You, Too, Could Be Batman In 10 To 12 Years 493
jmcbain tips a fascinating interview in Scientific American with a professor of kinesiology and neuroscience (and a 26-year practitioner of Chito-Ryu karate-do). The question was, how much training would it take for a normal person to become Batman? The professor says: "You could train somebody to be a tremendous athlete and to have a significant martial arts background, and also to use some of the gear that he has, which requires a lot of physical prowess... In terms of the physical skills to be able to defend himself against all these opponents all the time, I would benchmark that at 10 to 12 years." The problem is, even after that amount of training, no one could remain on top of their game for more than a few years. And "Batman can't really afford to lose. Losing means death — or at least not being able to be Batman anymore."
Then we'd need to train a bunch of people... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Then we'd need to train a bunch of people... (Score:5, Funny)
That would be an insane morale buster for the bad guys. Say you knife the Batman -- actually see your knife tear into his guts -- but he shoots his BatRope and BatDisappears for ten minutes. When he comes back he's replaced and as strong as ever, but you don't know that. All you know is that the Batman can't be killed. Maybe he's an immortal?? Maybe he's a demon?? It would be like one of those bunker busters that just completely deflate the enemy..
Re:Then we'd need to train a bunch of people... (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Then we'd need to train a bunch of people... (Score:4, Insightful)
The Phantom is the greatest comic evarrr! Disregard the horrible movie with Billy Zane, here's the comic: http://www.kingfeatures.com/features/comics/phantom/about.htm [kingfeatures.com]
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Or Ace Rimmer, Space Adventurer!
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
What a guy!
Re:Then we'd need to train a bunch of people... (Score:4, Informative)
Except, of course, that Ace is replaced by other Rimmers from parallel universes, not by his son. And when the Rimmer we know and love became Ace, that was probably the end of the chain, as by that point he was a hard-light hologram -- pretty much impossible to kill.
Damnit, don't force me to be geeky.
The Parallel-Rimmer that passed the torch to the Red Dwarf-Rimmer was clearly a hard-light hologram, and he died from a bullet wound. They say in the episode that it penetrated his hard-light and struck the light-bee inside, damaging it. When he opens his jacket, the light-bee is clearly malfunctioning, spewing random streams of light out from the bullet-hole.
In any case, Legion never said hard-light holograms were indestructible, he said "practically indestructible". He probably didn't anticipate being shot at, he was probably referring to thinks like stubbing your toe.
Re:Then we'd need to train a bunch of people... (Score:5, Funny)
Xerxes and his ten thousand "immortals" (Score:4, Interesting)
By the way, this is the thinking behind the ten thousand "immortals" of Xerxes army. His hand picked crack troops were always kept at this number with replacements making up the dead/injured.
You can see one fictionalized representation of them in the movie "The 300". They were the warriors who went up against the greeks wearing the shiny silver masks. As befitting their awesome reputation, they were the first ones to draw greek blood (although they still got slaughtered).
Re:Then we'd need to train a bunch of people... (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Close...
That would be an insane morale buster for the bad guys. Say you knife the Batman -- actually see your knife tear into his BatGuts -- but he shoots his BatRope and BatDisappears for ten minutes. When he comes back he's BatReplaced and as BatStrong as ever, but you don't know that. All you know is that the Batman can't be killed....
Re:Then we'd need to train a bunch of people... (Score:5, Funny)
I am not the real Batman. My name is Ryan; I inherited the Batmobile from the previous Batman, just as you will inherit it from me. The man I inherited it from is not the real Batman either. His name was Cummerbund. The real Batman has been retired 15 years and living like a king in Patagonia.
Re:Then we'd need to train a bunch of people... (Score:5, Funny)
>I am not the real Batman. My name is Ryan; I inherited the Batmobile from the previous Batman, just as you will inherit it from me. The man I inherited it from is not the real Batman either. His name was Cummerbund. The real Batman has been retired 15 years and living like a king in Patagonia.
Inconceivable!
Re:Then we'd need to train a bunch of people... (Score:5, Funny)
You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Ha ha! You fool! You fell victim to one of the classic blunders!
Re:Then we'd need to train a bunch of people... (Score:5, Funny)
RAIB?! (Score:5, Funny)
Would that be a RAIB?
Redundant Array of Interchangeable Batmen?
or more like a High Available Batcluster?
