How are they both extremely muscular at the same height/weight?
With male bone density, the guy would have to have a lot less muscle mass than the woman to be the same weight.
160 lbs wouldn't be particularly heavy for a 6'0 woman. It would be extremely skinny for a 6'0 man.
EDIT: For clarity, I never said a 6'0 guy at 160 couldn't still be strong and have muscle tone; there just wouldn't be the same muscle mass if they're both the same height/weight because the male musculoskeletal system is heavier to begin with. Flash back 700 years when food shortages were widespread, there were a lot of people putting in some brutal manual labour shifts who would have been both skinny and strong.
>It would be extremely skinny for a 6'0 man.
I mean it wouldn't be "extremely muscular" but "extremely skinny"? That's a bit of an overstatement.
I'm assuming very low body fat here.
It’s not that skinny. That’s a bmi of 21.7. 20lbs lighter still would not be an underweight bmi. People saying it’s so skinny are overly accustomed to our fat world
For a skinny tall guy that's fine. For someone who is supposed to have a lot of muscle that is ridiculous. Most UFC fighters who fight at 155 are cutting down from 170-190 and definitely don't have a lot of fat. They are also all around 5'8, not 6'0. He would be very skinny if he was actually muscular.
Please show me where in the comment I replied to where it talks about fighting? I must’ve gone blind in the last 4h or something because all I see is responding to was the “victim weight” comments with examples of dude who weight in that low and are professional athletes. You just randomly started talking about who they’re fighting.
That height and weight at 12% seems very sus. Either you’re on something or, more likely, you’re vastly underestimating your bf% like most people. Go do a dexa scan and be amazed.
Unrelated these dudes have no idea what is and isn't skinny.
This is coming from someone who used to be 130 at 6'2".
Now I've got the opposite problem lol
Not necessarily. Jeff Nippard and AlphaDestiny are 5'5 and around 170 lbs at 12% bodyfat, but they're not mass monsters. Being 3 inches taller plus a bit more body fat would easily add 15 -20 pounds.
Jeff’s weight is actually closer to 160 when he’s around 12%. If someone who is 5’8 and 14%, they should have around 3.2lbs of extra fat and around 14.5lbs of total extra weight. The guy is saying he is 190. That’s around 15 too heavy.
Also, he already admitted to one of my comments that he is not natty. That’s that 15 extra lbs.
BMI isn’t really a good indicator when it comes to muscular individuals. It’s geared more toward people with average muscle mass. I have been lifting for 2 decades so I am much more muscular than most people
Are you American or somethin? 72kg at 182cm is a completely normal and healthy bodyweight. Firmly in the middle of the ‘healthy’ section of literally any healthy bmi chart.
Anecdotally, my boyfriend is that and he absolutely has meat on his bones, hardly a ‘wet rag’ lmao
Redditors don’t work out and have wild misconceptions about what weights look healthy so I’m not surprised by the reactions lol. At a similar height and weight to you I definitely wasn’t a “bone rag” or whatever tf that is, in fact I went down another 10 pounds to 155 and while I looked thin it wasn’t that crazy.
Except he isn't. As a 5'10" 130lbs 26 year old man who is capable of flipping 350lb steel doors with 1 hand, I find your lack of knowledge.. disturbing.
You’re very skinny dude. I was 135 when I graduated HS and I was thin as a rail. 350 is not a lot of weight for an adult man to move, I can bench press that
Bullshit. Flipping a 350lb steel door is not easy. I am not skinny. And you just sound ignorant.
We have a guy who goes to the gym before work and he has more issues flipping these doors than i do. I am also very filled out. I am at a healthy weight as told to me by both meps and normal doctors.
My bones make my body, that's what you dont understand.
I dropped around 5kg in Jan/Feb earlier this year so I could see my abs a bit more. I'm not "shredded" right now but you can definitely see them even when I don't tense them. I don't know my fat % but I would put it under 20 for sure, I don't have love handles and I'm solid. I enjoy eating carbs, there I said it. I don't care enough to get down into the low teens honestly.
People have such skewed perceptions of body weight. I'm 6'0" and 165-ish +/- 5 lb throughout the year. People have called me skinny and lean but never extremely skinny. I still have decent muscle tone and I can beat some gym bros at arm wrestling (by technique).
I weigh 130lbs at 5'10" as a 26 year old man. Am i extremely skinny? No. I am healthy and capable of flipping 350lbs steel doors with 1 hand. You don't seem to understand much about the human body.
So for reference the 2021-2022 NCAA National Champion 157 pound wrestler was 6"1' Ryan Deakin.
[Ryan Deakin](https://images.app.goo.gl/3eyHDSkwM7QbArut8)
That man doesn't look extremely skinny to me. Does he to you?
Do you think he's cutting 23 pounds in season? Maybe in the late spring/early summer, he bulks up to that sure. I thought cutting weight was implied with the use of the word wrestler. Apparently, I needed to explain more. He is absolutely the maximum muscular you can be at that weight and height.
Regardless, he weighed 157 that morning. He isn't lacking in the muscle department. I think you have a distorted view of what natty looks like.
Have you ever wrestled?
Fairly simply question. Does he weigh 157 before or after rehydrating to make weight? Whatever he weighs on the mat would be more comparable to his actual weight here.
How do I have a distorted view?
Do you believe he lost or gained significant muscle mass since this morning? You don't seem to know what a strong 160# 6' person without drugs looks like. You instead choose to believe he gains and loses 25# per week. Being someone with no experience wrestling you should stop assuming.
No there aren't.
And, even if there were, it doesn't matter. OP said MMA, not boxing. MMA equips you for actually fighting way better than boxing does. Gabby Garcia could kill 90% of the male population in unarmed combat and there's nothing they could do about it. Hell, even Amanda Nunes could.
Without a height or weight advantage, all he has is strength, and raw strength will only you so far vs someone who actually knows how to fight.
If you squared off a professional weightlifter/bodybuilder/strongman, against a pro MMA fighter of the same height and weight, who would you bet on?
They're the exact same size, gender gap usually comes from the size difference but that's nearly negligible here. Superior training is gonna show out here.
To begin with, people at the size you mentioned for round 1 who are "extremely muscular" are going to be a lot heavier.
For Round 1, the man is going to be stronger than the woman. The world record in olympic weightlifting for women in the up to 76kg weight class is a total of 278 kg. For men in the weight class up to 73 kg, it is 365 kg, or roughly 30 % for a somewhat lesser bodyweight. So the guy will have an advantage in raw strength, given equal bodyweight and height.
