speed or stregnth?

[supajuice]

hey guys! I'm just doing some reasearch about speed or stregnth. when I mean speed I mean that a guy could dodge very well. when I say stregnth I mean, hits hard always resists hits. thanks. stickaay!

[Fairfax_Uechi]

hey guys! I'm just doing some reasearch about speed or stregnth. when I mean speed I mean that a guy could dodge very well. when I say stregnth I mean, hits hard always resists hits. thanks. stickaay!

I'm not sure what you're asking. Basic physics has a formula Force = Mass times Acceleration. In other words the more speed and the more mass you have the more force you'll generate. So it always gives me a chuckle when folks debate this. Based on F=MA, both have an equal input into the equation. In other words, say your punching. You can generate so much power say 4 units. Lets say your mass (or the amount of power you have, for this example) is 2 units. And lets say your speed is 2 units. So if you can increase your speed (or more correctly acceleration) one unit, and keep the mass the same, the amount of force you generate from 4 units to 6 units. Likewise if you increase your power increases but your speed stays the same, you generate more power. In other words, they have an equal affect.

Now the key is that it's very hard to increase your strength. It takes lots of time and effort in the gym lifting weights correctly. Do it wrong, and you waste lots of time. But if you can do it, you can generate more force.

Now, many very strong folks are slow, and unless they work on speed they won't get faster.

Likewise, most folks who don't train for speed are not incredibly fast. So for most folks it's easier to increae speed, hence it seems to have a greater impact.

So with all of this said, if you can increase both speed and power (and it can be done) you can generate a lot more force. Just looks at baseball and football players. They train hard and are getting stronger and faster every day.

So if you can, do both and you'll be strong and fast, and pack a wicked punch and kick!

[White Warlock]

If you were hoping for a short survey, with no input, it's likely this isn't going to be all that beneficial a survey for you. Fairfax' points are valid, in that neither speed nor strength are valid ends.

Speed is measured by the distance you travel given a finite timeline, but developing acceleration is actually a more apt goal. If you are able to accelerate through all your techniques, despite the resistances presented by your adversary, then you will clearly present more capability of utilizing your mass to a greater extent than say someone who does not work on developing their ability to accelerate through their techniques.

Strength is far more subjective, and one must consider so many 'set' values, as well as some variables, in order to present an examination of strength being a determinate in a confrontation. Mass, center of balance, weight distribution, muscular power in the legs or arms or torso, the degree of dependence on strength to effect a technique (many techniques require very little strength, if done properly, and thus if strength is utilized it is due to a technique being done improperly... which could cause the person performing said technique, via the use of strength, to be exploited), your opposition's physical dimensions, etc. As a whole, strength is more an abstract than an applicable value. At least in comparison to acceleration.

It is the system itself, and the techniques applied therein, that determine whether one or the other is more effective in presenting the benefits of said system. Personally, i would say... given a choice between the two, i would choose acceleration over strength. The problem here is, strength also effects acceleration, while acceleration 'and' strength effect presentation of power. Granted, mass is more a factor than strength, but it can be argued that mass in motion is essentially a presentation of strength. For to move mass in the first place requires strength, and to accelerate, requires plenty of strength... sufficient to move a large mass at an increasing rate of speed.

[White Warlock]

hey guys! I'm just doing some reasearch about speed or stregnth. when I mean speed I mean that a guy could dodge very well. when I say stregnth I mean, hits hard always resists hits. thanks. stickaay!

On the other hand, your examples present defense being associated with speed, and offense being associated with strength. These are not appropriate examples, for both are a factor in offense and defense.

Also, being able to resist a hit is more along the lines of 'skills' and conditioning, not physical power.

[karatekid1975]

For me, as a female, I count on speed (and technique). I don't have much "mass" but I know if I get more "speed" into a breaking technique, for instance, I know I will be better off (complete the break). If I try strength alone, it doesn't work for me.

As far as taking hits, I can take hits better than some females, but I'm not the best. I still get the wind knocked out of me if I get caught in "mid breath" so to speak.

I don't know if that's what you are looking for, but that's what works for me.

[cheetahkata]

running training can help u with your speed and strength.

[Synaesthesia]

One of the reasons that humans aren't bruisers is because we weigh in with sharp weapons and projectiles.

Speed and agility in war. Brute strength in dominance brawls.

Just a thought. I'm not voting for the reasons White Warlock put so well.

[mean fighter]

In my MAs school my instructor stresses the same thing, Velocity is Power

[ovine king]

something that needs to be repeated many many times:

we are not point masses.

[shogeri]

The poll questions are kind of weak.

----------------

Speed, balance, position, and timing.

There are others, but those are the most crucial.

The other's are flexibility, endurance, agility, mental prowess, and technical skill.

You can have all the strength in the world, and if you cannot get there first, it will more than likely be for nothing, especially if someone of equal or greater caliber comes along.

Or just someone luckier.

The true test of strength is not necessarily related to mass or velocity.

Rather strength is (or should be) measured when one takes into consideration, all of these things we speak of.

Thus when we say one person in a combative situation is stronger than another, we do not mean to imply physical or muscular size or ability to use such (excel in).

Rather we say that collectively that person is a stronger fighter than the other.