strength or endurance?

[hand2handCombat]

wat is more inmportant to you, strength or endurance?

[Aikikitty]

I thought strength possibly meant the same thing as endurance. :confused: I think endurance is more valuable. Unless you are locked in a cage with a He-man who wants to kill you and you have only 3 minutes to defeat him or die or something....

Robyn :)

[LanceWildcat1]

strength or endurance?

I'll go for endurance any day!! It doesn't matter how strong someone is, if they can't outlast their opponent. If you stay away from your strong opponent and have more endurance than he does, you'll wear them down to the point where you can do pretty much whatever you want-and they can't keep up with you. :asian:

[Despairbear]

I would have to sey that skill would be the most important. But in this case I have to say endurance. From what I have seen strength is more of a liability than an advantage. It often leads to bad mechanics as people try to "muscle" there way threw the art rather than learn the propper way to move and fight.



Despair Bear

[tshadowchaser]

my vote is for endurence. Yes the person with strengh will hurt you in the beginning but if you can last a while endurence wins out (most of the time)

[Rich Parsons]

Originally posted by tshadowchaser

my vote is for endurence. Yes the person with strengh will hurt you in the beginning but if you can last a while endurence wins out (most of the time)


I agree with you TShadowChaser.

Nice comment

Rich
:asian:

[karatekid1975]

I agree with tshadow. I believe technique is most important. But strength helps, and endurance comes last, but not least. I have good strength for a chic and pretty good technique, but it doesn't help me during sparring ..... gggrrrrr. I have enough technique and power to fight them off for the first 2 minutes, then I "tucker" out and I get my butt kicked. I need to work on my endurance.

[GouRonin]

Any boxing match I ever had I won with endurance. I don't have the same amount I had when I was younger but I used to like to just wear my oponnent down then eat them alive.

[sweeper]

first off what do you consider strength? do you mean the ability to gennerate force in a blow or just raw strength of a muscle? I think endurance and strength go hand in hand, Also I tihnk it deppends on the situation, if I'm in s self deffence situation I'm not gona stick around for several minuets to wait for my attacker to get worn out.. I'm gona hit fast and hard than run like hell.. I don't want to spend any more than 10 seconds fighting before I'm running. Ring fighting is diffrent, I would go for endurance, in a ring fight you have rules in place that you can strategicly put your back up against, you can use the rules to your advantage for the purpose of deffence and you can wear your opponant out and beat them latter on.

[Kenpo Wolf]

,,,,because no matter how strong you are, you'll lose if you wear yourself out. This comes from experience.

[Baoquan]

Fighters need conditioning...its core to being a good fighter. If you're well conditioned, you maintain peak strength longer.

That being said, Butterbean ("King of the Four Rounders") is not exceptionally well conditioned, and he does allright :D He does have A LOT of power, tho....

It's a bit of a chicken and egg..one without the other results in a less than effective fighter. Being able to go all day is less than helpfull if u cant finish the job, and being a one hit wonder is no good if u get tired just turning up.

If you're point-fighting, conditioning is everything. If its anything else, being able to drop heavy hits is very reassuring.:p

on balance though, i'll have to go with the crowd and say endurance.

Cheers

Baoquan.

[Yari]

I know this is not one of the options you mentoined, but I would say that timing is most important.

You can be weaker and slower , ass long as your timing is correct.

/Yari

[sweeper]

I can't argue with the timing option (or lack of).

[karatekid1975]

I found out after three days of sparring, I need to work on speed as well :mad: ggggrrrrrr.

[Shinzu]

i would have to go with endurance also. speed will develop after much practice, but if you dont have the endurance to stay alive, all the strength in the world won't be able to help you.

[IFAJKD]

I apologize for not reading this entire post. If I repeat anything move on....Endurance is an important attribute but reletive to the situation. A stronger person can quickly depleat your advanced cardio easily. ALSO weight training and muscle mass has nothing to do with bad mechanics, poor coordination, and is in no way detrimental. Muscle moves our limbs and is in part (ajor part) responsible for our speed. You can have great mass be fast, flexible and also have great endurance. This is however kind of like asking "what's better a car or a boat"

[bscastro]

Like many have said, strength and endurance both have some factors. I voted for endurance, but it was not by much. In my training, my instructor is much stronger than I am, but I have pretty good endurance. However, when holding the pads for him for either punching or kicking, I often find that I feel that my should joint is coming apart or my wrists are are about to break at the point where he is kicking the thai pad. In any case, I feel that any shot taken by him for real would be quite devestating. However, in grappling, sometimes I can almost hold my own if I can last near the beginning due to more muscular endurance (although most of the time he can win anyway because of superior technique and experience).

