PDA

View Full Version : What type of physical fitness is appropriate for today's tactical threats?


JohnH1963
March 18, 2010, 08:12 AM
There are many ways a person can train themselves, from a fitness perspective, for a certain tactical environment. In regards to today's threats which appear to be in urban environments, which type of shape seems most appropriate?

1) Weightlifter- A strong bulky shape that does not have endurance or speed. Stronger then the sprinter type.

2) Sprinter- A toned muscular shape which is fast and has some strength, but lacks endurance.

3) Decathlete- A shape where the individual seems to be good with endurance, strength and sprint speed, but is not great with any one thing.

4) Long Distance runner- A slender shape where the individual has the greatest amount of endurance but lacks sprinting speed and strength.

KLRANGL
March 18, 2010, 10:23 AM
By tactical, do you mean police/military or self defense?
I can see where endurance would be more important for police/military than for self defense, where a self defense situation would require strength and speed for a short duration.
Interesting question for sure...
I myself have always focused more on speed and endurance (they are not mutually exclusive), without focusing on strength so much (genetics wont let me build much muscle :o).

Wildalaska
March 18, 2010, 10:41 AM
Old fat guys with experience and brains

WildiminshaperoundisashapeAlaska TM

evan1293
March 18, 2010, 10:49 AM
Old fat guys with experience and brains

Thats great...I love it!


For police work, especially for new recruits going through the academy, lean and mean is best. Lower overall weight so that they don't have problems with the runs with yet enough strength to do push ups and the other activities that require upper body strength. For the civillian, the same would probably transfer if your looking to be in good shape and well rounded enough to face a variety of situations.

hoytinak
March 18, 2010, 10:52 AM
Old fat guys with experience and brains

True dat...if pear's a shape then I'm "in shape". :D

Frank Ettin
March 18, 2010, 10:53 AM
Old fat guys with experience and brains+1 Old age and treachery overcomes youth and skill.

In any case, if one is training for a particular activity or occupation, one can consider any unique demands of that activity or occupation. But if one's goal is to simply go through normal life reasonably well prepared, balance is probably most appropriate. No one can predict the future.

output
March 18, 2010, 10:57 AM
good cardio ;)

SPUSCG
March 18, 2010, 11:35 AM
All around fitness. I mostly lift, but lower weight higher reps, so endurance is built. Run enough to be a decent runner (no 10k runs for me but a few miles is okay at a good pace.) I wouldnt want to be big slow muscle or fast and weak. Ilm going for the middle of the road.

Sixer
March 18, 2010, 11:56 AM
Tactical threats?

I don't really consider tactical threats while I'm at the gym. As long as you have good cardio and a build that isn't so muscular it slows you down... you should be good.

:rolleyes:

ZeSpectre
March 18, 2010, 12:12 PM
The same physical fitness that has always been wise...cardio.

Stephen_Brady
March 18, 2010, 12:21 PM
Dependent upon your overall condition, I prefer sprinting ability. I'm 61, and can still do a 40-meter sprint in 4.3 seconds. At 15, I could run a 100-yard dash in 9.91 seconds.

The point is, in a tactical situation, you need the ability to move from point A to point B in the shortest period of time, and still be able to fire an aimed shot at the end of the sprint.

If I get into a brawl with a 20-year old, I'm likely dead. Fight or flight, and keep your powder dry!

spacecoast
March 18, 2010, 12:32 PM
I'm 61, and can still do a 40-meter sprint in 4.3 seconds

Yeah, right. ;) Better get that stopwatch checked.

http://www.boston.com/sports/football/patriots/reiss_pieces/2008/02/top_running_bac.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/40-yard_dash

Blue Steel
March 18, 2010, 01:37 PM
The CrossFit concept of broad, general, & inclusive fitness best serves personal defense.

