Pound for pound weakest fighter in the ufc?

Ironnik94 said:
@Bangkok ready d1
@Hellowhosthat
@Titan1980
@qw3rty
@The Chosen
@Zach The Maniac
@Leone510
@tibba
@Martialbeef
@jeskola
@Fesaine
@ExitLUPin
@Merman
@FIghtxIQ
@Get To Da Choppa
@gevoudane
@MescalineDreams
@SteveColdStone
@g*r*b
@stipeszn
@crodor3
@Masturbin
@Willek
@igorvswanderlei
@Bowel-forged Stool
@wwkirk
@I Lie To Girls
@Stevenseagull53
@slicebergjim
@PunchKicker
@The Accuser
@xhaydenx
@fight_fiend
@loisestrad
@HunterAcosta
@Koro_11
@Askafan
@Cooliox
@SalvadorAllende
@Xuh
@KBE6EKCTAH_CCP
@Kid Quick
@supnavarili
@Kdup
@MichaelT
@Kenny Powerth
@HI SCOTT NEWMAN
@Rygu
@SupremeGuy
@RightToBareKnuckles
@rear naked ankle pick
@muaytao
@SlomiGa (you're spot on btw)

Pound-for-pound, heavyweights are on average the weakest fighters amongst the male fighters due to physics alone.

Not only have fighters generally a higher muscle and lower fat percentage the further you go down in weight, but also - and this is arguably even more important - strength is determined by the cross sectional area of the muscles, which is measured in square, making it a 2-dimensional measurement, whereas weight is determined by volume, which - you guessed it - is a 3-dimensional measurement.

The 3D measurement (volume => weight) will increase and decrease to the power of three, whereas the 2D measurement (muscle cross section area => strength) will increase and decrease to the power of two.
This means, that if we scale a fighter down, his weight (think: volume) will decrease faster than his strength (think: cross section area of the muscles), making him stronger in relation to his bodyweight in the process, whereas if we scale a fighter up in size, his weight will increase faster than his strength, making him weaker in relation to his bodyweight.

Cube a)
length/width/height: 1m/1m/1m (or 1 m³)
bottom area: 1m/1m (or 1m²)
weight: 1t
weight loading (t) per m²: 1.0

Cube b)
length/width/height: 2m/2m/2m (or 8 m³)
bottom area: 2m/2m (or 4m²)
weight: 8t
weight loading (t) per m²: 2.0

=> In conclusion, the bigger cube is 8 times as heavy, but only has four times the surface (and) bottom area, making for twice the amount of stress

(What i'm talking about is called the square cube law and it's the reason why ants are "strong", elephants are incredibly "weak", small cats can survive falling from absurd heights and why warm blooded babies have round proportions compared to cold blooded babies and many more things.)
fbd.jpg
Click to expand...
This is hypothetical if we are actually able to scale up people to match the science. The measurements should be taken by actual strength measurements. An ant may be able to lift more weight than it's bodyweight but other insects will be able to lift more actual weight. You are assuming the strength is the same in every individual of the same size. Strength differs between all people of all sizes. We are not cubes, so that comparison works for cubes, not people. If strength was relative to just size, height, and weight - there would be no need for strongman competitions.
 
In response to the OP’s comments on the Diaz brothers. One person I can remember Nate Diaz getting the better of strength wise was Josh Neer way back. Very odd fight, Nate overpowered him in the clinch if I recall correctly and used some judo to put him on his back for the majority of the fight. That led to Neer going for submission after submission which Diaz kept easily shrugging off and he maintained top position throughout the fight and eventually got a split decision nod. Just an odd way for a Diaz to win, but he did what he had to do. Crazy that Neer almost won the fight off his back alone, but I scored it for Diaz as well because he never really put him in any danger with those submission attempts. Nate fought very intelligently.

But yeah, that’s a time I can think of Diaz looking physically stronger than an opponent. Didn’t he also out muscle Pettis? I actually missed the fight.

Billy Quarantillo is talented, but he seems physically weak to me. His pace and conditioning overwhelms his larger opponents though.

Chase Hooper has time to fill out at least. Still a kid really.

really hard to measure guys strength though. Not everyone’s style to try and out muscle their opponents. Conserving is important as well.
 
CM Punk by a mile. Then Chase Pooper at a distant second
 
FIghtxIQ said:
This is hypothetical if we are actually able to scale up people to match the science. The measurements should be taken by actual strength measurements. An ant may be able to lift more weight than it's bodyweight but other insects will be able to lift more actual weight. You are assuming the strength is the same in every individual of the same size. Strength differs between all people of all sizes. We are not cubes, so that comparison works for cubes, not people. If strength was relative to just size, height, and weight - there would be no need for strongman competitions.
Click to expand...
Obviously factors like the amount of motor units etc. matter, but since i'm talking about averages, these things don't need to be considered at all.

If you've got two muscles who're pequally made up in terms of fibre types etc., the muscle with a bigger cross section area is stronger. Always.

And yes, my example doesn't just work for cubes, but every three dimensional body to a great extent.

By the way: big people tend not to increase proportionally in bone circumference and length equally - small guys more often have stockier proportions, making the disparity in strength pound-for-pound even greater between small guys and big guys.
 
Ironnik94 said:
Obviously factors like the amount of motor units etc. matter, but since i'm talking about averages, these things don't need to be considered at all.

If you've got two muscles who're pequally made up in terms of fibre types etc., the muscle with a bigger cross section area is stronger. Always.

And yes, my example doesn't just work for cubes, but every three dimensional body to a great extent.

