Fight Science

http://www9.nationalgeographic.com/channel/fightscience/videoPreview.html

I think this looks interesting, I might poach a copy from somewhere after it is Aired :P

Here's some 'fight science':

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pdrzBL2dHMI

I reckon the National Geographic one looks very interesting. I'll be keeping an eye out for that :) thanks Brain

i sooo want to see that... thanks for the heads up brain :D
if you find a copy of it over the next few days someone pm me :)

awesome that looks really interesting, might have to watch cable for the fist time since i got adsl....or i could d/l it too ;)

as for the youtube video, the guy is full of shit, he been watchin too much DBZ

that show looks so cool. have to watch it.

havent found a copy yet.. :(

I'm not hearing good things about the show so far :(

ive searched high and low for this, and nothing so far

anybody?

I believe in science.
But where not going to be around to see it lol.

it's not bring aired untill September 4th isn't it?

september four AFAIK is episode 2?

it's out...

found it :)

Quote from MetalAttack;276816:
found it :)

no u didnt, and cow already posted that it was out

Already have it downloaded, I just gotta watch it when I get back home.

Graphically, it's a pretty show, but the 'science' was shit.

They want to find out who the best puncher is...wow, it's a boxer, how surprising.

But they obviously didn't use any basic scientific process on this; for one, the guys were obviously from different weight classes...trying to compare the punch of a heavy boxer (who's art is already expected to dominate due to it's focus purely on striking with the hands) against a slender kung fu guy...how the hell does that show which art has the best/strongest punching technique? Shouldn't they have people in the same weight class? Also, the art with the LEAST emphasis on striking with the hands, TKD, came second. The kind of shows how they didn't choose equal representatives of each art. And why didn't they try the Muay Thai fighter's punchign strength? In theory he should be second behind the boxer, but they don't even try to use him...

Best kicker, they were kind of vague on, they didn't give Muay Thai a chance to compare his roundhouse shin kick on the dummy, just his knees. Still, it looked good. I'm not sure why he had an American accent, I've seen some of his fights in Thailand on video.

The grappling demo was interesting, but I would have liked to see something more interesting, not 'if you bend someone's neck the wrong way you'll paralyse them'. I think most of us kind of realised this before.

Showing the Kung Fu and TKD guy pissed me off. They should have put them in against the Muay Thai guy one after the other, see how long their pitter-patter punches and kicks last before they irritate the guy and he KOs them.

And then they introduce 'drunken boxing'. What a fag. When he was on the ground, someone could have stomped him 4x in the time it took him to get up. I'm going to go watch my vids of Drunken Boxing vs Kyokushin Karate vids and laugh as the kung fu guy gets tooled with his faggot drunken boxing.

Wait, did they say the fighter 'fight in the air'? I'm going to throw up.

Then it got worse:

They bring in a 'ninja'.

And the science they're going to investigate is whether 'a ninja can balance like a cat'.

It's like a bunch of 9 year old kids came up with this. I think this 'documentary' was created purely to broadcast propoganda for this alleged 'Ninjitsu'. Here are some quotes:

"Like no other fighting style, Ninjitsu itself balances every martial skill, power, speed, timing, exerting the least effort for the most damage...it's the way (at this point they show sub-par grappling by the 'ninja' as well as what looks like a nipple cripple) of the shadow warrior...the ultimate warrior...THE NINJA"

then the fag-ninja says "I want you...to come with me...on a journey to your own destruction"

Then they go on to explain some of the deadly secrets of the ninja (that's how they describe it), how they can kill someone with a strike to the chest. Apparently if you hit the chest hard enough you can stop a heart. Yes, any cardiologist can you that, except it almost never happens in any combat sport. Actually, I can't remember any case where it ever has. At least that explains why they didn't show the results of the fag-ninja in the punching competition, he would have been exposed.

More quotes:

"As masters of anatomy, ninjas pass down their knowledge in secret teachings"

Yes, that's why this fag is 'exposing' his secrets, known to any doctor, on national TV. Awesome ninja.

Then onto Dim Mak, the 'death touch'. I've already posted a link to a video about someone claiming dim-mak.