Re:RAIB?! (Score:5, Funny)
Killing Grendel, then taking out the Joker ... I don't think the words exist to convey exactly how badass a Beowulf cluster of Batmans (Batmen?) would be.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Then we'd need to train a bunch of people... (Score:5, Insightful)
and replace them as they 'fail' ... that way we've always got a batman.
That always seemed like a better way of handling an avenger sort of character like this. Use a face-obscuring costume so there's no way to tell one masked man from another but don't have multiple ones operating together so baddies would guess there has to be more than one but will never have a clue as to how large the organization is or how many.
I always liked the idea of the two-king system of Sparta, a king could be lost in battle and yet there would still be a king. With rulers using doubles to protect t
Re:Then we'd need to train a bunch of people... (Score:4, Funny)
the next step would be to adopt an official royal uniform that again hid the face and body
It's been done [freshpeel.com].
Re:People we can get but the real question is... (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
And then shits on the legacy of this story with Dark Knight Strikes Again
Re:Then we'd need to train a bunch of people... (Score:4, Informative)
Correction - it was stolen from Alan Moore's 'Watchmen.' That, in several ways, is probably the most realistic superhero book ever written.
Re:Then we'd need to train a bunch of people... (Score:5, Interesting)
I can't answer to the rumors, but I think that this may be a nod to Japanese Animation cultural influences in Western cinema and art.
I have seen several examples of characters in Anime where male sexual ambiguity is used explicitly in villains, usually in conjunction with some form of insanity. This is also heightened by cases where even the gender of the character isn't revealed until later in the series/movie, thanks to a highly androgynous character design and careful voice-acting.
Anyway, one could draw a line between homophobia and such a character design; I disagree with that. Personally, I see this as a kind of hint of "hypersexuality" - a complete lack of selectiveness for a mate - that suggests a very reckless personality, even at the most base and carnal level.
Glad I don't subscribe to Scientific American (Score:5, Funny)
The problem is, even after that amount of training, no one could remain on top of their game for more than a few years. And "Batman can't really afford to lose. Losing means death â" or at least not being able to be Batman anymore."
So, after all that, we should all stick to our day-jobs? Thanks Slashdot, you saved us again!
Comment removed (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Glad I don't subscribe to Scientific American (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Glad I don't subscribe to Scientific American (Score:5, Informative)
its pop science (Score:5, Insightful)
pop science is important. it is a gateway to serious science for many youngsters and average joes
you are dismayed it does not feature serious science
ok, so go read something else
why the hate for a magazine of pop science?
it serves a valuable function. are you angry that some obscure technical journal is not popular? so why are you angry that a piece of pop science is doing what a piece of pop science must do?
if it is serious science, it is relegated to obscurity, as a rule. because it needs to be digested for the masses, where anything popular takes place
why don't you understand this?
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:i've been reading sciam for a long time (Score:4, Insightful)
By rigorous he means that they weren't afraid of having articles published by actual scientists, discussing their own field. They had rather technical stories on genetics, quantum theory, and cosmology, where the authors were actually writing about their discoveries, and doing so in such a manner as to not talk down to their readers.
Think of it as more than for laymen, but less than reading Nature, it was a good bridge for people who are not completely ignorant (used not as a value judgment but as a quantifier of knowledge) to know more about various fields. I think that is what the parent means by "rigorous", not that the other magazines lie, or have bad reporting, but lack the depth of SciAm.
Yes, it is a pop science magazine, but it always aimed towards a more informed, or sophisticated, audience.
Re:Glad I don't subscribe to Scientific American (Score:5, Interesting)
I like Scientific American - I don't think you're being fair. The "fun" articles are obvious and they are careful to make no claims of certainty. Actually, I really have to put my thinking cap on when they get into Astrophysics these days.
Just as a for-instance, their medical articles are top-notch... my wife is a physician and will often read them. Their environmental articles are also often very interesting. It's not like the whole issue is full of Batman trivia!
Of course, I also like Popular Science and Popular Mechanics - but those I approach more from a comic book angle. At least Popular Mechanics has practical car and home project advice.
Glad I don't read slashdot (Score:5, Insightful)
Looking at Scientific American articles from even fifty years ago, let alone a century, shows how sadly dumbed down the magazine has become. It used to target a readership of average citizens who were keen on the nitty-gritty of scientific developments. Now it all flash and no substance, little different from Popular Science. The lesson American media teaches us: nothing good is every ultimately profitable as is.
