In Thursday’s class, we had a great discussion after the
watching of the video about whether or not a girl can punch as hard as a
man. This was such an interesting
discussion, but also led to much debate.
Personally, I don’t believe the video did the actual debate any
justice. Looking at the video
realistically, it should have been obvious that, yes, a women can punch as hard
as a man, Sports Science doing that
video did nothing more then add fuel to the already large fire in the debate of
male and female equality in sports.
The video had circumstances that successfully sparked a
discussion on a woman fighting a man, when in reality; the video was only about
whether or not woman could punch as hard as a man. They used uneven circumstances in the video,
the women fighter is a world champion female fighter, whereas the male, was a
little known boxer of the UBF (Underground Boxing Federation), who barely
cracks the top ten in that league (Officialubf.com). So, by using one of the best females against
an unknown male, it immediately started the debate on an uneven playing field. Simply asking the question, “Can a female
punch as hard as a male” should obviously be followed by a yes, not because I
am trying to be fair, but because that is just an ignorant question, of course
some females can punch as hard as or harder than some males. Using the circumstances they tried to
portray, which was two world class boxers of the same weight class but
different sexes, there should have been a male world class boxer used as well. If they really wanted to spark a controversy they
would have used a Floyd Mayweather, or Manny Pacquiao. Now I know this is unrealistic, but simply
put, why? If this is a fair debate, it
should be the Female best versus the Male best, considering the whole point of
this Sports Science episode was to be
able to say a female could beat a male.
All things considered, Lucia Rijker would beat me and most likely anyone
in the class easily, but if she was put up against a male counterpart of the
same class of boxer, she would not stand a chance, much like Candance Parker
against Lebron James.
Gene,
ReplyDeleteI appreciate your critique of the conditions under which the Sport Science video was presented. However, they did equalize conditions of the male and female boxer on the basis of height (5'8") and weight (140 lbs.). I'm not sure if Mayweather or Pacquiao would fit those criteria. As for the male boxer, all they said was that he was an Olympic boxer whose record was 100-0, while hers was 54-0.
I agree with you that the video raised a lot of questions and that is always good for discussion:-)
Dr. Spencer
Hi Gene,
ReplyDeleteI enjoyed reading your blog and what you had to say about sports science. I agree, and you have to remember this is a TV show and they're trying to make good TV. That's why sports science didn't tell us the overall record of the "Olympian male boxer", we just knew he had 100 overall wins. When he was going against the "LeBron James" of female boxers. So when asking can she hit as hard or harder than a male, I would say of course she can. Even before they did the testing, I knew she had a great opportunity of beating him. This is like saying, lets take LeBron James (6'8 240lbs) and have another male with the same figure as him compare shooting percentages from around the floor. The other contender could possibly beat him, but if they played one vs one or in a team setting LeBron James would win in my opinion. Similar to the male vs the female if they were to fight in an actual match. Does anyone else have any thoughts about this, or if they decided to do a study about this? Once again I enjoyed your input Gene!
-Brett Creamer
Hi Gene,
ReplyDeleteYou wrote a very nice post on the Sports Science video that we watched in class last week! I would have to agree with you when you said that it would be more fair if The Sports Science staff brought in a Male World Class Boxer, instead of somebody who was more of a no name boxer. Bringing in a male world class boxer with the same height and weight class as Lucia Rijker would have evened the playing fields, from our viewpoint at least. Prior to watching the video, the question was can girls hit as hard as guys, and the answer to that question is Yes. I am sure that it is not a large majority of females, but there are some out there who can. Lastly, when a classmate brought up the fact of Lucia Rijker and the Male Boxer actually having a fight, I would have to say that at the end of the day, I feel like males are stronger than any female, and I personally think that the male would edge out with the win, but it would be a nice match to watch.
-Turea Moore
Gene,
ReplyDeleteI agree with you on a lot of the points you made. The playing field was even in height and weight but not even in skill level. The male was basically a no named Olympic boxer. Lucia Rijker on the other hand is the best women's boxer in the world. The study to me was also not done correctly. Why did the male boxer switch hands when he punched the test dummy? Why did Rijker step into the punch while the male boxer just jabbed? These are just some of the questions I thought of when watching the video. Maybe the male boxer picked to punch that way and switch up the hand he hit with. To me though that seems unlikely he would do that.
Josiah Blevins
Gene,
ReplyDeleteI agree as well that the Sports Science segment definitely played into the impossible to end debate on male vs. females in sport/strength/speed etc. But, I want to be sure you realized that the segment was asking the question "Can a woman hit as hard as a man?" Not could a woman beat a man (in boxing). Which Sport Science proved, even with only mostly ideal conditions. When it comes to throwing males in a ring with females, that brings up a whole new debate on technique, style, and stamina. Not to even highlight the social implications many of the males in our class brought into discussion, that it is not only frowned upon but never actually to occur that a male would strike a female, even in a staged and expected fight between the two. This debate is trifold at least, if not more with social, strength, moral, physical and more questions that will probably never be able to be answered.
Stephanie Loomis
BY: RJ Hefflinger
ReplyDeleteI totally agree with you here, especially with your last sentence. Lebron James would dominate Parker and it really wouldn’t even be worth watching. That is an exact comparison to what should have gone down in the video. To even further demonstrate the unbalanced comparison, the two boxers did not do the same technique. This is a huge difference maker in the overall power of a punch. I know it was up to the boxers to give it their best hit and that’s what they did, but it would have been a much closer comparison if the technique of the hit was more similar. It’s the same concept of how most people can jump straight up higher when they take a step into it rather than starting from rest. The bodies momentum is such and over looked aspect to this demonstration. I also agree with you on how Lucia Rijker could dominate pretty much anyone in the class, she was a beast.
Hello, Gene
ReplyDeleteI agree with you. It is just TV show, so they want to make a fun to people. If they want to make real Sport Science, they should make same weight division between men and women. However, they didn't make same weifht division, so it is not doing sport scientific experiments. They want to make higher analysis of broadcasting rating. Also, if Lucia Rijker boxer punched the test first, i think the test result will be changed.
-Junho Song