By the way: big people tend not to increase proportionally in bone circumference and length equally - small guys more often have stockier proportions, making the disparity in strength pound-for-pound even greater between small guys and big guys.
Click to expand...
That's because the study assumes every person is going to be the same. Cubes have no strength disparity between each other. In real people it doesn't quite add up like that. This isn't clone wars, use examples of real people. Compare athletes from 5ft - 6ft or 5'6'' - 6'6'' for actual strength measurements between difference in their height/weight/size. That will be more realistic than hypothetical cubes expanding in size.

Also strongman and olympic lifting competitions will get you a nice study group of examples.
 
Last edited:
FIghtxIQ said:
That's because the study assumes every person is going to be the same. Cubes have no strength disparity between each other. In real people it doesn't quite add up like that. This isn't clone wars, use examples of real people. Compare athletes from 5ft - 6ft or 5'6'' - 6'6'' for actual strength measurements between difference in height/weight/size. That will be more realistic than hypothetical cubes expanding in size.
Click to expand...
The smallest powerlifters are pretty much always stronger than the bigger ones pound-for-pound.
 
Ironnik94 said:
The smallest powerlifters are pretty much always stronger than the bigger ones pound-for-pound.
Click to expand...
Current worlds strongest man is Oleksii Novikov and he is 6'1''. But if you are talking about overall strength compared to their bodyweight there will be outliers from all sizes, it's not just the smaller guys. The strongman competitions have a huge difference in bodyweight compared to what they are lifting and those are usually filled with bigger sized competitors.
 
Matt Hughes


Ok I'm kidding, hmmm , how are we classifying strength. Ryan Hall maybe becuse he's not the strongest puncher and he really can't muscle people around either in wrestling. He's more of a cerebral fighter using 50/50s and pulling guard most of hte time to get the position he wants.
 
FIghtxIQ said:
Current worlds strongest man is Oleksii Novikov and he is 6'1''.
Click to expand...
Oh and i'm sure his frame is the same as that of Carlos Condit.

Or is he by any chance built way sturdier, from a skeletal standpoint?

Also, even if the biggest part of him being the strongest man currently came from him just having crazy activating power from a neuronal standpoint, your example wouldn't disprove that if two muscles are of the same make up, the one with the bigger cross section area will inevitably be stronger.

I'm also talking about averages, so anecdotal evidence is very much not important at all, nor really does it prove much.
 
Ironnik94 said:
Oh and i'm sure his frame is the same as that of Carlos Condit.

Or is he by any chance built way sturdier, from a skeletal standpoint?

Also, even if the biggest part of him being the strongest man currently came from him just having crazy activating power from a neuronal standpoint, your example wouldn't disprove that if two muscles are of the same make up, the one with the bigger cross section area will inevitably be stronger.

I'm also talking about averages, so anecdotal evidence is very much not important at all, nor really does it prove much.
Click to expand...
Of course the bigger cross section area will be stronger, that's not the point. Anecdotal evidence or actual evidence? You have people's actual strength measurements recorded and you have their height and weight listed. But you would rather believe in imaginary cubes and hypothetical expanding human bodies and muscles to prove your point.

Examples coming from real subjects is better than examples coming from theory. This is why people still test out theories with real examples to either prove or disprove the theory. It doesn't always go according to plan. Real examples is the real measurement.
 
Last edited:
FIghtxIQ said:
Of course the bigger cross section area will be stronger, that's not the point. Anecdotal evidence or actual evidence? You have people's actual strength measurements recorded and you have their height and weight listed. But you would rather believe in imaginary cubes and hypothetical expanding human bodies and muscles to prove your point.
Click to expand...
I mean feel free to find out all the strength numbers from hundreds (or another big number) of fighters on the roster...

But it's not really needed in this case, i have to disagree with you there.
 
Ironnik94 said:
I mean feel free to find out all the strength numbers from hundreds (or another big number) of fighters on the roster...

But it's not really needed in this case, i have to disagree with you there.
Click to expand...
That's not my work to do. It's your theory to prove or disprove. The real life examples are there. Like you said there are hundreds of real life examples to study.
 
FIghtxIQ said:
That's not my work to do. It's your theory to prove or disprove. The real life examples are there. Like you said there are hundreds of real life examples to study.
Click to expand...
Nah, i don't need to "prove" anything else besides what i already did.

...and fun fact: Kai Kara-France deadlifts over 200 kg, which is more than some 170ers and possibly some 185ers can lift and it's even crazier in relation to his own weight.
 
Ironnik94 said:
Nah, i don't need to "prove" anything else besides what i already did.

...and fun fact: Kai Kara-France deadlifts over 200 kg, which is more than some 170ers and possibly some 185ers can lift and it's even crazier in relation to his own weight.
Click to expand...
What you posted was just a theory, it hasn't been tested for an actual result. It would only work if you had a bunch of clones so you can set their body and muscle mass a certain way to test your theory. Real people and real strength is different than strength in theory. There are lots of variables to strength. Like Kara-France and his heavy deadlift, but it doesn't transfer over to punching power or actual strength in his fights because he rarely has a strength advantage in any of his fights.
 
FIghtxIQ said:
What you posted was just a theory
Click to expand...
Mate, it does translate perfectly to real life.

You think it's just by chance that the pound-for-pound strongest guys are always small guys?
You think gymnasts are almost always small guys by chance?
You think it's by chance that the further away you go from the equator, animals of the same species become larger due to the fact that more volume and less surface area in relation to each other helps them keep their warmth?

All these things and many others are due to the square cube law and it's totally a thing. It's incredibly simple too, so i really don't know what you want.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

AMAZINGUFC
News Nate Diaz Confirms Plans For UFC Return Next, Interested In Fight With Max Holloway
2 3 4
Replies
63
Views
2K
HHJ
HHJ

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,267,560
Messages
57,479,704
Members
175,721
Latest member
athletesnation_mngt

Share this page

Back
Top