At this point I'm thinking about turning it off. Fag-ninja can hurt someone by hitting them in the chest with his fist. Wow, that must be exclusive to someone with faggot-ninja powers. It's no surprise they dont invite the boxer to see if he can generate more power with a punch to the same spot. No, that would ruin the mystique of the faggot-ninjitsu.

"I feel like superman"

I turned it off at this point, I'm going to watch the rest tomorrow if I can retch enough. I'm going to pray tonight that they redeem themselves by putting the fag in the ring with the Menor, Rickson Gracie or the boxer, whatever his name was.

BTW, this post contains spoilers.

two words for you Jaan

Frank Dux

look him up then just stfu

i dunno if that was a bit of sarcasm between mates or what, so i wont delete it

it was alright, fkn long though, jaian's right with the whole fancy computer stuff taking over what could have been a better path for the show. i wanna see some fights between the arts, but like thats gonna happen

and that bren foster/TKD guy pissed me off

I couldn't help myself, I ended up watching it again. Here are some things I learnt from the second half:

- An Australian expert in the Korean art of Taekwondo is the best spokeperson for a Japanese katana blade. Also, Australian TKD practioners with a single katana blade can simultaneously block two kung fu practioners who attack with Chinese swords.

- A Japanese sword can slash through and completely pierce a human body. We know this because they tested it on a dummy full of gel meant to simulate a human body. I'm no scientist as they would employ with National Geographic, but I must have imagined in biology class all that crap about humans having ribs, bones, a skeleton. The science behind this show amazes me.

- After hacking away at the naked gel dummy FOURTEEN times before it falls over in pieces - with the sword, the TKD guy states "now you know why the Samurai, when they fought, it was one strike one kill". I'm not making this up. It's as if the Samurai of ancient Japan never had skeletons...or armor!

- Now this show is called 'Fight Science'. So when they show Japanese archers, you'd assume that they'd be taking about the martial arts of Japanese archery. Well, they have a Japanese archer, and look how far from the target he is:

[Image: http://img237.imageshack.us/img237/5413/fightsciencezu2.jpg]

So they're pointing out that these amazing archers can hit a target that's one metre away? Actually, that wasn't fair, it might have been 1.5 metres. And it took him about 20+ seconds (I counted) for the archer to load a single arrow and fire it. I hope they learnt to fire farther and faster in Ancient Japan.

p.s. there's more spoilers in this post.

phillip, read up on Frank Dux: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frank_Dux

He's a fraud, he made up the tournament in Hong Kong, made up his military record. Bloodsport was a fictional story, regardless of his claims.

actually, that was ballistics gel, made to simulate the density of human tissue and bone - it is used by the FBI to test bullet penetration

No, it's only meant to simulate human flesh, not bone.

Jaian do as your avatar and go play with yourself

lol

yes cocky. good call, i have to agree. play with yourself, you should.

Quote from cockroche;276957:
Jaian do as your avatar and go play with yourself

smells like iron, tastes like iron... yup, it's irony!

Quote from cockroche;276957:
Jaian do as your avatar and go play with yourself

ouch man, seriously... ouch.

Jaian's post was informative and on topic. What's the problem?

I found the show both interesting and informative, it wasnt about finding who the best was, it was about measuring how far beyond the preconceived limits martial artists can go and to seperate fact from fiction.

the best puncher, they already told you that it would be no surprise it would be the boxer, they were measuring the force and true/false fact of one hit KOs

same with the kickers, they were measuring the force and true/false fact of one kick KOs

once again same with the grappling, they were pushing the fighter to his limits testing just how much force one person could inflict on onther before possible death

again you seem to be comparing the fighters against each other when the actual purpose is to seperate fact from fiction and measure the seemingly impossible speeds and force

drunken boxing, he was explaining what he was doing - thats why he didnt get up straight away; and if someone tried to stomp him he would more than likely flip them over like a......well lets not go there

as for ninjitsu, whats wrong with that? there are several modern versions of this martial art in practice such as Taijutsu - they just dont call it ninjitsu anymore, chances are the only reason they used the term ninjitsu in the show is because everyone is familiar with it - the guy obviously had skills and im damn sure i wouldnt want to mess with him.

