No she wouldn't, where in the hell did you get that idea at?She's destroy every single person on this board (maybe except for matsuki who could throw a casual hook and knock her into the next galaxy)
138 pounds.
No she wouldn't, where in the hell did you get that idea at?She's destroy every single person on this board (maybe except for matsuki who could throw a casual hook and knock her into the next galaxy)
I am not debating anything. I am clarifying that using a fact based activity (track) does not allow for debate.Are you saying we really have a debate about pro male fighters vs female pro fighters? I see no debate at all.
How could anyone who knows sports go there?Now? No debate. At one point there was a very arrogant and vocal group of Rhonda Rousey believers who thought she could take the likes of Floyd Mayweather, JJ Watt and Ron Artest.
I'm more than totally prepared to prove my point.Forget it, man. There are a lot of people on this board who assume everyone is as weak and unathletic as they are. Suggest otherwise and you get called delusional x's 1000 and what not.
How can this be debated?I am not debating anything. I am clarifying that using a fact based activity (track) does not allow for debate.
You used track as a reason that MMA fighters cannot compete with each other. MMA is more subjective and can lead to a debate while there is no debate when discussing track comparisons. You are either faster or you are not. There is no influence by the opponent in any way.How can this be debated?
I agree that almost any Male with athletic training would do well in a fight with a super lightweight fighter, but her knowledge of submission holds and ability to bend and force people to tap out would take down more people than you might envision. Toe to toe fighting gets her killed 99% of the time, no doubt. But throw some mma at me and I know that I would more than likely lose to her and I am a 245 pound guy.How could anyone who knows sports go there?
Why do people freak out over a man hitting a woman? Yep, men are just too superior physically and we all know this.
Rousey could whip some men not into sports who aren't physical. In with any athletic male she'd take a beating.
I'd say all college/pro footballers could kick her butt.
Most? Way to go out on a limb there.
How about this gem from you in 2015? She'd beat a lot of the male MMA fighters in her weight class.
Or this one? When the most dominant athlete in the world is a female basketball player, maybe we can have that discussion. Until then, we are talking about RR.
You'd better hope you tap out in time so she doesn't injure you after she submits you. Do you lift, bra? Does bench press teach you a lot of jiu-jitsu?Do you really think a 138 pound woman could beat any athletic man in a fight? I don't.
I;m 6-2 275 pounds, been lifting since I was 15, what is a 138 pound woman going to do?
You actually thought she could beat guys in her weight class? Good God.In this case, I say RR would beat >98% non-mma males and that's probably conservative.
She was the most dominant athlete in the world when I wrote that. Really sporting of you to take potshots with the benefit of 4-years of hindsight.
Not only me but many informed MMA experts (pretty sure Joe Rogan agreed). This was not an outlier opinion.You actually thought she could beat guys in her weight class? Good God.
Do you still think that? Joe Rogan commented he said that in jest mocking the guys who thought she was the best thing since sliced bread.Not only me but many informed MMA experts (pretty sure Joe Rogan agreed). This was not an outlier opinion.
Who's the arrogant jerk now?Sporting? Re-read what you were posting in there. You were an arrogant jerk about it.
Be a man. Just admit you were wrong and move on.
I'm really just being vindictive, but you are right.Who's the arrogant jerk now?
Noway I'd ever beat up a female. BUT......I like all big strong men would totally destroy any female MMAer, would be ugly.You'd better hope you tap out in time so she doesn't injure you after she submits you. Do you lift, bra? Does bench press teach you a lot of jiu-jitsu?
The difference is strength would simply be too much. I could pick her up over my head as could most athletic men. She's just too small, too weak to be able to do anything.I agree that almost any Male with athletic training would do well in a fight with a super lightweight fighter, but her knowledge of submission holds and ability to bend and force people to tap out would take down more people than you might envision. Toe to toe fighting gets her killed 99% of the time, no doubt. But throw some mma at me and I know that I would more than likely lose to her and I am a 245 pound guy.
There is nothing soft about softball. It is a very fast paced game that is much different than baseball. It doesn't make it inferior in any way. It is just different. I am not sure why that statement has anything to do with whether or not a female MMA fighter would or would not be able to compete against men.Women play soft ball for a reason. They get special treatment for a reason, a man slugs a woman and he's an animal. Why is that, yep....the weaker sex.
Imagine a womans basketball team vs a men's....ouch!
A fast HS boy can run a 10.20 100m, the fastest women of all time can't break 10.60. (forget that 10.4 it was windy)
HUGE physical differences,
Strength is not debatable either. What female is as strong as a man her size?There is nothing soft about softball. It is a very fast paced game that is much different than baseball. It doesn't make it inferior in any way. It is just different. I am not sure why that statement has anything to do with whether or not a female MMA fighter would or would not be able to compete against men.
And as I stated earlier.....your track example is not applicable. Speed is not a debate. It is simply a comparison of factual numbers.
A softball is just as hard as a baseball. You can't be serious with this statement. The ball has a lower coefficient of restitution but the outer shell is just as hard and varies depending on level of play (just like baseball). Typically the compression for baseballs and softballs are similar.Strength is not debatable either. What female is as strong as a man her size?
Everything is soft about softball compared to baseball. We can start with the ball. I can't believe you said that,
not sure if seriousEverybody knows the strongest fighter wins every match.
Wait for the heart attack?Do you really think a 138 pound woman could beat any athletic man in a fight? I don't.
I;m 6-2 275 pounds, been lifting since I was 15, what is a 138 pound woman going to do?
My cardio conditioning off the charts, Run the bleachers, skip rope, run 400's, jumping jacks.Wait for the heart attack?
