely too much.

BL,

Na zai na li gong zhou? Zai Zhong guo, ni cong na li lai?

[blooming lotus]

know the path to the skill was about all I could decipher, and if that's what you're saying and skill can be interperated as emotional, physical / combat and intellectual, I guess I do.......


if i'm off track, I just am.but to've met what I have regardless of how yiban ban that skill is, compartively to the other "greats" on these boards . and considering that according to Serpent i'm a "skinny little hoe", I think I have some skill enough to keep that "skinny little hoe " alive despite the big hard as* es I've had to deal with, and apply some wude, ch'an and martial conduct of when to and when not to, and in what capacity, I think I'm doing okay. for a little chick out in the real world with no desire to compete.


To All: - To accept the big guy is always going to win, is to throw your towel in before you even confont him. It's against my morales to not try and not survive, so I have to believe there's something you've missed.


B

[TAO YIN]

BL,

No. I asked you, where do you work in China. I asked you, where do you come from in China. I apologize for the first type-o... Na=Ni. Wo ben dan hao tien.

I like your post by the way.

[Serpent]

TAO YIN, are you trying to score?

:eek:

;)

[blooming lotus]

thx. one does but try...... :) ;)


right now, not working at all, just trying negotiate with the embassies and psb to go home .......

previously worked hefei, shanghai, beijing, zhenghou, lianoning, hong kong, and Guangzhou and surrounding districts twice.


come from???........ :- NZ born Australian living ( or use to :( ) on the gold coast - Brisbane.

BL

[Ego_Extrodinaire]

SevenStar,

Definately its not easy. There is a saying in the army that the best way to stop a tank is with another tank. If all things being equal and the big guy plays a flawless game then smaller guy is in trouble.

I agree that striking the vital parts is not an easy thing to do - contrary to 3 day self defence seminars, eyes, throat groin. You need to open up those targets through a variety of ways.

blooming lotus,

You're right. To have a chance to win, you must first not accept defeat or throw in the towel so to speak. Streetfights cut both ways, no rules hence you can do as you please but there is also no ref to stop the fight.

In fact, people get badly hurt when they are getting hit while unconcious, like head on concrete etc. As long as you keep moving and with an active intent to pressuring your opponent back, you'll get hit, but much less likely to get over run.

So when I mean you keep moving and use evasion as a little guy, I don't mean turn tail and retreat. You make strategic moves to make yourself a difficult target which would also present you with opportunities to hit the targets you're after.

For example in basket ball, if a shooter is allowed to shoot with no interuption, unlikely to miss the basket - at an elite level. However, if you pressure the shooter then chances are he would over extend and make a mistake. same goes with tennis, boxing etc.

[TAO YIN]

Serpent,

Hehehe! Nope, I’m not trying to score; in a sense I just agree with what BL wrote. When I read threads like this, I constantly try to figure out how everyone is qualifying their answers. Temples, Eyes, Nose, Mouth, Neck, Liver, Nuts, Knees… all useless targets. Punches to the liver are no good, but knees to the liver and head are good… seeing as how everyone’s legs are faster than their hands. The bigger fighter with more skill almost always wins; we must disregard the other fighter’s will to survive. We also must disregard sociopaths, psychotics, homicidal maniacs, gangs, and anyone else who would even be happy to lose a fight, so they can have an excuse to come back the next day and kill us.

Well, I think Royal Dragon pretty much answered this question some pages back. But, please let’s not forget environment. A bigger fighter usually has it made in the ring, but a bigger fighter can also be screwed as an easy target say, on a bus in China, or anywhere for that matter, full of people, in a crowded pub, in a cramped alley, anyways, it doesn’t matter. Wasn’t that fun? No you say? Hehehe.

TAO YIN


"Forget it Donnie you're out of your element...Dude, the Chinaman is not the issue here."

[SevenStar]

Originally posted by blooming lotus

To All: - To accept the big guy is always going to win, is to throw your towel in before you even confont him. It's against my morales to not try and not survive, so I have to believe there's something you've missed.


nobody is asking you to accept that the big guy is gonna win... wake up. All we are saying is his size does matter and will play a role. Will a person's speed play a factor in a fight? you say yes, but then try to downplay that size will as well? That makes no sense.

[Ego_Extrodinaire]

Sevenstar,

Now I'm having doubts. Maybe size and strength actually doesn't matter.