"I want you...to come with me...on a journey to your own destruction" "I feel like superman" - its just a joke, there were a number of these light hearted comments in the show.

As for killing someone with dim-mak, im sure it does work if someone knows what they are doing and the reason why it almost never happens in any combat sport is fairly obvious - most people fighting for sport arent trying to kill anyone, that and the fact killing is usually illegal :P

Japanese Katana, first off the Aussie Taekwondo expert was one of the main people in the show demonstrating most of the weapons - they showed just as much with the japanese expert, chances are he just didnt speak english and the other guy was better at talking.

as for the single katana blade can simultaneously block two kung fu practioners who attack with Chinese swords - they werent fighting they were just showing the variances in technique, if they were really fighting do u actaully think he would let them roll over his back?

as for the sword going through the the ballistics gel dummy, notice where he was putting the sword? nope no ribs or any other bones there on a person just pure flesh and squishy bits - seems to me thats where a TRAINED martial artist would aim
btw a well forged katana can easily pierce the armour for the period.

Japanese archery close target- did u actually watch with sound? they told you that even though the archers can strike far away objects with near pinpoint accuracy, they always train/practice from close distances - thats what he was doing

seriously this show was great to watch and you really need to listen to what they have to say as this is a show about "science" of fighting not who is better than whom

*END RANT*

Frank Dux Is No Fraud!!!!!

You Are The Fraud So

Suck It Long And Suck It Hard Trebec!

Quote from mepm;277101:
I found the show both interesting and informative, it wasnt about finding who the best was, it was about measuring how far beyond the preconceived limits martial artists can go and to seperate fact from fiction.

Actually, it was about finding out which arts were the best. The introduction of the video said:

"the goal: separating fighting fact from martial myth, and to determine if one style could be the mightiest of them all"

It's pretty clear that they were interested in finding out which martial arts were the best as well, although they appear to have tossed any objectivity to the wind and chose their 'best' arts and chose to steer the documentary towards that end. Actually, it reminds me of Bowling for Columbine/Farenheit 911 in that respect.

Quote:
the best puncher, they already told you that it would be no surprise it would be the boxer,

Let me quote the National Geographic article on this documentary:

"The researchers were surprised to find that boxing is the fighting style capable of delivering the most force in a single punch." - National Geographic News

Quote:
they were measuring the force and true/false fact of one hit KOs

What true or false of one hit KOs? We KNOW that people get KOed in one hit. We have over a hundred years of Marquess of Queensberry boxing records to draw that upon. It's a fact. It's as true or false as gravity.

What they were measuring was how hard the practitioners of specific arts could punch, and thus determine which martial art had the most powerful punches. That's why they stated in percentage figures how much more powerful the boxer's punch was to the TKD and Kung Fu guys punches.

It's only after they seemingly establish, through figures, that boxing is better than the arts in terms of punching power, that they ask:

"But can a single punch knock you out?"

After which they give the medical explanation of how/why people get KOed when punched, an explanation which has nothing to do with the figures they just obtained. So this segment had two purposes:

1) To see which art has the most powerful punches.
2) To explain to viewers how and why people get KOed from punches.

Quote:
same with the kickers, they were measuring the force and true/false fact of one kick KOs

Then why did they NOT measure the force of the thai kickboxer? The person who in theory should have been the hardest kicker? Instead they skipped it and compared the force of his knee (which is compacted into a much narrower point) to all the kicks by other arts. They even showed him breaking a baseball bat with his shins...yet that's not good enough to measure?

Once again, they don't even make a pretense at objectivity.

Quote:
once again same with the grappling, they were pushing the fighter to his limits testing just how much force one person could inflict on onther before possible death

No. They measured how much force the grappler would inflict by performing a neck crank. They also said what would happen if a certain part of the neck snapped. They didn't show how much pressure would be need to break the neck (which would have been a lot less than they showed him using).

Quote:
again you seem to be comparing the fighters against each other when the actual purpose is to seperate fact from fiction and measure the seemingly impossible speeds and force

Again, that is one of the stated goals of the show. Not only is it a stated goal, but they DO compare the power of the different fighters.