Link: CrossFit Journal March 2003: Police Training by Greg Glassman (http://library.crossfit.com/free/pdf/policetng_Mar03.pdf)

spacecoast
March 18, 2010, 01:54 PM
Distance runners tend to be rather light and quick, and good ones mix a fair amount of cross training and sprints in their workouts.

burger and fries
March 18, 2010, 02:24 PM
i think cardio is the most important, then strengthening upper body muscles. you'd be surprised how many weight lifters give out after just a few minutes on the mat. having more reserve energy is vital to coming out on top. a person must be able to endure a sustained and accelerated heart beat with heavier breathing for at least thirty minutes. if you can't do that, then it's time to peal yourself of the sofa and put on some running shoes.

bnf

BigJimP
March 18, 2010, 03:01 PM
I'm with WildAlaska on this one ... " Old, fat ..and chewy"...

I can't catch em, but if I do, they're toast ...." Cranky old me, with guns they know how to shoot, are a very dangerous group...

Ian0351
March 18, 2010, 03:35 PM
I use a scaled back version of the cross-training regimen the military uses, with a focus on endurance (cardio) and functional strength (circuit training). As has been mentioned, it is inadvisable to bulk up to the point that you are inhibited in your ability to muster a rapid burst of speed.

In relation to firearms usage (staying on topic) and PT, cardio cardio cardio. Getting trained shots after sprinting is hard, especially if you don't do any regular aerobic exercise.

Also, from a survivalist point of view, the ability to walk all day with gear or run a few miles on rough track certainly won't hurt, especailly if you have to carry the reloading supplies you've been hoarding for (prohibited acronym).

Cycling a great way to rapidly cross distance in (sub)urban terrain without making excessive noise or using fossil fuels as well as being good for your heart, lungs and legs, and is reasonably easy to do with a battle rifle, unlike jogging.

Swimming is great full body exercise, is easy on older/chubbier joints, and has real-life flight vs. fight applications... but it's not good for your blued guns!

Of the options presented, decathlete is the most appropriate, and my vote.

Stephen_Brady
March 18, 2010, 04:23 PM
@Spacecoast

No need to get my stopwatch fixed. Your links deal with the 40-yard dash. I said "40 meters".

Doc Intrepid
March 18, 2010, 04:47 PM
"Cage fighter" wasn't on the list.





It's all good, but lots of gym rats think they're bad asses with all their toning and abs. A guy who has been boxing in the ring for 5 or 6 years or fighting professionally is often in much better position to both avoid and give out punishment than a guy who looks great but who has never actually been in a fight. Two or three rounds in a ring will give you some idea what sort of 'tactical conditioning' you have going...

IMHO.

YMMV.

spacecoast
March 18, 2010, 04:57 PM
No need to get my stopwatch fixed. Your links deal with the 40-yard dash. I said "40 meters".


Which is even further than 40 yards... so what's your point?

FreakGasolineFight
March 18, 2010, 05:26 PM
For an urban environment, I like bulky and muscular. The reason for this is mainly because I have a jacked-up ankle and because I smoke too much to really have an endurance for running :( ... which of course is my own fault. Long and short of it is I can't really run all that frighteningly well, so I pretty much stay in the gym and off the track.

Balog
March 18, 2010, 05:32 PM
If a 61 y/o can run a time that's only been beaten 9 times by professional football players in the last 11 years, I want to do his workout regimen. ;) IOW, I'm going to call BS unless I see some video.

Stevie-Ray
March 18, 2010, 06:11 PM
I can sprint, but long distance is out unless it's less than a mile. (Half-mile is long distance for me;)) I've wrestled most of my life, boxed some, and have been weightlifting for near 20 years. Wish I had started that seriously in my teens. My strength and grappling ability may come in handy if my gun is ever grabbed, if I'm surprised in a dark corner of my house, etc. Then again, maybe not, but my work-outs are mostly for health reasons, not to give me any kind of edge in a gunfight. For that, only gun-fu will suffice.:D

oneounceload
March 18, 2010, 06:17 PM
for today's tactical threats

Outside of the video game crowd, perhaps you can define this a little better for me....I don't see what you mean by tactical threats - do you mean zombie hordes coming down the street looking for food........or??

Thanks for your clarification

KenpoTex
March 18, 2010, 06:24 PM
"Cage fighter" wasn't on the list.

