Will lifting make me better at fighting?
>>37941619
No.
no
Yes.
It won't make you better than someone who trains martial arts, but it'll make you better than what you're now.
>>37941638
No.
Have you seen the original Dragon Tattoo movies? The big guy doesn't even feel any pain but he is still defeated by a skinny little girl because she is FAST
You have to train for speed, you have to be flexible, even a little girl can take down a giant if she does these things
>>37941619
>does physical training make me better at something physical
>>37941680
>b-but the movie replicated a david and goliath story so getting stronger is pointless
>let's ignore weight classes exist, let's ignore mass is an important component in producing impact
>>37941682
>>37941695
This desu f4m
It makes you stronger for sure, but you may not have the skill or endurance to fight in a ring with someone.
>>37941619
it will make you stronger, but knowing how to fight is knowing how to punch, not how to lift.
>>37941638
>>37941682
>does lifting weighs make me a better fighter
is literally what OP is asking, and nobody could ever argue for it because of how ridiculous it is. No, you're not a better fighter because you do SS. You're not going to beat anyone that practices any sort of martial arts at any novice level at your size, and you have no actual retort to that. Training to be a fighter will make you a better fighter. This is like asking if doing algebra problems will make you smarter.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IdeNFcZE9s4
>let's ignore weight classes exist
Weight classes exist to make competitions fair, as they are competitions that are to be on a playing field that facilitates the will of the fighters to be the deciding factor to who will be victorious. A 145lb black belt will beat a 250lb power lifter in a fight because the black belt is a trained fighter and the power lifter is trained in lifting weight. If the black belt was in a power lifting competition, then obviously they would lose against the power lifter.
Bruce Lee was a 125lb-145lb 5'7 Asian guy that could beat anyone larger than him with less experience. Few people on /fit/, even with an experience coming close to Bruce Lee's would feel comfortable going against him.
>let's ignore mass is an important component in producing impact
Skill is the most important component. I could kill someone in one well placed shot, without much strength.
You don't know what you're talking about and sound like a troll so I'm going to ignore the rest of your posts and replies you will inevitably send to me.
>>37941757
>Bruce Lee was a 125lb-145lb 5'7 Asian guy that could beat anyone larger than him with less experience.
he would get murdered by amateur cruiserweight boxers.
I want to be able to punch out a horse.
>>37941793
You can't define what you're saying so it doesn't matter and I'm not arguing with what you can't define.
Even if you could, it would be negligible as it was a loose example to explain my point.
>>37941757
that doge is cute, your argumentation on spot, I upvote this post
>>37941757
You are strawmanning the guys you replied to.
>OP: will lifting make me a better fighter
>Guys you replied to: yes
>You: Of course lifting won't let you beat a professional MMA fighter, the guys who said yes are retarded and making a ridiculous argument!
But those guys never said anything about beating a professional fighter. Strength will still help in a fight, even if it isn't as helpful as learning boxing or something. You bring up Bruce Lee, but he lifted weights extensively. Lifting won't turn you into a professional fighter, but no one here argued that, they just said lifting will help.
If two untrained guys were fighting, one who lifts weights and the other doesn't, I'd bet on the guy who lifts. Argue against this argument instead of the strawman you put up.
>>37941828
>If two untrained guys were fighting, one who lifts weights and the other doesn't, I'd bet on the guy who lifts. Argue against this argument instead of the strawman you put up.
You don't understand that we have no way of quantifying what you're saying. They're both untrained so anything could happen. Being larger doesn't make you a better fighter. There is nothing about being larger and stronger inherently that makes you better at fighting another person. Any amount of training over someone else will automatically make you a statistic winner every single time.
There is no reason that you can quantify that is not random, meaning you are not correct, that being larger or stronger makes you inherently better at fighting someone equally as unskilled as you. Anything can happen and there are too many constituents unrelated to size and strength in whatever situation you want to cite to try and support your argument, which you can't, because it's ridiculous as they don't exist.
>>37941852
>Being larger doesn't make you a better fighter. There is nothing about being larger and stronger inherently that makes you better at fighting another person.
according to this an untrained woman has a equal chance of winning against an untrained man
fucking retard
>>37941852
>There is nothing about being larger and stronger inherently that makes you better at fighting another person
>Anything can happen and there are too many constituents unrelated to size and strength in whatever situation you want to cite to try and support your argument, which you can't, because it's ridiculous as they don't exist.