Tell me though, what fiction did they separate? Name a single 'fiction' they exposed? I can't recall one.

All I remember them doing is getting measurements, then claiming some martial arts theory/legend is true. The one punch KO was crap because they didn't establish the likelihood of the punch KOing anyone. Only that it can KO someone. And if you didn't already know that a boxer punching someone can KO them, then you need

Stating that the boxers punch was equivalent to hitting someone in the face with a sledgehammer...um, no. While the computer measurements may have recorded a similar figure, the fact is you have far more powerful professional boxers who outweight this boxer by 100lbs who punch away at people's faces all the time. They don't destroy someone's skull like a sledgehammer would. It's pure sensationalism.

Quote:
drunken boxing, he was explaining what he was doing - thats why he didnt get up straight away; and if someone tried to stomp him he would more than likely flip them over

No he did not. He wasn't going to flip over his attacker, but flip HIMSELF over while he's being attacked, then when he's standing he would chain punch at his attacker. Here's a video clip of that particular segment:

[MEDIA]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Bub-mI6jL8[/MEDIA]

Now if you had read what I posted before, you'd see I was saying that in that time that he takes to flip himself up (which was pointless theatrics) someone could just stomp on him a few times. He was entertaining the viewers, he wasn't fighting.

This show isn't really about the science of fighting, at most about 10% of it is dedicated towards that. The rest is pure entertainment fluff. What annoys me though is that they try and portray the whole thing as science, and coming from National Geographic, it's annoying, especially since I have seen National Geographic documentaries on similar topics that weren't sensationalist crap.

Quote:
as for ninjitsu, whats wrong with that? there are several modern versions of this martial art in practice such as Taijutsu - they just dont call it ninjitsu anymore, chances are the only reason they used the term ninjitsu in the show is because everyone is familiar with it - the guy obviously had skills and im damn sure i wouldnt want to mess with him.

What skills? He had a hammerstrike, but they don't compare it to anyone else's so we dont' know if he can hit any harder than a normal person or even a 12 year old girl. The only impressive thing he demonstrated was his agility, he's obviously trained his balance and agility to a point that most martial artists couldn't come close. Although why they would want to is another question.

But yeah, this is supposed to be fight science. Not who can balance on raised stilt platforms the best.

Quote:
As for killing someone with dim-mak, im sure it does work if someone knows what they are doing and the reason why it almost never happens in any combat sport is fairly obvious - most people fighting for sport arent trying to kill anyone, that and the fact killing is usually illegal :P

If someone were to use dim mak in the UFC or Pride, it would not be illegal. The 'dim mak' attacks shown on this video are perfectly legal in any major MMA event. Yes, they're not trying to kill each other, but if these guys are willing to jump in the air to stomp on someone's skull to get the KO, then nobody would hesitate at using dim mak if it were effective.

And who exactly has EVER been killed by dim-mak? Have you ever heard of it happening outside of movies and ancient legends? Have any of the thousands of kung fu masters who claim to have mastered dim-mak killed someone with their skill? We know the rear naked choke, popular in Jujitsu is lethal, because it's been used to murder people or kill them accidently while grappling. We know punches can KO people, because we've seen it happen. The only place you've seen it happen or heard of it happening is in movies.

From what the documentary shows, Dim Mak is nothing more than punches to certain spots. And they were careful not to compare the fag-ninja's dim mak strike against the boxers punch. The 'science' of the dim mak showed that it was nothing more but a blow to the right spot on the chest, so a more powerful blow would in theory be more deadly. But the boxer is nowhere to be found.

They don't prove anything about dim-mak. They just showed the effect of a strike to the chest. The rest of it they just filled with fluff.

Quote:
Japanese Katana, first off the Aussie Taekwondo expert was one of the main people in the show demonstrating most of the weapons - they showed just as much with the japanese expert, chances are he just didnt speak english and the other guy was better at talking.

They could bring one of the top Muay Thai trainers in the world, they could bring in Rickson Gracie, a man who charges millions per fight and US$400 p/h for hiring him out, and the rest of the experts, but couldn't get an English speaking Japanese swordsman?