So I would say that we should try to improve both. However, endurance comes in handy when we want to run away. ;)

Bryan

[sweeper]

I would say strength is more important in running away, if your legs aren't strong you probably aren't fast, and if you are seriously afraid of the person chasing you I think you will be able to keep up the pace long enough for them to give up. but if you don't have the speed no amount of endurance will matter.. you only have to convince them they can't catch you, or that it isn't worth chasing you.

[8253]

I would say a good balance of both. One or the other by itself wont really do a whole lot of good. For instance, you may be able to run circles around an opponent, but 1 good shot could end it for you. If you are strong and your opponent is running circles around you hitting you, you will get worn down quickly.
Then again strength and endurance can have a multitude of meanings to different people.

[kenpoworks]

If Endurance can be likened to Stamina and the ability to prolong a "fight" then it is probably more important for competition based situations , i suppose.
But if Strength is likened to Conditionng and the ability to withstand and recover from the inevitable blows that are sustained in a"fight", then i suppose that it is more important for assault situations.
Myself I think that if I had to choose between some sort of aerobic based endurance or some body Condititioning, I would go for the latter.

[Kane]

I say endurance. To withstand attack and not getting tired in a long tough situation makes you one tough SOB even if you are not too strong. I do though think strength is very important.

[kanjc]

what is more important to you, strength or endurance?
The endurance is the key to winning. I have the strength and the speed but, when I am sparring against someonr younger with more endurance after the first couple of minutes I also tend to "tucker" outand then I am done for...

[clapping_tiger]

For sparring or martial sport endurance (stamina and the ability to take punishment) is more important, followed by strength. And by strength, the definition I am using is overall striking or knockout power and brute strength. However in a street situation I feel power is most important. The ability to end the fight quickly and get out with as little damage to yourself is most important. In a street fight it does you no good to take the chance on taking a lot of punishment because there is no referee there to make the person stop when you are out and defenseless.

[kenpoworks]

However in a street situation I feel power is most important. The ability to end the fight quickly and get out with as little damage to yourself is most important.

Please, further define this "power"


In a street fight it does you no good to take the chance on taking a lot of punishment because there is no referee there to make the person stop when you are out and defenseless.

In a "street fight" all you can do is take your chances and if you move on with little or no punishment then you have a result. if you are "out and defensless" lets hope your luck holds up, because thats all that's left.

[jesse sutton]

How about both. Can i have both? I want both. I dont think i'll ever bend my training where i aquire one trait and not the other. Its like saying 'whats more important - inhaling or exhaling'

[clapping_tiger]

Please, further define this "power"
My Definition of "Power" is the ability to hit hard, or in other words penetrate your target. The problem most people have with a lack of striking power is they don't penetrate far enough into the intended target. Either you "pull" the strike for fear (either subconscious or not) of hurting your hand/foot/knee or whatever. You can hit something, or you destroy it by penetrating into it, or at least trying to. When I hit the bag, and when I used to get into fights (this was years ago), I would try to put my fist through the bag, or the guy’s head. Another version of my definition of "power" comes when you end up on the ground. This version is where just plain brute strength or the ability to manhandle your opponent comes in handy, but as the NHB competitions have shown us, the good old-fashioned ground and pound can be very effective also. I am not saying that you should solely rely on power, but in a "street" situation I think it comes in handier. But remember without quickness and agility power is worthless.





In a "street fight" all you can do is take your chances and if you move on with little or no punishment then you have a result. if you are "out and defenseless" lets hope your luck holds up, because that’s all that's left.
No argument there, but all I was saying is that if you don't have the ability to take your attacker out, all the endurance in the world doesn't mean squat. Unless you have a way out and can keep running until you are out of danger.

[Kenpodoc]

I'm growing to appreciate the eastern concept of yin and yang. The US has highly puritanical roots and we try to ram the world into the concept of Good and evil. This like most of these questions is an example of asking the wrong question. Both strength and endurance are useful What is the situation? All of the endurance in the world will be useless in a field with a 600 lb tiger. When strength becomes nearer, ie. equally skilled opponents one 200 lbs and one 150 lbs, suddenly endurance becomes a prime factor. The answer to most of tese either or questions is "It depends."

Jeff

[TonyM.]

There are many types of fighting. The type that involves 40 mile road marches with an M60 demands stamina.

[Patrick Skerry]

I prefer endurance over strength anyday. Going the distance is much more advantageous than short-term brute strength.

[matt.m]

Endurance is important, however if you don't have strength/physical conditioning then you have a good chance of loosing. Technique is the most critical, but without power and strength behind it then the technique means little difference.

I was in Haiti in 94. So I learned first hand that you have to be able to last in a fight, you have to have power behind your striking, and the better your techniqe the less likely you are to get hurt.

