Mir vs. Lesnar 2

[Wuyizidi]

Check out the reader comments from the Yahoo Featured Story on the the fight. I for one find it amusing now that MMA guys are on the receiving end of 'your sh@t ain't real' type comments. Maybe there is some merit to the idea that "sometimes it's not the art but the practitioners"?

http://buzz.yahoo.com/article/1:y_sport ... p57W2CfNdF

Hmm, die hard WWE wrestling fans vs. die hard MMA fans, who to root for?

[Wuyizidi]

Aw, c'mon, you guys must be kidding. How come all of a sudden size means everything? Doesn't everybody know some 120lb Asian master who would just wipe up the floor with Lesnar?

But, seriously folks, in a contest of size, strength, speed, skill and will, it's the person with the best combination of all those elements who will probably win. Lesnar is big, fast and strong, and he's skillful "enough" and wants to win "enough" that it will take someone with a better combination of those qualities to beat him. He's been beaten before. The hype about his size or Neanderthalness is good for business. Sooner or later, he'll face an opponent with "enough" of the qualities needed to beat him. Hey, he couldn't have beaten Andre the Giant in his prime ... or probably ever.

It's a sign of how disengaged empty hand fighting is from today's reality that we even have these discussions. In the old days everyone knows these two basic facts of fighting: in empty hand fighting, size and power are the most determinate factors; in weapons fighting, skill is the most important factor.

We can think of empty hand fighting as a scaled down version of weapons fighting. Here the source of destructive power is the human body itself (vs. electrical, mechanical, chemical... power of the weapon). In that regard every one of us is born with a theoretical capacity as a fighter. If mine is a rating of 100, then someone like Lesnar is probably 250. Martial art training is designed to bring our body as close to that theoretical limit as possible.

Martial art is not magic. All any system can do is to make you the best fighter possible given the body you're born with.
A lot of time that will not be enough if the opponent is sufficiently larger to start with. No system can make Woody Allen defeat Mike Tyson in an empty hand fight. If an 120 pound master can defeat a 200 pound man, then it is because the smaller master brought him body close to the upper limit (120 * 90% = 108), while the larger man's capacity is severely underdeveloped (200 * 50% = 100).

With weapons, especially modern weapons, most of the destructive power come from high technology of the weapon itself, it asks very little of the body of the operator. Here Woody Allen merely has to sight the weapon and pull the trigger. In that case it doesn't matter how big Lesnar or Tyson is in comparison. You want to talk about power, speed, accuracy, quickness, agility, maneuverability, coordination..., in modern weapons systems that's all done by the machines. No human being can hope to match what the machines can do.

Here the challenge is understanding. Are you smart enough to learn how to use it, how to make it? Incidentally that's the problem with a lot of people practicing martial art today. A lot of them are very smart. Once they think they have the underlying theories figured out, their effort stops. But in unarmed combat, understanding ≠ ability to actually do it.


Wuyizidi

[everything]

great post wuyizidi

[Steve James]

Well, I agree that weapons are equalizers; that's from sticks to sharp things to missiles. However, that merely changes the context to favor skill over physical strengths. If Lesnar is trained to use a knife (remember Posey in "Dirty Dozen") or taught to be a competent shooter, then it equalizes him, too.

Imo, the only thing impractical about these arguments is the presumption that conflicts are "fair" or even that both parties even understand that a conflict is occurring. I.e., the "best" way to fight is dirty and to run away if there is no clear advantage. Think the obvious US v. Vietnam. We, as relatively traditional mas, think of conflicts in terms of one on one duels (that are no longer to the death). That is rarely the case now, and that's probably nothing new. It doesn't really matter whether we're talking about empty hand or armed combat.

[Wuyizidi]

Well, I agree that weapons are equalizers; that's from sticks to sharp things to missiles. However, that merely changes the context to favor skill over physical strengths. If Lesnar is trained to use a knife (remember Posey in "Dirty Dozen") or taught to be a competent shooter, then it equalizes him, too.

Imo, the only thing impractical about these arguments is the presumption that conflicts are "fair" or even that both parties even understand that a conflict is occurring. I.e., the "best" way to fight is dirty and to run away if there is no clear advantage. Think the obvious US v. Vietnam. We, as relatively traditional mas, think of conflicts in terms of one on one duels (that are no longer to the death). That is rarely the case now, and that's probably nothing new. It doesn't really matter whether we're talking about empty hand or armed combat.