Looking at /. from even 5 years ago, let alone 10, shows you how lame it has become. It used to be about news for nerds and stuff that matters, now it is just about wannabe nerds whining about Popular Science. The lesson: making useful comments ultimately ever informative as if.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
You think SciAm is bad, try actually reading Popular Science. It's all science-fiction military technology.
Part of the problem is actually that the mainstream news has gotten much better science reporting, so the gap between the NYT or Newsweek and SciAm has gotten to be quite narrow. It's still not as good as SciAm used to be, but most major newspapers have, if not a legitimate 'science person' on staff, easily-accessible consultants who can help break things down for them. Once you add in Wikipedia and
There's no more good writers (Score:5, Interesting)
It used to target a readership of average citizens who were keen on the nitty-gritty of scientific developments
It's bad writing.
SciAM got political and that turned a lot of people off, the same way NYT or WashPost did. They tried to dumb things down while still pretending to be smart and all it did it was anger their core readership and they bailed.
Science has exploded beyond the ability of writers to manage... It used to be that 50 years ago, you could probably have a smattering of what's new in physics and a few other fields, but right now, what's new in physics is a highly specialized thing and it takes way too much to understand what's even old versus what's new. The baseline education of some high school teaches a mathematics based on a level of calculus that's 100 years old at best, physics that's basically newtonian mechanics and chemistry is just doing the old "let's make break up water trick" when right now scientists are looking at individual atoms.
All of this points to a colossal failure in writing. We have a body of technical knowledge that is so disorganized that it takes way too long for humans to really communicate it to each other in order to share the knowledge. Roger Penrose made a heck of a go at it in his book about how everything works, but even he falls into the horrible trap of using bad names for different mathematical constructs. At least biologists got it right when put a taxonomy on species ... but in math we have Fourier Transforms, Newton's Method, and it's just a disorganized mess, and on top of that horrible language, we stack everything we know about the basic laws of the universe.
What the world needs is a bank of good writers that also know math and physics to go in there and get rid of biographically named crap, and organize things in a more direct and intuitive fashion. For the love of god, you can't let a scientist in the field do it, because they are just terrible at naming and organizing.
Writers, step up, and take command!
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
You can just 'feel' something about pokemon and have a PhD in "Pokemon Studies", anymore.
See http://www.dourish.com/goodies/decon.html [dourish.com]
I'd go with the Charles Atlas method instead (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Even the mostly testosterone filled martial arts class has more of a chance of containing an actual attractive female than training alone at home with just those comics for company.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Don't you mean Mr Apollo?
You can beat up bullies 'til they cry
"Oh lah! Oh, crikey! Let go, you rotter! Don't punish me!"
Yes, just give me ten years of your life, and I'll trade in that puny flab for living muscle..
Physique you deserve!
Strong!
Chest and shoulders to hold your shirt!
Five years ago, I was a four stone apology
Today, I am two separate gorillas.
No tiresome exercises, no tricks,
no unpleasant bending, Wrestle poodles and win!
Play beach ball! Shave your legs! Lope over walls!
Tease people! Brush them
Bonk (Score:5, Funny)
Why spend all that time training (Score:5, Funny)
when you can just get hit in the head [youtube.com].
How many years for the morals? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:How many years for the morals? (Score:5, Interesting)
A large portion of the Batman storyline revolves around the question of whether or not that's really true.
One of the more poignant observations made in the comics was by Commissioner Gordon when he pointed out that there were always regular criminals in Gotham before Batman arrived, but there weren't any supervillians until after Batman made room for them.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I remember reading this LARGE comic (Batman Black And White? Alex Ross' art iirc) where Batman realized that he spent too much time fighting criminals but not crime. He had caught this kid, and it made him pause. Later on, as Bruce Wayne, he wondered what could be done to the neighborhood that kid was in. He gave the go-signal to projects that revitalized that run-down neighborhood. When he saw the kid again--can't remember if he was Bruce or Batman -- the kid was doing alright.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
In Batman's case, it's because they were all criminally insane, and therefore couldn't be tried as criminals, executed, or put into a normal prison.
What's unrealistic about Batman (from a social psychology perspective, not from a physics perspective) is that the super-villains never really tore into each other, the way major gangs and crime syndicates do. In fact, they worked together far more often than they warred with each other.