Quote:
as for the single katana blade can simultaneously block two kung fu practioners who attack with Chinese swords - they werent fighting they were just showing the variances in technique, if they were really fighting do u actaully think he would let them roll over his back?

I know they weren't fighting, but if they're trying to get to the science between arts, and show comparisons between the effectiveness of arts, then why do they get the experts on the show to stage stunt-movie martial arts exhibitions while trying to explain the science behind it?

Quote:
as for the sword going through the the ballistics gel dummy, notice where he was putting the sword? nope no ribs or any other bones there on a person just pure flesh and squishy bits - seems to me thats where a TRAINED martial artist would aim btw a well forged katana can easily pierce the armour for the period.

Here's the clip:

[MEDIA]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u8Kv0y4sTDE[/MEDIA]

^^^^

The sword cuts through where the the ribs, sternum, arms etc would be. Those tend to be a lot stronger than gel.

Quote:
Japanese archery close target- did u actually watch with sound? they told you that even though the archers can strike far away objects with near pinpoint accuracy, they always train/practice from close distances - thats what he was doing

Actually, what they said was "legend says that a trained archer can put an arrow through a willow leaf one hundred paces away".

So, finally they present a myth they have a chance to prove or disprove...can an archer really hit a willow leave one hundred paces away? They answer this by having him shoot an object half his body size, 1=2 metres away.

I'm trying to work out now, did or didn't they prove the legend? Maybe you could tell me. The positive part of that segment was the science behind how the arrow travels, that was fairly informative and possibly something that's of scientific value and interest.

Quote:
seriously this show was great to watch and you really need to listen to what they have to say as this is a show about "science" of fighting not who is better than whom

You'll have to burn me a copy of the show you watched, cause the one I saw specifically stated they wanted to compare the fighters against each other to see which art was best.

And, when a show claims "Like no other fighting style, Ninjitsu itself balances every martial skill, power, speed, timing, exerting the least effort for the most damage...it's the way of the shadow warrior...the ultimate warrior...THE NINJA", it kind of loses it's credibility for any purported claim to serious science.

first and foremost of all - these people know more than you, u need to realise this and stop knocking them; they were all great fighters that could kick your ass without breaking a sweat.

and you can quote all you like but the fact will still remain that it was not bs and they knew what they were doing

maybe when u learnt to fight and also get a science or medical phd you might be able to dispute them, but you dont have either

Quote from mepm;277142:
first and foremost of all - these people know more than you, u need to realise this and stop knocking them; they were all great fighters that could kick your ass without breaking a sweat.

Um, your point? Mike Tyson can kick my ass as well, that doesn't change the fact that he's a shit boxer and he had terrible form in his last few fights, and won't ever be a top fighter again.

However, does the fact that he can kick my ass make me wrong about my analysis of his current boxing skills?

Quote:
and you can quote all you like but the fact will still remain that it was not bs and they knew what they were doing

And that changes what I was saying how exactly? Does it change the fact that this show was for entertainment and wasn't a serious attempt to find out what martial arts were best?

Quote:
maybe when u learnt to fight and also get a science or medical phd you might be able to dispute them, but you dont have either

Sure, and until you learn act in your own movies, you can't ever criticize someone's acting skills, you're using the exact same logic.

But if you feel that you need to blindly accept everything you see on TV as fact, feel free to do that. I prefer to use a healthy dose of skepticism and common sense when watching purported documentaries.

i prefer to accept that they know more than you do, thats a fact

Quote from mepm;277146:
i prefer to accept that they know more than you do, thats a fact

That's funny, because you claim to know more than they do:

You - "hey already told you that it would be no surprise it would be the boxer"
Them - "The researchers were surprised to find that boxing is the fighting style capable of delivering the most force"

As I said, you can blindly believe everything you watch on TV, just don't expect everyone else to.

Do some work you lazy bitches - there are servers down everywhere and all you girls are doing is bitching about the size of your shlong

Lazy my ass, you've taken 12 calls in three hours, that's 4 calls an hour.

and i have lunch in half an hour lol

Hmm... Jaian you know quite a bit of this shit hey...