Right, if Woody Allen and Lesnar were to fight by launching long-range rockets from computer terminals, then they may be equals. Knife is a much more primitive tool, Woody would still be at great disadvantage: a knife offers hardness, sharpness. It multiplies the effect of a hit. It allows you to disable someone with one small but well-placed hit. But all the things that leads to landing that hit: power, speed, balance, reflex, coordination, agility, mobility, strategy, tactics, timing, angle, direction, etc, all that still has to come from the user.

Wuyizidi

[DeusTrismegistus]

Aw, c'mon, you guys must be kidding. How come all of a sudden size means everything? Doesn't everybody know some 120lb Asian master who would just wipe up the floor with Lesnar?

But, seriously folks, in a contest of size, strength, speed, skill and will, it's the person with the best combination of all those elements who will probably win. Lesnar is big, fast and strong, and he's skillful "enough" and wants to win "enough" that it will take someone with a better combination of those qualities to beat him. He's been beaten before. The hype about his size or Neanderthalness is good for business. Sooner or later, he'll face an opponent with "enough" of the qualities needed to beat him. Hey, he couldn't have beaten Andre the Giant in his prime ... or probably ever.

It's a sign of how disengaged empty hand fighting is from today's reality that we even have these discussions. In the old days everyone knows these two basic facts of fighting: in empty hand fighting, size and power are the most determinate factors; in weapons fighting, skill is the most important factor.

We can think of empty hand fighting as a scaled down version of weapons fighting. Here the source of destructive power is the human body itself (vs. electrical, mechanical, chemical... power of the weapon). In that regard every one of us is born with a theoretical capacity as a fighter. If mine is a rating of 100, then someone like Lesnar is probably 250. Martial art training is designed to bring our body as close to that theoretical limit as possible.

Martial art is not magic. All any system can do is to make you the best fighter possible given the body you're born with.
A lot of time that will not be enough if the opponent is sufficiently larger to start with. No system can make Woody Allen defeat Mike Tyson in an empty hand fight. If an 120 pound master can defeat a 200 pound man, then it is because the smaller master brought him body close to the upper limit (120 * 90% = 108), while the larger man's capacity is severely underdeveloped (200 * 50% = 100).

With weapons, especially modern weapons, most of the destructive power come from high technology of the weapon itself, it asks very little of the body of the operator. Here Woody Allen merely has to sight the weapon and pull the trigger. In that case it doesn't matter how big Lesnar or Tyson is in comparison. You want to talk about power, speed, accuracy, quickness, agility, maneuverability, coordination..., in modern weapons systems that's all done by the machines. No human being can hope to match what the machines can do.

Here the challenge is understanding. Are you smart enough to learn how to use it, how to make it? Incidentally that's the problem with a lot of people practicing martial art today. A lot of them are very smart. Once they think they have the underlying theories figured out, their effort stops. But in unarmed combat, understanding ≠ ability to actually do it.


Wuyizidi

I know a 140lb master who I have watched wipe the floor with someone weighing 350lbs + with 15 yrs of MA experience. However he isn't asian

Honestly Wuyizidi I must disagree. I am lucky to be at a school where we have people of vastly differing sizes. I am probably the 2nd heaviest at 260 right now and I have some of the most trouble with the smaller guys. Its all about learning how to deal with the size. The skills exist to do so. I can't even hit close to as hard as my teacher despite outweighing him by 120 lbs. A person can only be so strong, or so fast, but if that was all there is to fighting then why are we trying to study a path that eschews those attributes for the much less apparent abilities of the IMA masters? If skill cannot overcome size and strength then we are wasting our time. And the early UFC showed that skill beats size and strength. Mir lost because he didn't fight correctly. He lost his head, took stupid risks, and put himself at the disadvantage. He didn't lose because he is smaller.

[Chris Fleming]

Naw, Mir lost because he got his ass beat. Brock wasn't giving Mir any opportunities to be caught in a sub this time. He used his superior size, strength and explosiveness (even from short distances) to beat Mir. If he didn't have those things, the match would have been completely different.

[Bhassler]

Size is an attribute. Strength, speed, accuracy/coordination, power, etc. are partly attributes and partly skills. Depending on one's beliefs about the degree to which things like strength, etc. are attributes vs. the degree to which they are skills will vastly affect how they train and how they fight. My experience is that the skill component is more important than the innate attributes of a person, but certainly that is not everyone's experience.