It's all good, but lots of gym rats think they're bad asses with all their toning and abs. A guy who has been boxing in the ring for 5 or 6 years or fighting professionally is often in much better position to both avoid and give out punishment than a guy who looks great but who has never actually been in a fight. Two or three rounds in a ring will give you some idea what sort of 'tactical conditioning' you have going...

Yep...

old bear
March 18, 2010, 06:34 PM
You the man, I love it!!!

Deaf Smith
March 18, 2010, 06:37 PM
Just take Krav Maga for a few years while taking a few shooting/law classes like LFI-1 and you will be ok.

And take up IDPA or such to keep your gunhand in while working out.

The gun is not the total answer, but H2H is not either.

Old fat guys with experience and brains

True but many of them can't get it up.

Matt19
March 18, 2010, 06:42 PM
As for fitness, it needs to be a mix of strength and conditioning.

Lifting weights/odd objects/bodyweight exercises.
Running distance/running sprints/walking/swimming.

Pretty simple. Keep it mixed up and have fun with it.

JohnH1963
March 18, 2010, 10:21 PM
I have seen the new threats evolve into similar issues for all involved, for example:

the police officer- The active shooter or a run in with armed gang members in an urban environment.

the civilian- A group of armed robbers or terrorists.

the soldier- Urban environments

In each situation, you are dealing with combatants who may be only 25 feet or less away from you. You might have to engage them at close range and if you miss or your shots are not effective then you might have to go hand-to-hand. You will have to be agile enough to manuever from covered position to covered position quickly or to rapidly change direction.

Wildalaska
March 18, 2010, 10:35 PM
WildogawdiwishiwasntalwaysontheedgeAlaska TM

pax
March 18, 2010, 10:51 PM
Gentlemen, I'd like to draw your attention back to TFL's forum rules (http://www.thefiringline.com/forums/faq.php?faq=rules_catecory#faq_forum_rules) for a moment. This one, in particular: 2) Language that would be inappropriate in the polite company of strangers is quite unwelcome here.

No, nobody cussed. But sometimes it's possible to forget that TFL is a mixed audience of "polite strangers." Although your own daughter might not read here, it is a sure bet that someone's 16-year-old daughter probably is. Although your own grandmother might be deceased, it's quite possible that someone's grandmother is reading these words right now.

This means that jokes and comments which might be completely acceptable in a group of guys standing face to face, really have no place here.

Although any one of these little jokes is relatively minor, the cumulative effect on the board culture can become huge.

So next time, please think twice, post once. If you wouldn't say it in front of someone else's young daughter, someone's wife, someone's grandmother -- someone whom you don't know well -- don't say it here.

In short: please remember that TFL is NOT the men's locker room.

Thanks.

pax

Ricky
March 19, 2010, 08:25 AM
The best conditioning exercise for self defense is to study martial arts. You'll get great cardio conditioning, develop lean muscle tone, increase endurance and actually learn to fight.
I know that a lot of guys think that they just "know" how to fight, some guys that don't have formal training can be pretty tough but there is nothing like learning proper technique and practicing till you do it well without thinking about it. I studied Karate but I suggest you go to a lot of different classes. Karate, Jue-jitsu, boxing etc. and see what you like. Not all classes or teachers are created equal so sit in on as many classes as you can before you settle on one.
If you don't want to study martial arts and just want to be in shape you really should lift weights. It is the most efficient way to build strength. If you don't want to be bulky then lift lighter weights and do more reps. (3 sets of 20 reps instead 10 reps) Mix it up though, don't do the same exercises all the time. Jog, ride a bike, hike a mountain for cardio.
Physical fitness has to become part of your lifestyle. You need to make it a priority and stick with it. You can change your workout but don't be a couch potato.

Rattlehead
March 19, 2010, 08:42 AM
It's all good, but lots of gym rats think they're bad asses with all their toning and abs. A guy who has been boxing in the ring for 5 or 6 years or fighting professionally is often in much better position to both avoid and give out punishment than a guy who looks great but who has never actually been in a fight. Two or three rounds in a ring will give you some idea what sort of 'tactical conditioning' you have going...

