Vote on format for a proposed "ultimate warrior championship" (with shooting)


PDA






losangeles
December 1, 2005, 04:21 PM
Vote on one format for a proposed Ultimate Warrior Championship. This is just theoretical.

The idea is to create a new sport that's more a reflection of true fighting skills than today's sports. It has to be realistic, but keep in mind it's only a sport so you need some type of limitations (i.e., competition shouldn't last like over 4 hours) and it needs to be entertaining for spectators.

If you enjoyed reading about "Vote on format for a proposed "ultimate warrior championship" (with shooting)" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
losangeles
December 1, 2005, 04:37 PM
I thought about a combination type sport, after reading in today's LA Times about this: http://www.wcbo.org

They claim ultimate warrior type of status with a combo of boxing and chess!

Biker
December 1, 2005, 04:38 PM
I went with #1, but I'd like to see some shotgun ala three-gun match thrown in.
Biker

Cosmoline
December 1, 2005, 04:49 PM
This is a great idea. Like the biathalon, the shooting should be done while the competitors are just finished with a fighting bout. That's when shooting straight is the most difficult. They should come from the ring and go right out to the range, no rest period or cool down.

losangeles
December 1, 2005, 05:21 PM
Like the biathalon, the shooting should be done while the competitors are just finished with a fighting bout. That's when shooting straight is the most difficult.

That's a great idea. That's what I was thinking about in option #2 with the shooting after the obstacle course. But it makes better sense after the unarmed fighting.

Owen
December 1, 2005, 06:04 PM
if I was designing a soldier competition, I think it would be along the lines of biathalon, but with orienteering instead of straigt running.

Maybe 2 k loops, for a total of 10k, with a different skills test at the end of each loop.

losangeles
December 1, 2005, 06:24 PM
Maybe 2 k loops, for a total of 10k, with a different skills test at the end of each loop.

Wow, that's a really long distance. I had in mind an obstacle course. There'd be activities like crawling on your belly through some type of tunnel, running for balance on a beam, climbing a wall, tackling and driving a blocking sled, swinging on a rope, etc.

losangeles
December 1, 2005, 06:29 PM
The inherent problem with the unarmed fighting is how do you score it? The others are straightforward --- times and target scores.

It wouldn't be fair to have people randomly matched against each other. And it wouldn't be practical to have a tournament -- that would be a major organized event in itself. And it could take multiple days to complete depending on the number of competitors.

Owen
December 1, 2005, 06:32 PM
10k isn't that long. At an amateur pace, it's about an hour of exercise.

I'm 5'10" 240 lbs, and I run that 2x/week.

losangeles
December 1, 2005, 06:40 PM
10k isn't that long. At an amateur pace, it's about an hour of exercise.


OK, fair enough. I guess it was just a little bit of personal bias on my part getting in there, as I've never found long distance running too entertaining. I'd want to make it more challenging, and entertaining, with obstacles. When I think of obstacle courses, I'm thinking about something along the lines of completion times in ten minutes or less.

Also, a shorter sprint obstacle course makes it more logistically possible for a sport. You can run 2 competitors against each other. Or in small groups. I think with a one hour event, all the competitors have to run together. Or maybe some type of staggered groups.

I don't know, maybe the scope is too wide to make any of this a one-day event.

Owen
December 1, 2005, 06:56 PM
losangeles,

In sailing that format is called match racing. It does make televised spectating more interesting, but with a random pool of folks, most every match will be a total blowout. You'll end up with Rob Leatham fighting a Gracie, and shooting against me! I also think it would turn the scoring into a nightmare.

Do you have experience organizing sporting events? Have you ever been CRO or stats dude at an IPSC match? The more starts and finishes you have, the longer it takes.

I do think the full contact fighting will be a problem also. There is a reason why most boxers have big fights once a year, or less. It takes them that long to heal and back into shape. You start getting badasses in the ring, and more than half the field won't be available for the next event in 6 months.

For the distance, make it 5k. Elite runners run 5k in 15 minutes or less.

nfl1990
December 1, 2005, 07:00 PM
How about a match of paintball, except with MILES gear.

losangeles
December 1, 2005, 07:05 PM
losangeles,

Do you have experience organizing sporting events? Have you ever been CRO or stats dude at an IPSC match? The more starts and finishes you have, the longer it takes.


Nahh, nothing more than a sports dad in common sports and competitor in multiple sports myself. Just a theoretical scenario. Someone was "creative" enough with a combination chess and boxing, which I kind of think is far out, so that motivates me to think of an alternative.

losangeles
December 1, 2005, 07:07 PM
How about a match of paintball, except with MILES gear.

I don't know. Nothing against paintball but somehow I think it'd be difficult to mainstreamize something like that.

scott.cr
December 1, 2005, 10:32 PM
Full contact fighting is a pretty tall order. I fought full contact muay thai when I was in college, and training was almost a full-time job. Of course, muay thai isn't one of those elegant styles either hahaha.

