Gameness and Size ????

[No Quarter Kennel]

Jack, don't waste your time.
I don't think I ever said it, but I am not thinking proportionally in any way whatsoever. I don't think I ever suggested it, but if I did, I apologize b/c I was trying to compare gameness in percentages, in numbers and NOT proportionally in an equal sense, if that makes sense.

So to maybe clear some things up, I am with SB. I don't think either has a monopoly on gameness. Not animals or humans. I think there are equal numbers of game animal and athletes in each division (for lack of better compartmentalization).

My original question or post was simply to provoke thought as I see a tendency from most people I've been exposed to, that smaller is always associated with more gameness and I disagree. When the doctor wouldn't allow Frazier to come out of his corner at Ali in the 15th, I believe Joe displayed as much gameness as any human athlete by telling the doctor after they said he couldn't see, "I will feel him there" or something to that affect. Meanwhile, Dundee is in Ali's corner and quotes, "Ali is saying, I can't go back out". In a dog match, we all know who wins. BUT, it's not that kind of sport, so it doesn't matter.

Anyways. Sorry for bring something up that pissed some folks off. Crap, all I was doing was trying to kick up some convo. Jack, seriously, don't waste your time. You WILL PROVE YOUR POINT, but it's not a point I'm trying to win or learn. HOWEVER....LOL...this is the argumentative side of me. I do believe, there will be a higher percentage of KO's as the weight divisions climb upward as I also believe there will be a climb in rounds fought per victory as the weight classes get smaller.

Use to have these dicussions all the time in strength forums with some real deal gurus of strength. Glenn Pendlay, Mark Rippatoe, Louie Simmons and some of the Russians whose names I can't spell. The argument of power and strength. Power is limited by or dictated in capacity by how much strength one possesses. The "power formula" will point to smaller guys all the time that THEY are the more powerful and by formula, they are. However, which takes more power to Press overhead? A 500lb lift or a 300lb lift? Many would argue the smaller guys were more powerful, but there were more guys lifting 500lbs over their head than the smaller guys. SO, while the little guys are more powerful by formula and math, the larger guys are simply......more powerful. I love this stuff....sorry to bring it into a bulldog forum, but the twist myself or Jack has taken this thing is interesting to me nonetheless.

Take care men.

[S_B]

The "power formula" will point to smaller guys all the time that THEY are the more powerful and by formula, they are. However, which takes more power to Press overhead? A 500lb lift or a 300lb lift? Many would argue the smaller guys were more powerful, but there were more guys lifting 500lbs over their head than the smaller guys. SO, while the little guys are more powerful by formula and math, the larger guys are simply......more powerful.

And to this I agree.

[Officially Retired]

Jack, don't waste your time.
I don't think I ever said it, but I am not thinking proportionally in any way whatsoever. I don't think I ever suggested it, but if I did, I apologize b/c I was trying to compare gameness in percentages, in numbers and NOT proportionally in an equal sense, if that makes sense.

When dealing with a sport that has weight classes, and when talking about "power/ability," you have to speak in terms of proportion.

Everyone knows, in general, a 60-lb dog is stronger "overall" than a 33 lb dog.

But the 60-lb dog may be a piece of shit by comparison in each's respective weight class.

So to maybe clear some things up, I am with SB. I don't think either has a monopoly on gameness. Not animals or humans. I think there are equal numbers of game animal and athletes in each division (for lack of better compartmentalization).

Again, everyone agrees gameness has nothing to do with size.

But "ability" damned sure can ... as there are simply "certain things" that large dogs/men cannot do ... that the most-talented smaller dogs/men can do ... (e.g., gymnastics)

My original question or post was simply to provoke thought as I see a tendency from most people I've been exposed to, that smaller is always associated with more gameness and I disagree. When the doctor wouldn't allow Frazier to come out of his corner at Ali in the 15th, I believe Joe displayed as much gameness as any human athlete by telling the doctor after they said he couldn't see, "I will feel him there" or something to that affect. Meanwhile, Dundee is in Ali's corner and quotes, "Ali is saying, I can't go back out". In a dog match, we all know who wins. BUT, it's not that kind of sport, so it doesn't matter.

I don't believe smaller dogs = gamer dogs (but they may have more energy/moves, and the ability to fight at a good rate for a longer time, which can appear to be "gameness" ...)

Anyways. Sorry for bring something up that pissed some folks off. Crap, all I was doing was trying to kick up some convo. Jack, seriously, don't waste your time. You WILL PROVE YOUR POINT, but it's not a point I'm trying to win or learn. HOWEVER....LOL...this is the argumentative side of me. I do believe, there will be a higher percentage of KO's as the weight divisions climb upward as I also believe there will be a climb in rounds fought per victory as the weight classes get smaller.

You are simply wrong here, and your "beliefs" are based on nothing but your baseless, over-active imagination ... and certainly NOT on actually crunching the numbers of fight records/KO percentages

Use to have these dicussions all the time in strength forums with some real deal gurus of strength. Glenn Pendlay, Mark Rippatoe, Louie Simmons and some of the Russians whose names I can't spell. The argument of power and strength. Power is limited by or dictated in capacity by how much strength one possesses. The "power formula" will point to smaller guys all the time that THEY are the more powerful and by formula, they are. However, which takes more power to Press overhead? A 500lb lift or a 300lb lift? Many would argue the smaller guys were more powerful, but there were more guys lifting 500lbs over their head than the smaller guys. SO, while the little guys are more powerful by formula and math, the larger guys are simply......more powerful. I love this stuff....sorry to bring it into a bulldog forum, but the twist myself or Jack has taken this thing is interesting to me nonetheless.
Take care men.

Well, sure. The ability to push 500 lb takes more power than pushing 300 lb. It doesn't take a genius to figure that out.

But the strongest smaller men are proportionally stronger than the strongest big men ... based on the simple math S_B laid out above, and the smaller athletes tend to have better KO %s also

Jack

[Officially Retired]

Crap, all I was doing was trying to kick up some convo.

And you surely achieved your goal

[S_B]

And you surely achieved your goal

Haha yes, indeed he did.

I think NQ, you are speaking more in terms of power lifters. Your belief system is like Danny Burton's in that respect.

But when it comes to dogs, the big dogs generally fall short of impressive ability. They aren't power lifting.

Not trying to put words in your mouth, this is the vibe I get, feel free to corect me if I'm wrong.

[No Quarter Kennel]

Haha yes, indeed he did.

I think NQ, you are speaking more in terms of power lifters. Your belief system is like Danny Burton's in that respect.

But when it comes to dogs, the big dogs generally fall short of impressive ability. They aren't power lifting.

Not trying to put words in your mouth, this is the vibe I get, feel free to corect me if I'm wrong.

SB - I was using lifting sports as an example, but I have a very strong understanding of strength sports and understand power. I was simply using that example to discuss power. There are some small lifters out there that blow my mind in what they can do. There are impressive things accomplished by larger lifters that floor me.

My belief system parallels DB's in many ways, but we don't see eye to eye that much on a lot of other things.

I wasn't comparing any of this to power in dogs, but rather in my discussion with Jack about boxers and power.

You aren't wrong, you are just talking.