So who's doing something new - Page 5

**Peregrino** · 03-17-2005, 13:55

Quote:

Originally Posted by FrontSight

The only unfair thing is that XYs are stronger. You are more free because of that. FrontSight

Maybe - But I've never seen an XY pick up the phone and have six XXs show up to help them move either.

**Razor** · 03-17-2005, 14:09

Quote:

Originally Posted by FrontSight

The only unfair thing is that XYs are stronger. You are more free because of that.

I know plenty of XYs that are no more free than a fish in an aquarium; sure, they can swim around and explore their tank, maybe bully some of the weaker fish, but there are invisible walls stopping them from going farther, and they depend on someone else to provide their O2, feed them, clean their tank, and set their schedule. Freedom doesn't come from being physically strong--it mostly springs from mindset, self-confidence and determination.

That, and not having to sit down to pee.

NousDefionsDoc · 03-17-2005, 14:18

Quote:

Originally Posted by Razor

I know plenty of XYs that are no more free than a fish in an aquarium; sure, they can swim around and explore their tank, maybe bully some of the weaker fish, but there are invisible walls stopping them from going farther, and they depend on someone else to provide their O2, feed them, clean their tank, and set their schedule. Freedom doesn't come from being physically strong--it mostly springs from mindset, self-confidence and determination.

That, and not having to sit down to pee.

Well said - on all counts.

**Jack Moroney (RIP)** · 03-17-2005, 15:20

Quote:

Originally Posted by Peregrino

Maybe - But I've never seen an XY pick up the phone and have six XXs show up to help them move either.

Maybe it's your technique

03-18-2005, 00:52

Quote:

Originally Posted by Razor

Freedom doesn't come from being physically strong--it mostly springs from mindset, self-confidence and determination.

Agree. (Yes, don't pass out, I'm actually agreeing with you, because you included the word 'mostly'. ) Because mostly, people choose to be humane to each other. Then, "mindset, self-confidence and determination" can take primacy in defining how free you are.

The problem is when "mostly" doesn't cut it.

A related problem then is because occasionally "mostly" doesn't cut it, someone whom others would assume to be weaker will significantly restrict all their life activities, i.e., not go out alone at night to even the grocery store, or not go biking alone during the day.

Is that good SA or is that living in a cage. Who is less free then.

FrontSight

03-18-2005, 02:41

Quote:

Originally Posted by Razor

That, and not having to sit down to pee.

PS: That is the only disadvantage I will cede re: that area of the anatomy.

At the end of the day, those femme parts have gifted us with multiple organizational advantages over XY parts.

FrontSight

**Roguish Lawyer** · 03-18-2005, 05:32

Quote:

Originally Posted by FrontSight

PS: That is the only disadvantage I will cede re: that area of the anatomy.

At the end of the day, those femme parts have gifted us with multiple organizational advantages over XY parts.

FrontSight

Aren't you forgetting something else? Perhaps you are answering the question at the wrong time of the month . . .

03-18-2005, 05:41

Doesn't phase me in the least...

Your mileage may vary.

------------------------

OK, so conclusion is steroids aren't worth it.

-------------------------

re: Mike Mahler's website from NDD's reply

http://www.mikemahler.com/index.html

had a picture (can't find it now) of him on an Indoboard. Went to that website.

http://www.indoboard.com/

Had never heard of a balance trainer, but what a cool invention!

After so many years of ballet I think I have decent balance, but that would be a fun thing to do while on con calls without sounding too out-of-breath.

FrontSight

NousDefionsDoc · 03-18-2005, 06:33

Quote:

Because mostly, people choose to be humane to each other.

Ah yes, the social contract. It is not unanimous by any means.

One must train body and mind, neither is good without the other.

In OODA terms, it is best, in my opinion, to deal with the Big "O" early on. Decide your Orientation to be hit "that" when "this" is observed. Have 1-2 good techniques ready to go. Takes most of the decision making out and allows you to get inside the adversary's loop very quickly. Much easier to turn it off than turn it on.

If you do hit - hit don't grab. And keep hitting. There are no neutral corners and no 10 counts.

SA will tell when it is more likely to occur than not. Time/place/people. If you go to the 5th Ward after 22:00, figure very likely. Yellow is not hard to maintain and Yellow to Orange is an easy step. Much easier than Green to Red or even Green to Orange. Yellow is also good for avoiding falls and traffic accidents.