I wouldn't mind seeing some sniper and fieldcraft competition thrown in there.

jefnvk
December 1, 2005, 11:42 PM
I think somethign with service rifles would be more appropriate than benchrest.

strambo
December 2, 2005, 12:55 AM
You'd need to have the fighting last due to injury possibility. Just have a 3 gun match followed by a couple MMA rounds. The MMA score will be most points for win by KO/tap out. A few less for win by decision. The loser should get a few points per round/time. Like maybe 1 point per minute so they get rewarded for going the distance vs someone who gets KO'd in 10 seconds. Then decide how to weigh these scores in relation to the 3 gun and assign the actual point values.

It would be hard to organize and run and hard to find competitors. The irony is true warriors don't have time to hone their shooting skills to competition level (and they don't have to, just have to hit better/faster than the enemy). They also don't have time for the MMA training which is very specialized and way more than what is needed on the battlefield with emphasis on different skills. Most time is spent doing realistic operational training. The above is of course a generalization. A spec-ops type could develop these skills on their own time to competitive levels...but they wouldn't be the weak link on the team if they didn't.

psyopspec
December 2, 2005, 01:45 AM
I realize I'm arriving a little late in the game, but when you say you want the competition to be "realistic," what exactly do you mean?

JAG2955
December 2, 2005, 03:51 AM
I'd go with something like sparring where the round is stopped after a clean hit. It might be a little too "sporty", but it would make things run smoother. Pugil sticks might work.

I like the obstacle course idea, and would have a pistol, rifle, shotgun match at the end.

The finale would be a Simunition battle, since it doesn't get more realistic than that.

losangeles
December 2, 2005, 12:19 PM
I realize I'm arriving a little late in the game, but when you say you want the competition to be "realistic," what exactly do you mean?

Something closer to reflecting true combat skills than present sports. It's sport, so it can't be too hardcore and close to the real deal. Like kickboxing is an improvement over boxing, and full contact mixed martial arts is an improvement over kickboxing, according to this definition. Adding firearms makes it even more realistic. (But a firearms-only format is not as good as one including unarmed combat.) And some test of physicality would enhance it.

Not forgetting that it's sport, with its inherent limitations. It needs to be entertaining as a spectator sport and safe enough for the competitors (not looking for anything hardcore like Dog Brothers fighting -- although there is some measured risk to keep it realistic).

Sinsaba
December 2, 2005, 01:17 PM
How about this…

Make a competition like IDPA but on an expanded and more realistic scale. You start with designing a scenario. As an example, the contestants (individually) have to “rescue” a hostage held somewhere inside a 3 story office building. People are armed with weapons simulators (rubber knives, laser emitting guns/receivers, etc.). Flash bangs are much reduced (all people wear protective clothing/equipment), frag grenades are actually reduced flash bangs and damage to individuals are calculated by pre defined parameters.

Damage (such as a wound) is calculated and awarded. One could even go as far as say to handicap a wounded individual by using drugs to numb an effected limb. Etc. Hand to hand fights are conducted the same way full contact fighting sports are conducted.

The competing individuals get to choose how they will solve a given problem. Do you start with a diversion? Do you try to go in through the roof? The “staff” (in this instance the hostage takers) have specific instructions as to how to react. Under what circumstances they kill the hostages etc.

Add microphones and cameras and not only do you have a realistic sport but I’ll bet that in today’s realm of reality shows you have a winning television show too.

LawDog
December 2, 2005, 01:27 PM
Take the Modern Pentathlon. Replace the equestrian segment with a three round, three-minute per round MMA segment; add IDPA elements to the pistol segment; and replace epee with stick-fighting.

Modern Pentathlon already has a scoring system that would need very little modification to adapt to this.

LawDog

Devonai
December 2, 2005, 02:46 PM
They already have an Ultimate Warrior Championship, and you can spot those who've won it:

http://www.rangerteam16.com/images/Misc%20Images/ranger%20tab.gif

:D

I'm just an 11B; the thought of RIP scared the willies out of me during basic.

carebear
December 2, 2005, 03:00 PM
Glad I read all the way through.

+1 to Lawdog, that's what the Pentathalon was designed to simulate, military skills.

The key would be in the scoring, so you couldn't be Bruce Lee and throw away the shooting and still win.

Devonai,

From what I hear (and the effects on my fridge from returning graduates), Ranger School is more of a sleep and food deprivation exercise than an Ultimate Warrior test. :D

JamisJockey
December 2, 2005, 03:03 PM
The inherent problem with the unarmed fighting is how do you score it? The others are straightforward --- times and target scores.

It wouldn't be fair to have people randomly matched against each other. And it wouldn't be practical to have a tournament -- that would be a major organized event in itself. And it could take multiple days to complete depending on the number of competitors.

The UFC already has a scoring system for full contact mixed martial arts fighting.

kfranz
December 2, 2005, 03:15 PM
I'm no warrior, but it would seem to me that you are lacking in the "changing your plan to deal with the unknown" department

losangeles
December 2, 2005, 03:37 PM
Add microphones and cameras and not only do you have a realistic sport but I’ll bet that in today’s realm of reality shows you have a winning television show too.

That's an awesome idea! Reality programs are popular these days and something like you suggest can be riveting for viewers.

If you enjoyed reading about "Vote on format for a proposed "ultimate warrior championship" (with shooting)" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!