[FngSaiYuk]

But, considering the power to size curve of increasing muscularity and overall size and the amount if resources (energy, time and effort to stimulate growth, etc), is there an IDEAL size and strength for a fighter?

There are tradeoffs between all of the various aspects to a fighter-

size
strength
speed
flexibility
skill/techniques
experience
knowledge

And these various aspects can differ amongst the various parts of the body. To improve on any of these aspects for any part of the body, requires time, energy, rest, etc. Basically, you have a limited amount of resources to spend improving yourself. What really is the ideal?

I honestly don't think anyone can answer this. There is not enough rigorous scientific research to come up with an 'ideal' training and lifestyle regimen to produce the 'ideal' fighter. And in all likelihood, genetics plays a MAJOR role.

So again, size & strength matter, just as many other aspects, but really, this is all rather personal, as every one of us have various advantages and disadvantages due to our genetics, our upbringing, our experiences, etc. The best we can do is to improve ourselves to the best extent we can and be as well rounded as possible.

[IronFist]

Are there any attributes you can develop that will make you worse at other things?

For example, BL would say "you can get big and strong, but that will make you slow."

Are there any attributes you can develop that would actually have some REAL negative effect, tho?

The only thing I can think of would be someone who doesn't do any cardio for the sake of putting on size. Then they'd be getting bigger and stronger, which is helpful, but their endurance would suffer.

rtb, don't say it :D

[blooming lotus]

not really Iron, because as far as little chicks go, i'm a lil " big and strong " myself ;)


what I'm saying though is A. the more "overly" muscled you are the less range of movement and speed you'll have ( scientifically trading that off for the strength in strike you may or may not get away pending opponents skill) and is of no use to the smaller , faster more accurate and focussed player.

and B. to close the fight before it's begun , just because you are smaller is against EVERY combat philosophy I've ever known!! I've gotta believe I can strategise my way to survival, no matter the circumstance, or why the hell do we practice the arts we do???!!!!

I'll NEVER be a "big gal", but I can guarantee you , I've worked twice as hard, sweated twice as many joules and listened at MIN, twice as hard as fat boy!!!!!!
I'm walking away babes.....
( running for help min )

B

[Ego_Extrodinaire]

blooming lotus,

That's correct what you saif about people who are muscle bound. They can hardly move at all. Worse still, they have disproportionate strength - such as body builders, all show no go.

[Serpent]

Originally posted by blooming lotus
what I'm saying though is A. the more "overly" muscled you are the less range of movement and speed you'll have ( scientifically trading that off for the strength in strike you may or may not get away pending opponents skill) and is of no use to the smaller , faster more accurate and focussed player.

Completely wrong. For muscle mass to impair range of motion, it has to be massive, coupled with a complete lack of stretching. People that massive that do not stretch are an exception, not the rule.


and B. to close the fight before it's begun , just because you are smaller is against EVERY combat philosophy I've ever known!! I've gotta believe I can strategise my way to survival, no matter the circumstance, or why the hell do we practice the arts we do???!!!!

Of course. Strategy, training, skills, luck - all these things will help you have a chance. But if someone is a lot bigger and stronger then you'd better hope that your skills are far superior.


I'll NEVER be a "big gal", but I can guarantee you , I've worked twice as hard, sweated twice as many joules and listened at MIN, twice as hard as fat boy!!!!!!
I'm walking away babes.....
( running for help min )

B
Maybe, maybe not. Don't underestimate anyone. And never over-estimate yourself. You may have some trouble with that, bl.

[blooming lotus]

No Serps,

we have had debates here on other threads before that you were a part of yourself, where muscle bound guy claims stretching comprimises his strength!! ( and wtf on that score ?? :confused: )

no matter what I say nor when I call black, some smart guy is saying white and has links to support him.......


one can but try ........

Ps: still not ever submitting and confident I'm walking away ;) :P :)

Ps: not really relevant on this thread, but how old did you say were anyway???

[Toby]

Originally posted by blooming lotus
we have had debates here on other threads before that you were a part of yourself, where muscle bound guy claims stretching comprimises his strength!! ( and wtf on that score ?? :confused: )Another example of your comprehension skills :rolleyes:. It was someone like Father Dog saying that stretching pre-workout compromises strength. Stretching post-workout OTOH was recommended. And (no offence FD if you're reading), Father Dog isn't exactly what I'd call muscle bound - not in the 7* sense. The argument was backed up with references.

