How Effective Is Bodybuilding For Self Defence?

[Alan0354]

There is an obvious, uncontrolled variable.

'Trained' is not a consistent measure - who decides, and how.. that two people are 'equally trained'? Two people who have been training for exactly the same amount of time are obviously not going to have exactly the same degree of skill. Is someone going to magically 'know' that two people are equally skilled?

It's a frivolous discussion.

I did not say two trained exactly equal. In fact, I said choose the small one that is better compare to the bigger one. In order to establish some sort of standard, I said specifically pick the 140lbs best of UFC to fight with an average 180lbs UFC fighter. Just by specifying UFC fighter, I narrow to those that are good enough to be in UFC fights, that control to a specific minimum standard. I specified the same height to ensure they have similar reach.

Yes, there's no absolute controlled comparison, but it is the best I can think of. Hell, it's sure better than people that said "muscle is no use, it slow you down and get in the way!!". By what standard they use to say this? At least I am trying to be fair. If anyone has better ways, I am all ears. I just cannot accept what is being said. This is very miss leading, giving people false hope that if they train, they are all good. It is NOT.

Do not say muscle doesn't matter, do not say height doesn't matter. It is irresponsible to say that to students. They might go out and start something they cannot finish thinking they can win. Life is not that simple. Just train, the more people train, the better chance they can win.

 

[BrendanF]

Of course size and strength matters. But so does skill. So does luck. This is one of my favourite size mis-matches:

 

[Alan0354]

Of course size and strength matters. But so does skill. So does luck. This is one of my favourite size mis-matches:

Of cause, there are exception like luck, there is always possibility the small guy somehow lands a perfect punch and knock out the big guy. As for skill, if you have a better way to control that than what I described, I am all ears. All I know is it's wrong to say size doesn't matter, muscle just gets in the way of speed and flexibility. That's a totally lie and is irresponsible to tell student this. Should just say muscle and height clearly give advantage, but good skill can compensate and overcome the lack of power and reach to a certain extend. That would be an honest assessment.

 

[BrendanF]

there are exception like luck, there is always possibility the small guy somehow lands a perfect punch and knock out the big guy. As for skill, if you have a better way to control that than what I described, I am all ears.

Fedor did not win through luck. As I said, there is no way to quantify skill, and being a trait in constant flux, it cannot be held constant.

All I know is it's wrong to say size doesn't matter, muscle just gets in the way of speed and flexibility. That's a totally lie and is irresponsible to tell student this. Should just say muscle and height clearly give advantage, but good skill can compensate and overcome the lack of power and reach to a certain extend. That would be an honest assessment.

I've heard people make all sorts of stupid claims regarding fighting. The only honest assessment is actual fighting. Everything 'matters'.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

muscle just gets in the way of speed and flexibility

I haven't seen anyone here say muscle gets in the way of speed and flexibility. I have said that the bodybuilding I was exposed to (both the approach and the hypertrophy it is intended to encourage) can get in the way of both speed and flexibility. Strength can be an asset to at least speed (so far as I know, it has no direct effect on flexibility).

 

[Xue Sheng]

I haven't seen anyone here say muscle gets in the way of speed and flexibility. I have said that the bodybuilding I was exposed to (both the approach and the hypertrophy it is intended to encourage) can get in the way of both speed and flexibility. Strength can be an asset to at least speed (so far as I know, it has no direct effect on flexibility).

I am not against building muscle, but have noticed, in some cases, that the more muscle one builds, the higher ones center tends to get.

 

[dvcochran]

I haven't seen anyone here say muscle gets in the way of speed and flexibility. I have said that the bodybuilding I was exposed to (both the approach and the hypertrophy it is intended to encourage) can get in the way of both speed and flexibility. Strength can be an asset to at least speed (so far as I know, it has no direct effect on flexibility).

I feel it is more correct to say the way the muscle is built can get in the way of flexibility. Using the comparison between a gymnast and a bodybuilder is the perfect example.
It does take strength to facilitate and/or augment speed. But when the person passes the threshold over into muscular bulk (different for every body type) this will usually slow them down.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

I am not against building muscle, but have noticed, in some cases, that the more muscle one builds, the higher ones center tends to get.

There is possibly some truth to that, especially if someone is very focused on the easiest "show" muscles (ignoring lower body and trunk).