IMHO.

YMMV.

Amen.

Beach muscles don't make any difference in a fight. There may be a correlation of sorts with fitness, appearance, and performance, but knowing what you're doing (and equally importantly BEING ABLE TO CARRY OUT YOUR INTENTIONS), is by far the most important factor. Whatever that is is probably more suitable to the individual, but if I had to pick from the list, I'd probably go with an endurance athlete.

BlueTrain
March 19, 2010, 10:06 AM
Someone once asked the question about who would do better in a fight and one answer was a boxer. You might not think so, given how a boxer has to fight according to rules and so on. But the logic was that a boxer is used to pain. And that just reminds me of a boy who has been physically punished a little too hard and a little too often. It won't bother him any more.

Stephen_Brady
March 19, 2010, 11:23 AM
@Balog
You can call it "BS", if you wish. I didn't come here to make enemies, but to be among like-minded people.

My fitness regimen consists of almost daily workouts, with several sprints. I've been doing this for 44 years.

At my age, I could be in a wheelchair in five years. But don't bet on it. My job requires me to sometimes chase down people forty years junior to me. I don't want to go to the desk, so I train like I'm still 20.

No video is forthcoming. I find no reason to prove myself to anyone. I know who I am, and am proud of it.

Skans
March 19, 2010, 11:29 AM
Sprinters can run long distance and have stamina. Many distance runners can also spring. Both generally do a fair amount of weight training these days.

The bottom line - be in the best all around shape you possibly can. Speed, strength and endurance is all important in defending yourself.....not to mention brains and experience.

There's a reason why the Army doesn't recruit old fat guys. And, there's a reason why special forces don't take low-scoring aptitude recruits.

ChileVerde1
March 19, 2010, 11:45 AM
Crossfit is the rage at my station now. I do it as well. It's a mix of sprints, olympic weighlifting (snatch, etc..), and other moves using your bodyweight. It's all done for time with practicioners doing multiple consecutive sets with no rest. To me, this exercise regimen most closely simulates what you feel in an all out mata me!" or fight. It's great for stability, agility, and practical strength.

2damnold4this
March 19, 2010, 04:45 PM
Someone once asked the question about who would do better in a fight and one answer was a boxer. You might not think so, given how a boxer has to fight according to rules and so on. But the logic was that a boxer is used to pain.

I agree. I'd also add that someone who has sparred a fair amount is less likely to close their eyes in a fight.

Balog
March 19, 2010, 05:01 PM
People who make claims that are fairly obviously untrue and then get uppity when called on it amuse me greatly.

Stephen_Brady
March 19, 2010, 05:07 PM
Balog said:
People who make claims that are fairly obviously untrue and then get uppity when called on it amuse me greatly.

Glad I could make your day, son ...

semi_problomatic
March 19, 2010, 05:17 PM
slow, big targets... who think they know so much they don't have to wear body armor? yeah... thats the winner.

and boxing...sure... if you're going against someone who's never fought before. But boxers are severely handicapped against MMA fighters. Boxers wear thick gloves, they don't train for ground-n-pound, they dance around and use their arms only, not utilizing legs, elbows, locks and bars.... etc.

MauiDoc
March 19, 2010, 07:57 PM
....and I'll say it again....Target Focus Training.

I've just finished working my way through their 17-disc video series, and this is some deadly stuff. Shape doesn't much matter--there are Wild Alaska types all over these classes, giving what-for (and taking it back!) in the sessions. Works for me. I'll be taking their 2-day class in June in Vegas with My-Brother-the-Cop and reporting back here. You can subscribe and learn it all on-line, as well.

More info here: targetfocustraining.com

For getting in shape, I've just started this:

tacfit.com

and it kicks the proverbial booty. Seriously. Mostly body-weight exercises, and some other stuff.

Cheers!

Daniel

MauiDoc
March 19, 2010, 08:51 PM
Get fit exercise for those who don't want to spend all day at the gym:

alsearsmd.com/pace

pretty simple--it boils down to 'exercise as hard as you can until you're gasping and sweating, heart pounding--then stop! Rest until you're almost back to normal--do it again! 6 times.