Off-topic - that thread was also the "ex-olympiad" thread IIRC ;).

[TAO YIN]

FOR FARKS SAKE!!


WHERE, HOW IS EVERYONE QUALIFYING THEIR "BIGGER ALWAYS BETTER" ANSWERS???

[Ego_Extrodinaire]

Serpant,

"Completely wrong. For muscle mass to impair range of motion, it has to be massive, coupled with a complete lack of stretching. People that massive that do not stretch are an exception, not the rule."

How can you say that BL is completely wrong when within your own understanding, there are examples that agree with her?

In any case you must consider functional strength. For example if a person were to train up using their muscles on one plane - common to exercise machines, they may not have to co-ordination to cover a wide range of movement in say a fight.

There are other aspects, such as the muscles for balance in the lower back etc, that a so called strong person may not have developed.

Of course someone with good functional strength in a relative and absolute sense would also be very atheletic.

I think this is the point that BL is trying to bring across, which I hope I'm doing justice in paraphraising what she says. Again what BL is saying is right.

[Serpent]

To quote Toby: You're a crappy troll, Kelvin.

[TAO YIN]

Here at KFO, we take pride in little relevance, seeing as how everything is reletive.

[Mr Punch]

Originally posted by TAO YIN
FOR FARKS SAKE!!


WHERE, HOW IS EVERYONE QUALIFYING THEIR "BIGGER ALWAYS BETTER" ANSWERS??? FOR FARKS SAKE!!

ARE YOU COMPETING WITH BL FOR THE READING INCOMPREHENSION PRIZE?! NOBODY ****ING SAID "BIGGER ALWAYS BETTER".

We said usually it's an advantage, but only one thing out of many factors. If you can find anywhere withing the context of previous posts where somebody HAS claimed "BIGGER ALWAYS BETTER" THEN come back and SHOUT. Until then, stop sucking BL's nuts.

[Ego_Extrodinaire]

Mat,

Just by way of a friendly advice, girls don't have nuts.

[TAO YIN]

LOL at YOU Mat.

I wasn't shouting; I was typing with the caps lock on. Got your attention huh? You like that? Reading incomprehension prize? What do I get? It sucks when someone points out obvious implications doesn't it? Okay, so "bigger always better" is a bad label that I put on most arguments here. I apologize, I meant to say "bigger almost always better." I wasn't sucking BL's nuts or pinkies either. I liked what she typed, thats it. She's small she says...wtf is she supposed to believe? It's funny how much shiot she gets here. Sure, sometimes she deserves it, but I just think it's funny. So many bullies, but no bullies bully. I guess in this world everyone with a kcid- is still a hard tnuc-.

Anyways, I apologize for typing. I forgot how many chiefs reside here. Anyways, again I apologize for wasting my breath, excuse me, my typing time, on you.

[FatherDog]

Originally posted by Toby
Another example of your comprehension skills :rolleyes:. It was someone like Father Dog saying that stretching pre-workout compromises strength. Stretching post-workout OTOH was recommended.


Correct. Specifically, stretching pre-workout (speaking, specifically, of a weight workout designed to increase strength) will lessen your gains from that workout. Stretching afterwards is definitely recommended.

blooming lotus recommends stretching before, during, and after a workout, but just about anything bl says about strength and fitness is usually the polar opposite of correct.



And (no offence FD if you're reading), Father Dog isn't exactly what I'd call muscle bound - not in the 7* sense. The argument was backed up with references.


No offense taken - I'm 6'4" and compete at 189. 7's pecs are bigger than me. :D



Off-topic - that thread was also the "ex-olympiad" thread IIRC ;).

Oh yeah, just to recap for those who don't read the training forum -

so far, blooming lotus has claimed that

she could easily qualify for the Olympics, but "doesn't do the competition thing"
she could easily beat Mike Tyson
she was asked to be the lead singer for Savage Garden
she's a certified genius
she's a former supermodel, being offered $10K a week modelling jobs
she's an expert in dim mak
dim mak is the same thing as chin na

That's just what I can recall off the top of my head; I'm sure I'm missing some.

Please keep this firmly in mind when evaluating any advice she gives, and take it with a mountain of salt.

[SevenStar]

Originally posted by Ego_Extrodinaire
Serpant,

How can you say that BL is completely wrong when within your own understanding, there are examples that agree with her?

because BL's generalization is applying to all big guys. That is wrong.

