Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[mrtall]

As for wrestling, Cael Sanderson, Daniel Cormier and Yoel Romero are easily on the leve of Karelin in terms of wrestling skill, except for the fact that the wrestling competition is stiffer at their weight class compared to Karelins. There are simply way more talented wrestlers at that size.

we're not talking about skill - that is a sub-set. We are talking about absolute undefeatablility! Heavy weight champions and contenders can easily defeat champions of any other weight class despite a slight relative lack of skill. Period.

My point is that the most undefeatable wrestler of modern times of any weight was 6'4. A tall, powerful guy with mad skills is generally unbeatable by anyone

Skills are good, and loads of small guys have skills, but its the whole package that counts

[Moubgf]

actually that is incorrect. there are plenty of factual records, warrants against barons and masons, raids on castles to find corroborating evidence, the entire document was printed in the barvarian national paper all of which there are archived records for.

it was a huge scandal in the late 1700's. and the masons as a group were outlawed from entire countries.

you need to look for more information. it does exist. warrants and all matters dealt with for conspiracy/treason/subversion are locked into the archived records. and the letters from George Washington are all categorized and inventoried. specifically talking about the iluminati. just because you cant find any official records does not mean there are none.

ps I don't use marijuana. I use raw unpasteurized milk though for trace levels. I understand what you are saying about using it at different stages in life as a tool. and I agree with you. 

ps. humans are suppose to use marijuana. specifically for brain function to remain optimal. and specifically when in the growing years. and especially when you are a new born.

You take what i say to literal. Humans will not make the connection between the warrant on a mason and illuminati. Also the masons are not the illuminati just like the jews are not illuminati.

[GROWtalORdieTRYING1]

no your wrong. no connection needs to be made. because it was the Bavarian illuminati that also just happened to be the masons.

According to available documents, the Ancient Illuminated Seers of Bavaria (commonly known as the Bavarian Illuminati) were founded by Adam Weishaupt (Spartacus) on May 1, 1776

your not dam well getting it....... they were not the masons who I "am just calling" the "illuminati"..... their actual name was the Bavarian iluminati and was written as such in the documents.

Also the masons are not the illuminati just like the jews are not illuminati

this is an incorrect statement, what I think you meant to say is that being a jew or a mason does not automatically make you apart of any secret society. (illuminati is just 1 of many secret society's) they all inter relate and overlap with members. there is no 1 group. it is a collection of groups that form an financial oligopoly.

. After founding the Bavarian Illuminati in 1776, Weishaupt was initiated into a Masonic Lodge of Strict Observance, Lodge Theodore of Good Council (Theodor zum guten Rath) in Munich early in 1777.

they are 2 groups with overlapping members.

I don't want to get into a history lessen here. just go read the national records.

[programdude]

This topic is so wildly off topic lol..

[GROWtalORdieTRYING1]

anyway getting back on topic.

I think the best method is to teach girls that just as they would not date a 4"7 man, we will not date a 600 pound woman.

explain to them that the equivalent of a man getting shorter is the same as it is for a woman to get fatter and fatter.

when a man is too short the girl your talking to wont date him, and likewise as a woman gets fatter all men have their cut off aswell.

its as simple as that. we are looking for the best person to mate with and physical appearance is indicative of superior genes.

no need to be all angry at each other when discussing it. I think just explain your point of view to women and it should be fine. they wont like being equated to short men, but it is the truth. and they will just have to deal with it.

[Wannabegiant]

we're not talking about skill - that is a sub-set. We are talking about absolute undefeatablility! Heavy weight champions and contenders can easily defeat champions of any other weight class despite a slight relative lack of skill. Period.

