Physically Most Adept/Strongest Europid Sub-Group in a Fight?

[Angelcynn Beorn]

A few more successful white fighters to classify.

Clinton Woods


Bas Rutten


Andrei Arlovski


Any classifcation attempts at any of the pictures i've posted yet?

[SuuT]

Not really, the emphasise is on the group and not the individual. ... But we are looking for patterns, to see which group is most over-represented amongst successful combat athletes.

Individuals comprise groups - this is obvious enough; as is the pattern that emerges. CM or CM influence.

Well during the early days of MMA and NHB there weren't any boxers that participated in the sport. The only noteworthy example i can think of would be the guy who defeated Paul Eriksson before being subbed by Royce Gracie in one of the early UFC's, though i can't remember his name offhand.

That is actually the opinion of most people, as most people were not an actual part of the inception of MMA in the states, where its commercialisation was born. The history of MMA does not begin with UFC 1 in the nineties.

MMA (hybridised fighting) emerged in the late seventies in southern California - kind of an underground, very little rules, 'toughman' competition sort of thing. From there, some Martial Art gurus of note picked-up on the sucessful melding of Jitz and striking, and began experimenting with further hybridisation. The wheat was separated from the chaff long before this stuff ever made it to TV. UFC (especially) played-up the angle that it was all a mystery as to who would win what, when in reality (as the betting record indicates!) the outcomes of the fights were predicted at an accurate 96%: by the time hybridised fighting made it to pay-per-view - there was no more theory; just room for a quantum leap. Incipit today's hybridised fighter.

Since then plenty of cross-trained boxers have had success in MMA. The point being that both are combat arts where the strongest, toughest, and fastest fighter will win, and the 2 sports have more in common than they have differences in that respect.

There has never been a cross-trained boxer, that began as a boxer, and did well as a boxer, to hold a hybridised (MMA) fighting title.

MMAers are more well rounded certainly, they have to be. But that doesn't make MMA the only combat sport nor the only criteria by which you can judge someone's success as a combatant.

Bit of a strawman, there. I've not said that MMA was the only combat sport. I've said that it is the most well rounded combat sport; further, that it is overwhelmingly dominated by CM's or CM influenced individuals.

Mixed Martial Artists, particularly ones with CM influence, are the most physically adept/strongest Europid sub-group in a fight. There is just no debate. I'm not stating theories.

Boxing is certainly a combat sport. I would say kickboxing is as well, and Muay Thai, although i don't watch them as much as i watch boxing and MMA.

You've got your terminology a bit twisted: MMA (Mixed Martial Arts) has borrowed from everything that works in a one on one combat scenario, including boxing, kickboxing, and Mui Thai. In fact, the odds of not seeing an upper-cut, high-kick, or the Mui Thai clinch in an MMA fight are slim and none.

Lots of fighters started out in boxing before progressing onto successful MMA careers, including the examples i gave you earlier - Mirko Cro-cop, Igor Vovchanchyn, Gary Goodridge, Jens Pulver, etc - without having any problem adapting.

Every one of them were piss-poor boxers, and only found there way when they were able to diversify - when they were not left to the restrictions of sanctioned boxing. Every one of them, to the very last man, did not "adapt" - they were allowed to open the entire range of the human body: they had to be able to do this, first and foremost. In a formula: all MMA's have to be boxers; no boxers have to me MMA's. It is an issue of both quality and quantity - and, again, the boxer losses. This is not theory.

The theory i think you're referring to is negative transfer of skills between sports. As far as i'm aware this has never been proven to have been a problem. Most of the studies i've seen on skill and strength transfer between sports show either a neutral or positive transfer, never a negative one.

Well, then you've heard it here first fellow Lion! I have been involved in Martial Arts for 30 years, and MMA for 20. Boxers who begin as boxers, and remain boxers for a very long time (say for 5-10 years), and attempt to transition to a well rounded combat sports game (MMA) are, while trainable, doomed to fall back on striking when in a pinch. And when that pinch is usually being picked-up and slammed on their head, and then elbowed stupid, they may as well be handcuffed: they loose every time - I've seen it hundreds of times - I will see it hundreds of more times.

Chris Lyttle started fighting as a pro boxer after he had already established himself in MMA, and has a winning record so far.

The exception proves the rule.

I actually think the h2h training of special ops soldiers is a joke. In training they spend about 16hrs total on h2h, compared to the hundreds of hours they spend developing fitness, map reading ability, fire arms drills, etc.

Is that what they're giving you Brits?

I think looking at the racial make up of most special forces could be illuminating when talking about discipline, endurance, and intelligence. But not particularly in terms of h2h combat.

Obvious enough in all volunteer armies!

I have a feeling that when his boxing career starts to run dry, that Pride are going to try and snap him up and put him into one of their freak show fights.

He's already been talked to.

While we're at it though. Imagine if you would, that you came across his skull on an archeological dig somewhere, with no indication of it's age. What timeframe would you intially place him in?