In any case you must consider functional strength. For example if a person were to train up using their muscles on one plane - common to exercise machines, they may not have to co-ordination to cover a wide range of movement in say a fight.

There are other aspects, such as the muscles for balance in the lower back etc, that a so called strong person may not have developed.

Of course someone with good functional strength in a relative and absolute sense would also be very atheletic.

I think this is the point that BL is trying to bring across, which I hope I'm doing justice in paraphraising what she says. Again what BL is saying is right.

people tend to confuse bodybuilding with strength training...

[Mr Punch]

Originally posted by Ego_Extrodinaire
Just by way of a friendly advice, girls don't have nuts. Nobody told me! I'm gonna hafta have a word with my 'girl'friend... :eek:

Tao Yin, enough with the bullying crap already... like the crazy broad doesn't give as bad as she gets. People only give her **** cos she's arrogant, egotistical and wrong... she's got bigger cohones than most as far as hypocrisy too so you can keep your bleeding heart nonsense.

I'm not hard, I don't pretend to be... and I never have arguments with people, but I do talk straight. If that offends you, excuse me.

[TAO YIN]

Oh come on Mat, calm down, enough with your crap already. Bleeding heart. Hahahahha! As if I had one. You don't like being bullied I notice. In case you didn't notice, most people are arrogant, especially on internet forums. Oh, I forgot hence the edit..."Straight talk" usually reads as hard talk on internet forums, both literally and subjectively. I mean, you did tell me to stop sucking balls right? Anyway, nothing much offends me except stealing my children, so say what you like.

"We can do this all day."

[Mr Punch]

LOL, who's bullying me? :D

Shame there isn't a smiley for disinterest to show you just how agitated I am. If I were any calmer I'd be dead.

I talk the same in real life, and I never get into fights and rarely seem to rub people up the wrong way... tone can be a lot. Well, I've apologised to you once, and I'm just about done with explaining myself, esp to someone who has yet to contribute to the (any?) discussion...

"We can't do this all day cos it's 2:50 am over here!":rolleyes:

BTW I still stand by my, and many other people's assessments of BL, and though her posting style is mellowing a little she's still full of it, and though not every thread is turning into a BL fest nowadays it's still a high proportion. But even so if you think me telling you to stop sucking BL's nuts was in any way serious (since she is indeed a woman) you should change your pant-liner. Get over yourself. Good night.

[TAO YIN]

Hahahaha, You get over yourself.

You know this is all a joke right, and has been, don't you? Yeah, it's about 3:00 am over here now. Oh yeah, I contributed to the (any) discussion, but maybe my questions were either taboo or no good. Anyways, take it easy. Good very early morning.

[joedoe]

Of course size and strength matters. They aren't everything, but they ceratinly count. If they didn't matter, then we would not need the martial arts to try to overcome those advantages.

[blooming lotus]

thank you Joe Doe for some common sense logic!!

7* they certainly do and particularly on these boards ;)

Matt:- when you get over the fact you shouted about how you knew more about everything, were the undeniable residing expert and when you would like to give us explaination as to why you had no idea on a how to pertaining to your own art basics meets fitness training basics , that me of only 5 mths study in your art , but bulk health and fintness and qigong internal practice did , and your corresponding acknoweledgement of it, I'll be happy to pay your credit. Til then, deal with it. these days, there are schools everywhere and sorry Matty boy, you're not the only one who attended.

[Mr Punch]

Originally posted by blooming lotus
Matt:- when you get over the fact you shouted about how you knew more about everything...When? Show me where I said this...
... were the undeniable residing expert ...When? Show me where I claimed this...
and when you would like to give us explaination as to why you had no idea on a how to pertaining to your own art basics meets fitness training basicsWhen? Show me where I said this. I've been in my MMA class for only five months, I'm a complete newbie and not pretending to be anything else, and I don't know the name of one exercise... so shoot me. At least I assume that's what you're babbling about...
... that me of only 5 mths study in your art but bulk health and fintness and qigong internal practice did , and your corresponding acknoweledgement of itWhich one of 'my arts' have you trained in? Aikido/jutsu 14 years and counting, and I don't remember you putting me right on anything about that, but if you'd like to discuss something feel free, this is a discussion board.