My point is that the most undefeatable wrestler of modern times of any weight was 6'4. A tall, powerful guy with mad skills is generally unbeatable by anyone

Skills are good, and loads of small guys have skills, but its the whole package that counts

Well currently the baddest man on the planet is 6'1, while some time ago it was Fedor who was 6'0. I understand that 6'0 is considered tall, but if your logic holds true, then the absolute biggest and tallest dude should be the most dangerous or unbeatable, which is not true at all. Fedor defeated giants like hong man choi that where 7 feet 2 inches tall, and Semmy Schilt that was 6'11. Those guys where skilled for their size too, but in fact their size actually works against them here, since they can never be as fast or coordinated as a smaller guy.

The same way a skilled 6'0 foot guy can have a definite advantage in fighting against a skilled 7'2 guy, a 5'10 guy can have a definite advantage over a skilled 6'4 guy. There are so many other factors in fighting that height is not nearly as important as you think.

[programdude]

anyway getting back on topic.

I think the best method is to teach girls that just as they would not date a 4"7 man, we will not date a 600 pound woman.

explain to them that the equivalent of a man getting shorter is the same as it is for a woman to get fatter and fatter.

when a man is too short the girl your talking to wont date him, and likewise as a woman gets fatter all men have their cut off aswell.

its as simple as that. we are looking for the best person to mate with and physical appearance is indicative of superior genes.

no need to be all angry at each other when discussing it. I think just explain your point of view to women and it should be fine. they wont like being equated to short men, but it is the truth. and they will just have to deal with it.

Women get way too crazy when anything about weight and their gender get brought up, its like hardwired into them.

[GROWtalORdieTRYING1]

Women get way too crazy when anything about weight and their gender get brought up, its like hardwired into them.

you are right.
LOL if in doubt just call them the name of some really fat stereotype animal. and then start making animal sounds and laughing. if they wont listen to reason then just laugh at them lol at the end of the day as long as we understand what is going on that is all that matters.

[mrtall]

but if your logic holds true, then the absolute biggest and tallest dude should be the most dangerous or unbeatable, which is not true at all.

The same way a skilled 6'0 foot guy can have a definite advantage in fighting against a skilled 7'2 guy, a 5'10 guy can have a definite advantage over a skilled 6'4 guy. There are so many other factors in fighting that height is not nearly as important as you think.

At no point did I say the that height and fighting ability were linear. I said that 6'4 is probably the sweet spot all else being equal; tremendous grappling ability is still possible, whilst jab and reach and punching speed are all very high.

This extends to other sports:  6'0 - 6'4 is the "ideal" for most physical sports, but there will always be exceptions and geniuses.

[Wannabegiant]

At no point did I say the that height and fighting ability were linear. I said that 6'4 is probably the sweet spot all else being equal; tremendous grappling ability is still possible, whilst jab and reach and punching speed are all very high.

This extends to other sports:  6'0 - 6'4 is the "ideal" for most physical sports, but there will always be exceptions and geniuses.

Thats only theory though, we have to many exceptions to that rule and there are also to many variables to take into account when determining fighting ability that we cannot say that any specific size is the best, and even if there was an ideal size, there would always exist people shorter than the proposed "ideal", that could beat them.

[mrtall]

Thats only theory though, we have to many exceptions to that rule and there are also to many variables to take into account when determining fighting ability that we cannot say that any specific size is the best, and even if there was an ideal size, there would always exist people shorter than the proposed "ideal", that could beat them.

yes I accept that at the elite level.

But for you or me, being tall is a massive advantage to staying out of trouble. Being tall and ripped is intimidating and average idiots won't risk picking on you.. whereas my shorter friends (5-6-5'9) get picked on occassionally in public settings despite being stockier

And if they do I can keep them at bay with my 2 metre jab. The odds of coming across a specialist MMA fighter are pretty low.

[Wannabegiant]

yes I accept that at the elite level.

But for you or me, being tall is a massive advantage to staying out of trouble. Being tall and ripped is intimidating and average idiots won't risk picking on you.. whereas my shorter friends (5-6-5'9) get picked on occassionally in public settings despite being stockier

And if they do I can keep them at bay with my 2 metre jab. The odds of coming across a specialist MMA fighter are pretty low.