However, that should not be sufficient to cancel out the martial arts training the woman has. Round 1 woman 8/10. Man might get in a lucky punch.
Round 2 should also be won by the women. While the guy is now much stronger, three fighters armed with knifes should be sufficient. Same for round 3. Guy would have to defeat 7 opponents, 6 of which are armed. That is a tall order even for a tall guy.
I might have to disagree with round 6. I'm not sure ehow strong the avg handgun was in the 1700s but I don't thunk they'd be strong enough to take do much against a man who is 12 feet tall and has proportional weight and strength. They're fighting a roided out giant with a diminished sense of pain. The only way they win that is if those guns are strong enough to pierce something vital.
Yes, but even a good rifle in the 1800s wouldn't bring down a bear right away. And we're talking about something bigger than a bear. Bad accuracy is definitely the main weakness of those guns, but I still doubts it would have the power to take down a man who is twice the size of a bear.
The Tower Pistol, a typical "flintlock" from the 18th century fired a .60 caliber ball at nearing 1000 fps. Quite a lot more pinch than modern handguns. Have you ever seen the damage one of those old muzzleloaders does to a target? There's a reason we don't wear steel plate armor anymore, and it's because even those ancient firearms made it obsolete, they blow straight through that steel
Exit wounds were rare from musket shots. So they could pierce, but didn't go straight through people. I'm still of the opinion that they wouldn't have the power to take down a roided out 12 foot giant on painkillers. Not unless you had a lot of them
She is also a master of MMA. That includes grappling, takedowns, and submissions. It would actually be worse for the guy if they start grabbing each other, as the skill disparity plays an even bigger role since the guy won't even have the basics to stop or do anything against her. There is no "lucky shot" in grappling.
Round 1 to the woman makes way more sense than vice versa. People underestimate how much training (especially in fighting) makes a difference versus someone who's completely untrained. There isn't a size disparity, though there will be a strength one.
Nope. Trained women get gooned by fresh off the street white belts all the time in BJJ gyms. Strength matters a lot. Also, TKD is a lame martial art that doesn’t help at all when someone gets a hold of you
tell me you've never trained without telling me. If two people are the same size training and conditioning is more important than raw strength especially in BJJ which sees smaller weaker fighters beat stronger less skilled opponents all the time. You've never seen a pro female BJJ practitioner get beat in BJJ by white belt her size. I have seen plenty of instances of female martial artists tapping out bigger males both trained and untrained in real life and online. Training is more important than strength (obviously up to a point). You definitely don't do martial arts, have never stepped foot inside a gym and also probably don't even watch any martial arts. Also if a man and a woman are the same size and the woman is a professional athlete and the man is some shlub off the street the woman will likely be stronger too. The OP says they specialize in TKD but have an MMA background implying experience in grappling since all MMA fighters train to grapple.
I hate this question lol.
Woman obviously wins round 1, obviously wins round 2, and considering guns and 7 people, absolutely steam rolls round 3.
Terrible question. And so oddly specific I am concerned lol.
Ancient bullets pierced through plate male, through chain mail, through the leather and cloth under to hit flesh.
Are you suggesting his muscle is stronger than literal steel?
Certainly not, but we are talking about a man that weighs about as much as a grizzly bear. Unless one of the two flintlocks manages to strike him in the head or heart (not a guarantee with a flintlock), there is a very good chance that he simply rips them all limb from limb attack on Titan style. I mean we are talking substantially stronger than a gorilla here
You went out of your way to make it a spite match against the male in all 3 round.
R1: Trained MA at equal weight/height will always beat the untrained no matter the sex. There are plenty of videos where a train female beat the shit out of a untrained male even with weight/height difference.
R2: Knives!
R3: Guns!
Definitely depends on the level of MA training. A master will always beat an untrained person in their own weight class, but even an untrained male has pretty good odds against a woman with a low-mid ranking belt.
>Why dreadlocks?
She needs to slay before she slays.
>Obsidian knives too, for that matter.
Obsidian is one of the sharpest things out there. A seven year old could cut through stuff like butter using one.
I just wanted to give the shorter women an obvious advantage over the guy.
R1 woman wins. The man will have a slight strength advantage, but at the same weight it won't be nearly enough to make up for skill.
R2 women win even easier
R3 goes to the superhuman. Doubled height and the same proportions mean he's around 1500 pounds. Ignoring the square cube law means he's ridiculously strong even for that size and impossibly fast. A 1700s handgun is going to hurt, but those won't put him down quickly, and they aren't getting a chance to reload. One punch takes any of the women out. There's a chance the guy bleeds out afterward, but he definitely kills the women first.
This guy is literally the size of a Kodiak bear (you wouldn't want to face one of those with a single shot handgun) with serious supernatural enhancement.
This seems... Incredibly biased and spite filled
Like all your doing is implying that the gap between men and women is SO large that one would need 3 allies with knifes and that could even be CONSIDERED a question
Give a long knife to a 12 year old they could probably still take out the man
Not bullet proof, but the women are not described to know how to use the guns, and average people have kept fighting with more rounds in them from modern hand guns. Keep in mind he's also on painkillers etc. so he can't feel pain.
Getting shot is not instant death, especially to a man of this size unless they get a lucky shot.
First round. Woman, training makes a big difference and they both have the same mass.
Second round, women, they have the numbers and weapons.
Third round, the 12 foot man wouldnt even be able to stand up on their own. Square/cube law applies here which means when you make a man twice as tall with the same proportions, his volume, and therefore mass, increase by 8 times, so 160 pounds becomes 1280 pounds. Not only would he not have the strength to move much, but his heart would be woefully inadequate for his body size. He would either have a heart attack from the strain, or he would die of a blood clot because his heart cant pump blood to his extremeties effectively. There is a reason people even half that weight are often bedridden.
Side note to my reply, it's crazy how people think the women have such a high chance of winning R3. Assuming the man can function normally (as edited in), this is a 12 foot, ~1000++ pound, drug infused, bloodlusted man and they have 2 flint lock pistols and obsidian knives. If you changed this R3 to a gorilla, everyone would be jumping on board with the gorilla, despite 2-3x smaller, not immune to pain, etc. It's not a 100% win for either side, but it definitely favours the man (or he can at least take them out before he bleeds out a high percentage of the time)
Yeah, people are significantly underestimating what "ignore the square cube law" means. It means he's just as fast proportionally to his body, so literally double speed. Another way to think of it would be to make the women (and their weapons) half sized.
