Fight Science [Archive] - Kyokushin4life

View Full Version : Fight Science


jcbel
02-03-2010, 06:51 PM
Has anyone seen this on National Geographic?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FjVvhDwFnJk&feature=fvw

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XlzUuMLTiLM

I borrowed the DVD from the local library and the first episode is on MMA fighters, second episode is self-defence with Bas Rutten, and third episode is Spec Ops.

I've only watched the first episode so far and the testing is somewhat flawed but interesting still!

I vaguely recall seeing some Bas Rutten self-defence videos before and they were absolutely brutal so it will be interesting to see how "sanitized" this one will be.

sandman
02-03-2010, 07:02 PM
Osu!

Yes, I've seen this. As you mentioned, the testing is very flawed - they don't take size / weight of the fighters into consideration, and even if they did you can't call a study "scientific" if you base your conclusions on 1 of each test type of test subject. You would really need a a large number of fighters from each category and control for weight and a whole number of other variables before you can really draw conclusions.

FredInChina
02-03-2010, 07:07 PM
(...)You would really need a a large number of fighters from each category and control for weight and a whole number of other variables before you can really draw conclusions.
Why? you completely underestimate the power of television...
If they say it is, then who are you to argue?
And who cares?
And if someone cared, how would they hear you anyway!

Please revise your judgment :D
Osu!

sandman
02-03-2010, 07:27 PM
You know what? You are right Fred - they have sensors and pressure transducers and I don't. I got ahead of myself :o Sorry!

:D

FredInChina
02-03-2010, 07:31 PM
You know what? You are right Fred - they have sensors and pressure transducers and I don't. I got ahead of myself :o Sorry!

:D
Apologies accepted --- I sure hope I could get myself one of these truth telling machines... :D

Hangtime
02-03-2010, 08:28 PM
How ironic; Sandman and I were just talking about this Saturday.


...yes, I suspect Bas won't be doing his typical self defenses ;)

Bardock
02-03-2010, 09:17 PM
Bleh.. back when I was watching Fight Quest and Human Weapon.. I just "had" to find something alike that..
so I did what every reasonable person would do, I went to wikipedia and went to the "also check this out" page..

And then I saw fight science..
and it was noted it had been heavily criticized due to their flawed "facts"

Godai
02-03-2010, 09:39 PM
Science is great and can be a real help in many things. However lately "science" has become the latest craze and it seems to have worked it's way into everyone's vocabulary looking to prove something. When it comes to fighting I think that people have climbed the science mountain so far that they reached the top and don't realize they are on the other side heading down now!

Science can be used to aid fighting to a point IMO, but you shouldn't lean on it. Understand it to understand points of what you do in fighting and technique but then forget it. I know that scientists like to say that there is a scientific explanation for everything but a fight goes beyond that. When you get too scientific you end up getting beat by natural instincts and the unorthodox.

Logic and science should win fights; the problem is the world is full of amateurs and fools. Better to fight on their level, only smarter. ;)



Osu-EN1

FredInChina
02-04-2010, 08:00 AM
Science is great and can be a real help in many things. However lately "science" has become the latest craze and it seems to have worked it's way into everyone's vocabulary looking to prove something. When it comes to fighting I think that people have climbed the science mountain so far that they reached the top and don't realize they are on the other side heading down now!

Science can be used to aid fighting to a point IMO, but you shouldn't lean on it. Understand it to understand points of what you do in fighting and technique but then forget it. I know that scientists like to say that there is a scientific explanation for everything but a fight goes beyond that. When you get too scientific you end up getting beat by natural instincts and the unorthodox.

Logic and science should win fights; the problem is the world is full of amateurs and fools. Better to fight on their level, only smarter. ;)



Osu-EN1
Great post Godai; I mostly agree and would like to contribute by beaming the flashlight from a slightly different angle.

I believe science is slow, mostly tedious and boring at the research stage, journalists are profoundly ignorant and their pulic want spectacular action right now.
The medium of distribution (TV) is also competing for audience and their choice is clear cut between a dull true to protocol scientific demonstration that concludes "we don't know enough as yet to give you an absolute answer" and a spectacular sophism or speculation or outright lie that produces a snapping soundbite that can be twittered and repeated - TV uses the "science" vocab for the apparent authority it confers.

I omitted conflicts of interest and outright crowd manipulation on purpose...

