I've often seen people use lifting feats to show that a character could outdo another character in general strength. How relevant is lifting strength when compared to striking strength?
Lifting Strength and Striking Strength?
@deannunaki: Mark Henry, Mike Tyson, Bruce Lee.
Which would you rather take a hit from?
Its not very relevant. Striking power is more of a skill that requires specific training for creating power. Lifting strength has little to do with it, since youre not lifting anything while punching.
Theres many forms of lifting too.
Was it lifting over the head? That involves shoulder strength.
Was it lifting it off the floor to about waste level? That requires many different muscles depending on how it was lifted. Back, legs, some bi's, lats.
Benching is mainly chest.
Striking is different because intelligent strikers know the most effective places to strike. It requires speed, accuracy and torque geberated from rotating the hip and even the back heel.
So while lifting strength feats getting eaten up by fan boys, theyre not striking feats. Muscles matter, about as much as skill and speed. Ask bruce lee
Neither of them, really. Mark Henry has his mass to back up his strikes, and Mike Tyson and Bruce Lee have their speed and striking strength.
I've seen one 100+ tonner character struggle with a steel door. Yet people seem to accept that these lifting feats make a good enough argument for his strength. Does it really depend on the character?
@deannunaki: In reality, a bodybuilder would not make a great boxer or mma striker. The muscle would be useless and if nothing else slow him down. The muscles needed to snap out a hard punch are forearms, triceps, deltoids, traps, lower lumbar, & calves. Without using all those muscles the punch is just an arm punch. You turn all your weight into a punch, snapping it out like a whip. No weight lifting can replicate that. Boxers/mma fighters some times shadowbox with 3lb weights to prepare themsevles for protecting themselves with 4-16 oz gloves depending on the situation.
If someone were to stand still and let a musclehead hit you it would do some damage. Who just stands there though?
I've noticed on these boards speed is the end of the discussion in battles. In booxing/mma timing beats speed. But who wants to talk about reality?
Ah. So I guess the "big guys hit harder" belief is a myth.
True, but I'm also wondering how lifting strength would be relevant to striking, if there's any connection at all.
The heavier they are the more bodyweight they can put into a punch. They still need to know how to throw the punch and have the stamina to keep throwing as long as it takes.
Well, I train in martial arts so from experience, lifters generally hit harder. HOWEVER, better fighters know how to hit harder than guys that are only strong. I've seen a kid who's 120 pounds give a guy who 200 pounds and 6 inches taller a concussion with one kick. Strength is definitely not the only factor, but it is an important one.
doesn't really make that much sense. In comics writers basically write them as one and the same. You have someone like the hulk who can destroy a planet yet he's clearly not punching fast enough to deliver the force needed to do that. But at the same time how are you expected to punch harder then a guy with actual super strength if pure strength is what determines the density of your muscles/bones and skin tissue. If you hit with enough force to destroy a car but can't lift it then by all accounts I think your arm should have broke in the process since it doesn't have the actual physical strength to back it up.
Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment