This Is Why Kimbo Beat Houston

Training
21

I’m not really familiar with either fighter but I imagine someone considered to be the “greatest professional female boxer” would have a much higher technical development than an Olympic boxer. I think its easy to forget because of how many sports where the highest level is the Olympics, but it is a contest of amateur athletes.

That guy might go on to eventually develop an amazing pro career but theres something to be said for experience in favor of the girl.
That and olympic boxing rules favor hitting many times and accurately over hitting hard. Not to say hitting harder won’t help, its just that knockouts are rarish and a point is a point.

22

[quote]Kevin_Meaux wrote:
That and olympic boxing rules favor hitting many times and accurately over hitting hard. Not to say hitting harder won’t help, its just that knockouts are rarish and a point is a point.[/quote]

Agreed.

23

[quote]AttackOfTheChris wrote:
I agree with Aussie. Saw the show a few months back and decided it was bullshit because if they aren’t going to test the same kind of punch then why test at all?[/quote]

Female involvement = guys thinking with their dicks = double standard = bad science

Women should stick to being sex objects rather than athletes.

24

[quote]Nominal Prospect wrote:
Women should stick to being sex objects rather than athletes.[/quote]

Your ignorance knows no boundaries,does it?

Last time I checked,they could be both. Pull your head out of your ass…because you’re continuously spewing a lot of shit on these forums.

25

Are they really measuring the force, or just the pressure?

Large force divided by larger contact area from larger gloves, could yield a lower “score”.

26

[quote]Nominal Prospect wrote:

[quote]AttackOfTheChris wrote:
I agree with Aussie. Saw the show a few months back and decided it was bullshit because if they aren’t going to test the same kind of punch then why test at all?[/quote]

Female involvement = guys thinking with their dicks = double standard = bad science

Women should stick to being sex objects rather than athletes.[/quote]

WTF you serious? (I catch myself asking that question a lot lately…)
If so… you’re pathetic.

27

There are 2 totally different kinds of punches… The guy performs a straight without any wind. The female takes a good leap and performs a hook, thus accelerating far more. This show is complete bullshit.

Ok she can hit hard, but let her perform the same kind of punch.

28

i don’t watch (bad) sports science since i first saw it…
it’s so bad that it hurts.

29

[quote]Bungalow wrote:
Are they really measuring the force, or just the pressure?

Large force divided by larger contact area from larger gloves, could yield a lower “score”.[/quote]

Yeah, there are a number of different ways to go about measuring collisions. I’ve noticed that a lot of the “science” shows when measuring impacts neglect the effect of impact area. I’ve noticed myth busters do this several times.

You can measure force and you can measure area, but you have to remember that both of those variables change thought a collision and that they are not directly proportional. You can also monitor things like impact energy, but they are all incomplete views of the event.

Was what they were measuring max force generation? If so they ignored max pressure because they weren’t recording area (getting hit with 100 pounds of force spread all over your body, low pressure, is not the same as getting hit with 100 pounds of force using the tip of a pin, high pressure. (this could be greatly affected by things like gloves)

It also sounds like they were ignoring things like impact duration. Time profile of both force and area are really important in a collision. 700lbs of force for a 1 second duration can be more damaging that 800lbs of force over a 1/4 second duration, not to mention it requires for total strength for the 700lbs force generation.

This is why I hate these shows. I only have a very basic understanding of collision mechanics, and their analysis is laughable.

30

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[quote]Bungalow wrote:
Are they really measuring the force, or just the pressure?

Large force divided by larger contact area from larger gloves, could yield a lower “score”.[/quote]

Yeah, there are a number of different ways to go about measuring collisions. I’ve noticed that a lot of the “science” shows when measuring impacts neglect the effect of impact area. I’ve noticed myth busters do this several times.

You can measure force and you can measure area, but you have to remember that both of those variables change thought a collision and that they are not directly proportional. You can also monitor things like impact energy, but they are all incomplete views of the event.

Was what they were measuring max force generation? If so they ignored max pressure because they weren’t recording area (getting hit with 100 pounds of force spread all over your body, low pressure, is not the same as getting hit with 100 pounds of force using the tip of a pin, high pressure. (this could be greatly affected by things like gloves)

It also sounds like they were ignoring things like impact duration. Time profile of both force and area are really important in a collision. 700lbs of force for a 1 second duration can be more damaging that 800lbs of force over a 1/4 second duration, not to mention it requires for total strength for the 700lbs force generation.

This is why I hate these shows. I only have a very basic understanding of collision mechanics, and their analysis is laughable.[/quote]

Oh, absolutely. I mean, besides the technicalities of the strike that everyone else has mentioned, the mechanics and reporting is just out of wack.

I’m not too sharp on collision mechanics either, you’re talking about impulse right? It’s the same theory that makes seatbelts work. You lengthen the time of deceleration and the impact is lessened too. Throw a quick punch, and it’ll have more bite than a driving one. Less force, perhaps, but more bite.

What it comes down to, is shock value. They just want to be able to say “This tiny little girl punches harder than an olympic boxer. Don’t believe me? Watch our show.”

31

[quote]Big_Boss wrote:

[quote]Nominal Prospect wrote:
Women should stick to being sex objects rather than athletes.[/quote]

Your ignorance knows no boundaries,does it?

Last time I checked,they could be both. Pull your head out of your ass…because you’re continuously spewing a lot of shit on these forums. [/quote]

No, they can’t be both. You are rather mistaken. And probably thinking with your dick.

[quote]FirestormWarrior wrote:

WTF you serious? (I catch myself asking that question a lot lately…)
If so… you’re pathetic.[/quote]

What’s pathetic about observing self-evident truths?

32

[quote]Aussie Davo wrote:
I’m a bit concerned with the science behind the show. Both Moe and Houston performed a straight punch. Lucile on the other hand performed a hook after a wind up. Anyone who’s been in boxing for more than a few months knows that while straights are the shit in terms of accuracy, hooks can generate ALOT of more force.[/quote]

x2

33

same punch from Page 1800pounds of force F getting hit for that

34

[quote]Xen Nova wrote:
she’s sexy as fucking hell.

That said, MMA fighters have shit striking technique, that’s not news to anyone :-p[/quote]

Shitty generalizations in reference to quantifying something without a context of reference are a dime a dozen, that’s not news to anyone.