Or maybe wing chun, 9 years and counting, and I don't remember you putting me right on anything about that, but if you'd like to discuss something feel free, this is a discussion board...

If you are talking about the rib-power thread, when I posted something, you didn't refute or even directly address anything I said, then I agreed with something you said, and questioned the validity of something else... this is called discussion: adults have them.
I'll be happy to pay your credit. I don't want anything from you, except that you shut up.
Matty boyI notice you use the word 'boy' a lot. There are some of us on this board who are grown men and women.

[IronFist]

Originally posted by blooming lotus
what I'm saying though is A. the more "overly" muscled you are the less range of movement and speed you'll have ( scientifically trading that off for the strength in strike you may or may not get away pending opponents skill) and is of no use to the smaller , faster more accurate and focussed player.

Haha, as other people have already said, that's so wrong!

In Arnold's "New Encyclopedia of Bodybuilding," there's a pic of Tom Platz (or was it Lee Priest?) doing full splits. I think Tom Platz has like the biggest quads ever, and Lee Priest is pretty **** big, too. The point is tho, these are professional bodybuilders who are more flexible than most martial artists. Granted, one instance doesn't prove a rule, but I've never seen any *evidence* anywhere (other than MA instructors who don't know what they're talking about) that having big muscles makes you inflexible.

You know what else makes you inflexible? Not stretching. How many regular people do you know that can bend forward and touch their palms on the ground? How many regular people can do the splits.

Now that I think about it, I think the only thing that makes you inflexible is not stretching. Lifting weights has nothing to do with it, really.

Second of all, the strength you get from added mass makes up for the extra weight of the mass itself. Have you ever seen the big fat olympic lifters who have 3 or 4 foot vertical jumps? Do you think they can jump higher than pro basket ball players because they're slow?

Ok, there are a few exceptions where VERY big people have limited range of motion. But since 99% of the population can't get that big even if they tried, it doesn't really matter. Besides, a MA would not want to get that big anyway so it's not the point. The time required EATING and SLEEPING to get that big would waste all his training time, not to mention eating 7-10,000 calories a day doesn't really make you feel like being active and training.

You know what's funny? All these MA'ists are all "ooooh, lifting weights gives you big muscles and big muscles make you slow." But look at how many fat MA's there are. How come no one ever says "man I need to lose weight. All this fat is making me slow?" I know muscle weighs more than fat, but still.

I guess MA's just want to feel powerful despite not lifting weights, so they spread these rumors. Either that or they're just REALLY misinformed.

btw, did I mention that the fastest athletes (olympic athletes) on the planet lift weights? Must not slow them down too much.

[FngSaiYuk]

Originally posted by IronFist
Second of all, the strength you get from added mass makes up for the extra weight of the mass itself. Have you ever seen the big fat olympic lifters who have 3 or 4 foot vertical jumps? Do you think they can jump higher than pro basket ball players because they're slow?


Great overall post, however I disagree on this particular point. There is a curve of relative power gained over the added mass of added muscle. The slope of this curve is not continually positive the more muscle mass that is added. There is a 'sweet spot' which is unique for each individual and the purpose to which they are building their muscles.

[Knifefighter]

Weight lifting develops fast-twitch muscle fibers. These muscle fibers contract..

guess how..

yes, quickly.

Weight lifting helps to develop speed and quickness by developing the muscle fibers that contract at a rapid rate.

Performing slow-motion, lengthy, martial arts forms develops the slow twitch muscle fibers.

Who do you think is going to be faster, quicker, and stronger?

[SifuAbel]

Originally posted by Knifefighter


Performing slow-motion, lengthy, martial arts forms develops the slow twitch muscle fibers.



You mean tai chi?

[IronFist]

Originally posted by Knifefighter
Performing slow-motion, lengthy, martial arts forms develops the slow twitch muscle fibers.


There's something called SAID (specific adaptation to imposed demands). This means basically that whatever you make your body do, it will get better at. So if you want to be able to sprint, you practice sprinting. If you want to be able to run marathons, you practice distance running. Distance running will not make you a better sprinter, and sprinting will not help you run a marathon.

For this same principle, practicing slow, lengthy martial arts forms will only make you better at performing slow, lengthy martial arts forms. It won't make you better at normal speed stuff, and it won't make you punch faster or harder. The only thing it may do is reinforce neural pathways, which has some benefit, but that's another topic altogether.