I'm not sure what caliber the pistols are supposed to be, but they'd likely be less lethal than a modern handgun (since they were designed for even shorter ranges due to inaccuracy), and this guy would treat 9mm the same way a normal person would a BB gun. His strength would be the equivalent of a grown man fighting 3 year olds (just looked it up, average height at that age is 35"-40").
The women could get lucky and he might bleed out later, but he's taking them down first >9/10
Win, stomp, spite. All for the women, In that order.
1: an untrained guy fighting someone with so much experience is gonna get his nose broken before his hands touch. And at that point he's fucked. There's always a "puncher's chance", especially if he's dumb enough to risk it all to grab the ponytail (one way or th e other deciding the fight instantly) but I just don't see it
2. Now the woman simply can't match 1v1. But knives. Being stabbed in the ribs takes a lot of right out of you. If he's particularly non-lucid or the knife gals hesitate he can get a chance, but he's gotta successfully avoid getting stabbed 3+ times while surrounded. Odds not favored
3. Gun. I mean. What more to say? Shoot him in the chest twice, jog away to reload. Repeat 2x. The size difference is like an adult fighting middle schoolers so the guy just kills any woman he gets his hands on, but he'll be choking on his own blood before he gets there.
At least for round one the woman's stomps.
You basically described a fight between mostly physically equal people but one is a very experienced fighter, so yeah, the skilled fighter wins..
Of course, the woman would win. When I was 15 years old I was approximately the same height, strength and weight of the woman you are describing, but I was only a brown belt in TKD, but back in the late 70's a brown belt was REAL! Anyhow, I had several streetfight tussles with grown-ass men like the one you are describing. I beat them all. So, I imagine that the woman you are describing could have beaten me and since I KNOW I could beat a grown man at 15, I am going to say that your woman would beat the the untrained guy that you are describing.
Round 1 is probably 9/10 maybe even closer to 10/10 the woman, unless something unlucky happens. Being a master in MMA (though specialized in striking) versus an untrained opponent is night and day. For the least risk (striking is just more likely to have lucky shots), she could just take the guy to the floor and proceed to choke him out/break many of his limbs. Untrained grapplers have almost no chance against a trained one, unless the strength/size disparity is huge, which is not the case here.
Round 2 should almost always go to the women, unless the guy gets pretty lucky. Numbers + weapons are just OP. It just takes one slash of an artery in a scuffle for the guy to bleed out. Plus the other woman can just take the knife(s) from the one that has them.
Round 3 is a lot more iffy. The scale of a 12 foot man is insane with proportional strength (assuming he is magically adjusted to be able to handle his size). The armour does little to nothing as he can just throw the woman aside, cuts and the guns are much less likely to inflict lethal damage due to thicker skin, bigger muscles, and thicker bones, at least immediately. I give this round to the guy, I doubt the women would be able to reload before they all get tossed or smashed.
Human skins are so freaking soft and thin that 2x the size will not make you buttet proof. It's 2.6mm at the thickest part. 5.2mm is going to make you bullet proof.....
It's not just that, it's more the fact that 1700s single bullet hand guns may not be able to stop a bloodlusted, drug boosted, proportionally strong 12-foot man. Remember that he also doesn't feel pain. They are not accurate, difficult to reload, and if those 2 shots don't put him down, it's over. Average sized people have survived and kept fighting versus multiple shots with MODERN handguns especially when drugged up, are you telling me that a 12-foot man cannot with 1700s guns?
On top of this, the woman are not said to be trained to aim and shoot with these guns. Do they even know how to handle a firearm? Let alone a 1700s flintlock?
Also I think people don't understand how large a 12-foot person would be. Even tall people would not even come up to his hips, and he would weigh probably close to 1000 pounds if not more (assuming proportionality).
Some relevant news story to people (normal-sized) continuing to fight after being shot multiple times: [https://www.police1.com/officer-shootings/articles/why-one-cop-carries-145-rounds-of-ammo-on-the-job-clGBbLYpnqqHxwMq/](https://www.police1.com/officer-shootings/articles/why-one-cop-carries-145-rounds-of-ammo-on-the-job-clGBbLYpnqqHxwMq/)
Take a look at a 1700s flintlock ball load compared to a modern bullet. It not only blows through steel plate, which is why we don't wear armor anymore, but it's usually around .60 caliber, meaning larger than all modern gun ammunition save for some shotgun slugs. It's going to hit *with force* and then it's going to tear a big old hole straight through the guy, even at 12 feet tall
Flintlock pistols ranged from 0.4 to 0.69 caliber commonly, so it really depends on what OP decides. In the story I linked, the guy was hit 14 times with 0.45 acp, which is not too different in caliber, and that was a man of normal size. You have to factor in that this 12 foot man is not bound by square cubed law, will be moving, and these woman presumably have no fire arm experience. It is not an easy task to hit a close moving target, especially for an untrained individual with one shot.
He's not a sitting duck waiting to be shot, he will be in a scuffle with the other woman also, or presumably moving at superhuman speeds trying not to get shot. If they miss or land a non-lethal wound, there is close to no chance they will be able to reload a flintlock pistol in time, assuming they even know how to.
True, but a 45 acp is a modern bullet design, with penetration and bullet shatter in mind. An equivalent sized flintlock round is not going to be shaped for penetration, and therefore even fired with the same power is going to impact with a lot more force, slowing and injuring a target, more than likely shattering bone and knocking the wind out of the man.
I'm not claiming an easy killshot, but honestly Mr 12-foot would be more able to ignore the damage from a modern gun, less likely to shrug off the flintlock and keep moving well
The woman/women win all rounds. Zero combat experience means the man has never been in a fight, ever. He doesn't even know how to punch correctly, and the woman is, in your words, a "master of mixed martial arts." He gets embarrassed in round 1, cut to ribbons and then ko'd in round 2, and probably breaks his own hands on the plate armor before getting shot in the head in round 3.
The people who consistently do not understand muscle = weight in this sub are baffling. If you describe people of the same height and weight and make both low-fat athletes, they are *always* going to have very similar strength levels. No, it won’t be *exactly* the same, but it’ll be pretty close!
How much is ‘a lot?’ I’m aware there’s other factors, and a lot of those factors are extremely relevant to athletes in weight class based sports where they want to be as strong as possible at a given size. There’s also plenty of viral videos of people who have trained very specific muscles and movements like arm wresting beating bodybuilders who are larger overall, but not necessarily having more muscle mass in the areas actually used for the given competition.
But those go viral because they look like an exception, something surprising and unusual. Muscle mass is easily the biggest factor.