And I do believe that ninjas are a bit overstated. Psychology part of their "magic".

Jaian knows his shit, his brother actually fights in the ring MMA, ive seen him fight.

Ninjitsu is a joke.

you dont know much i mean you just called mike tyson a shit boxer.... that makes you an idiot in my books. ill agree he isnt what he was but in his prime he could take anyone

A pirate will still wtfpwn all your ninja's AND their bases.

Notice there was no pirates in the film....that's right, the producers didn't want a one sided battle.

Quote from phillip;277166:
you dont know much i mean you just called mike tyson a shit boxer.... that makes you an idiot in my books. ill agree he isnt what he was but in his prime he could take anyone

"won't ever be a top fighter again"

I recognise he was the best during his prime, and in the top 10 heavyweights of all time; he's my favourite boxer.

Doesn't change the fact that he's a shit boxer now.

CocoBuckets, you're not talking about Tolga or Hall are you? Neither are my brother.

Your brother fought Michael Hall didnt he?

I know Tolgs pretty well.

Quote from phillip;277166:
you dont know much i mean you just called mike tyson a shit boxer.... that makes you an idiot in my books. ill agree he isnt what he was but in his prime he could take anyone

Buster Douglas??

fighting styles are designed for a certin purpose and most of them are pretty old.
I wonder what it would be like if we got a top heavy that was a mixed martial arts pro heavy weight against an old day gladiator that would be cool to watch.
as mixed martial arts is the newest fighting style of the century the should name it something else not sure what

Why ?? Its Mixed martial arts, they take the best out of the systems and train themselves for it. Wrestling , BJJ and striking.

Sounds like this show is crap...if you want to see the evolution of fighting in the last 15 years go hire UFC 1 - 15. Its all there, Judoka's, Ninjas, Wrestlers, Boxers, Pit Fighters and Ju Jitsu artists.

See first hand in real fights whats effective and whats not.

Quote from CoCoBuckeTs;277175:
Your brother fought Michael Hall didnt he?

I know Tolgs pretty well.

That was Toan, and no, he was my MMA instructor, before he left for QLD to pursue profesisional MMA. I train (occasionally) with Tolga and Hall now.

yeah i have watched all them i know what you mean coco but im talking about getting someone like our heavy weight champs of today in a sand pit with lions and weapons and chains and nets and against gladiators of the old times and see what happens that would be entertainment.
in the ring there is still rules and you can judge a martial arts in a confind space as some arts need room to move.

LOL yeah i'd be up for that Sonicks :)

Im sorta waiting for the next uber violent sport to hit the airwaves.
In the states now UFC has just passed boxing in ratings and PPV numbers.

MMA is now accepted mainstream...so im curious to see what will be next :)

Quote from phillip;277166:
you dont know much i mean you just called mike tyson a shit boxer.... that makes you an idiot in my books. ill agree he isnt what he was but in his prime he could take anyone

ali in his prime.

(aslong as tyson didnt reach into the bag of dirty tricks)

Didn't a ninjitsu guy win UFC 3?

*stirs the pot*

He was a sub fighter, lost in the 1st round, got brought back because a winner got too injured to continue..i've seen that fight...it was pathetic :)

It is clear to me, that none of you have done your research on the subject of Ninjitsu.

Look, I AM a damn ninja.
Why don't we win fights on TV? Simple. The only Ninja's on TV are the ones who didnt make it as a real ninja.
Real ninja's are never seen (except for the 'Ask a Ninja' guy, hes alright in my Ninja books). Hence, we are never on TV fighting.

If by chance you DO see one of us, we NINJA VANISH in a cloud of smoke and thats the end of it (if you aren't dead by then).

Don't even get me started on Pirates.

Lenko - 60 rogue.

Quote from Milenko;277207:
You guys don't know anything.

Look, I AM a damn ninja.
Why don't we win fights on TV? Simple. The only Ninja's on TV are the ones who didnt make it as a real ninja.
Real ninja's are never seen (except for the 'Ask a Ninja' guy, hes alright in my Ninja books). Hence, we are never on TV fighting.