[Serpent]

Nice work, Ironfist - great posts.

KnifeFighter - why do you assume forms are slow?

[Mr Punch]

Ironfist - great posts.

[blooming lotus]

Originally posted by IronFist
Haha, as other people have already said, that's so wrong!

In Arnold's "New Encyclopedia of Bodybuilding," there's a pic of Tom Platz (or was it Lee Priest?) doing full splits. I think Tom Platz has like the biggest quads ever, and Lee Priest is pretty **** big, too. The point is tho, these are professional bodybuilders who are more flexible than most martial artists. Granted, one instance doesn't prove a rule, but I've never seen any *evidence* anywhere (other than MA instructors who don't know what they're talking about) that having big muscles makes you inflexible.

You know what else makes you inflexible? Not stretching. How many regular people do you know that can bend forward and touch their palms on the ground? How many regular people can do the splits.

Now that I think about it, I think the only thing that makes you inflexible is not stretching. Lifting weights has nothing to do with it, really.

Second of all, the strength you get from added mass makes up for the extra weight of the mass itself. Have you ever seen the big fat olympic lifters who have 3 or 4 foot vertical jumps? Do you think they can jump higher than pro basket ball players because they're slow?

Ok, there are a few exceptions where VERY big people have limited range of motion. But since 99% of the population can't get that big even if they tried, it doesn't really matter. Besides, a MA would not want to get that big anyway so it's not the point. The time required EATING and SLEEPING to get that big would waste all his training time, not to mention eating 7-10,000 calories a day doesn't really make you feel like being active and training.

You know what's funny? All these MA'ists are all "ooooh, lifting weights gives you big muscles and big muscles make you slow." But look at how many fat MA's there are. How come no one ever says "man I need to lose weight. All this fat is making me slow?" I know muscle weighs more than fat, but still.

I guess MA's just want to feel powerful despite not lifting weights, so they spread these rumors. Either that or they're just REALLY misinformed.

btw, did I mention that the fastest athletes (olympic athletes) on the planet lift weights? Must not slow them down too much.


I've also read arnie saying he could never pull off an ma routine nor technical execution. Btw , I was actually referring to range of movement on the strike and splits at own pace are hardly the same thing to pulling it in a fight.



Mat: okay .....and yah, I was talking about the iron body / rib expansion on the wc thread. Fair statements, but if you're claiming that adulthood , grow up a little ha and make it consistent.

[blooming lotus]

Originally posted by IronFist
How many regular people do you know that can bend forward and touch their palms on the ground? How many regular people can do the splits.



you mean, there are folks who can't ??? :eek: :eek:

[SevenStar]

Originally posted by blooming lotus
I've also read arnie saying he could never pull off an ma routine nor technical execution.

On the same token, you can't place in a bodybuilding competition. It's not what you train for, just as MA isn't what he trains for.

[blooming lotus]

I know I'm going to cop trolls for this post, but in light of integrity, actually in full training I most definately could. It is part of my training to synospis to train every group to max function at every range of movement , and to be frank , I've considered it several times in the past myself. but as we klnow, that river does not flow both ways.

[SevenStar]

no, you couldn't. I've seen a pic of you. you don't have the definition to place in any contest. working out is one thing, but what they do is quite another.

[cerebus]

Well hey, she could be world San Shou champ (if she wanted to), or an Olympic athlete (if she wanted to), so hey why not a bodybuilder (if she wanted to.............. :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: ).

[SevenStar]

However, if you can do all of these things that you claim you can - place in bb contests, be a world champ in san shou, etc. Why aren't you doing any of it?

[cerebus]

Because she "doesn't want to" and "isn't into competition" (trollspeak for "because she can't really" :p :p ).

[blooming lotus]

exactly.. can't possibly , busy elsewhere..... end of story.

[cerebus]

Dam mit people wipe your shoes before you come in! Someone's tracking blooming lotus all over the forum! Eew! :mad:

[blooming lotus]

now there you go, that was creative!!!

[SevenStar]

Originally posted by blooming lotus
exactly.. can't possibly , busy elsewhere..... end of story.

whatever... imagine it - if you were making your living via MA, you would have more time to devote to chan and to your studies.