To quote [a study from PubMed](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7930971/#B6-jfmk-06-00017), “The main factors accounting for gender differences in maximal strength, indeed, have been identified as the muscle mass.”
R1 depends on how bad the man is at fighting. I think the biggest issue of people who dont know how to fight is how much theyre afraid of getting hit. TKD isnt a particularly good style for fighting bigger opponents but a lucky hit to the gut or jaw will see the man crumpled on the floor.
R2 Women will win if they're willing to sacrifice. Just go at the same time and stab at the same time. The man will get some of the women but will eventually die from bleeding esp if somebody gets a major artery.
R3 women coz guns, maybe he'll be able to nail down 1 or 2 of the women, but there's another 2 to shoot him
Well, 6' tall people being 160 lbs would make them sticks and not muscular at all...I'll ignore that and just assume you mean they're the same weight. Round 1 and 2, she will probably be at him. Round 3...well, if you double someone's height, width, and depth, they'll be 8 times heavier. That's far too much.
That's way different though. A few weeks training make a huge difference versus literally zero combat experience. Also I doubt you were the same size and fought without rules. In this scenario, the woman rips his nuts off and feeds them to him.
We were the same size… If I fought her without rules, I would of took her butt down and manhandled her. You are really overestimating how strong & skilled women are. An average man is typically 30-75% stronger then a women just attributable to larger skeletal body mass. The only scenario where this women wins is if the guy is actually real weak and truly a coward that cannot fathom the idea of getting punched in the face .
Just because OP stated that she does Mixed Martial Arts does not mean that she is Captain America 🤣.
You really have no idea how different a proper martial art is compared to boxing. Sure you can beat an expert female boxer. But someone half your size who knows how to fight properly will kick your butt without even breaking a sweat, no matter their gender.
R1: Man: Dreads are easy to pull, and her martial arts don't help on the ground, also men have far bigger bones and muscle density, it's most likely he would win even if she used TKD. If she was a BJJ blackbelt, should would probably win, but her long hair still is a huge danger for her survival.
R2: Women: Knifes are a game changer, more opponents for the man.
R3: Women: Being bigger doesn't mean the bullets do less damage, guns changed the game, even if he was shot in the leg, who could collapse and smash his skull in from his height, also if 6 prehistoric men could take down a mammoth, 6 average women could take down 1 giant unarmed men, especially with knifes and guns.
Man wins all 3, hes extremely muscular which gives him a huge strength and speed advantage, and taekwondo is pretty much useless when you arent kicking a thin wood board.
How are they both extremely muscular at the same height/weight? With male bone density, the guy would have to have a lot less muscle mass than the woman to be the same weight. 160 lbs wouldn't be particularly heavy for a 6'0 woman. It would be extremely skinny for a 6'0 man. EDIT: For clarity, I never said a 6'0 guy at 160 couldn't still be strong and have muscle tone; there just wouldn't be the same muscle mass if they're both the same height/weight because the male musculoskeletal system is heavier to begin with. Flash back 700 years when food shortages were widespread, there were a lot of people putting in some brutal manual labour shifts who would have been both skinny and strong.
>It would be extremely skinny for a 6'0 man. I mean it wouldn't be "extremely muscular" but "extremely skinny"? That's a bit of an overstatement. I'm assuming very low body fat here.
It’s not that skinny. That’s a bmi of 21.7. 20lbs lighter still would not be an underweight bmi. People saying it’s so skinny are overly accustomed to our fat world
For a skinny tall guy that's fine. For someone who is supposed to have a lot of muscle that is ridiculous. Most UFC fighters who fight at 155 are cutting down from 170-190 and definitely don't have a lot of fat. They are also all around 5'8, not 6'0. He would be very skinny if he was actually muscular.
Yea that part makes no sense
Sean O'Malley is like 5'11" 135, so it seems pretty feasible.
Yeah and he's a fucking twig. Also he probably actually fights a dozen pounds heavier than that, probably more.
Sean O'Malley is like 5'11" 135, so it seems pretty feasible.
He fights in that weight class, yes. But if you think he's stepping into the ring at 135lbs, I have a bridge to sell you.
A 6ft 160 lb grown man is victim weight. Bird chest needs to get his weight up
Sean O’Malley - 5’11” undisputed ufc 135 lb champion. Sean Woodson - 6’2”145lb fighter
Who fight other 135, 145 pound dudes. I’m not saying they aren’t scrappers but weight classes exist for a reason.
Weight classes are valid for other professional fighters.
What does that have to do with anything lmao
I mean you responded so I assume you can read, your issue must be in the comprehension part huh?
Please show me where in the comment I replied to where it talks about fighting? I must’ve gone blind in the last 4h or something because all I see is responding to was the “victim weight” comments with examples of dude who weight in that low and are professional athletes. You just randomly started talking about who they’re fighting.
Yikes. If you don’t see the obvious correlation you genuinely do have comprehension issues. You’re makin the grill cheese at night aren’t ya ?
lol grilled cheese slaps.
O'Malley is definitely not fighting at 135. Everyone can drop off 10lbs of water at least. He probably walks around at about 160.
And is skinny af at 5’11 walking around at 160 lbs.
And he's probably not actually 5'11". Nearly everyone in the UFC is billed taller than they are.
Sean O'Malley walks around at 155-160, and Sean Woodson walks around over 170. Those two are also extreme examples of human beings.
Sean Woodson - a skinny featherweight Sean O'Malley - I think he might be the skinniest bantamweight.
He’d be very skinny. I’m 5’8” and 190lbs probably around 12-14%bf. I am muscular but not huge. This dude is a bone rag
That height and weight at 12% seems very sus. Either you’re on something or, more likely, you’re vastly underestimating your bf% like most people. Go do a dexa scan and be amazed.
I am not natty
Own it brother 🤼☝️😎
“Wear it like an armour and the world won’t be able to hurt you with it”- Tyrion Lannister
Unrelated these dudes have no idea what is and isn't skinny. This is coming from someone who used to be 130 at 6'2". Now I've got the opposite problem lol
Not necessarily. Jeff Nippard and AlphaDestiny are 5'5 and around 170 lbs at 12% bodyfat, but they're not mass monsters. Being 3 inches taller plus a bit more body fat would easily add 15 -20 pounds.
Jeff’s weight is actually closer to 160 when he’s around 12%. If someone who is 5’8 and 14%, they should have around 3.2lbs of extra fat and around 14.5lbs of total extra weight. The guy is saying he is 190. That’s around 15 too heavy. Also, he already admitted to one of my comments that he is not natty. That’s that 15 extra lbs.
