The Instigator
Pro (for)
6 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
7 Points

I would beat you in a fight.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 2 votes the winner is...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 1/5/2013 Category: Entertainment
Updated: 5 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 2,385 times Debate No: 28911
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (12)
Votes (2)




Now this is a debate about who would win in a fight pro or con. A LOT OF RULES FOR THIS SORRY I DON'T WANT TO BUT TROLLS COULD WIN BY MAKING OUTLANDISH CLAIMS. :(
1. No lying, this is a big one because if someone says I am 7'9 and 500 pounds and run the mile in 2 minutes, then obviously their lying or are a giant version of superman. Neither of which is acceptable ;). To dissuade people from this, any claim that seems outlandish has to be justified extensively. For example, if one REALLY was 7' feet tall they would have to have a picture on DDO of themselves standing next to something similarly tall. Outlandish is defined as impossible or extremely unlikely claims.
2.NO its against the law to fight so I win type scenarios. Con is arguing they would win the fight. This is also assuming that the fight for some reason is legal.
3.NO intentionally fallacious arguments
4. No semantic based arguments, by I, I a mean me, by you, I mean the person accepting this debate, come on don't be a jerk.
5. No I am a girl and you cannot hit a girl type things, as I would not hit a girl in real life and this is a perfectly theoretical fight(same thing goes with age or social status(handicap))
6. Pro=AFF or Affirmative, Con=NEG or Negative
7.BOP is shared for obvious reasons
Special Factors
Special Factors

Good luck!


I will assume that weapons are not allowed.

Strengths- I'm 6 feet 2 inches tall. I weigh 251 pounds. I am strong (example I can squat 300 pounds), I am quick, I am smart (4.0 in school) I play or have played on either on a school team or a rec league in football, basketball, baseball, and wrestling.
Special Factors- I have a high tolerance to pain (examples: I sprained my ankle in football practice and started for my football game the next day, I pulled my hamstrings at the start of the football season and played the whole season, and bruised and strained my rib cage in the first quarter in a football game and played the rest of the game.). I have had training in self defense. I don't have great blood flow which means I don't bleed out if cut.
Weaknesses- I'm not a very fast runner. With my bad blood flow I cramp if I work hard and have a long stretch of inactivity.
Debate Round No. 1


My opponent has followed all the rules well and I appreciate it and I am also glad he inferred(correctly) no weapons will be allowed :)
Quote to start off my strengths:
"Shorter people of the same proportions as taller people have many physical advantages based on the laws of physics, and these advantages are supported by many researchers. Shorter people have faster reaction times, greater ability to accelerate body movements, stronger muscles in proportion to body weight, greater endurance, and the ability to rotate the body faster. They are also less likely to break bones in falling. As a consequence of these physical attributes, shorter people can excel as gymnasts, divers, skiers, martial artists, rock climbers, figure skaters, rodeo riders, soccer players and long distance runners. Within their weight classes they are excellent wrestlers, boxers, and weight lifters. "
Human Body Size and the Laws of Scaling: Physiological, Performance, Growth, Longevity and Ecological Ramifications
I am 5'2 tall and weigh 134 pounds, according to the conversion factor on Google(from metric system). I am decently strong, I can bench almost twice my weight(about 209.439 :P). I lived in America for 6 years in Aspen,Colorado specifically. I was exposed in high altitudes there. While I was in America I did middle school and high school wrestling from 10-16 specifically apart of Western Suburban League, placing 3rd at state my 14 and under and 2nd in 12 and under when I was twelve. I have been taking Judo classes for about a year now(as they don't offer wrestling often in Scotland) and I am a Orange belt now. The Dojo I practice at primarily focuses on ne-waza more than tachi-waza than average at least. This means I am exposed to a lot more ground work than the average judoka. Another thing that's important about this is since my club isn't huge I am used to rolling with people much bigger and stronger than me. The biggest guy I actively practice with is probably a little heavier(but shorter) than my opponent. The only other martial art I have taken is what's known as Scottish backhold wrestling. The importance of this is that backhold wrestling emphasizes using strength to do really damaging throws. Judo is really focuses on redirecting someone's strength and using it against him, and wrestling focuses on control. On a academic note( I was not expecting this quite interesting point), I have 3.3 which is less than my opponent, but my iq is 142 range according to the iq test(online). I do not know how accurate the test is.
Special Factors
I have alot of competition experience, while I have never done MMA or something similar, I have been actively competitive in wrestling since ten and I am used to being in pain alot. I wouldn't say I am extremely pain tolerant, but I am used to pain. So its not that pain doesn't affect me as much as my opponent, its just it seems more normal to me. Another factor is that I have never lived in great neighborhoods, we moved to America only because my family couldn't afford Scotland because N.E.D.s(non-educated delinquents) were bothering us. Aspen while nice in the main city isn't exactly great where the money isn't. So I had to go to school and work on a old mans farm that lived about 10 miles down the road. This bulids a certain emotional toughness. I won't emotionally freak out from pain or blood or work. I am not pampered I can get the job done.
I have Asthma and I am not fastest runner either, at short distance running I am pathetic. Long distance is different story. I am not particularly "good" at striking. Not terrible, just not good. This can be a weakness or a strength it really depends. Most of my strength is in my hips and my upper body. I have semi-strong legs, with not very strong arms per se(I don't win arm wrestling matches ever). One, last one, leverage.