[blooming lotus]

very tempting and really....if I get home, that's the plan. I've looked into various dojos for wc and ninjutsu and sounds perfect. can't wait to kick off......



now if someone will just point me to nxt dptr at the "illegal immigrant " / "ppl smugglers" dock, I'll be on my way ;)

[Ego_Extrodinaire]

Bloominglotus,

Sounds like a good plan, hope it pans out well.

Sevenstar,

I think you under estimate the work involved in making a living from martial arts. It's more than just the fighting skills you possess, but also teaching skills. Fortunately BL has both. There is also another side to the equation which involves running a business ranging from boring old accounting work to advertising.

I feel that people who run small businesses are brave and I always wish them all the best.

[SevenStar]

Originally posted by Ego_Extrodinaire
Sevenstar,

I think you under estimate the work involved in making a living from martial arts. It's more than just the fighting skills you possess, but also teaching skills. Fortunately BL has both. There is also another side to the equation which involves running a business ranging from boring old accounting work to advertising.

I feel that people who run small businesses are brave and I always wish them all the best.

That's pretty muchg my point, dude. If she really has all that she claims, it should be a snap for her. She doesn't even have to run a school. With all of the skills and abilities she claims to have, she can make a living merely off of doing seminars all over the globe.

[SevenStar]

Originally posted by blooming lotus
very tempting and really....if I get home, that's the plan. I've looked into various dojos for wc and ninjutsu and sounds perfect. can't wait to kick off......



now if someone will just point me to nxt dptr at the "illegal immigrant " / "ppl smugglers" dock, I'll be on my way ;)

you still intend on trying to open a wc shool?

[Toby]

With her 9mths-ish of "wing chun knives", she's almost overqualified.

I just pray she heads to the east coast :o.

[Ego_Extrodinaire]

Sevenstar,

You underestimate the difficulty in setting up a MA business. To travel around the world and give seminars is very expensive. You actually hope to break even when you add up the expenses from a world tour. When you're away, you need to hire people to run your shop.

But if BL were to setup shop, I'll be first to sign up for membership. I think you will too.

[SevenStar]

I'm very aware of that. We have a bjj black belt that comes to see us for two weeks out of the year. If she's as good as she claims, it can be done.

Royce comes here twice a year as well. As good as she claims to be, she can achieve such status.

I will pretend I didn't see your last sentence.

[Ego_Extrodinaire]

Sevenstar,

I agree, I'm not saying it can't be done. In all areas of endeavour, there is a line which separates hobby and profession. I've seen many doctors, dentist, chemist etc.... fail dispite the fact that they are shall we say "exponents" in their field. Why, because there business management skill wasn't there.

But to risk personal capital in setting up a business is a very brave step indeed. And on that point, size does matter but so does agility in meeting unforeseeable challenges the business may run into. There maybe an optimal size.

(Just to bring the discussion back on track else you might decide to ban me). You can't have a forum without a troll, albeit a loney troll :(

[SevenStar]

bl ASKED to be banned.

It definitely takes business sense, but, as she said, she is a certified genius. I would think she either knew how to handle that or knew someone who could assist her.

[Toby]

Originally posted by Ego_Extrodinaire
... endeavour ...You accidentally used Australian spelling Kelvin ;). You wanna watch that.

[Ego_Extrodinaire]

Originally posted by SevenStar
bl ASKED to be banned.

It definitely takes business sense, but, as she said, she is a certified genius. I would think she either knew how to handle that or knew someone who could assist her.


actually far as I personally know, she's shedding no tears and found sensible disscussion elsewhere!

besides, she revoked that comment before the boss - troll caught it anyway....... and now who the heck are you going to fight and scrap with???

( looks for cover )

[Toby]

That last post (and the others posted in other threads at the same time) has a decidedly Eyebrows-feel to it. Wouldn't it be funny if Kelvin had pm'd his idol and allowed her to use his login details to post?

[Serpent]

Originally posted by Toby
That last post (and the others posted in other threads at the same time) has a decidedly Eyebrows-feel to it. Wouldn't it be funny if Kelvin had pm'd his idol and allowed her to use his login details to post?
LOL. Good call, Tobes. Far too many ....'s in that post for Ego. Or he's just impersonating bl now that his attention wh0re has been banned.

[joedoe]

Originally posted by Serpent
LOL. Good call, Tobes. Far too many ....'s in that post for Ego. Or he's just impersonating bl now that his attention wh0re has been banned.

Sorry Serp, but I am going to have to pull you up for incorrect use of the apostrophe there :D