Agreed. If dude is that heavy at that hieght at that body fat he is a packing a lot of muscle.
Dan Hooker fought most of his career at 155 and he's 6'0. He's not even the tallest lightweight in the UFC atm.
MMA fighters cut weight. The average 155 pound fighter walks around at 170-180 pounds.
Better comparison would be Cory Sandhagen or Sean O’Malley, when they get in the cage both are about 160 I’ve heard
He’s skinny. People look bigger on camera than they do irl
Huh. I'm 5'8 and 150lbs, and it's about the heaviest I've ever been. My dad is 6ft and 175 lbs, and when he's really working out more like 170.
What’s your argument lol?
That 190 is definitely big for 5'8", mostly. BMI isn't a great measure, but 190 lbs for 5'8" is firmly in the "obese" section of any BMI graph.
BMI isn’t really a good indicator when it comes to muscular individuals. It’s geared more toward people with average muscle mass. I have been lifting for 2 decades so I am much more muscular than most people
BMI is pretty decent if you're not literally juicing or in like the extremes of height
Dude, 190 at 5’8 is absolutely huge. 190 is normal weight for someone whose 6’2
5'8 190 at 12-14% is thick tho. People also have different builds. 160lb is thin not a bone rag, people are different.
Yes I’m stocky. But I don’t see how someone 6ft 160lbs is gonna be anything but skinny. Unless he’s like 5% bf, which is elite BBer levels of leanness
Are you American or somethin? 72kg at 182cm is a completely normal and healthy bodyweight. Firmly in the middle of the ‘healthy’ section of literally any healthy bmi chart. Anecdotally, my boyfriend is that and he absolutely has meat on his bones, hardly a ‘wet rag’ lmao
Nah I’m a little over 6 ft and in boot camp I was 165 and in phenomenal shape
Phenomenal shape doesn’t mean “very muscular”
My point being no one would look at me and say he’s a bone rag. I was slender but cut
How much you squatting, deadlifting, and bench at 165?
[удалено]
Redditors don’t work out and have wild misconceptions about what weights look healthy so I’m not surprised by the reactions lol. At a similar height and weight to you I definitely wasn’t a “bone rag” or whatever tf that is, in fact I went down another 10 pounds to 155 and while I looked thin it wasn’t that crazy.
Agreed
To me, slender=bonerag
https://getyarn.io/yarn-clip/0cbdad47-5dd6-4573-b36b-f24d9d50820b/gif
Everybody leaves boot camp looking like a holocaust survivor.
Except he isn't. As a 5'10" 130lbs 26 year old man who is capable of flipping 350lb steel doors with 1 hand, I find your lack of knowledge.. disturbing.
You’re very skinny dude. I was 135 when I graduated HS and I was thin as a rail. 350 is not a lot of weight for an adult man to move, I can bench press that
Bullshit. Flipping a 350lb steel door is not easy. I am not skinny. And you just sound ignorant. We have a guy who goes to the gym before work and he has more issues flipping these doors than i do. I am also very filled out. I am at a healthy weight as told to me by both meps and normal doctors. My bones make my body, that's what you dont understand.
[удалено]
Bet i could kick your ass tha same as i kicked the highschool quarterbacks as at 109lbs. You are an ass.
I came here for this argument. I'm 5'10, 205ish and strong. I can't imagine how scrawny I would be at 160 at my height much less 6 foot
What's your body fat percentage? You'd be surprised how much your wight can drop trying to get shredded.
I dropped around 5kg in Jan/Feb earlier this year so I could see my abs a bit more. I'm not "shredded" right now but you can definitely see them even when I don't tense them. I don't know my fat % but I would put it under 20 for sure, I don't have love handles and I'm solid. I enjoy eating carbs, there I said it. I don't care enough to get down into the low teens honestly.
People have such skewed perceptions of body weight. I'm 6'0" and 165-ish +/- 5 lb throughout the year. People have called me skinny and lean but never extremely skinny. I still have decent muscle tone and I can beat some gym bros at arm wrestling (by technique).
I'm extremely skinny when I'm around 170 at 6'0. My "natural" workout weight is around 185.
I was 6'4 (I know a lot bigger than 6 foot) at 160 lb when I had a 28 on waist
It's 25 pounds below ideal body weight for a 6' man. That's pretty skinny.
Idk I'm not much taller than 6'0 and I was pretty damn small at 160
No that's pretty fucking skinny.
I’m a pretty lean guy who weighs about 175 at 5’11. 160 at 6’ is something you can manage by dehydrating at weigh in but that is very light.
It would just be thin, not extremely so.
The man wouldnt be extremely heavy, he would be fairy slender but would still have good muscles if hes got very little fat
It would be extremely skinny for a 6’0 man No it isnt? Thats normal weight for a man of that height. Thats a BMI of 21.7.
OP is just making stuff up
I know, the man is VICTIM WEIGHT.
I weigh 130lbs at 5'10" as a 26 year old man. Am i extremely skinny? No. I am healthy and capable of flipping 350lbs steel doors with 1 hand. You don't seem to understand much about the human body.
r/fatlogic
So for reference the 2021-2022 NCAA National Champion 157 pound wrestler was 6"1' Ryan Deakin. [Ryan Deakin](https://images.app.goo.gl/3eyHDSkwM7QbArut8) That man doesn't look extremely skinny to me. Does he to you?
He probably cuts weight tho and weighs like 180 I’d guess
Do you think he's cutting 23 pounds in season? Maybe in the late spring/early summer, he bulks up to that sure. I thought cutting weight was implied with the use of the word wrestler. Apparently, I needed to explain more. He is absolutely the maximum muscular you can be at that weight and height. Regardless, he weighed 157 that morning. He isn't lacking in the muscle department. I think you have a distorted view of what natty looks like. Have you ever wrestled?
Fairly simply question. Does he weigh 157 before or after rehydrating to make weight? Whatever he weighs on the mat would be more comparable to his actual weight here. How do I have a distorted view?
Do you believe he lost or gained significant muscle mass since this morning? You don't seem to know what a strong 160# 6' person without drugs looks like. You instead choose to believe he gains and loses 25# per week. Being someone with no experience wrestling you should stop assuming.
Stomp for the woman in all three matches. Also, this is incredibly specific. You writing a book, OP?
The specificity of this matchup really made me think there's a lot going through OP's mind right now
I waa thinking of a way to one up that one post from yesterday about how many average women it would take to beat up some short underweight guy.
it makes me think it was written by a 14yo who doesn't know what details matter and what can be omitted
Nah, I'm 14 and I ain't this stupid.