Builds muscle, endurance, strength.

Makes it easier to hold that gun on target for longer!:)

Ricky
March 19, 2010, 08:53 PM
I'm not trying to offend you but can you really learn from a video? or from a 2 day course for that matter.
In my days of Karate training we worked out 3 days a week for 90 minutes. We practiced the moves over and over until they became muscle memory. We sparred to practice speed, timing and technique. It took most people the better part of 2 years to become somewhat proficient, an athletic gifted person at least a year. It seems to me that if you were to take a 2 day course, 3 months later the lessons are lost.
OK I watched the promo video, and I'll stand by my statement. You can't just be shown how to fight, you have to practice. Tim Larkin is selling a product and the packaging is slick but I'm far from convinced.

semi_problomatic
March 21, 2010, 05:53 PM
not sure how this turned into a training debate, but... vids can't teach you anything. you can watch all the tai-bo you want and its not going to help you do anything. Fighting is 70% mental, 20% strength and 10% technique. In reality the best way to learn how to fight is TO FIGHT. just like you can't learn how to shoot by watching videos, it falls short everywhere else, more so in fighting.

BlackFeather
March 21, 2010, 08:23 PM
I would go with a medium build based on stamina and speed under stress. I don't say this based on what nature herself has given us but on what we can do to our own bodies. Finding a balance with ourselves and training.

TAPS
March 22, 2010, 09:18 AM
Q; What type of physical fitness is appropriate for today's tactical threats?
A; Whatever helps you line up the sights better.

JohnH1963
March 22, 2010, 05:48 PM
Quite honestly, I would go with the weightlifter profile. If I was entering a close quarters, then I would want as much muscle on me as possible in order to deal with the threat.

I know that speed is important in a fight, but I have found that all out strength is what counts. One good blow can put someone out better then three or four weaker blows...

semi_problomatic
March 22, 2010, 06:28 PM
whats the use of strength with no endurace? It takes 12lbs of pressure (less on other weapons) to pull the trigger of a M4/M16. It takes a lot of endurance to run, jump, duck, dive, crawl, run, sprint, kick, climb...etc etc and then still be able to hold your rifle or pistol stead enough to make your shots count. Like with the biathalons in the olympics, cross country skiing and shooting...how many of them looked like old arnold?

leadcounsel
March 22, 2010, 07:19 PM
What 'tactical threat'?

An armed/unarmed attacker? You need excellent cardio endurance because your heart and adreneline will race and exhaust you quickly. So you need a variety of cardio including long distance running, sprinting, hiking under a moderate load, swimming, and some form of grappling experience (judo, wrestling, etc.), and others mentioned cross fit - which is a great workout to build overall body strength.

You need to build good/great core strength and good leg strength and fair arm strength at minimum.

Also, I did IDPA recently and that re-enforces the need to train your brain and shooting/decision making under stress. This is very important.

BlackFeather
March 23, 2010, 12:11 AM
I know that speed is important in a fight, but I have found that all out strength is what counts. One good blow can put someone out better then three or four weaker blows...

I respectfully disagree. I am by no means stronger than most people I have fought, I won by sheer knowledge and ability to use it fast enough. The strength I do have is more for striking and speed. I am no wrestler but have beaten them when it has counted. Though I am still young...

Skans
March 23, 2010, 07:53 AM
and boxing...sure... if you're going against someone who's never fought before. But boxers are severely handicapped against MMA fighters. Boxers wear thick gloves, they don't train for ground-n-pound, they dance around and use their arms only, not utilizing legs, elbows, locks and bars.... etc.

That's crap! I've boxed. I've also kickboxed and trained in a variety of grappling and street fighting techniques. Most boxers these days also know how to fight. If you think otherwise, you've making a huge mistake.

I also agree that good solid fighting skills help you with combat-defensive shooting. While target shooting will teach you trigger control, it doesn't teach you how to fight using a gun as a tool. It's really only part of the equation.