Yeah i cant really argue with that, although in a street fight it would be easier for them to punch/kick you in the groin, considering the smaller guys  are likely to be significantly faster than a guy your size.

[Overdozer]

Being tall and ripped is intimidating

And thus more taunting and provocative. And so is your attitude. You'll get in trouble if you keep it up, your long limbs won't compensate for your ignorance. Mark my words.

[Taller]

Exilde, if his fighting prowess won't make him feel good about his height, then what will?

Sometimes ckiness in small doses can be a healthy thing. It sure makes for good discussion here.

[mrtall]

And thus more taunting and provocative. And so is your attitude. You'll get in trouble if you keep it up, your long limbs won't compensate for your ignorance. Mark my words.

Absolute rubbish. And no, I won't mark your words. I've been 6'7 for 15 years and not a SINGLE person has tried it on once.

Get over your own insecurity, the fact is when you get to this height, the intimidation factor is just super strong.. I would not pick a fight with anybody powerful and >6'3+ and for good reason, I suggest you don't either.

[mrtall]

Yeah i cant really argue with that, although in a street fight it would be easier for them to punch/kick you in the groin, considering the smaller guys  are likely to be significantly faster than a guy your size.

Actually I would say I'm faster than average.. 5% bodyfat, and pretty strong for bodyweight.

In my experience in fighting, smaller guys haven't been able to get that close, it might seem like its the case,
but jab has kept them at bay as its quite a risk coming in that close. I haven't fought a real heavyweight before though, I suspect they could breach my defences pretty easily, but 16 stone guys are rare and for good reason most people will avoid getting into trouble with them!

Anyway the point is more that height and build are satisfactory deterrants to threats. That is why its great and women feel safe with you.

[Wannabegiant]

Actually I would say I'm faster than average.. 5% bodyfat, and pretty strong for bodyweight.

In my experience in fighting, smaller guys haven't been able to get that close, it might seem like its the case,
but jab has kept them at bay as its quite a risk coming in that close. I haven't fought a real heavyweight before though, I suspect they could breach my defences pretty easily, but 16 stone guys are rare and for good reason most people will avoid getting into trouble with them!

Anyway the point is more that height and build are satisfactory deterrants to threats. That is why its great and women feel safe with you.

Like some other guy in this thread said, i would be more intimidated by a medium height and big stocky dude, rather than a very tall guy but with average build. But maybe this is because i know quite a lot about fighting compared to the average guy.

Also, if the smaller guy can get past one of your jabs they will be on the inside already, and also many guys can eat a jab pretty decently without going down, its not a powerpunch. If they get on the inside, you with your height will have big problems preventing them from destroying your groin with low blows. The best you could do at this point is downward elbows but if they are smart they can hide their head under your armpit to make that very difficult to land for you.

Btw im not arguing social perception of height, thats a different subject and has been done already. Im arguing fighting prowess here. And height is not nearly as significant of an advantage here.

[Carter]

For fighting,  physical skills > height difference between a average and tall guy.   

A trained fighter would duck your punches and lock your arms to break them.  The fight would be over in 15 seconds.  The average guy doesn't do this, so it's just about not pissing off the wrong guy.   You also have no chance in a street fight if 3 guys attack you with weapons

The best fighting is no fighting unless you do it for a living.  lol.   

[Polycrates.]

mrtall,

Is most of your height in your legs? The reason I ask is because I want to know if you'll be worried about disproportion if you remove that amount of length from your legs.

[Moubgf]

Walked past my somewhat friend when leaving the bathroom at a party once. All i could say is Wow when he was infront of me.