I will attempt to show while my opponent will lose next round, to make it fair. Good luck!


I will now show the voters how I would win this debate in the following areas.

p1) Body Types
p2) Environment
p3) I.Q.

p1) My opponent has given evidence that suggests that shorter and smaller people are pound for pound stronger than larger people. This may be true but it doesn't matter because the larger person has more pounds and by average is stronger. I also have the height advantage which my opponent brought up that is should be an advantage for him this is simply not true. While he might naturally have the leverage all it takes for me to neutralize that is by bending by knees and getting lower to the ground and his advantage goes out the window. With being taller I can attack all parts of his body with ease and most importantly his head which my opponent knows that if you control the head you control the whole body. Most if not all knockouts occur when there is a blow to the head and my opponent being a whole foot shorter will have to strain and work harder to get my head while I can put all my focus on the head. Being taller usually means I have longer arms which means that I have a larger reach than my opponent so while I can hit him he can't. My body type compared to my opponents is superior for fighting.
p2) While my opponent and I both have lived in high altitude areas for me its Utah while for him it is Colorado and Scotland. So the environmental conditions are the same the difference is his asthma. If a lot of allergens are in the air my opponent might be overcome by his condition while I have no such condition. I can fight in any condition that a human can live in while my opponent might have trouble in certain areas giving me the advantage.
p3) I have a 4.0 GPA while my opponent has a 3.3 GPA. This gives me the advantage because if it comes down to who can outsmart the other corroding to the math I on paper have the advantage

Turn it to my opponent.
Debate Round No. 2


I thank my opponent for his well thought out case, I will now show voters why I would win :)