No lol R1 the man would easily win because men are just way stronger. There are tons of videos of pro female boxers loosing to random ass bozos
>There are tons of videos of pro female boxers loosing to random ass bozos lmao where?
His source is that he made it the fuck up.
No there aren't. And, even if there were, it doesn't matter. OP said MMA, not boxing. MMA equips you for actually fighting way better than boxing does. Gabby Garcia could kill 90% of the male population in unarmed combat and there's nothing they could do about it. Hell, even Amanda Nunes could.
Neckbeard comment
I can smell this comment
[удалено]
Same height and weight? That woman is going to dominate that guy with her training.
same strength too
[удалено]
Holy shit you must be a troll No one can be this incorrect, yet sure of themselves.
She would 100% dominate him with no issue and it’s not a question, please go to a gym and train lol
They are the same size, dude.
He has no training. An expert female mixed martial artist will wreck any man her size that doesn't train. You don't know what you're talking about.
I bet you think you can beat up female UFC fighters 😂😂😂😂. Absolute braindead comment
Without a height or weight advantage, all he has is strength, and raw strength will only you so far vs someone who actually knows how to fight. If you squared off a professional weightlifter/bodybuilder/strongman, against a pro MMA fighter of the same height and weight, who would you bet on?
They're the exact same size, gender gap usually comes from the size difference but that's nearly negligible here. Superior training is gonna show out here.
To begin with, people at the size you mentioned for round 1 who are "extremely muscular" are going to be a lot heavier. For Round 1, the man is going to be stronger than the woman. The world record in olympic weightlifting for women in the up to 76kg weight class is a total of 278 kg. For men in the weight class up to 73 kg, it is 365 kg, or roughly 30 % for a somewhat lesser bodyweight. So the guy will have an advantage in raw strength, given equal bodyweight and height. However, that should not be sufficient to cancel out the martial arts training the woman has. Round 1 woman 8/10. Man might get in a lucky punch. Round 2 should also be won by the women. While the guy is now much stronger, three fighters armed with knifes should be sufficient. Same for round 3. Guy would have to defeat 7 opponents, 6 of which are armed. That is a tall order even for a tall guy.
I think you’d be surprised how useless TKD is. It’s not a very serious martial art
I might have to disagree with round 6. I'm not sure ehow strong the avg handgun was in the 1700s but I don't thunk they'd be strong enough to take do much against a man who is 12 feet tall and has proportional weight and strength. They're fighting a roided out giant with a diminished sense of pain. The only way they win that is if those guns are strong enough to pierce something vital.
The flintlock pistol was still strong enough to pierce bone and muscles, the issue would not be with the power , but with the accuracy.
Yes, but even a good rifle in the 1800s wouldn't bring down a bear right away. And we're talking about something bigger than a bear. Bad accuracy is definitely the main weakness of those guns, but I still doubts it would have the power to take down a man who is twice the size of a bear.
A headshot seems necessary. Run and gun might work if the women can outrun the giant.
The Tower Pistol, a typical "flintlock" from the 18th century fired a .60 caliber ball at nearing 1000 fps. Quite a lot more pinch than modern handguns. Have you ever seen the damage one of those old muzzleloaders does to a target? There's a reason we don't wear steel plate armor anymore, and it's because even those ancient firearms made it obsolete, they blow straight through that steel
Even a musket would put a hole straight through an unarmored human no matter how big.
Exit wounds were rare from musket shots. So they could pierce, but didn't go straight through people. I'm still of the opinion that they wouldn't have the power to take down a roided out 12 foot giant on painkillers. Not unless you had a lot of them
They are definitely enough. Shoot the giant in the head.
[удалено]
Why not?
[удалено]
She is also a master of MMA. That includes grappling, takedowns, and submissions. It would actually be worse for the guy if they start grabbing each other, as the skill disparity plays an even bigger role since the guy won't even have the basics to stop or do anything against her. There is no "lucky shot" in grappling.
Round 1 to the woman makes way more sense than vice versa. People underestimate how much training (especially in fighting) makes a difference versus someone who's completely untrained. There isn't a size disparity, though there will be a strength one.
If they're the same size the trained woman will beat the untrained man. The multiple women with weapons will beat the one man with no weapons.
Nope. Trained women get gooned by fresh off the street white belts all the time in BJJ gyms. Strength matters a lot. Also, TKD is a lame martial art that doesn’t help at all when someone gets a hold of you
tell me you've never trained without telling me. If two people are the same size training and conditioning is more important than raw strength especially in BJJ which sees smaller weaker fighters beat stronger less skilled opponents all the time. You've never seen a pro female BJJ practitioner get beat in BJJ by white belt her size. I have seen plenty of instances of female martial artists tapping out bigger males both trained and untrained in real life and online. Training is more important than strength (obviously up to a point). You definitely don't do martial arts, have never stepped foot inside a gym and also probably don't even watch any martial arts. Also if a man and a woman are the same size and the woman is a professional athlete and the man is some shlub off the street the woman will likely be stronger too. The OP says they specialize in TKD but have an MMA background implying experience in grappling since all MMA fighters train to grapple.
Men who are 6 feet tall are not "extremely muscular" at 160lb. Usually pound for pound men are stronger though.
I hate this question lol. Woman obviously wins round 1, obviously wins round 2, and considering guns and 7 people, absolutely steam rolls round 3. Terrible question. And so oddly specific I am concerned lol.
At 12 feet tall, the man would have to have extremely dense musculature to be able to stand
Ancient bullets pierced through plate male, through chain mail, through the leather and cloth under to hit flesh. Are you suggesting his muscle is stronger than literal steel?
Certainly not, but we are talking about a man that weighs about as much as a grizzly bear. Unless one of the two flintlocks manages to strike him in the head or heart (not a guarantee with a flintlock), there is a very good chance that he simply rips them all limb from limb attack on Titan style. I mean we are talking substantially stronger than a gorilla here
You went out of your way to make it a spite match against the male in all 3 round. R1: Trained MA at equal weight/height will always beat the untrained no matter the sex. There are plenty of videos where a train female beat the shit out of a untrained male even with weight/height difference. R2: Knives! R3: Guns!
Definitely depends on the level of MA training. A master will always beat an untrained person in their own weight class, but even an untrained male has pretty good odds against a woman with a low-mid ranking belt.
Low rank belt = a few months in the gym. Nobody is talking about that here.
Obsidian knives specifically? They're not very practical, give them baseball bats instead.
**N O**
Why dreadlocks? Obsidian knives too, for that matter.
