Size vs Skill

[bushido_man96]

DP, that's a very good point to make. Some people believe they are "starting a fight," and another may believe they are going to kill someone. Two different mindsets, to be sure.

Bob, I like the points you've made. Of the two, I think the dual is easier to avoid, especially if one is able to be free of his ego. If it isn't avoided, it's usually due to egoism (but not always).

[Zaine]

- on the mentality point, i have a very good friend who also trains and we are a very similar size. He was going on and on one day about how 'deadly' some of his techniques would be in a fight. We were near a road and i asked him to demonstrate and pretend we were just fighting, as he was quickly setting himself i grabbed him, and went to throw him into the street (i kept a very tight hold so he didn't go onto it) and explained to him that while he prepared and got ready for his 'fight' i had just thrown him under the wheels of a bus so i win by squish! He wasn't ready for someone to fight outwith the rules of what he thought were sensible and fair.

This is what is so scary about real fights, and a big reason why I hope to never be in another as long as I live. You just don't know the intent of the assailant. Because of this, you have to assume the worst. My original sensei would always tell us that in this situations, be ready to kill someone because they could be ready to kill you. Now, he also taught constraint, and how to incapacitate rather than kill, but the message was always there. If it's them or me, I'm going to choose me.

[KarateKen]

- on the mentality point, i have a very good friend who also trains and we are a very similar size. He was going on and on one day about how 'deadly' some of his techniques would be in a fight. We were near a road and i asked him to demonstrate and pretend we were just fighting, as he was quickly setting himself i grabbed him, and went to throw him into the street (i kept a very tight hold so he didn't go onto it) and explained to him that while he prepared and got ready for his 'fight' i had just thrown him under the wheels of a bus so i win by squish! He wasn't ready for someone to fight outwith the rules of what he thought were sensible and fair.

This is what is so scary about real fights, and a big reason why I hope to never be in another as long as I live. You just don't know the intent of the assailant. Because of this, you have to assume the worst. My original sensei would always tell us that in this situations, be ready to kill someone because they could be ready to kill you. Now, he also taught constraint, and how to incapacitate rather than kill, but the message was always there. If it's them or me, I'm going to choose me.

That is kind of how I look at it. Every street fight is a potential life or death situation for the fighter. Even if the attacker is not intending to kill there have been times where a person died in a street fight from hitting their head after being knocked down. You also don't know if someone is hiding in the bushes and will jump out and attack you from behind.

[KarateKen]

I know this has a lot of variables and might be impossible to answer, but how much training would a person need to overcome an attacker who is larger than they are?

Person A is 5'9" tall 165 pounds, a second-degree black belt with 8 years of training and they get attacked by person B who is 6'3" 220 pounds with zero training, who would have the advantage?

Going back to this original question for some clarification. Seeing the way the conversation has evolved, I think defining some things is important.

How do we define "overcoming" the attacker? Are we talking about standing over our fallen opponent in victory? Or are we talking about doing just enough to get away and be safe, and avoid injury as much as possible? Are we talking about two people having a disagreement, and then "stepping outside," dual style? Or we talking about the sudden violence of an ambush attack? I think identifying these parameters can add some nuance to the conversation.

Overcoming the disadvantage of being smaller when attacked. So, assuming one is violently attacked by another person, unarmed, single attacker, and is not able to get away without conflict.

Though I think the dual style conversation would be interesting!

[DarthPenguin]

I know this has a lot of variables and might be impossible to answer, but how much training would a person need to overcome an attacker who is larger than they are?

Person A is 5'9" tall 165 pounds, a second-degree black belt with 8 years of training and they get attacked by person B who is 6'3" 220 pounds with zero training, who would have the advantage?

Going back to this original question for some clarification. Seeing the way the conversation has evolved, I think defining some things is important.

How do we define "overcoming" the attacker? Are we talking about standing over our fallen opponent in victory? Or are we talking about doing just enough to get away and be safe, and avoid injury as much as possible? Are we talking about two people having a disagreement, and then "stepping outside," dual style? Or we talking about the sudden violence of an ambush attack? I think identifying these parameters can add some nuance to the conversation.

Overcoming the disadvantage of being smaller when attacked. So, assuming one is violently attacked by another person, unarmed, single attacker, and is not able to get away without conflict.

Though I think the dual style conversation would be interesting!

Would also need to add a little more nuance : is the attack unannounced (coming up behind and attacking) or can the smaller person see the attack coming and prepare for it?

[bushido_man96]

Overcoming the disadvantage of being smaller when attacked. So, assuming one is violently attacked by another person, unarmed, single attacker, and is not able to get away without conflict.

If this is the case, then I think it is far easier for the smaller person to turn the tables enough against a larger attacker in order to stifle the attack, reduce the damage done, and get away from the situation.

Would also need to add a little more nuance : is the attack unannounced (coming up behind and attacking) or can the smaller person see the attack coming and prepare for it?

This brings on a whole bunch of other aspects. Starting with being aware of your surroundings (situational awareness), learning to notice pre-contact cues given off by an attacker, things of that nature.

[DarthPenguin]

Good points bushido_man!

I think what it comes down to is it is actually quite a complex topic and probably lends itself to a lot of sub-categories (competitive fighting; 'civilised altercation' (ie a disagreement with someone who would still stay within accepted norms); being attacked but with some restraint on part of attacker (hurt not kill); life or death situation. Probably loads more too!

It's also quite hard to answer on here as everyone trains! So even though quite a few people 'meet the criteria' for the 'big person' in the initial scenario, we all train so it is hard to answer properly objectively! From a personal standpoint i started MA training at 5 (with the odd gap over the years due to life and injuries as most will have), and i was always tiny until i hit 16 (i didn't hit 5' until i was about 12, got to 5'10 when i was 15, started uni at 16 at 6'3" (our schooling ages are different so i was leaving normally as a younger person in the year) and topped out at 6'4"). So i can't ever think of having been the 'big unskilled person' in the scenario (from this context anyway - i would say i could get a lot more skilled!!)

[KarateKen]

I know this has a lot of variables and might be impossible to answer, but how much training would a person need to overcome an attacker who is larger than they are?

Person A is 5'9" tall 165 pounds, a second-degree black belt with 8 years of training and they get attacked by person B who is 6'3" 220 pounds with zero training, who would have the advantage?

Going back to this original question for some clarification. Seeing the way the conversation has evolved, I think defining some things is important.

How do we define "overcoming" the attacker? Are we talking about standing over our fallen opponent in victory? Or are we talking about doing just enough to get away and be safe, and avoid injury as much as possible? Are we talking about two people having a disagreement, and then "stepping outside," dual style? Or we talking about the sudden violence of an ambush attack? I think identifying these parameters can add some nuance to the conversation.

Overcoming the disadvantage of being smaller when attacked. So, assuming one is violently attacked by another person, unarmed, single attacker, and is not able to get away without conflict.

Though I think the dual style conversation would be interesting!

Would also need to add a little more nuance : is the attack unannounced (coming up behind and attacking) or can the smaller person see the attack coming and prepare for it?

I'd like to discuss both situations.

[bushido_man96]

I'd like to discuss both situations.

Sounds great. Do you have some opening thoughts?

[KarateKen]

I'd like to discuss both situations.

Sounds great. Do you have some opening thoughts?

I liked what someone posted earlier in the thread about how even though they were younger and larger than their grandmasters they know they have no chance.