Body Types and Judo
My opponent claims that my body type gives him some of advantage aganist me I will show why this false and why my body type along with other factors make me the superior fighter in this situation. My opponent has not informed us that he is a bodybulider, only that he lifts recreationally. Now knowing this bit of information about my opponent almost undues him. He is a 33 on the BMI scale. Which makes him catagorically obese, I on the other hand am at the normal weight at a comfortable, 24.5. His size means he has exert more energy to move himself than I do. Furthermore, defending my quote, while it may true that since don't weigh the same so I don't have the same muscle compacity as he does but if we read the quote correctly it states I have a higher endurance, faster reaction times, better ability to rotate my body, and a greater ability to accelerate movements. Muscles are less valuable than all of that put together. Advantage me. Now with regards to his comments, he seems to have some preconceived notion that I will stand and box with him. This is absolutely not the case. I attempt to(no matter the area) bring him down to the ground, if my opponent doubts my ability to do this on such a large person, I would point out three things, one judo is designed to work on anybody, two I have three sports that all focus on just taking someone down to the ground and I have been practicing one for 6 years, three I work with much bigger guys with me at my dojo as mentioned prior.
Athema and me
I have grown out of my athema for the most part, but let me explain why my opponent has no such advantage. During a fight adrenaline rushes to brain. Personally, if my asthma is acting up(which is rare) it doesn't hit me until after the activity is over. The fact is that my asthma is mostly passive, furthermore my altitude gives me a distinct advantage over my opponent even if my opponents contention was right. I have been competing in high-level competitions at high altitudes and therefore train at high altitudes. I have much more experience in stressful conditions at high altitudes to illustrate this further I will talk about a typical wrestling season. Practice every weekday, Saturdays(possibly sundays, if they are two day) is tournament day and you train with no food the day before and limited food the whole week so as not to spike your weight that takes extreme mental and physical toughness, along with that I have trained in these conditons, this makes my conditioning superb. While cannot do as much wrestling here(I found a club, yay), Judo is almost as competitive here in Europe as wrestling is in America. They train very seriously. I got extra endurance to go the extra mile.
IQ is no reflection of GPA, or vice versa. My opponent has not justified why GPA ought to matter anyway. Why does fighting have anything to do with academic achievement? Last I checked most nerds didn't beat on the jocks(not to be mean to either group just a example). In fact it would seem often the most academically achieved one doesn't win the fight, look at the past, they didn't say "Okay everyone of you that did good in school, lets go to war" while I am sure there are intelligent warriors this is irrelavent because GPA isn't a factor in IQ. My opponent has chosen not to tell us whose IQ is higher. But even if his IQ were higher, fighting isn't solely about who is smarter, it is about who is in better condition to win the fight at some point of time. I think I am.
Grappling and Striking
My opponent has not indicated he has any experience any hand to hand combat(with exception of wrestling but no details here), he has also not indicated any formal striking training. Based on this information we cannot conclude which of us will be better strikers. We have to assume we are fairly even, however when it comes to grappling it seems I have the extreme advantage. All the combat sports/martial arts I have done have trained me to get on top and maintain control or submit someone. I have trained them extensively and competitively. This gives me a huge advantage. My opponent may be able to stop my wrestling partially due to size but Judo is made for beating someone similar size to him for guys similar to the size of me. Now the basis of probablity it would seem I have the upper hand.

Clearly I would defeat my opponent in a fight.

Now in celebration of my victory here is a *old* movie trailer.



I will now rebut my opponents arguments .

Body Types

While I am not a bodybuilder, I'm certainly not obese. Most obese people have a high fat to muscle ratio while I don't. I play such sports as football, basketball, baseball, and wrestling and most obese people are unable or don't play any of these sports. My BMI body fat percentage puts me at 17% which means I'm in the category of fitness. I don't have a slow reaction time my opponents thinks that I will be unable to keep up to his level of reaction and endurance while this is simply not true, in basketball running up and down a court takes a lot of endurance, and in Baseball to be able to get a hit I must have fast reaction time. I do have a longer reach then my opponent does for him to bring me down he will have to enter my personal base area, and in doing so I can punch and hit him while he doesn't have the reach to do so until he gets close. If my opponent does bring me down he will be unable to finish me off because being bigger and stronger than him I can push him off and if I'm able to reverse his move he will be unable to get me off of him. My body type is just as endurable and fast as my opponent, but I am stronger and bigger than him giving me the body type advantage.

I don't only train in high altitudes I live in them. I play for my high school football team and every year for about a week or two we have something called Two a days during hell week. We practice a total of 6 hrs a day in temperatures above 100 degrees Fahrenheit and before are two a days we have a 5 week long conditioning of running, lifting, and agility. I that I know how to train hard as well.

When you are in school you are given grades and the higher the grades you get the higher the GPA you will receive. And to do well in school you need to have a high IQ to pass tests get homework done and simply show what you have. The reason I don't put my IQ down is because I have never had a formal IQ test. Like my opponent even stated that the IQ test he took was online which are not very consistent. Like online IQ test I have taken before, but sometimes I'm told I have one 160 other times 120 or 100 you can't trust them.

All the hand to hand combat I need comes from sports. All those who have played football you know that it takes a lot of striking when playing football. In baseball being able to catch a ball or get a hit takes the body to have striking movement.

I will not let my opponent try to prove me wrong.
Debate Round No. 3


I thank my opponent for this spirited debate and while I commend him for perseverance he simply has lost this debate, as my opponent says I will not prove him wrong, but logic and reason ultimately will.