Being a little crazy never hurt either.

**Bill Harsey** · 03-18-2005, 07:54

Quote:

Originally Posted by NousDefionsDoc

If you do hit - hit don't grab.

All is good in your post here NDD but I wanted to ask folks about this one statement, do you know (not NDD) why this is important?

03-18-2005, 10:26

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bill Harsey

All is good in your post here NDD but I wanted to ask folks about this one statement, do you know (not NDD) why this is important?

It doesn't stop a determined man one bit. It doesn't hurt (much), imobilize, kill or anything else of consequence. If anything, it keeps the bad guy close while allowing a moment to act - for him. Personally, I'd see it as hesitation on the holder's part and be further encouraged. You don't control the other person, i.e. neither the fight.

Is that correct, Sir?

**The Reaper** · 03-18-2005, 11:14

Quote:

Originally Posted by Martin

It doesn't stop a determined man one bit. It doesn't hurt (much), imobilize, kill or anything else of consequence. If anything, it keeps the bad guy close while allowing a moment to act - for him. Personally, I'd see it as hesitation on the holder's part and be further encouraged. You don't control the other person, i.e. neither the fight.

Is that correct, Sir?

Depends on what you grab.

TR

03-18-2005, 15:37

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Reaper

Depends on what you grab.

TR

Yes, Sir. I interpreted NDD and Harsey's message to mean somebody pretty unfamiliar with fighting. I can see multiple techniques made possible or more efficient because of grabbing, e.g. the head, or take take downs.

Leozinho · 03-19-2005, 16:33

Quote:

Originally Posted by mffjm8509

Dedicate Gym time to endurance type lifting with as much weight as you can manage. I look toward 10 sets of 10 repititions of any major muscle group exercise. Bench for Chest, Pullups for back, Curls for Bi/tri, Military Press for shoulders, and squats and lunges for legs. You'll not get huge or enourmously strong, but you will get rapid strength and enduracne, (and sore as hell).

just my .02

mp

Thanks for that post.

Some of you may want to check out www.Crossfit.com. It's a website/gym/community that seems to have found favor among military/le types.

They work hard on finding the right combination of functional speed/strength/power/endurance/balance/agility. They do O-lifts and other complex movements, rather than just trying to add more pounds to your one-rep bench max. Lots of rope climbing and work with gymnast rings, as well.

It also introduced me to 'endurance lifting' that will leave you smoked. The Fight Gone Bad workout has you doing one minute of 75 lb deadlift high pulls, followed immediately by a 20" box jump for a minuted, followed by a minute of 75lb push presses (standing military press, with a slight squat to get the bar moving if needed), followed by a minute on a Concept 2 rower and a minute squating/throwing a 20 lb medicine ball at a mark draw 8 feet high. Rest for a minute, then repeat cycle 2 or 4 more times.

Another good one a 400 meter run, then 21 Kettebell or dumbell swings then 12 pullups. Repeat 2 more times. (A lot of the exercises are better suited to a garage gym where you can drop the weight and take off on a run, rather than a commercial facility)

In my humble view, it's far and away better conditioning that following a bodybuilding routine, which is what I see most people doing at the gym.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Razor

"Have any of you seen the draft version of the "new" PT FM that the Physical Fitness School put out a few years ago (before they took it off their website)? They changed the focus of PT to 'functional fitness', incorporating exercises that mimiced tasks soldiers could expect to perform in combat, and other exercises that strengthened supporting and stabilizing muscles. Its more equipment intensive than the current push-up/sit-up/run concept, but appears to be more directed towards what an infantryman would need.

My AIT DSs switched my class to the new PT program toward the end of my course in March '04. More "core strength' (abs and obliques) than the old PT program. One curious thing is that you had to get up out of the seated position without using your hands. It also had shuttle runs. (The PT program at Basic had ZERO speed work. ) Seems to me the ability to run/sprint for short distances is important. We were also supposed to do pull-ups, but we didn't have any pull up bars. The DSs didn't like it because there were fewer pushups, and they worried our PT scores would go down. We graduated before I could judge the efficacy of the program.

NousDefionsDoc · 03-19-2005, 16:40

Quote:

More "core strength' (abs and obliques)

Are you sure that's what core strength means?