Re:How many years for the morals? (Score:5, Funny)
Isn't that because they keep all the super-villians locked up, and then release one at a time randomly for Batman to fight? That's how it seems to work. The real trouble in Gotham is that doctor at the psych ward who keeps saying things like, "Yeah, I think the Joker is rehabilitated now." Batman should just fight that guy.
Re:How many years for the morals? (Score:4, Informative)
Re:How many years for the morals? (Score:5, Interesting)
Well, if you're going to remove yourself from the context of the storytelling, obviously there aren't going to be any supervillians like the Joker...
But within the context of the story, the point was this: Batman attempted to impose order by brutalizing the criminal element until it was too beaten and scared to stand against him. When that happened, only a few well-financed, high-powered, or outright-insane villians could continue to fight him, and with organized crime no longer in control of the underworld in Gotham, they had an arena in which to do it.
By taking street crime and organized crime out of the picture, Batman removed a barrier that prevented the supervillians from moving in to take Gotham, because the "common" criminals had just as much a reason to oppose the supervillians, in most case, as Batman does. No matter how deadly Joker is, he can't exist in a world where both the corrupt police AND organized crime have a reason to oppose him because they'll hunt him down and destroy him, but if he's only opposed by Batman, he's a one-man army facing a one-man army.
A common theme in Batman his how Wayne is tortured by the fact that he may have caused a lot more suffering in Gotham by donning his mantle than if he had simply internalized his own suffering and let it him alive.
The question becomes: Did Batman help Gotham by taking up his crusade, or did he just unleash the pain he was suffering on the entire population?
Re:How many years for the morals? (Score:5, Interesting)
Haven't you heard. Might makes right. So training for the skills is the same as training for the morals.
If I only had a brain... (Score:5, Interesting)
What about the mental component? While the movie Batman Begins didn't do too much with it, Batman's greatest asset is his mind.
He's a genius and one of the greatest minds in the DC universe. He uses it be one of the greatest detectives and occasional research, and use strategies/tactics to take down even the greatest forces (even Superman).
It isn't his physic and toys that let him stand with the greatest heroes and face the most dangerous villains, but his greatest asset: his mind.
Without his mind he's just some generic tough guy.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Obligatory Neal Stephenson: (Score:5, Interesting)
Until a man is twenty-five, he still thinks, every so often, that under the right circumstances he could be the baddest motherfucker in the world. If I moved to a martial-arts monastery in China and studied real hard for ten years. If my family was wiped out by Colombian drug dealers and I swore myself to revenge. If I got a fatal disease, had one year to live, and devoted it to wiping out street crime. If I just dropped out and devoted my life to being bad.
Finishing the quote (Score:5, Informative)
Hiro used to feel this way, too, but then he ran into Raven. In a way, this was liberating. He no longer has to worry about being the baddest motherfucker in the world. The position is taken.
That's So Starfire (Score:3, Funny)
Hiro used to feel this way, too, but then he ran into Raven.
You mean Raven from That's So Starfire?
Losing != death (Score:3, Insightful)
That's BS. The Adam West Batman lost and got captured tons of times. That's when his utility belt's contents really got interesting!
Re:Losing != death (Score:4, Interesting)
10,000 hours (Score:5, Interesting)
But I doubt that many people have the finances or drive to keep up such a regime until you achieve your goal. And thats what separates the world class people from the rest of us.
Of course some people do have a natural ability that also gives them a benefit. So I doubt a really short person could ever be competitive in a world class basketball - unless there was a league for really short people.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
... Of course some people do have a natural ability that also gives them a benefit. So I doubt a really short person could ever be competitive in a world class basketball - unless there was a league for really short people.
Hmm, what qualifies as Really short [wikipedia.org] ? I'd pay special attention to the entries for Bogues, Boykins, and Webb.
Re:10,000 hours (Score:4, Interesting)
That's about six hours a day on most days for five years. With world class teaching and appropriate practice facilities, that sounds pretty consistent with what I've found in everything from playing a musical instrument to martial arts. Obviously there are going to be some prerequisites: someone is going to have to be fairly smart to become a world class chess player, or fairly tall to become a world class basketball player. But you can get seriously good at most things if you have the resources and you're willing to devote the time to it.