Gods... lower paleolithic?

[Angelcynn Beorn]

Individuals comprise groups - this is obvious enough; as is the pattern that emerges. CM or CM influence.

But just saying 'CM influence' covers a vaste swathe of Europes population. Everything from Brunn's in Ireland to East Baltics in Russia, and if you agree with the SNPA defintion, anyone showing any Nordic tendencies as well. Most of Europe's population could be summed up under that heading.

Classifying the successful types by sub-type i feel would be more appropriate.

That is actually the opinion of most people, as most people were not an actual part of the inception of MMA in the states, where its commercialisation was born. The history of MMA does not begin with UFC 1 in the nineties.

I thought Vale Tudo had an earlier origin? But regardless, prior to it's becoming a popular sport, MMA drew from too small a group to be useful for determining what sub-type was successful.

There has never been a cross-trained boxer, that began as a boxer, and did well as a boxer, to hold a hybridised (MMA) fighting title.

Because boxing pays a lot more than MMA. No sane person is ever going to walk away from making tens of millions as a successful boxer, to earning a few thousand as a possibly unsuccessful hybrid fighter.

Bit of a strawman, there. I've not said that MMA was the only combat sport. I've said that it is the most well rounded combat sport

Which is true. But that doesn't mean that others who are also successful in other combat sports shouldn't be counted as examples of successful combatants. They dominate their chosen field of combat, and have just as much right to be held up as an example of a successful sub-type as any other.

You've got your terminology a bit twisted: MMA (Mixed Martial Arts) has borrowed from everything that works in a one on one combat scenario, including boxing, kickboxing, and Mui Thai. In fact, the odds of not seeing an upper-cut, high-kick, or the Mui Thai clinch in an MMA fight are slim and none.

Of course, you see all of those techniques in a good MMA fight. But those sports are also combat arts in their own right, and the dominant whites therin deserved to be included in this discussion.

Every one of them were piss-poor boxers, and only found there way when they were able to diversify - when they were not left to the restrictions of sanctioned boxing. Every one of them, to the very last man, did not "adapt" - they were allowed to open the entire range of the human body: they had to be able to do this, first and foremost.

Everyone is able to fight, it's in their very nature. Human beings have evolved into the form we are today at least partially because of the need to use our bodies for combat. That's why we have a surplus of muscle and bone density that isn't called into use during everyday life.

You're right though, those fighters couldn't succeed as boxers, so they moved into MMA, where they had a good deal of success. If any of those fighters had had the ability to excel in boxing, they would have, and would currently be earning millions as champions in their respective weightclasses. Which is my entire point. Because champion boxers proved superior in this aspect of combat, doesn't mean that they would therefore necessarily have been inferior in any other range of combat. It's about training and opportunity. The physical skills needed to succeed in any of these combat sports are very similar.

Well, then you've heard it here first fellow Lion! I have been involved in Martial Arts for 30 years, and MMA for 20. Boxers who begin as boxers, and remain boxers for a very long time (say for 5-10 years), and attempt to transition to a well rounded combat sports game (MMA) are, while trainable, doomed to fall back on striking when in a pinch. And when that pinch is usually being picked-up and slammed on their head, and then elbowed stupid, they may as well be handcuffed: they loose every time - I've seen it hundreds of times - I will see it hundreds of more times.

Without meaning to be rude, i don't think personal anecdotes prove anything.

Besides, boxing punches are a good habit to have in MMA. There is little that needs to be unlearned, simply more skills that need to be added. Training a boxer for MMA would require less training than starting with someone from scratch.

Is that what they're giving you Brits?

Actually i was basing that on hwat i've heard about American spec op forces. The training given in the British army is also pretty terrible anyway. The theory being that on active duty you are never supposed to be without your rifle, let alone your knife or helmet or other improvised weapon, that training specifically to fight unarmed is almost redundant.

He's already been talked to.

Any idea what the offer was?

[SuuT]

But just saying 'CM influence' covers a vaste swathe of Europes population. Everything from Brunn's in Ireland to East Baltics in Russia, and if you agree with the SNPA defintion, anyone showing any Nordic tendencies as well. Most of Europe's population could be summed up under that heading.

Classifying the successful types by sub-type i feel would be more appropriate.

See though, here's the thing: the answer is obvious - there is no real need to spell it out any further without arguing for the sake of argumentation. Not all CM's are robust mesomorphs, and are no less CM. Indeed, the Kurgan CM was quite gracile strongly dolichocephalic. Just look at the fighters! There is, as I have said, only going to be one constant, and that constant is (robust/largely unreduced/mesomorphic) CM or CM admixture.

If you want to break it down by combat category, you're certainly invited to do so. Get ready to see a lot of CM though as you work your way into the upper strata of any given combat sport above the 165 lb. marker.