Dropped Points/Rebuttal
My opponent has clearly dropped the grappling points in fact he doesn't even reference strategy regarding the fight. He has dropped the point about my work out at high altitudes, the big problem with my opponents case is that he never references if he is even good at what he does. If I were on the bench(not saying you were) all the time for the sports I participated in there is no reason to suggest that I would be exceptionally good at these sports, which means we cannot contrive athletic ability solely from numerical value of sports but rather the quality of performance in the sports. Obviously I have experience at living in high altitudes(Aspen and Scotland), but further more his skills learned from high school football will not help him much. Sports like football are non-combative in nature, regardless of practical aspects, so we cannot effectively conclude striking ability from non-combative sports. Furthermore, my opponent must concede(since it wasn't addressed) I have higher mental and emotional toughness given my background which is a strong factor when your being striked by someone. My opponent hasn't addressed the effectiveness of the system of Judo against bigger people. This obviously gives me a strong advantage against my opponent. I am used to rolling around with much bigger people. My opponent seems to claim he isn't obese because body fat percentage. I have a question of my opponent, Was this measured by calipers? And then don't you fall over the 30 mark for obese by the Body Mass Index developed by Belgian polymath Adolphe Quetelet during the course of developing "social physics"? My opponent quotes the ACE fat percentage to say that he is in the category of fitness but the other fat percentage calculator says simply average for the Jackson & Pollock. My opponent seems to think that I will not be able to control him. However this is gravely mistaken, I have Judo and Wrestling experience both of which can help with hold downs. My opponent is especially vulnerable to the Ashi-Garami and reverse Ude-Garami. Now with regards with to IQ, class work has nothing to do with GPA. As the blog Call of the Explorer notes:
"Recently, I heard of someone who was pressured by his father to study medicine. Now this guy, call him Tim Hawtinz, is sort of slow. He’s an ordinary man, lives life on the sidewalk — as opposed to the fast lane — and loves nature — most especially coffee beans. Being meek, he did not put up a fight with his father and more than gladly studied medicine. graduating with a 3.87, he walks home, hands his dad his transcript, packs his bags and leaves the house for the last time. Tim Hawtinz is now a prolific writer after graduating in his second degree in Literature and Classical Arts.

His IQ? Low. But his GPA? A stunning 96.75%. When he was asked how he did it he says, “everyone in who’ll knew my condition and worked me through it. I had good professors who always listened when I approached them and I always wanted to do more hours with my tutors who were always ready”. Hardworking. Despite his degree in medicine, Tim Hawtinz claims he knows nothing and because he never practiced it; though people still believe the contrary."
There is nothing that correlates IQ and GPA specifically. Another problem with my opponents case is he simply dropped the aspects of my initial quote that he didn't like without addressing the relevant information, therefore the point stands and I am a better fighter than my opponent.

My opponent brings a interesting case but he simply mistaken if he thinks he will defeat me in a fight. I have given core reasons for why I would think I would win some my opponent ignored some of them were mistaken. My opponent hasn't fulfilled his BOP and I fulfilled mine. Please Vote Pro. Thank you.


I will like to thank my opponent for this interesting debate and would suggest not telling the voters who won, but letting them decided. Since my opponent never put in his rules that I couldn't bring up any new facts, but before I can do that I will rebut my opponents arguments.

I did start in all three sports and was even the team captain for some of those years and would like to put that to rest. While football isn't a combative by definition those who have seen it or played would agree that it has combative qualities. Being able to block someone you need to strike them like a punch, tackling, running, agility are all in football that are used in fighting. Just doing some research I notice that he stated that he is an orange belt in Judo which is good, but it is the third belt someone can obtain out of seven, so while he is good at Judo he is no master.{1}

Mental/Emotional toughness
I don't think that it is fair since it was never brought up that my opponent thinks it should just be awarded this factor. I would like to give a case for why I should be award this. Playing these four sports means that it is a year long activity which means I have to juggle school, church, sports, and family all at the same time. This is mentally and emotionally draining. Having to practice almost everyday and trying to keep my grades up causes me to toughen my mental capabilities. While I agree that doing what my opponent does is mentally and emotionally draining I feel that what I do is not a walk in the park and would ask the voters to think of this before voting.