At any rate, MAs are not MSs - there ought to be a good reason for that, right? :)

Osu!

kakatootoshi
02-04-2010, 08:09 AM
After reading another thread about legal issues arised from fighting outside the Dojo, I am more convinced that in today's world, understanding law is more practical than learning science in many ways.

liuzg150181
02-04-2010, 08:37 AM
After reading another thread about legal issues arised from fighting outside the Dojo, I am more convinced that in today's world, understanding law is more practical than learning science in many ways.

Not unless you intend to work in a secret lair harboring a certain diabolical megalomaniac who is bent on taking over the world with some secret weapon of mass destruction.:p

Science,for starters, is seldom viewed as practical by the general public, until the marriage of industry and science, which can be said to be originated from the US.

liuzg150181
02-04-2010, 08:43 AM
Great post Godai; I mostly agree and would like to contribute by beaming the flashlight from a slightly different angle.

I believe science is slow, mostly tedious and boring at the research stage, journalists are profoundly ignorant and their pulic want spectacular action right now.
The medium of distribution (TV) is also competing for audience and their choice is clear cut between a dull true to protocol scientific demonstration that concludes "we don't know enough as yet to give you an absolute answer" and a spectacular sophism or speculation or outright lie that produces a snapping soundbite that can be twittered and repeated - TV uses the "science" vocab for the apparent authority it confers.

I omitted conflicts of interest and outright crowd manipulation on purpose...

At any rate, MAs are not MSs - there ought to be a good reason for that, right? :)

Osu!
I think most people have misconceptions of what science is, and I think Richard Feynman,the maverick physicist of the 20th century had a lot to say about it:

"We have found it of paramount importance that in order to progress, we must recognize our ignorance and leave room for doubt. Scientific knowledge is a body of statements of varying degrees of certainty some most unsure, some nearly sure, but none absolutely certain. "

"Our freedom to doubt was born out of a struggle against authority in the early days of science. It was a very deep and strong struggle: permit us to question to doubt to not be sure. I think that it is important that we do not forget this struggle and thus perhaps lose what we have gained."

"Science alone of all the subjects contains within itself the lesson of the danger of belief in the infallibility of the greatest teachers in the preceding generation ... Learn from science that you must doubt the experts. As a matter of fact, I can also define science another way: Science is the belief in the ignorance of experts. "

"Science is a way of trying not to fool yourself. The first principle is that you must not fool yourself, and you are the easiest person to fool. "

FredInChina
02-04-2010, 08:45 AM
(...) the marriage of industry and science, which can be said to be originated from the US.
Really? I am afraid history did start before the US startup got funded...
but we are drifting off topic. :)
Osu!

liuzg150181
02-04-2010, 08:55 AM
Really? I am afraid history did start before the US startup got funded...
but we are drifting off topic. :)
Osu!
Yeah,off-topic if you guys dont mind.
In fact read abt this from a book about history of science,cant remember if it is published by Cambridge or Oxford, but certainly either of them.:D

Interestingly, the book propounds the concept,that until recently, inventions and discoveries of science can be two different things: the former done by tinkerers(say engineers) through rules of thumb and experience, and the latter by elucidators, in the former of 'gentleman scientist'(that's not the term used,but the idea is there). In fact,'scientist' as a profession is rather nascent, those 'scientist' before industrial revolution were not remember as 'scientist' by their contemporaries.

My memory regarding the marriage of industry and science in the book is rather vague, but the author attributed it to US, and more specifically the Henry Ford era.

FredInChina
02-04-2010, 09:03 AM
(...) specifically the Henry Ford era.
Still off topic, please pardon us... :o
Ahhh, the scientific organization of labor...
I think Henry Ford got inspired (but not sure) by a study made with workers loading slugs of steel on rail carts.
The short story is that a scientist, using a stop watch had one worker do a 10 man work in half the time and less fatigue simply by telling him when to work and when to rest -- the same scientist was in turn inspired (I think, but the sequence might be messed up in my memory) by studies that showed that the heart cycle was half work and half rest, each cycle...
[/end detour]

It is for different purposes, but one could imagine a link, or at least a parallel with interval training here...

Osu!

liuzg150181
02-04-2010, 09:12 AM
Still off topic, please pardon us... :o
Ahhh, the scientific organization of labor...
I think Henry Ford got inspired (but not sure) by a study made with workers loading slugs of steel on rail carts.
The short story is that a scientist, using a stop watch had one worker do a 10 man work in half the time and less fatigue simply by telling him when to work and when to rest -- the same scientist was in turn inspired (I think, but the sequence might be messed up in my memory) by studies that showed that the heart cycle was half work and half rest, each cycle...
[/end detour]
Osu!