(Don't know where your getting the "Nordic tendencies" = CM influence. The SNPA - who basically takes the median of all prominent physical anthropologists and calls it their 'take' - is in agreement with Coon et. al. that CM was crucial in the formation of racial sub-types, particularly North/North western Europe; and are, therefore, considered, in the manner they consider them, to be peripherial types. In some instances, asserting that it is more appropriate to speak of CM influenced Nordics (e.g. St. Pierre) and/or Nordic influenced CM (possibly Randy Couture). However, the admixture is largely isolated to DaloFaelid, Borreby, and Northern Alpines and the considerable expanse of the Sub-Nordid spectrum etc.)

... MMA drew from too small a group to be useful for determining what sub-type was successful.

Red Herring. The most physically adept/strongest Europid sub-group, in a fight, is CM - here and now.

Because boxing pays a lot more than MMA. No sane person is ever going to walk away from making tens of millions as a successful boxer, to earning a few thousand as a possibly unsuccessful hybrid fighter.

Not to be rude, but clearly you are not a fighter, and probably don't know any: fighters fight to win. They will fight in the venue that allows them to exercise their skills to their full extent to achieve victory. Fighters who fight for money are either non-'whites'; or, the exception to the rule.

But that doesn't mean that others who are also successful in other combat sports shouldn't be counted as examples of successful combatants. They dominate their chosen field of combat, and have just as much right to be held up as an example of a successful sub-type as any other.

If you keep tossing these strawmen at me, the forum will burst to flames : We are talking about, per the thread title, the BEST - the "physically most adept/strongest Europid sub-group in a fight", not who or should or would not be counted as "successful combatants" or any given "chosen field of combat". You have already agreed with me that MMA's are at the apex of combat sports; further, you have agreed that CM's comprise the Lion's share of the BEST fighters.

Without meaning to be rude, i don't think personal anecdotes prove anything.

Besides, boxing punches are a good habit to have in MMA. There is little that needs to be unlearned, simply more skills that need to be added. Training a boxer for MMA would require less training than starting with someone from scratch.

And that's why I hesitate to produce anecdotes in this forum: for all you know I could be some fat, bald, OREO eating video game nerd with potato chip crumbs all over my keyboard that is full of shit... As far as the rest of your statment, its all very rational, but its just wrong. Sorry! - As a general rule, as I have said, I would rather have raw skill to mould any day of the week than anyone who has boxed for over 5 years. Look at the age of most fighters at their peek, and this should put it in better perspective: there is only so much time for prime - and then its over. In short, even 3 years in an eternity in MMA.

Actually i was basing that on hwat i've heard about American spec op forces.

My brother, who is currently a cryptologic linguist out of the airforce, was a former Martial Arts instructor for Airborne Rangers as well as Navy S.E.A.L.S in Houston, TX.

They are deadly men, which takes quite a bit more than 16 hours to achieve. Indeed, more than 16 hours of hand-to-hand combat training is given to enlisted men prior to leaving basic training.

Long story short, whoever told you that is a Mo Mo.

Any idea what the offer was?

To the best of my knowledge, he was probed about his personal interest in crossing over; and ideas were tossed around about an exhibition between himself and Tim Sylvia, to which he declined.

[ladybright]

I agree CM/CM influence makes for a sturdy fighter. I think Anglosaxon or Brünn are probably the best but I have seen some really scary looking eastbaltid types. As far as MMA type fighting goes you need strength/muscle and bone density, flexibly and speed. Mental strength and intimidation cannot be forgotten about either. Jujitsu and wresting are good for takedowns. My husband has over 10 years of wresting and 5 years of judo/jujitsu training so talking to him has colored my understanding of freeform fighting. He is atlantid, with strong Brünn + Borreby. When he was taking Judo in collage he got to be a practice dummy for Rorion Gracie. He was sutiably impressed.

[Van De Poele]

Well would be interesting if one could have a relativelly anthopological data on the composition of some memorable battles: in this moment I'm thinking, for instance, in the British counter-armada sent against Spain and Portugal in 1589 as a retaliatory expeditio nto the Spanish Armada of 1588

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English_Armada

or the English expedition against Cartagena de Indias in 1741

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_...gena_de_Indias
but of course this would be of little use givent that thez anthropological composition of each opponent played no role in the battles

[Dropkick]

How about some WWE wrestlers. I know they're not really fighting but they have size and strength.

Triple H and the Big Show for example.

[Agrippa]

The best proof for this or that variant comes from K1 and Mixed Martial Arts obviously if its about close quarter combat without weapons.

What we can see is a certain variation between the heavier Leptomorphs to the very heavy, even slightly obese Pykno-Athletic constitution/body type wise. By race there seem to be little limits, just that the more robust boned and masculine forms seem to dominate, again no surprise.

There are more intelligent, tactical and self-disciplined fighters however and these seem to be, on average, again like expected, more progressive and rather on the leptomorph or lepto-mesomorph side comparatively.