So you're telling me that you think a 5'1 girl would have a 50/50 chance of beating a 6'4 guy in a fight? And don't say "b-b-b-but what if the girl is trained and the guy isn't", that's not what I'm arguing for. Let's assume both of them are equally skilled in fighting. No strawmans.
>>37941862
As already stated but you've ignored, there are too many constituents unrelated to size and strength in whatever situation you want to cite(this case you've chosen an untrained man and woman) to try and support your argument, which you can't, because it's ridiculous as they don't exist.
>>37941869
As goes for you as well, read above.
Females have many, many differences to their physiology to males that supersede mass and strength such as pain tolerances, reflexes/reaction times, hand/eye coordination, balance, lung capacity, less oxygen in their red blood cells(this is why women faint), fragility in their bones, in comparison with male bone structures catering much more to contact; those are a few.
Even if we were to take this situation you two have posted blindly, men are naturally about 50% stronger than women, so this would be unrelated to lifting weights and make your points invalid to your own arguments.
>this thread
>>37941862
>>37941869
>they throw in being female, which is much more different than just size and strength
you guys are literally mentally challenged if you think all that is different between a girl and a guy is their size and strength.
all else being equal, yes.
Of course in reality things are very rarely equal.
inb4 some white belt autist gets mad (oh wait he already did), I was a competitive fighter, you are some chump who thinks he knows about fighting because he took 3 months of BJJ classes.
People who have never been in a fight seriously underestimate how little control they will have and how hard it is to fight someone physically bigger and stronger than you.
I have, I started fighting as a light middleweight, by the time I gave it up I was fighting as a HW.
> There is nothing about being larger and stronger inherently that makes you better at fighting another person.
Yes there is. Size and strength are inherent ADVANTAGES.
your problem is reconciling the word "advantage" with the concept of a foregone conclusion. Of course the bigger fighter can lose, but it does not change the fact that being bigger and stronger is ADVANTAGEOUS in fighting.
>>37941619
does biking make you a good runner?
>>37941908
>there are too many constituents unrelated to size and strength in whatever situation you want to cite(this case you've chosen an untrained man and woman) to try and support your argument, which you can't, because it's ridiculous as they don't exist
Wat?
>Females have many, many differences to their physiology to males that supersede mass and strength such as pain tolerances, reflexes/reaction times, hand/eye coordination, balance, lung capacity, less oxygen in their red blood cells(this is why women faint), fragility in their bones, in comparison with male bone structures catering much more to contact; those are a few.
Bones are directly strengthened by lifting. Even if lifting ONLY helped bone fragility (which isn't lifting's only benefit, but I digress) by your own logic a lifter would beat a none-lifter more often if both of them were equally trained in fighting.
Nice b8 tho senpai. 6/10 b8 for getting me to reply this long.
>>37941951
You are a retarded faggot if you think that if a none-lifter and a lifter fought that they would both have equal chances of winning (assuming they're both equally skilled in fighting). I hope you're just samefagging and that multiple different people aren't this retarded though.
>>37941953
and this. this is completely right
>>37941933
A comedic exaggeration doesn't make something true.
>>37941953
>it does not change the fact that being bigger and stronger is ADVANTAGEOUS in fighting.
It isn't advantageous if you are not as skilled. It's like putting a 16 year old that just got his drivers license(no skill) behind the wheel of a NASCAR(very powerful vehicle). He'll lose in a race against a NASCAR driver(skilled) behind the wheel of some off the lot stock Mustang(not nearly as powerful) very quickly.
It's funny that the "yes" guys are even trying to argue this when there is literaly proof to the extremes that it doesn't help you.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lEp01vrt8bE
the guy has 100 pounds on him, is a professional body builder, and gets his ass kicked.
>>37941979
>It isn't advantageous if you are not as skilled
No one is arguing for that fuckboi. Read the rest of the thread and find out what a strawman is.
>>37941986
No one is arguing for this shit. No one ITT said that an untrained lifter could beat a professional fighter, holy shit, learn to read.
>>37941969
>Bones are directly strengthened by lifting. Even if lifting ONLY helped bone fragility (which isn't lifting's only benefit, but I digress) by your own logic a lifter would beat a none-lifter more often if both of them were equally trained in fighting.
You literally don't even read what you quote. You, yourself, put up the argument of putting an unskilled woman against an unskilled man, and I made you look like a fool for explaining the many physiological differences between a man and a woman unrelated to strength and size. You lose as you did not retort.
>will swimming make me a better driver?