While in Boulder one time Xie Peiqi casually in passing launched a loud-mouthed young man such that said youngster was embedded in the drywall between studs. To those that saw it, it looked like just a touch. Was this kind of power an innate attribute or a skill?

[Steve James]

Like I said, we hear of people who know 120lbers who could launch Lesnar all the time. They all have the opportunity to do it, not just talk about it.

[Bhassler]

Well, Xie Peiqi is dead, so he probably doesn't have much chance at taking Lesnar's title away-- I just used him as an example because he's well known and generally accepted as "the real deal"-- and he was also very small.

And for the record, I'm just framing the question differently so that people (if they choose to) can start to clarify for themselves exactly what they think strength, skill, power, etc. are rather than just arguing back and forth endlessly whether they think Lesnar is good or just a 'roided up beast. It doesn't matter what people think, but they should have an idea why they think that for purposes of self-understanding, not necessarily to defend it to others.

For myself, I kind of hope that Lesnar takes all comers and defends his title for the next 20 fights or so until he decides to retire on top. Right now he's the bad guy, but if he continues to work and learn he could retire as one of the greatest in the sport. I like to see guys overcome adversity, even if they are the biggest and the strongest.

[chud]

Check out the reader comments from the Yahoo Featured Story on the the fight. I for one find it amusing now that MMA guys are on the receiving end of 'your sh@t ain't real' type comments.

LOVE IT!!!

and if brock loses his next fight...oh freakin well...he came from hollywood to hardknocks and all you mma diehards are speechless...I am smoking a cigar dippin it in brandy right now and thinkin ...about how this is almost as satisfying as the giants beating the pats ...and their cheating coach

[Steve James]

All I'm saying is that size and strength do matter, but they can be overcome. Even more, it's not the size; it's the individual with it. The same with skill. Take sprinting, for ex.. Some people have bigger legs and more natural speed; others have better technical skill. You can watch them coming down the track and see the difference. But, you can't tell who will win a race.

As far as Lesnar goes, I'll bet that all the people who've beaten him in the past have been smaller than he was. Moreover, I have the feeling that none of them believed that Lesnar couldn't be beaten because he was so big and strong. As the old saying goes: "It ain't the size of the dog in the fight; it's the size of the fight in the dog."

Otoh, the reason for the hubbub about big Brock is all the background bs about mma and martial arts that started long before the UFC --which, we remember, was started to showcase just these sort of open contests between styles and stylists. The Gracies said their style could defeat anyone else's, and they won a lot of their fights. Then, specialists from other arts began cross-training, and we had mma (per se). So, people like Hughes, etc., started to say that mma (a la the new ufc) was "the" example of contemporary martial arts. They scoffed at traditionalists (especially karate and tkd) and ridiculed WWE athletes. Now they've got Machida and Lesnar ... whoops, gotta flip the script. All we need now is for one of the ima masters to come and really put them all in their places. I'm just tired of hearing them talk about it. They have the perfect opportunity to shut them up forever. Lesnar would be the perfect victim; especially since we know he's defeatable.

[chud]

They scoffed at traditionalists (especially karate and tkd) and ridiculed WWE athletes. Now they've got Machida and Lesnar ... whoops, gotta flip the script. All we need now is for one of the ima masters to come and really put them all in their places.

I know, it's going to happen. I can't wait.

[Darth Rock&Roll]

I hope you guys aren't serious.

IMA training is not intensive enough to stand up in a sporting venue.
That much is abundantly clear right now.

Heck, IMA doesn't seem to standup to any sportive combative venues when it comes right down to it.

I love yoga, I love qigong and I love the practice of Moving Ch'an.
But can IMA be used to fight for real? Well, not really and certainly not demonstratively so far.

great for health and keeping supple, definitely not for fighting though by all indications.

[chud]

I hope you guys aren't serious.

IMA training is not intensive enough to stand up in a sporting venue.
That much is abundantly clear right now.

Heck, IMA doesn't seem to standup to any sportive combative venues when it comes right down to it.

I love yoga, I love qigong and I love the practice of Moving Ch'an.
But can IMA be used to fight for real? Well, not really and certainly not demonstratively so far.

great for health and keeping supple, definitely not for fighting though by all indications.

I think someone who trained Xingyi seriously at a young age, and cross-trained with some ground fighting stuff, could come in and do well in the UFC.