GPA and IQ debate
I think that the voters would agree that having a high IQ doesn't equal having a high GPA, but having a high GPA equals having a high IQ, let me explain. If someone has a high GPA they must be smart because doing tests and homework takes a high IQ and also a high work ethic to get it done. If a smart individual doesn't work hard they can have a low GPA but still have a high IQ. Working hard and being smart makes having a high GPA not easy

Obese vs Fit
While I wouldn't say I have a body like a Greek God I would say I'm in good shape. I work out and play four tough sports. I do eat pretty healthy and keep myself from getting sick my natural ways. So I think I'm in good shape but I'm defiantly not an obese person.

How the fight would go down
My opponent stated that I never have a strategy even though he didn't but I would give my idea of what would happen.

We meet at a open field ether a soccer or football field. Then my opponent counts down from three to start the fight. My opponent says three and the fight beings. He comes at me and goes for my legs to get me on the ground so that he can take my height advantage. He goes down trying to tackle one of my legs, but before getting to it, me having the reach advantage pushes his head down like in wrestling to the ground. I keep his head on the ground as I move my body to the side of his and using my strong legs push him over on his back. I them climb on him getting my body on his chest as I use my knees to push down his elbows making his arms useless and Keeping my weight between his chest and stomach making his legs less effective and being unable to kick of my hold. I then to proceed to punch him in the face over and over again until he is KO'd or taps out giving me the victory.

In conclusion I would ask the voters to look at this debate and ponder. While it is hard to say who would win because he aren't in the ring to end it I would suggest looking at the factors my opponent and I brought up and hopefully you would vote for me.
Thank You

Debate Round No. 4
12 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by RyuuKyuzo 5 years ago
Oh you'll get the debate -- when you least expect it.*

*Unless you're expecting it tomorrow... because I'll probably send it tomorrow...
Posted by utahjoker 5 years ago
Just send me the debate
Posted by RyuuKyuzo 5 years ago
Well, I guess that's the end of that. utah, your days are numbered! >:D
Posted by RyuuKyuzo 5 years ago
More people need to vote on this! (I would, but I plan on challenging the winner, so it's a bit of a conflict of interest =p)
Posted by DoctorDeku 5 years ago
You're calling my vote a votebomb, seriously?

Of course the arguments are subjective, it's a debate. You failed to convince me and I vote Con on every singly issue. It's funny how you don't contest ATL's vote when he gave you six points with the warrant for conduct being that Con's rounds were short.
Posted by Center_for_Rationality 5 years ago
2 major reasons:
Link to evidence is not a reason to discredit evidence, that is clear misconduct.
The obese claim was catergorial not offensive not a reason to lose conduct point.

The arguments are subjective.

The others are clear misconduct.
Posted by likespeace 5 years ago
Center_for_Rationality, you requested a COUNTER. From a quick glance, both voters provided RFDs for their votes, so I'm not sure on what basis you are requesting one.
Posted by Center_for_Rationality 5 years ago
Aye :)
Posted by utahjoker 5 years ago
I was just wondering since was the first one to start the debate
Posted by Center_for_Rationality 5 years ago
Argue why you would win :) and sure :P
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by DoctorDeku 5 years ago
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Reasons for voting decision: Conduct: Pro made several baseless assumptions about con such as him being obese and declaring victory during the second round, vote goes Con. S/G: they're = they are; Not 'their'. Sorry if that's a bit nit-picky put misusing they're, there and their is one of my biggest pet peeves. Arguments: Both debaters show that they have some kind of sports training (Pro with wrestling and Con with Football, Basketball, Baseball, etc...) so I'm not going to immediately prefer one over the other. I don't find Pro's martial arts training to be a compelling argument either as Con is correct in his analysis of football having offensive qualities to the game. I also tend to believe Con would hold out longer due to his arguments on vitality and enduring 2-a-days. Pro never gives me a significant reason to believe he would hold out as long as Con would. Sources: Pro references some general evidence but never provides a link to the evidence. For all I know it's false; so this goes Con for Wikipedia.
Vote Placed by AshleysTrueLove 5 years ago
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:60 
Reasons for voting decision: Couple of notes here, utahjoker didn't seem to make a effort till the last round which is conduct. Argument go to CFR because he provided analysis. Sources to CFR because he quoted medical journals vs wikipedia.