strength or endurance?

which is more important

  • Strength

  • Endurance


Results are only viewable after voting.
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.
 
hand2handCombat said:
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...
 
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.
 
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.
 
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'
 
kenpoworks said:
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 guys 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.



kenpoworks said:
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 thats 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.
 
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
 
There are many types of fighting. The type that involves 40 mile road marches with an M60 demands stamina.
 
I prefer endurance over strength anyday. Going the distance is much more advantageous than short-term brute strength.
 
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.
 
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"
 
hand2handCombat said:
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..........
 
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:
 
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
 
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.
 
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.
 
Adept said:
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.
 
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.
 
Last Fearner said:
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
 
Back
Top