If we wore to fight we would probably grab each other and wrestle. In that sense he would use his bodyweigt to get me down. And i feel that i see no damage points that i can take on him. Weird to fight a dude that has his shoulders/ribcage in your face. It feels like im fighting his body more than his face. And as a unexperienced fighter i would like to go for the face because that is the 1 shot scenario. While if i have to work the body i have to punch through layered clothes and it feels like my punches does no damage you know?. Really need to learn how to fight taller guys efficently incase it ever goes down.

And that i mean unprovocted fighting. If i was mad as hell i guess it wouldn't matter what height he is i get a f**king wire and strangle his ass..

[mrtall]

Walked past my somewhat friend when leaving the bathroom at a party once. All i could say is Wow when he was infront of me.

This^^

it takes years of specific training for a smaller built guy to easily take on a strong, trained 6'2+ fighter. EVEN FOR ME AT 6'7 I find it way more difficult and daunting.. its that penetrating reach that's so difficult to deal with.. its a nightmare infact.

All this talk of.. oh just kick him in the groin, oh smaller guy will be much faster etc... sounds good in theory, but when some angry, stacked 6'4 guy is throwing punches in your face its a whole different story. I can't even imagine what it'd be like dealing with that at 5'8!!!! And then you go.. "just go on the inside" and f**k him up with grappling... well unfortunately all it takes is one knee or elbow drop on on your head as you go down low for the takedown and your dead. A smaller fighter has to take on a lot more risky a strategy to take down a bigger one. I'd rather be the rule than the exception to the rule.

[Greek-Semidget]

In America they use guns, as for fighting skills they are barely needed nowdays. Oh and a 5'4 man who is reach can kill any guy with just a phone call.

[Wannabegiant]

This^^

it takes years of specific training for a smaller built guy to easily take on a strong, trained 6'2+ fighter. EVEN FOR ME AT 6'7 I find it way more difficult and daunting.. its that penetrating reach that's so difficult to deal with.. its a nightmare infact.

All this talk of.. oh just kick him in the groin, oh smaller guy will be much faster etc... sounds good in theory, but when some angry, stacked 6'4 guy is throwing punches in your face its a whole different story. I can't even imagine what it'd be like dealing with that at 5'8!!!! And then you go.. "just go on the inside" and f**k him up with grappling... well unfortunately all it takes is one knee or elbow drop on on your head as you go down low for the takedown and your dead. A smaller fighter has to take on a lot more risky a strategy to take down a bigger one. I'd rather be the rule than the exception to the rule.

It doesnt take years, it depends on the talent on the individual, even rookie trained guys will have a significant advantage over guys who havent even tried the sport.

Also you are making the unfair comparison of making the short guy seem unathletic compared to the taller one ("smaller built" vs strong 6'2 guy). We are discussing the effect height has, so to make a fair comparison, a strongly built short guy against a strongly built tall guy, lets say Mark Hunt vs Cheick Kongo:

http://assets.sbnation.com/assets/968995/Hunt-Kongo_SDW.jpg

Mark Hunt is 5'10, Cheick Kongo is 6'4. And in this case the taller guy was actually significantly faster than the shorter guy which is unusual. Didnt stop Hunt from wrecking Kongo with ease thanks to his superior skill. His build would also make it very very difficult for the taller guy to take him down.

Also another thing to take into account, is that without steroids/PEDs, its very difficult for a taller guy to become as thickly built as a shorter guy, its easier to become bulky and strong at a shorter height on average. If you see a 6'3 guy who looks like body builder you can almost be certain that he is on some type of PED.

this means that we are more likely to see a strong and bulky short guy vs a slimmer but still strong tall guy. And then it becomes a lot more even in terms of advantages and disadvantages.

[mrtall]

Mark Hunt is 5'10, Cheick Kongo is 6'4. And in this case the taller guy was actually significantly faster than the shorter guy which is unusual. Didnt stop Hunt from wrecking Kongo with ease thanks to his superior skill. His build would also make it very very difficult for the taller guy to take him down.