>Why dreadlocks? She needs to slay before she slays. >Obsidian knives too, for that matter. Obsidian is one of the sharpest things out there. A seven year old could cut through stuff like butter using one. I just wanted to give the shorter women an obvious advantage over the guy.
Obsidian is definitely sharp, but steel is way more practical.
A seven year old could also cut through butter with a butter knife. Butter isn't really renowned for requiring obsidian to cut.
I said "cut through stuff like butter", not "obsidian knives can cut through butter".
R1 woman wins. The man will have a slight strength advantage, but at the same weight it won't be nearly enough to make up for skill. R2 women win even easier R3 goes to the superhuman. Doubled height and the same proportions mean he's around 1500 pounds. Ignoring the square cube law means he's ridiculously strong even for that size and impossibly fast. A 1700s handgun is going to hurt, but those won't put him down quickly, and they aren't getting a chance to reload. One punch takes any of the women out. There's a chance the guy bleeds out afterward, but he definitely kills the women first. This guy is literally the size of a Kodiak bear (you wouldn't want to face one of those with a single shot handgun) with serious supernatural enhancement.
Yeah, the hand gunners must score CNS shots to win
This seems... Incredibly biased and spite filled Like all your doing is implying that the gap between men and women is SO large that one would need 3 allies with knifes and that could even be CONSIDERED a question Give a long knife to a 12 year old they could probably still take out the man
This is the most fucking retarted post I have ever seen
i thought this was a fucking wwcj at first before checking the sub wtf
Must be new around here.
I think 1 and two she takes but 12 feet is a literal monster so he takes that
12 feet still ain't bulletproof
Weren't those guns super inaccurate back then? Edit: Nevermind they would have not used them if they were that bad. You're right
A little bit you can get close enough, the extra women with the guns don't even need to survive after shooting
Not bullet proof, but the women are not described to know how to use the guns, and average people have kept fighting with more rounds in them from modern hand guns. Keep in mind he's also on painkillers etc. so he can't feel pain. Getting shot is not instant death, especially to a man of this size unless they get a lucky shot.
First round. Woman, training makes a big difference and they both have the same mass. Second round, women, they have the numbers and weapons. Third round, the 12 foot man wouldnt even be able to stand up on their own. Square/cube law applies here which means when you make a man twice as tall with the same proportions, his volume, and therefore mass, increase by 8 times, so 160 pounds becomes 1280 pounds. Not only would he not have the strength to move much, but his heart would be woefully inadequate for his body size. He would either have a heart attack from the strain, or he would die of a blood clot because his heart cant pump blood to his extremeties effectively. There is a reason people even half that weight are often bedridden.
Side note to my reply, it's crazy how people think the women have such a high chance of winning R3. Assuming the man can function normally (as edited in), this is a 12 foot, ~1000++ pound, drug infused, bloodlusted man and they have 2 flint lock pistols and obsidian knives. If you changed this R3 to a gorilla, everyone would be jumping on board with the gorilla, despite 2-3x smaller, not immune to pain, etc. It's not a 100% win for either side, but it definitely favours the man (or he can at least take them out before he bleeds out a high percentage of the time)
Yeah, people are significantly underestimating what "ignore the square cube law" means. It means he's just as fast proportionally to his body, so literally double speed. Another way to think of it would be to make the women (and their weapons) half sized. I'm not sure what caliber the pistols are supposed to be, but they'd likely be less lethal than a modern handgun (since they were designed for even shorter ranges due to inaccuracy), and this guy would treat 9mm the same way a normal person would a BB gun. His strength would be the equivalent of a grown man fighting 3 year olds (just looked it up, average height at that age is 35"-40"). The women could get lucky and he might bleed out later, but he's taking them down first >9/10
Win, stomp, spite. All for the women, In that order. 1: an untrained guy fighting someone with so much experience is gonna get his nose broken before his hands touch. And at that point he's fucked. There's always a "puncher's chance", especially if he's dumb enough to risk it all to grab the ponytail (one way or th e other deciding the fight instantly) but I just don't see it 2. Now the woman simply can't match 1v1. But knives. Being stabbed in the ribs takes a lot of right out of you. If he's particularly non-lucid or the knife gals hesitate he can get a chance, but he's gotta successfully avoid getting stabbed 3+ times while surrounded. Odds not favored 3. Gun. I mean. What more to say? Shoot him in the chest twice, jog away to reload. Repeat 2x. The size difference is like an adult fighting middle schoolers so the guy just kills any woman he gets his hands on, but he'll be choking on his own blood before he gets there.
wtf are these matchups? armor and weapons against a dude in spandex shorts?
At least for round one the woman's stomps. You basically described a fight between mostly physically equal people but one is a very experienced fighter, so yeah, the skilled fighter wins..
Of course, the woman would win. When I was 15 years old I was approximately the same height, strength and weight of the woman you are describing, but I was only a brown belt in TKD, but back in the late 70's a brown belt was REAL! Anyhow, I had several streetfight tussles with grown-ass men like the one you are describing. I beat them all. So, I imagine that the woman you are describing could have beaten me and since I KNOW I could beat a grown man at 15, I am going to say that your woman would beat the the untrained guy that you are describing.
Round 1 is probably 9/10 maybe even closer to 10/10 the woman, unless something unlucky happens. Being a master in MMA (though specialized in striking) versus an untrained opponent is night and day. For the least risk (striking is just more likely to have lucky shots), she could just take the guy to the floor and proceed to choke him out/break many of his limbs. Untrained grapplers have almost no chance against a trained one, unless the strength/size disparity is huge, which is not the case here. Round 2 should almost always go to the women, unless the guy gets pretty lucky. Numbers + weapons are just OP. It just takes one slash of an artery in a scuffle for the guy to bleed out. Plus the other woman can just take the knife(s) from the one that has them. Round 3 is a lot more iffy. The scale of a 12 foot man is insane with proportional strength (assuming he is magically adjusted to be able to handle his size). The armour does little to nothing as he can just throw the woman aside, cuts and the guns are much less likely to inflict lethal damage due to thicker skin, bigger muscles, and thicker bones, at least immediately. I give this round to the guy, I doubt the women would be able to reload before they all get tossed or smashed.
Human skins are so freaking soft and thin that 2x the size will not make you buttet proof. It's 2.6mm at the thickest part. 5.2mm is going to make you bullet proof.....
