Quote:
Originally posted by Cain
if two people are 100% the same when it comes to technique.. the stronger, faster and agiler WILL win.. end of story.. 
|
...
Stronger, Faster and more Agile will win? Well that's a given. But we weren't talking about those 3, the title of the thread is "Big Guy Against Small Guy". "Big Guy" could mean strong, tall, big boned, fat, buff, husky, stalwart, slow, stiff, agile, awkward, off balance, deft... ??????
Quite possibly, with all these hypothetical scenarios, yeah, maybe "size" does have an advantage.
I am just curious as to if it's such a determining factor, why isn't it played out more in real life? Seems like smaller guys win just as much as larger.
Would you say that "well, all things weren't equal. If all things were equal but size, the larger guy would win!!!11"
This argument only works with qualified by "all things being equal".
At no time in the history of existance have 2 fighters ever been "all equal". There is no such thing as 2 identically skilled fighters, but one is bigger. In every situation, there is too many variables to calculate. What if the "bigger" guy is less limber, or too slow and musclebound, or what if he just found his wife cheating on him and is distracted, or what if he hasn't eaten all day. What if the big guy slips on the mats, or catches his toe in a seam.
"All things being equal" is a fallacy and an impossibility in reality. I don't even know what this thread is trying to say. Sure, if things were 100% equal, a bigger guy might have a noted advantage. And all things being equal, the guy who can shoot laser beams from his eyes might have the advantage also.
It doesn't make much difference, because the *real* factor in a fight is eye color. All things being equal, a person with brown eyes is gonna have the advantage.