 

[Gerry Seymour]

I feel it is more correct to say the way the muscle is built can get in the way of flexibility. Using the comparison between a gymnast and a bodybuilder is the perfect example.
It does take strength to facilitate and/or augment speed. But when the person passes the threshold over into muscular bulk (different for every body type) this will usually slow them down.

The thread was originally about bodybuilding, which is why I commented about the impact of bodybuilding.

MMA, gymnastics, and a horde of other sports demonstrate that strength can come with flexibility.

 

[Oily Dragon]

I am not against building muscle, but have noticed, in some cases, that the more muscle one builds, the higher ones center tends to get.

Probably because most people have bad posture whether they lift or not, and the more they have to carry, whether it's fat or muscle, the worse they get at stressing their lower back, and then deal with spine problems later on.

Building muscle mass is one thing, learning to walk around with it properly? Anybody who goes to a gym knows not everyone knows this. Some people gracefully move around with their tone, others move like glaciers.

My take on this is pretty simple, more muscle means more maintenance. It can be overdone to the point where you're spending every day just working on keeping it, when that should come naturally just being active.

There will come a point when I'll have just the right amount of muscle for me, the key is to keep training and not worry so much about looking like The Hulk. Banner Hulk, balanced, is the way to go.

 

[isshinryuronin]

Yeah, bodybuilding and strength weight training are two different things, but both can be overdone with negative affect on one's MA. Aside from the physical liabilities, there is a mental one.

It's natural to rely on your strengths. When your strength IS strength, you will rely on this, instead of technique.
This will seriously restrict one's advancement in MA. I have seen this in a number of students, and is very hard to correct.

I think the student identifies himself as being strong, so it's hard for him to step out of this self-perception into the realm of technique and speed. It's kind of like having to change one's habit or personality - takes a lot of dedicated effort to rework oneself. It also takes some courage to put your best asset (comfort zone) on the back burner to work on other things. Being the strongest guy is often enough to win a fight, so there is no incentive to change - until he comes across someone with significant speed and skill.

Technique, speed and strength - I teach these elements in this order. I put the latter as least important. Substantial
force can be realized by speed + technique. Strength is good, but not when it supplants or lessens the other two qualities as can happen with those who value their muscles too much.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

I think the student identifies himself as being strong, so it's hard for him to step out of this self-perception into the realm of technique and speed.

Agree with you 100% there.

I had one student who were with me for 6 years. At the end of the 6 years, he was still depending on his strength. His opponent could not take him down (he had some defense skill). He had no skill to take his opponent down either (he had never developed any offense skill).

When I wrestled on the mat, I liked to wrestle with guys who were much bigger and stronger than I was. One day my teacher restricted me to only wrestle with lighter weight guys. He told me that to wrestle with a big/strong guy could destroy my speed intention. Since most big/strong guys are not moving very fast, my body could get lazy and move slow too. That's not good for my speed development in the long run.

But strength did help me after I had developed the wrestling skill. During my last tournament, I spent 3 months to move a 200 lb rock daily. During that tournament I knew I was the strongest guy in the whole tournament. I moved myself from the heavy weight into the super heavy weight. I was only 180 lb that year, but my opponent were all over 220 lb. My strength had no problem to defeat all my super heavy weight opponents in that tournament. I still remember that one of my opponents his arm muscle was as big as my leg muscle.

 

[dvcochran]

The thread was originally about bodybuilding, which is why I commented about the impact of bodybuilding.

MMA, gymnastics, and a horde of other sports demonstrate that strength can come with flexibility.

Understood. I have seen many gymnast who are straight up ripped. They have many 'bodybuilding' qualities by virtue of acquiring the strength to perform (which would derail us into another muscle building discussion). Maybe not in a competition body builder sense where individual muscles circumference is measured and such, but well beyond the average sedentary person.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Understood. I have seen many gymnast who are straight up ripped. They have many 'bodybuilding' qualities by virtue of acquiring the strength to perform (which would derail us into another muscle building discussion). Maybe not in a competition body builder sense where individual muscles circumference is measured and such, but well beyond the average sedentary person.

That’s the distinction of bodybuilding, as I know the term. It’s about muscle size, not strength (though there is obviously some strength development). And that was the reason I made the distinction about strength training. The methodology and results are different.