If by chance you DO see one of us, we NINJA VANISH in a cloud of smoke and thats the end of it (if you aren't dead by then).

Don't even get me started on Pirates.

Lenko - 60 rogue.

shhh dont tell everyone ;)
now everonye will want to be a ninja

Lenko wins :)

Although point in fact, I'm pretty sure ninjas didn't go "IM HERE FIGHT ME" and pretty much every basis of ninjitsu is against UFC rules. :P

Game, set, match to jaian. Logic and reason beat petty insults everyday of the week, mepm. Very interesting thread, hi-5's all round!!@#!

mepm got served

jaian is still a whinger. even if he is right.

Quote from Minorci;277280:
mepm got served

if you say so kelly, i watched it did you?

tool.

as for petty insults, i thought that was what Jaian was doing, apparently the scientists are idiots and the fighters are bogus

Your problem Matt is you didn't really watch the show. You sat back and let it dazzle you with flashy cgi special effects and Matrix-esqe fight choreography. I thought the quotes and film clips taken from the show that I posted would have made that clear to you.

You'll have to explain to me why you believe scientists are infallible (at least, the ones on TV). Scientists are wrong all the time, and this TV show isn't exactly a peer-reviewed journal. If you had made even the slightest attempt at critically analyzing the show you would picked up a number of contradictions and flaws in the methodology and results from the show.

For example, in that video of the Australian TKD practitioner with a katana, he slashed away at the gel dummy 14 times. 3-4 of those slashes were at the arms, to cut off the arms (the first one took the right arm clear off). I'll post it for you again:

[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u8Kv0y4sTDE[/media]

What do they say after the 14 slashes?

"Any ONE of those strikes would have been fatal"

Now, I won't make any claim to possessing a medical degree, but common sense tells me that losing an arm is not usually fatal. I know that, you (should) know that, anyone with common sense knows that. So why did they say it?

Because they're going for a sensationist approach.

They want a rapt audience of fans of martial arts flicks (like you) who swallow it whole, which means high ratings, which means they get paid more.

Yes, I was upset when I saw this, because I've seen other NG documentaries on martial arts and other topics, and they were well researched and impartial. What I saw here was not. Also, I found it insulting that they would try and pass off a lot of that crap as science. It wasn't, and if you rewatch the documentary with a skeptical eye you'll see it for yourself.

I am, however, saying all this as a fan of combat sports and martial arts in general, which I know you aren't, so I was fairly sensitive to the flaws in that show. It would be like you watching a documentary on gaming and have the narrator explain that AMD processors are no good for games, and that inbuilt graphic cards in the motherboard are all that's needed for playing the latest games. You know it's full of shit, and you know a lot of people are going to watch it, and those who aren't familiar with computer games will believe it, and it would probably piss you off. I feel the same way about this show.

As for fighters being bogus, maybe they were, but I singled out at least two of the fighters as being legitimate badasses. The boxer was bogus, they list him as an undefeated professional boxer, what they neglect to mention is that he only has three wins to his name. And I refuse to believe for one minute that the best practitioner of Japanese swordsmanship they could find was an Australian TKDer.

Anyway Matt, you can try to 'rebutt' this if you will, but I won't reply to you on this topic any further; take that as you will :)

Fight night on saturday night was awsome.
hope all you guys talking about fight science went I know I did.

Sorry to bring back an old thread but i had to comment and yes i am a new member. The actual fight science show was very informative IMO. Yes the boxer can punch harder but why not try a 1 inch punch and see who of the two punches harder.

These one inch punches are deadly if hit in the right spot. No Muay Thai/BJJ/Wrestler will be able to stop it in IMO and i have trained and taught Martial Arts for many years. If i had to bet on a MMA fighter fighting a Wing Chun practitioner in a street fight than i would put my money on the WC guy. Thats if everythign was even (yrs training, weight, etc).

Jaian, you seem to think you have alot of knowledge about Martial Arts. I went through your old posts (and that massive thread that was closed) and you said your instructor was Toan. Can i ask what credentials he has and how do you know what he teaches is correct? I ask because you were quick to attack so many other styles.