Everybody knows a trained male MMA fighter will simply be too strong for a female.Everybody knows the strongest fighter wins every match.
Stold this.A softball is just as hard as a baseball. You can't be serious with this statement. The ball has a lower coefficient of restitution but the outer shell is just as hard and varies depending on level of play (just like baseball). Typically the compression for baseballs and softballs are similar.
The coefficient of restitution has to do with the spring from the ball off the bat and rebound effect. It has nothing to do with how much it will hurt if it hits you. The compression (the amount of force needed to compress the ball a certain amount) is different than the COR and has more to do with the actual hardness of the outer shell of each ball. The compression of baseballs and softballs differ based on age group as you can have a "softee" used for lower level use. However, for standard high school or college balls the outer shell has similar "hardness" and will hurt similarly if you are hit by it. However, the COR value would dictate that if a baseball hit your head it would likely rebound further than if a softball hit your head. Each would equally hurt (or not depending on the actual hardness of your head) because the impact and "hurt" would be based on the similar hardness of the surface of the ball.Stold this.
Softballs got their name because their core is softer than a baseball and, therefore, they do not spring off the bat in the same way. ... An NCAA baseball's coefficient cannot be greater than .555, while a softball may not exceed .470
Which would hurt more if they hit you?
There is nobody who would prefer being hit by a baseball over a softball, ok?The coefficient of restitution has to do with the spring from the ball off the bat and rebound effect. It has nothing to do with how much it will hurt if it hits you. The compression (the amount of force needed to compress the ball a certain amount) is different than the COR and has more to do with the actual hardness of the outer shell of each ball. The compression of baseballs and softballs differ based on age group as you can have a "softee" used for lower level use. However, for standard high school or college balls the outer shell has similar "hardness" and will hurt similarly if you are hit by it. However, the COR value would dictate that if a baseball hit your head it would likely rebound further than if a softball hit your head. Each would equally hurt (or not depending on the actual hardness of your head) because the impact and "hurt" would be based on the similar hardness of the surface of the ball.
Bottom line this is an extremely silly discussion that has no bearing on the original discussion point.
There are many people that prefer watching softball over baseball. Some believe that quick style of play and game is better than the slow pace of baseball.There is nobody who would prefer being hit by a baseball over a softball, ok?
Ok, moving on.
Point
Why don't women simply play baseball?
So why don't women play baseball?There are many people that prefer watching softball over baseball. Some believe that quick style of play and game is better than the slow pace of baseball.
It's a completely different game. Not worse or better. Just different..........and your comments still have nothing to so with the topic.
Don't waste your time -- he's a troll and a fool.There are many people that prefer watching softball over baseball. Some believe that quick style of play and game is better than the slow pace of baseball.
It's a completely different game. Not worse or better. Just different..........and your comments still have nothing to so with the topic.
Wrong as you always are, kids troll, and I am anything but a fool.Don't waste your time -- he's a troll and a fool.
people just lost their minds for a while because of the hype, like Joe Rogan calling her the greatest athlete of all time. The talent level in women's MMA is pretty bad even now but back then it was like the NBA circa 1951 with Rousey as George MikanThat is amazing. Ron Artest is like 6'7" and 280 pounds of pure muscle. LOL
It started off on a bedrock principle, really. Only hopes and wishes and subsequent scorns mixed with dopes with #####es and unicorns' horns elevated Rousey to anything but a punching bag against professional male fighters.AhrnCityPahnder said:This thread started out on thin ice
Have you ever seen Kaleb Starnes fight?It started off on a bedrock principle, really. Only hopes and wishes and subsequent scorns mixed with dopes with #####es and unicorns' horns elevated Rousey to anything but a punching bag against professional male fighters.
No, I haven't seen Kalib fight. I'm really not sold on reality stars becoming world class athletes. I'm also not sold on the UFC in general, as I know firsthand that Dana White fixes fights but that's another story for another day.Have you ever seen Kaleb Starnes fight?
Firsthand? You can't drop that bomb and walk away. Spill.No, I haven't seen Kalib fight. I'm really not sold on reality stars becoming world class athletes. I'm also not sold on the UFC in general, as I know firsthand that Dana White fixes fights but that's another story for another day.
I guess I should say it was secondhand (my bad) and it was "might," actually. I might have had journalist friends who covered the UFC at inception. Fight fixing might have been admitted to in confidence and threats might have been made about publication of said confessions. The allegations never saw the light of day, which would have been smart given that the threats might have had overtures to physical repercussions in the very nature of how they were made.Firsthand? You can't drop that bomb and walk away. Spill.
Not hard to believe; the NBA fixed the draft in '85 so the Knicks could draft Ewing.Firsthand? You can't drop that bomb and walk away. Spill.
I am confused here. Dana White had nothing to do with the UFC at inception. He did not join the company until 8 years later.as I know firsthand that Dana White fixes fights but that's another story for another day.
.
.
.
I might have had journalist friends who covered the UFC at inception. .Fight fixing might have been admitted to in confidence and threats might have been made about publication of said confessions.
FYPNot hard to believe; the NBA had Tim Donaghy, point shaving allegations by the FBI, and 10,000 text messages between he and an officiating friend, and said there was nothing to see there.![]()
I am not contending that fights weren't fixed. RA said he knows firsthand.Not hard to believe; the NBA fixed the draft in '85 so the Knicks could draft Ewing.![]()
Who am I to argue?I am not contending that fights weren't fixed. RA said he knows firsthand.
Secondhand.I am not contending that fights weren't fixed. RA said he knows firsthand.