Brasky
March 23, 2010, 08:10 AM
LOL at MMA vs boxer. I know that's what I worry about walking the streets...rouge MMA gangs, lmao. Some of you guys are killing a brother with this nonsense!

Winning a fight = wanting to win a fight...discipline, style, size, speed, physical condition...irrelevant.

Slap a fat, old man's kid and see how tough he gets to handle.

Ian0351
March 23, 2010, 12:27 PM
"Rouge" MMA gangs? Like all dressed up and no one to fight?

PH/CIB
April 12, 2010, 12:10 AM
I have never seen anyone outrun a bullet.

Anyone can pull a trigger, old, young, disabled, out of shape, in shape.

gunrunner1
April 13, 2010, 02:46 PM
Old fat guys with experience and brains

I worked with a number of fat guys as a corrections officer. It took them an hour to run a hundred or so yards to a fight, and once they got there, they were so worn out, they had to take a 10 minute rest. You need strength and endurance.

booker_t
April 26, 2010, 03:24 PM
I liked the "old guy with brains" option.. indeed.

Physically speaking, I don't think you characterized the sprinter very well. Most sprinters are excellent all-around athletes. They must be strong in the legs, core and upper body. They do extensive weight lifting, plyo work, and agility work.

Likewise, sprinters do longer runs (3-5 miles) as it does improve their VO2 max and other attributes that help their sprinting. However, an elite sprinter will minimize endurance work because it promotes more slow-twitch muscle fibers in their legs, which hurts their performance. They are trying to convert as much slow-twitch to fast-twitch, and keep them there, as possible.

I think a more accurate description of an ideal "fitness" level for an LEO/military would be a mix between NFL Cornerback and a boxer/MMA. Or perhaps a gymnast. They combine elements of strenght, agility, balance and quickness (both of the feet and of the hands). Of course the CrossFit methods promote this type of fitness in varying ways.

The execution side of things, trigger control, decision making under stress, etc, is a separate portion of fitness that comes through repitition and appropriate training, to the point of failure.

So what's the culmination of all these attributes? Just look at the Army Rangers or Navy SEALS, and you've got it.

Matt19
April 30, 2010, 09:40 PM
Given that this thread originally had to do with "shape" in reference to strength and conditioning for a tactical threat, I'll give my 28 cents worth. One needs both physical strength and the conditioning to endure. How one obtains that is largely going to be a personal preference. Just make sure that there is a blend. After all what is the point of being able to bench press 400 lbs if you get winded walking a block? Or you can run 5 miles without any problem but can't lift an injured buddy?

There is a reason why it's referred to as Strength AND Conditioning in the sports world.

Find things that you enjoy and make 'em part of your day. Weightlifting, running, swimming, martial arts, etc. All have their benefits.

Haifisch
April 30, 2010, 09:45 PM
one of my favorite training tools are Kettlebells.

http://www.dragondoor.com/

riverwalker76
April 30, 2010, 10:42 PM
Well a few things come to mind here .....

My MCMAP instructor always told me .... "Never engage an enemy at arms reach whom you can safely engage at a distance!"

In other words ... it's always better to fire or fight, but never flee! ;)

On the other hand ....

In an urban CQC setting a person must be able to sprint down long alleys ... roll over 6 foot fences with minimal effort ... kick down doors ... and be able to run another mile when it's all over. ;) I've seen some of the biggest, baddest musclebound Marines get winded after a 2 mile hump. Then I've seen some of the fastest sprinters who were unable to roll a fence or short wall.

It's my opinion that in a CQC Urban setting you just need to be lean and mean. In other words .... built like a baseball player with the lungs of a Cross Country runner.

bamaranger
May 6, 2010, 03:00 AM
Everybody expects officers to run like a deer. My agency pushes fitness standards big time, and it is all geared to runners and agility people.

Good thing too, cause many of these antelopes and jack rabbits have little total strength. They better be able to run away! Most of the strength tests/standards are balanced against body weight. The lighter the officer is, the less weight they have to press to score well. The fact that you can press 110 % of your body weight is moot if you only weigh 155. A measure of fitness yes, but not fight winning strength. Total strength helps win fights.