This guy Cheick Congo was pretty lame so I can't really take this as a representative example... deserved to get his ass kicked by that fat guy.. (samoans are freakishly strong tho.. they are somewhat exceptional at any height)

I did some analysis to see how commonplace shorter fighters are, as by your logic there should be at least some champions knocking around given the tiny factor height plays is in your eyes.  Shall we see the the results?

List of ALL consecutive UFC heavyweight champions since 2000

jDSantos  6'4
Cain Velasques  6'1
Shane Carwin   6'2
Frank Mir 6'3
Brock Lesnar 6'3
Antônio Rodrigo Nogueira 6'3
Randy Couture 6'1.5
Tim Sylvia 6'8
Andres Arlovski 6'4
Rico Rodriguez 6'3
Josh Barnett 6'3

Mean height: 6'3.2 inches
Mode height: 6'3
instances of sub six foot fighters:  ZERO

The fact is, the most undefeatable fighters are tall. And there may be
some rare exceptions otherwise amongest journeymen contenders or examples of loss (I know they may have lost the occassional fight to a shorter guy -- no need to list them , but the CHAMPIONS are
tall with no exceptions.

I am choosing 6'3.5 as a height because I believe it to be the best alround,
these numbers almost exactly support such thinking.

I didn't even bother with heavyweight boxing because height is an even bigger advantage.. even 6'2 David Haye was considered small in this division!!

[Moubgf]

Mark hunt is samoan. They no humans

[Wannabegiant]

This guy Cheick Congo was pretty lame so I can't really take this as a representative example... deserved to get his ass kicked by that fat guy.. (samoans are freakishly strong tho.. they are somewhat exceptional at any height)

I did some analysis to see how commonplace shorter fighters are, as by your logic there should be at least some champions knocking around given the tiny factor height plays is in your eyes.  Shall we see the the results?

List of ALL consecutive UFC heavyweight champions since 2000

jDSantos  6'4
Cain Velasques  6'1
Shane Carwin   6'2
Frank Mir 6'3
Brock Lesnar 6'3
Antônio Rodrigo Nogueira 6'3
Randy Couture 6'1.5
Tim Sylvia 6'8
Andres Arlovski 6'4
Rico Rodriguez 6'3
Josh Barnett 6'3

Mean height: 6'3.2 inches
Mode height: 6'3
instances of sub six foot fighters:  ZERO

The fact is, the most undefeatable fighters are tall. And there may be
some rare exceptions otherwise amongest journeymen contenders or examples of loss (I know they may have lost the occassional fight to a shorter guy -- no need to list them , but the CHAMPIONS are
tall with no exceptions.

I am choosing 6'3.5 as a height because I believe it to be the best alround,
these numbers almost exactly support such thinking.

I didn't even bother with heavyweight boxing because height is an even bigger advantage.. even 6'2 David Haye was considered small in this division!!

That is an extremely bad argument, dont you realize that the fact that most shorter fighters will weigh significantly less, which means that in their optimal fighting weight there is no reason for them to fight above their natural weight class. Very few sub 6 feet fighters will weigh enough in shape to fight at that weight. In the UFC pretty much every fighter cuts signicant weight which means that mos shorter fighters will not only have the height and reach disadvantage, but also a massive weight disadvantage if they where to fight at HW.

So that explains why the HW fighters are all around that height, because fighters of those kind of heights are natural heavyweights, most smaller guys dont even try to fight at HW, but that doesnt mean they cannot be successful there despite the huge weight disadvantage in addition to being shorter.

Look at Igor Vovchanchyn, he is 5'8 and he only fought LHW and HW opponents and managed to get an 36 fight winning streak only fighting bigger and taller opponents, many which where very skilled.

So your argument is simply invalid, it might sound reasonable in theory, but in the real world we dont actually see any proof of it. So many examples of shorter fighters destroying bigger and taller fighters on the elite level that you cannot claim that the taller fighters are more undefeatable.