PDA

View Full Version : About big and small guys



luihu
29th September 2001, 12:08
Weightlifting and its advantages are one thing and trying to learn to fight is other thing. Both are interesting subjects, but I would be happy to have a discussion about how does your bodystructure help or harm you when trying to do both. It seems to me, that nowadays the weightcontrol is in more and more important position. Most of the people I know who train daily, consume dietary supplements to help them recover from training. I do that also.

But, is it really necessary to be a big guy? Smaller and thinner are in sometimes in better positions than fat or even big and muscular people. I do not believe that only benchpressing and weightlifting makes you good fighter, if you forget all aerobic exercises and donī't care how much fat you gain.

My opinion about weight is something like this. It doesnīt really matter how much you weight. Question is about training and how much fat you have. For an example Ken Shamrock is a big guy around 110kg, but I would bet that his fat-percent is even less than 10. Sumo wrestlers have lot of weight, but also lots of fat, which makes them little bit clumsier, but not slower. Cos they're so massive they actually are damn fast. But are they really good "fighters"?

J.Pap

luihu
29th September 2001, 14:00
This is useless message, can not delete. it really sorry.
J.Pap

R. L. Anglen
29th September 2001, 15:52
Interesting post, J.Pap. I made a comment just a minute ago, before reading this, about Shamrock's weight and body fat on a thread about weight lifting and the martial arts.

Size really is a matter of perspective. You and I both have a similar memory of how much Ken Shamrock weighs (110 KG to you, 225 LBS to me) - but to you that is big, and to me that is not very big. However in retrospect, if I were to think back prior to beginning power lifting a couple of years ago I think 225 did seem BIG to me. Now big is anything over 250 LBS. Probably if I continue power lifting, in about another year or two 250 will seem average. So size is a matter of perspective.

Your equation for martial success that you present (at least as far as the physical body) seems to be training plus low body fat.

I do not think body fat is very important to fighting ability or speed. I can think of many pro football players (USA style with pads, not soccer or rugby) who are 250-300 LBS and very very fast. I think Bruce Lee (and later Jean Claude Van Damme) did a disservice to martial artists who idolized him(them) by creating the image that having very low body fat is synonymous with being a good martial artist. Thank God for Sammo Hung.

George Foreman who made a boxing comeback about 4 years ago beat the tar out of some young kid, although he was over 45 years of age and actually toating quite a bit of blubber. Larry Holmes (former world heavyweight boxing champion) was never slender.

However I do agree with you that training is a key. I cannot remember his name, but there was a barrel chested Olympic sprinter from the 1940's who was quite lardy - but set a world record in his event. I think he ran the 100 yards (back then they ran the one hundred yards and not the 100 meter). I believe that a male with high body fat (20% and above), or even average body fat (15-18%) can often perform as well as any male with an athletic body fat (10-14%). Especially in events requiring athletic speed and explosiveness. However without training it is obvious he would not have been an olympic competitor.

The USA olympic lifting team in 2000 were all extremely portly, but had vertical leaps literally equal to the USA Olympic basketball team. I am sure a knee strike to the head from one of those fat boys would render you goofy. And I bet they can skip in on you and close the gap as fast as some 140 LB Bruce Lee.

I know you agree that the big boys can be fast, but I also think the fat athletes can be equally coordinated as a more lean athlete, and that fat does not render them clumsy. There are too many athletic examples to mention regarding athletic dexterity by someone with over 20% body fat.

R.L. Anglen

luihu
29th September 2001, 17:15
Actually last was meant to be reply to your article, but I managed to press wrong button, sorry.

It is true, that fat can be fast. I know that in 20m start the Finnish champion is one of our leading, sorry but I do not know the right term, guy who throws 10kg metal ball. If I recall right he weights about 140 kg ( same as Alexander Karelin).

Problem with body fat and in some situations with muscle is that they eat a lot of oxygen. You mentioned football players as an example for fast people. They are fast, but they probably wouldnīt do so well in sports, where you need long term strenght and endurance. Same thing goes with weight lifting with the intention to gain mass.

Probably because I am quite slim 180 cm and average 75kg with 7% body fat, my subjective view is opinion, that it is better to have muscles than fat;) Nobody can argue that you can not be good with sports with high body fat, but for some reason most top martial artists donīt have big belly.

At the end question is all about how do you choose your sport. If you have to wrestle, mass is plus, but if you have to perform long term activity with high kicks, it might be worthwhile to lose some weight.

With respect
J.Pap

R. L. Anglen
29th September 2001, 17:22
Well I can't argue with any of your points here. Another problem with more body mass it heat dissipation (cooling off). We recently had a death of a football player due to heat stroke while training, and he was about 300 LBS.

But I guess I consider fights to be something that are over relatively quickly, so I do not consider endurance a big factor. I run 2-6 miles a day myself, but really just for health. With guns, knives and chairs smashed against a persons head in a fight - I am not one to put another person in the gaurd position (Brazilian Jiu Jitsu) and try to wear them down, except for Dojo play.

Considering English is probably a second language, you use English very well.