[Kenpojujitsu3]

Endurance is more important unless the strength gap is VERY large and vice versa.

Example. My older brother (5'9, 215lbs) is less experienced than myself (5'7", 180lbs), and less technical. However, he has just as much endurance as me and is FAR FAR FAR stronger than myself. The end result of our workouts? I end up going to hit the weights some as strength is more important.

Next Example: My oldest Brother (6' 215lbs) is less experienced than myself and less technical (I train both of my brothers). He is however a little stronger than me but has nowhere near the endurance. More strength isn't necessary as I have enough endurance to reduce his strength to less than mine.

The reason I lean more towards endurance is because I run into few people who hold a MASSIVE strength advantage over me AND have nearly the same endurance. It's usually a fair trade off. And in street enocounters I've found that endurance is king because most of the problems I've encountered were from moderately stronger guys who "blew their wad" within the first few seconds.

"Neither the biggest truck nor the smallest car on the road is getting anywhere on a 1 gallon tank of gas"

[Brother John]

wat is more inmportant to you, strength or endurance?
Depends on what it's for.
Taken to an extreme?? I'd have to say endurance!!! Imagine punching, REALLY strongly...
but only Once, and then you've got to sleep.

No good.

Your Brother
John
PS: Personally, I'll take more of BOTH please..........

[pstarr]

ENDURANCE!!! When you run out of gas in the middle of a skirmish, it's bad juju...

[w.kaer]

If we are talking about muscular stregth versus muscular endurance, I would go with strength only because muscular strength brings with it muscular endurance. A stronger muscle uses less effort to perform a particular talk, so it can perform over a longer period of time compared to a weaker muscle. Now I value cardiovascular endurance above them both but not by much. :asian:

[Last Fearner]

How do you give any more importance to any one leg of a three-legged stool?

All situations require muscular strength, and cardiovascular endurance to some degree. Technical skill is the third balance point that allows a weaker person to defeat a stronger foe, or allows one with less endurance to conserve energy, and defeat an adversary who is more fit. Train in each of these three, and when the situation calls upon it, you will have sufficient amount strength, stamina, and skill to perform as needed.

Some situations will not last long enough to require any extreme endurance. Some encounters will require you to last longer (you may already be tired from other activities, and endurance will be important). No single one attribute is more important unless you believe you can dictate, and control the type of situations with which you will be confronted in the future.

CM D.J. Eisenhart

[MBuzzy]

My feeling is that a well trained fighter, with solid technique and good timing and make up for a lack of strength. A very well placed weak punch can often do more damage than a badly placed strong punch.

Nothing can make up for substitute for endurance. If you don't have it, you can't hide it, you will get tired out and the fight will be over. If you have the endurance but are lacking on strength, as stated above, you can simply outlast your opponent and overwhelm them with more moves.

[Adept]

Within reason, I believe Strength is more important. Significantly so.

Most 'real' encounters tend to be over very quickly. If you can last a couple of minutes at high intensity, you'll probably be fine. The question is not how long you can 'last'. It's how hard you can work before it's over, and in that regard I believe strength is much more important.

[Cirdan]

Most 'real' encounters tend to be over very quickly. If you can last a couple of minutes at high intensity, you'll probably be fine. The question is not how long you can 'last'. It's how hard you can work before it's over, and in that regard I believe strength is much more important.

I voted endurance, but you got an excellent point there. Got me thinking.

[empty cup]

If by strength you mean the " I can bench press more than you " kind of big muscle strength?. Then I vote for endurance. Going the distance in a fight seems more important to me. The ability to deliver an attack that will stun, stagger or stop your adversary seems like it would be more a function of learning proper body mechanics, weight shifting, breathing,and energy release techniques etc. than just having big biceps.

[Ybot]

How do you give any more importance to any one leg of a three-legged stool?

All situations require muscular strength, and cardiovascular endurance to some degree. Technical skill is the third balance point that allows a weaker person to defeat a stronger foe, or allows one with less endurance to conserve energy, and defeat an adversary who is more fit. Train in each of these three, and when the situation calls upon it, you will have sufficient amount strength, stamina, and skill to perform as needed.

Some situations will not last long enough to require any extreme endurance. Some encounters will require you to last longer (you may already be tired from other activities, and endurance will be important). No single one attribute is more important unless you believe you can dictate, and control the type of situations with which you will be confronted in the future.

CM D.J. Eisenhart
I've always looked at it the same way. In BJJ Grappling it seems obvious. The number of times I've seen muscle make up for lack of technique or endurance, or the number of times I've watched the smaller and weaker guy weather the storm, or the smaller more technical guy tear up the tougher noob...

A & B = fighters
IF the SUM of technique, strength, and endurance for A > the SUM of technique, strength, and endurance for B THEN A wins

unless B has more friends