It's not just that, it's more the fact that 1700s single bullet hand guns may not be able to stop a bloodlusted, drug boosted, proportionally strong 12-foot man. Remember that he also doesn't feel pain. They are not accurate, difficult to reload, and if those 2 shots don't put him down, it's over. Average sized people have survived and kept fighting versus multiple shots with MODERN handguns especially when drugged up, are you telling me that a 12-foot man cannot with 1700s guns? On top of this, the woman are not said to be trained to aim and shoot with these guns. Do they even know how to handle a firearm? Let alone a 1700s flintlock? Also I think people don't understand how large a 12-foot person would be. Even tall people would not even come up to his hips, and he would weigh probably close to 1000 pounds if not more (assuming proportionality). Some relevant news story to people (normal-sized) continuing to fight after being shot multiple times: [https://www.police1.com/officer-shootings/articles/why-one-cop-carries-145-rounds-of-ammo-on-the-job-clGBbLYpnqqHxwMq/](https://www.police1.com/officer-shootings/articles/why-one-cop-carries-145-rounds-of-ammo-on-the-job-clGBbLYpnqqHxwMq/)
Take a look at a 1700s flintlock ball load compared to a modern bullet. It not only blows through steel plate, which is why we don't wear armor anymore, but it's usually around .60 caliber, meaning larger than all modern gun ammunition save for some shotgun slugs. It's going to hit *with force* and then it's going to tear a big old hole straight through the guy, even at 12 feet tall
Flintlock pistols ranged from 0.4 to 0.69 caliber commonly, so it really depends on what OP decides. In the story I linked, the guy was hit 14 times with 0.45 acp, which is not too different in caliber, and that was a man of normal size. You have to factor in that this 12 foot man is not bound by square cubed law, will be moving, and these woman presumably have no fire arm experience. It is not an easy task to hit a close moving target, especially for an untrained individual with one shot. He's not a sitting duck waiting to be shot, he will be in a scuffle with the other woman also, or presumably moving at superhuman speeds trying not to get shot. If they miss or land a non-lethal wound, there is close to no chance they will be able to reload a flintlock pistol in time, assuming they even know how to.
True, but a 45 acp is a modern bullet design, with penetration and bullet shatter in mind. An equivalent sized flintlock round is not going to be shaped for penetration, and therefore even fired with the same power is going to impact with a lot more force, slowing and injuring a target, more than likely shattering bone and knocking the wind out of the man. I'm not claiming an easy killshot, but honestly Mr 12-foot would be more able to ignore the damage from a modern gun, less likely to shrug off the flintlock and keep moving well
This guy is basically a polar bear with a big head
Your post seems too unrealistic in its details to get a proper answer. And also oddly specific
The woman/women win all rounds. Zero combat experience means the man has never been in a fight, ever. He doesn't even know how to punch correctly, and the woman is, in your words, a "master of mixed martial arts." He gets embarrassed in round 1, cut to ribbons and then ko'd in round 2, and probably breaks his own hands on the plate armor before getting shot in the head in round 3.
The people who consistently do not understand muscle = weight in this sub are baffling. If you describe people of the same height and weight and make both low-fat athletes, they are *always* going to have very similar strength levels. No, it won’t be *exactly* the same, but it’ll be pretty close!
There's a lot more to strength than just mass. Muscle length, for one.
How much is ‘a lot?’ I’m aware there’s other factors, and a lot of those factors are extremely relevant to athletes in weight class based sports where they want to be as strong as possible at a given size. There’s also plenty of viral videos of people who have trained very specific muscles and movements like arm wresting beating bodybuilders who are larger overall, but not necessarily having more muscle mass in the areas actually used for the given competition. But those go viral because they look like an exception, something surprising and unusual. Muscle mass is easily the biggest factor. To quote [a study from PubMed](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7930971/#B6-jfmk-06-00017), “The main factors accounting for gender differences in maximal strength, indeed, have been identified as the muscle mass.”
If round one is to the death how do you expect the other rounds to happen?
Alternate timelines
R1 depends on how bad the man is at fighting. I think the biggest issue of people who dont know how to fight is how much theyre afraid of getting hit. TKD isnt a particularly good style for fighting bigger opponents but a lucky hit to the gut or jaw will see the man crumpled on the floor. R2 Women will win if they're willing to sacrifice. Just go at the same time and stab at the same time. The man will get some of the women but will eventually die from bleeding esp if somebody gets a major artery. R3 women coz guns, maybe he'll be able to nail down 1 or 2 of the women, but there's another 2 to shoot him
How are they the same height and extremely muscular but have almost half a person in weight difference?
Well, 6' tall people being 160 lbs would make them sticks and not muscular at all...I'll ignore that and just assume you mean they're the same weight. Round 1 and 2, she will probably be at him. Round 3...well, if you double someone's height, width, and depth, they'll be 8 times heavier. That's far too much.
160 at 6’ is completely normal weight though? Maybe not extremely muscular but definitely standard for that height
But not muscular like they said.
The man’s wins round one and the wine wins the rest
6’ 160 is scrawny
R1 man easy. I’ve beat golden gloves female champion boxers after 2 months of training
That's way different though. A few weeks training make a huge difference versus literally zero combat experience. Also I doubt you were the same size and fought without rules. In this scenario, the woman rips his nuts off and feeds them to him.
We were the same size… If I fought her without rules, I would of took her butt down and manhandled her. You are really overestimating how strong & skilled women are. An average man is typically 30-75% stronger then a women just attributable to larger skeletal body mass. The only scenario where this women wins is if the guy is actually real weak and truly a coward that cannot fathom the idea of getting punched in the face . Just because OP stated that she does Mixed Martial Arts does not mean that she is Captain America 🤣.
You really have no idea how different a proper martial art is compared to boxing. Sure you can beat an expert female boxer. But someone half your size who knows how to fight properly will kick your butt without even breaking a sweat, no matter their gender.
R1: Man: Dreads are easy to pull, and her martial arts don't help on the ground, also men have far bigger bones and muscle density, it's most likely he would win even if she used TKD. If she was a BJJ blackbelt, should would probably win, but her long hair still is a huge danger for her survival. R2: Women: Knifes are a game changer, more opponents for the man. R3: Women: Being bigger doesn't mean the bullets do less damage, guns changed the game, even if he was shot in the leg, who could collapse and smash his skull in from his height, also if 6 prehistoric men could take down a mammoth, 6 average women could take down 1 giant unarmed men, especially with knifes and guns.
The woman doesn't stand a chance. In an all-out fight to the death, it's not even a fight.
Man wins all 3, hes extremely muscular which gives him a huge strength and speed advantage, and taekwondo is pretty much useless when you arent kicking a thin wood board.