That's part of it, though as technological stuff get inherently complex and the rise of consumerism within the strong domestic market, pooling all the high-caliber brains together for research and funding them accordingly accelerated technological innovations. This became more evident during the technological arm races during the Cold War, and that's when the US govt placed emphasis on the study of science. Precisely the very reason why we are now able to post our opinion across this virtual world.

However, there were other attempts to do bridge the chasm btw science and engineering/industry, by both the British and German Empires respectively. Though I shall not delve beyond that.

Osu!

FredInChina
02-04-2010, 09:23 AM
(...)the technological arm races during the Cold War, and that's when the US govt placed emphasis on the study of science. Precisely the very reason why we are now able to post our opinion across this virtual world.(...)
The development of weaponry saw some fall outs in "livingry", that is true. (BTW, Iran just shot rats and tortoises into space... I wonder if it is for livingry or weaponry development...)
However, my take on "consumerism" is more of a skillful disguise of misery under marketing artifacts...
If internet is an offshoot of military communications, do you think they let it out for a purpose? What is the price to pay then? Was it "by design"?
Osu!

vapor
02-04-2010, 09:35 AM
and.....we need to get back on topic

vapor

FredInChina
02-04-2010, 09:37 AM
and.....we need to get back on topic

vapor
Indeed... Osu! :o:)

liuzg150181
02-04-2010, 09:54 AM
The development of weaponry saw some fall outs in "livingry", that is true. (BTW, Iran just shot rats and tortoises into space... I wonder if it is for livingry or weaponry development...)
However, my take on "consumerism" is more of a skillful disguise of misery under marketing artifacts...
If internet is an offshoot of military communications, do you think they let it out for a purpose? What is the price to pay then? Was it "by design"?
Osu!
Iran just shot rats and tortoises into space? LoL,got something to do with Aesop's fable?:D
Somehow I do agree with you regarding "consumerism", while it has created a panoply of interesting products(not necessarily useful), but essentially it is by means of creating of perception of shortcomings, in hope that individuals would compensate materially.
There is no "if" regarding the military origin of modern internet technology, as it came from DARPA(referring to TCP/IP protocol suite,and its relevant hardwares),for what I know it was a collaborative effort btw the military and civilian researchers.

Part of the reasons I can fathom is the advantages bring forth should the civilian sectors adopt them, economically the commercial sector would have cutting edge, and for researchers they can share information to bolster the research pace(helped by the free-spirited nature of academic circles),though I dont think they took internet porn and trolling as part of the considerations back then.:D

Of course, I am skimming lots of details, for the inherent factors are complex, though not within my time and capacity to explain it all.

Osu!

and.....we need to get back on topic

vapor
Agree, if deem necessary I think a new thread can be started.

Osu!

sandman
02-04-2010, 02:04 PM
Yes, back on topic...

I like the idea of using science to better understand how to make our martial arts more effective. The sensors and gadgets in the Fight Science show are kind of cool, but more important is the understanding of basic principles of physics, body mechanics, etc... If you understand the principles of force, power, leverage, etc... you can get a better idea of how to tweak your technique to get more impact out of it. Obviously in a fight the situation is fluid - the mechanics of a technique change when you are off balance or moving or getting punched simultaneously vs when you are practicing the technique in a static position, but its still useful.

The same idea applies to building a strength and conditioning program - understanding how the body's systems function gives you a better idea how to fine tune them for fighting.

In the end everyone's body is different, and you have to modify things to fit your body - but a solid understanding of the principles will help you do that more easily.

jcbel
02-04-2010, 03:56 PM
I just wanted to know if anyone had seen it, LOL... :)

To be honest when I saw it, I thought, "That's cool! I want to kick a crash test dummy!" :D :D :D

Yes I believe you guys are right about "science" being a fad right now, look at other shows like "The Deadliest Warrior", for example. At the end of the day, I think it's all fun and games until the "warriors" decide to go at it for real!

Godai
02-04-2010, 04:01 PM
The deadliest warrior is point sparring. :)

jcbel
02-04-2010, 04:03 PM
Oh and the other thing was when they broke down Bas' kick with the CGI it showed he did NOT pivot his supporting leg. I wonder if that was from the actual motion capture data or whether they just had no idea?

jcbel
02-04-2010, 04:05 PM
The deadliest warrior is point sparring. :)

Good one Godai!! :D

Godai
02-04-2010, 05:44 PM
Good one Godai!! :D


Ippon!!