Although the strength tests are adjusted by body size and weight, giving small officers good scores, though they may not move as much weight as a larger man, the run and agility tests are not. Somebody that weighs 250 is expected to be as fast and quick as another at 155. Its absurd! That's akin to expecting your lineman to be as fast as your running backs.

Despite what you see on the tube, it is my experience that the bad guy gets away on foot chases. Not every agency has choppers and dogs. And a blind foot pursuit is a dangerous thing. I feel I'm quick and agile enough to find cover, cross rough terrain. I am not, and never have been, a sprinter or gymnast.

You don't need to out last your assailant, you need to overpower them, subdue them. Most struggles/fights are quick and dirty. Strength and power are your friends. I'm slower and older than nearly all the guys I work with. In sheer strength, I'm stronger than many of them.

booker_t
May 6, 2010, 07:06 AM
I think bamaranger makes a great point. In LE scenarios, more often than not the scumbag is trying to flee, not win a fight. The Operator, on the other hand, is trying to apprehend, with minimal injury (and minimal paperwork!).

Getting that roided-up chucklehead to the ground and controlling him to where you can put cuffs on and protect everybody's safety is very different to winning a fight in the ring, a race on the track, or a pushup/situp contest.


--BREAK--

I wonder how many of the ~55% that responded "decathlete" actually know what's in the decathlon. I submit for review the following modern decathlon:

Day 1
100 meters
Long Jump
Shot Put
High Jump
400 meters

Day 2
110 meter hurdles
Discus
Pole Vault
Javelin
1500 meters

I've never seen much requirement to throw heavy objects or spears in the field, so Shot Put, Discus and Javelin are pretty much pointless.

General running and speed is worthwhile (not so much for patrol cops, but for SWAT/SRT/military definitely), so the 100m, 400m and 1500m make sense. But a decent sprinter or "cornerback" can score well in these runs. But quite frankly, running down an alley, through a crowded street, up and down stairs.. all very different to running around a 1/4 mile rubber-top track.

So what's left.. long jump, high jump, hurdles. Sure leg strength/power is important but I don't see any direct correlation from these events to tactical requirements. You might make an argument that you have to hurdle obstacles, but if you're wearing 30-80+ lbs of body armor and kit, you're not really hurdling you're traversing however best you can.

I don't know for sure, but I'm going to guess pole vault is primarily technique.

DanThaMan1776
May 6, 2010, 05:39 PM
If you're worried about hand-to-hand encounters... method means more than physical ability. If you're worried about a shootout... knowing what to do means more than physical ability.

But if it comes down to you and an adversary who share knowledge, a little strength, endurance, and speed would be nice :cool:

cracked91
May 8, 2010, 01:40 PM
MMA vs Boxers? I personally laugh at the thought of people thinking boxers would have chance. Boxers don't stand a chance against experiences wrestlers generally, let alone someone who can do both. The boxers I have encountered would generally be able to give me a severe beat down, until I took them off their feet. Then they squirm around wondering where their arms are and why they can't breathe.

Watch UFC people. The simple fact is your gun would probably be the only thing that would save you from someone who trains like these guys do. You guys can love to think its still the 1800s, but fighting techniques, as well as technology, and everything else on god's green earth, have advance quite a bit in recent years. Every branch of the Military teaches some form of MMA now. Because its effective. A blend of boxing, wrestling, and pressure points. Thats what fighting actually is. Zero rules. If you get half a chance to kick someone below the belt line in a fight, you better take it, because they are going to do the same thing to you given the chance. Biting, scratching, things that are considered "cowardly", start to seem like a much better idea when your on the receiving end of 3 guys with baseball bats.

Many people who get in brawls, particularly here in AZ where I live, don't stop to think until someone's dead. Things have changed. Its not bar fights anymore. There were a few students who were killed in unarmed fights when I was in high school. Not at the school, but at parties/bars.

Never assume that because you have some manly fighting morals, that the person your fighting does.