 

[Tony Dismukes]

That’s the distinction of bodybuilding, as I know the term. It’s about muscle size, not strength (though there is obviously some strength development). And that was the reason I made the distinction about strength training. The methodology and results are different.

Bodybuilding isn’t just about muscle size, it’s also about a highly specific aesthetic in terms of the relative proportions of the muscles and the absence of body fat. A high level power lifter or strong man competitor may have more total muscle mass than an equivalent body builder, but they won’t have the right aesthetic to win a bodybuilding contest. They will have more functional strength, though.

 

[Steve]

Bodybuilding isn’t just about muscle size, it’s also about a highly specific aesthetic in terms of the relative proportions of the muscles and the absence of body fat. A high level power lifter or strong man competitor may have more total muscle mass than an equivalent body builder, but they won’t have the right aesthetic to win a bodybuilding contest. They will have more functional strength, though.

That’s the distinction of bodybuilding, as I know the term. It’s about muscle size, not strength (though there is obviously some strength development). And that was the reason I made the distinction about strength training. The methodology and results are different.

Once again, to punctuate the point, these are two of the strongest humans in the world, ever. They have each executed feats of strength that are literally the stuff of legend. I tried to find two pictures of these guys where they are low body fat, but even at their leanest, they don't look anything like bodybuilders.

Hafthor Bjornsson

Eddie Hall:

 

[tim po]

strength is not universal. our bodies can get stronger in a great many ways, and they will become stronger at performing specifically the task that you train them to be strong at, and they will learn to do it the way you train them to do it.

a gymanast is much stronger than a powerlifter. at gymnastics, not deadlifts. a body-builder is strong-very strong- at the specific intentional excersizes used to force the muscles to grow. these are specifically isolation excersizes, performed with very heavy weight(high intensity) to achieve positive muscle failure as quickly as possible.

so body building, though more muscle is built, providing more muscle to contract and thus apply force to the (dumbell curl?) task at hand, the body as a whole is being trained to work as inefficiently as possible, using as few muscles as possible to perform the task, and fail quickly at that.

for this reason, i do not agree that building muscle quickly by applying bodybuilding science has any direct benefit to martial arts application (perhaps, dissuading an attacker by being jacked, perhaps) and in fact is a hinderance if overused to feed vanity,

also in the pictures above (are they the same guy?) he has a very asthetically balanced and lean physique, but he could look like a butterball and still have all the muscle he needs to do what he does. it is HOW he does it, that makes him so strong. he knows how to use his whole body, he is skilled. also, look at his wrists, and his ankles. thick, broad, heavy bones, lots of real estate available to anchor connective tissue. each of us can only ever hope to be as strong as the body we are part of was born to be, and we reach our potential as martial artists by learning to use the whole body(which includes mind), not one muscle at a time.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

Let's compare the following 4 cases:

1. Weak guy without MA training.
2. Weak guy with MA training.
3. Strong guy without MA training.
4. Strong guy with MA training.

It's easy to tell that 1 < 2, and 3 < 4.

How about 3 and 4? I believe in weapon fight 3 < 2. But in open hand fight, it may go either way.

 

[Oily Dragon]

Understood. I have seen many gymnast who are straight up ripped. They have many 'bodybuilding' qualities by virtue of acquiring the strength to perform (which would derail us into another muscle building discussion). Maybe not in a competition body builder sense where individual muscles circumference is measured and such, but well beyond the average sedentary person.

Gymnasts have some of the best functional strength of anyone on the planet. That's the kind of balance that makes sense for martial arts.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Let's compare the following 4 cases:

1. Weak guy without MA training.
2. Weak guy with MA training.
3. Strong guy without MA training.
4. Strong guy with MA training.

It's easy to tell that 1 < 2, and 3 < 4.

How about 3 and 4? I believe in weapon fight 3 < 2. But in open hand fight, it may go either way.

I agree. I think it's a matter of degrees, too. Someone who's a bit stronger than me (and untrained) probably loses to me in a fight. Someone who is a lot stronger than me and more athletic might be able to make up for my training if they are also very aggressive and tough (toughness is one of those variables that we don't usually include in the simplified look, but matter a lot). Likewise, someone with a little MA training probably doesn't overcome even a moderate difference in strength, but someone with a lot of training (and good fitness, etc.) has a good chance of making up for a larger difference in strength.