Fight Science

[jj19902003]

i personally liked it it had alot of data and i would have also liked to have seen iron palm impact force. and other stuff on the iron systems. speaking of the iron systems does any know any thing of the trainng of them except for iron palm?

[HG]

speaking of the iron systems does any know any thing of the trainng of them except for iron palm?

Iron is a general term in Chinese martial arts for a conditioned part of the body or extremities. Results come gradually over time without adverse effect on long term health. Other arts have similar training just named different. Specifics of the methods are best learned from a qualified instructor.

[bushido_man96]

well, just had an ad on foxtel (oz pay tv) that next month is MA month on NatGeo, and fight science will be on the menu.

i will have my 160gb HDD recorder just in time too.

Sweet!

[little kicker]

you can watch it here http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e9EjF9Zlubg

[Menjo]

In terms of experimental design, Fight Science fails miserably. They not only use only ONE practicioner as example for each "type" of art (never mind that each 'style' has many schools within. They also use people of different ages and different size, weight, height and body type. Probably they have different levels of proficiency.

For example the Muay Thai guy, Melchor, is pretty well-known, while the other guys are pretty obscure. So there is no way to tell if it is fair to compare them. The Karate dude I never heard of in my life, and his technique didnt seem to good to me according to traditonal karate standards. And so on.

Another example, They use a strong, heavy person to represent boxing and a small, athletic person for kung-fu. Based on what these representatives do, they conclude that boxing punches the hardest while kung-fu punches the fastest. Obviously, they have rigged the results from the beggining, based on their preconceptions about the art, and because they use a sample size of ONE!? for each style.

Conclusion? "Fight Science" was in fact not scientific at all, statistically speaking. Fancy technology doth not science make.

I agree. Whats worse is that there might be more shows like this, making statements like that without considering options.

The Karate dude I never heard of in my life, and his technique didnt seem to good to me according to traditonal karate standards. And so on.

Yeah, I question his skill, especially after seeing the video.

I wonder what style he takes, the way his techniques are used look alot different than what I've ever seen.

[Sengra]

What's with the TKD guy going topless and going berserk with the Katana?