NoMan
29th September 2001, 20:54
Regardless of any/all accompanying masses inside the body, two hundred pounds of muscle, is still two hundred pounds of muscle. The problem in relations to body fat is that it hampers more to endurance than any sort of explosive/ballistic strength. Those are problems such as excess stress on the ligaments in the knee, ankles, stress on the back, things of those nature. If you are really fat, it can start crowding up your internal organs, making breathing very difficult. As you can tell, that would make endurance related events a bit more difficult. Fat CAN be an advantage however. Intracellular pressure is a thing of use for powerlifters in the extreme competitive fields. To the laymen, it's not a big deal unless you are up in the 270 lbs. + field. Ken Shamrock wasn't "big" via bodyweight, he was big via muscle mass. If I'm going to be critical of Ken's body, his legs were disproportional to his upper body, big time. Especially notice his calves in his first UFC fight. I thought that it would be due to running, (heavy endurance runners rarely have big legs), but I read his autobiography and he only mentions jogging as a mild warm-up for him. In his book, he claims that his lower body is stronger than his upper body, but I doubt his squat strength is anywhere equal to his benching, which (was) well over 600 lbs.

Ruairi Quinn
29th September 2001, 23:18
.

R. L. Anglen
29th September 2001, 23:25
I know I am straying a bit off topic - and it is not really relevant to the bottom line of this topic, BUT....

I am doubtful Ken Shamrock has a bench over 600 LBS.

Go to Powerlifting.com and look at the records. Lets assume Ken is slightly bigger then we estimated and lets say he is 242 LBS. The open division national record for the bench press for individuals in the 242 LB weight class is only 545.50 LBS. I really doubt Ken has a bench press in excess of 55 more then the national record. If you look at the collegiate record for someone in the 242 LB body weight class , the record bench press is 522 LBs.

Maybe I am wrong, but if Ken has a 600 LB bench at 225 LBS, he should just walk into a contest and set a new record. He would blow way past the record. Usually records are broken by hundredths of a second, or fractions of a pound. One of the only times a world record has been really shattered was years ago in the long jump. Usually records are broken by small degrees. Ken would literally blow away ANY competition.

This is not to slight Kens fighting ability. I think he is one of the worlds best no holds barred fighters, and possesses some of the best well rounded capabilities. But if he stated he has a bench press over 600 LBS, I think it is doubtful

NoMan
30th September 2001, 03:15
Thanks for the heads up. I swear I thought it was 600 lbs. Either him or Tank Abbot was claiming 600 lbs. + on the bench press in one of the UFC's, and I thought it odd because, well, that's a whole lot of weight. Hmm... regardless, you made me dig through the book and see where he talks about his records. Pg. 137: "I have a strong chest and fair-sized biceps. I can bench press more than 500 pounds.." It appears I may have unintentionally maligned Shamrock. Even so, being able to bench over 500 lbs. in his weight class does leave a little to the imagination, noting the records you listed. One point about powerlifting though is that most guys have never done single-lifts. Usually, they guestimate, (what I call it), by figuring, "If I bench press 405, 10 times a set, I figure that I can bench press 470 no problem." Whether or not their presumptions are correct leaves a lot to the imagination.

luihu
30th September 2001, 07:17
I mentioned loss of endurance as an example of disadvantages, because atleast our legal system is very strict with violence. I would guess that some americans would even say that it wonīt allow to protect yourself with all means necessary. In a way it is a good thing, but maybe we can get back on that later. So my humanistic thinking goes like this:
1. It is not nice to harm people by hitting them or knocking them out, especially when there is good possibility to get caught, and you could have done something else, even if it would have taken more training.
2. Wearing the opponent out with slightest means possible is the best option, for you and your opponent. At least if you are in decent place where you can expect to get the police, or some kind of help, at decent time.

As Anglen announced, if you want to be a good wrestler, you have to have good endurance. Of course you wonīt get far without proper technique as well, but if you can wrestle someone down and put him in painful lock, I would prefer that instead of bashing his face with chair.

When talking about two men fighting eachother, it is usual, that the winner is decided by wrestling. Think about UFC, and I think you get my point.

If small guy and a big guy fight with eachother, often psychology aids the smaller fighter, because the big guy does not consider him as dangerous opponent as he could be. On the other hand for the smaller guy, if he doesnīt get too afraid, aka. is well-trained, it still is question of life and death, cos he sees a huge danger ahead of him and surely tries with everything he has.

And what comes to my English, I should write more, because it isnīt fluent yet. Shame considering that I had to study it in school for 10 years.

József Pap
-small guy

R. L. Anglen
30th September 2001, 23:50
Jozsef, first I think your English is actually very good. Secondly, more then many others on the E budo site, not only is your grammar decent, but you make valid points. Thirdly, you do so without insulting others. That puts you in an elite status here at E budo.

Your ethical points of wearing a fighter down in a "real life" combat situation is well taken, but I am not sure I would advise anyone to follow the same. In my opinion, the gaurd or the mount are not recommended outside of a sport ring, because of knives etc. Holding someone in the guard position just gives someone with a knife in their pocket or sock ample opportunity to use it at close range. Fights are unfortunate, but it is my opinion to finish them quickly.

No man, no kidding 500 LBS is a big bench. I looked up the world record for the 110 kg body weight class (which Ken would fall in) and it is 270 kg (594 LBS). Ken is arguably one of the most powerful fighters pound for pound.

joe yang
2nd October 2001, 14:34
There is a twelve year old kid in my dojang, he can't weigh more than 75lbs, he's under 5' tall. I never saw anything like him. He can move in on an 18 year old kid twice his size, step up on his thigh, kick and punch him and get back out before half the refs know what happened. The kid really is a terror in point tournaments. Before anyone detracts, we train full contact, and the kid is just as good in his weight class in full contact tournaments. Me, I'm just jealouse.