>>37941757
>Bruce Lee
Into the trash
>>37942005
you're arguing that lifting makes you a better fighter.
>>37941979
>It's like putting a 16 year old that just got his drivers license(no skill) behind the wheel of a NASCAR(very powerful vehicle). He'll lose in a race against a NASCAR driver(skilled) behind the wheel of some off the lot stock Mustang(not nearly as powerful) very quickly.
that is the perfect way to describe this logic. it's just retarded.
>>37941757
/thread
>>37941630
>>37941636
>>37941650
>>37941757
>>37941806
>>37941816
>>37941852
>>37941908
>>37941966
>>37941979
>>37941986
>>37942008
>>37942010
>>37942021
>>37942028
>This many newfags, samefags, and mentally retarded people using reddit-tier arguments
Go back to /r/fitness faggots
>>37942047
reminder that this autist actually went through the entire thread to quote every single post related to the argument. wow IRL that was so cool. dumb faggot.
ITT: some actual retard who can't get his pea-sized brain to understand the concept of ceteris paribus/all else being equal being used in an argument
kindly off yourself
>>37941619
Fighting will make you a better fighter.
Any full contact martial art will do, personally I enjoy grappling.
>>37942054
It's not hard to click on the post numbers as I'm reading through the thread, fuckboi. Then again I'm not like the dumbfucks in here who just jumped to the end of the thread and then started arguing out of their smarmy assholes.
Then again I don't type out the entire post number like you probably do. :^)
>>37942091
you meme loving fuck.
>>37942091
>Then again I don't type out the entire post number like you probably do. :^)
kek'd
>>37942086
wew
even in this unrealistic drawing /fit/ looks much better than this bitter /fa/ggot
If you don't know how to fight are you're weak and don't have muscle control, you'll be a worse fighter than if you don't know how to fight but you're much stronger and have significantly better muscle control.
You're still likely to get your shit kicked in by somebody who knows how to fight unless you're much bigger than him, and even then I wouldn't expect a bodybuilder untrained in martial arts to beat say a regional champion boxer even with a 50 pound advantage.
>>37941619
Boxers, MMA Fighters, and wrestelers all lift as the core of their physical discipline no? Ok your sperg curiosity is cured.
>>37941757
I hear a lot of that muh skills meme, but I knew how to fight when I was a child and win almost every fight when the other guy is muh skills. I really don't think there's too much technique involved unless the other person has a weapon.
>>37942021
>Using a strong YET AGAIN
Look we all FUCKING KNOW a trained fighter would trump any lifter but here a better analogy would be if both the drivers were 16 and at the same level. Now, without your strawmen, who would be more likely to win? And no I'm not saying its a 100% thing but the nascar car gives an advantage
>>37942133
What a sperg. It's not so simple like that. Some people are just not retarded and can fight without training. Pain tolerance in much more conditional and genetic as well. Lifting is the cornerstone of any fighter's discipline.
>>37942145
Meant strawman not strong
>>37942133
Plz
>Muscle control.
I've wasted people easily before and know nothing of this in fighting.
>>37942164
Some people have it naturally, others gain it through lifting. Nice **anecdote** though.
No.
In fact, if you already know a fighting style lifting will require you to undergo an adjustment period as your muscles produce velocity easier and throw off your timing and positioning.
Fighting will make you get better at fighting. Lifting will make it easier to fight higher weight classes.
>>37941695
I thought David won because he had a sling shot.
>>37942118
>being a barafag
Wew L
>>37942047
hey, how's your life on 4chan? :^)
>>37941757
>Bruce Lee
You fags are the worst. If tiny little chinks really were the best fighters you would see them win shit rather than play in movies.
Size matters even if le motion in le ocean does too.
>>37941757
> I could kill someone in one well placed shot, without much strength.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v5I70xq4Rds
>>37941757
>I could kill someone in one well placed shot, without much strength.
You lost me there
I'm just gonna leave this article here...
http://breakingmuscle.com/mma/why-and-how-to-build-muscle-for-the-combat-athlete
>>37943651
i'm not that autist, but it doesn't take a whole lot to collapse a trachea
>>37941757
Fighting without technique is 100% cardio. Honestly, when your opponent gasses out but you could still run another mile you'll be grateful.
>>37941852
If your opponent has zero cardio and light ass arms then yes. You will 1.Hit harder 2.Hit faster 3.Hit more 4.Great lower back strength, good for fighting on the ground.
>>37941638
This anon, it's no substitute for training to fight or sparing, but being in better shape always helps