The thing I always regret with my hobbies is that I never appreciated the difference a really good teacher and training facilities can make when I was young enough to take advantage of them. By the time I found a teacher who could answer my deeper questions in most cases, I had already spent several years studying with mediocre teachers and without access to the best facilities, or in one case well over a decade just messing around and learning by experimentation without any guidance. These things do work up to a point — after all, someone had to work each difficult thing out first — but for most of my hobbies, I could probably have achieved in 1–2 years what in reality took me 5+ with a lesser teacher and limited facilites, or a decade of experimentation on my own.
Re:10,000 hours (Score:4, Insightful)
I think you have hit on a very important point there, perhaps unintentionally. You wrote:
When you are starting to learn something, does it really matter if you are working with the best of the best, or just with someone who knows the basics and can get you started without major mistakes?
It has been my experience that the difference between the "master" teachers and the "journeymen" is precisely that the masters will teach you the right thing, while the journeymen will teach you something that superficially looks, sounds or appears similar, but gets the effect in the wrong way (in the sense that you will need a different approach to improve further).
This is not to say that journeymen cannot be useful teachers. They have greater experience than the student, and perhaps can pass on the wisdom that multiple teachers of their own have shared with them. Usually this will help the student much more than harm them, and a student can learn a lot from such a teacher, particularly if they have access to multiple teachers so they can spot the inconsistencies that might betray a misunderstanding on the part of any one teacher.
However, the master has moved beyond this, combining the guidance of his teachers with his own experience of both practising and teaching the subject, and thus developing his own personal insights. Where the journeyman mostly repeats advice based on the understanding of others, the master understands the subject deeply himself and can therefore create advice on demand in each specific situation.
This makes a significant difference in at least two circumstances. One is where the journeyman teacher has never themselves progressed beyond a certain level of understanding, and they are teaching a way of doing something that can only get their students to the same level, where the master's approach would achieve the same effect at the same level of development but also allow for further growth. Thus the student picks up a bad habit, which must be unlearned and replaced with the better version before they can make further progress.
The other big difference is in a field where people must adapt. For example, if I were coaching a short, stocky, strong Batman, I would teach him very different fighting techniques to those I would teach to a tall, fast, agile Batman, to take advantage of his attributes. A journeyman teacher who is short, stocky and strong and has received advice from teachers that play to those strengths might not have good advice available to pass on to the tall, fast, agile student. The master, in contrast, has developed experience beyond their own learning and practice of the skill, studying alternative perspectives and forming a more rounded view of the subject, and so can customise their advice based on the specific needs of each student. Again, much of the advice during the first years of study would probably overlap, but the master will identify the differences immediately and again prevent the need for the student to go back and make adjustments later.
This is just IME, and YMMV. That, after all, is the point. Whether it is worth paying the greater costs of going to a master teacher from the start (not just in terms of money, but also travel time if there is no-one that good who lives near you, etc.) is debatable, because of course much of the subtlety of their understanding really is wasted on a beginner at first. However, other things being equal and money being no object since we're talking about Batman, there are definitely advantages to avoiding the journeyman teacher and learning from the master.
(Incidentally, I personally find the study of how different people learn, the stages of development a student goes through as they learn a new skill, and how best a teacher can help them, to be a fascinating area. There is a lot of interesting research about it, which you might like to explore if you're interested and haven't seen it already.)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
It doesn't take that long to become a superhero.....just look here: http://www.scifi.com/superhero/ [scifi.com]
Layne
Oh he'd stay on top of his game (Score:5, Insightful)
I prefer some 'Real' expert opinions (Score:5, Funny)
I trained in Kung Fu for 6 years (Score:3, Informative)
And did not become Batman. I started at age 33 and by age 39 I had been in Physical Therapy 3 times; once for neck pain and twice for hip pain. I was not very flexible when I started training and was equally inflexible when I stopped. At least I didn't get much worse.
On the plus side, for a while I was reasonably confident in my ability to defend myself in a fair fight against a similarly skilled and otherwise unarmed person. It's now been another 6 years I'm quite out of practice and out of shape.
So as usual, YMMV.
Re:I trained in Kung Fu for 6 years (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:I trained in Kung Fu for 6 years (Score:5, Insightful)
One of the best lessons I learned in martial arts is there are two kinds of fights, those you fight dirty and those you lose.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
I was being ironic.
Batman? Phooey (Score:4, Informative)
It's more than physical ability and big money... (Score:5, Insightful)
Yeah, the character has an almost super-human physique. And yes, he's got a big pile 'o cash that helps him afford the toys and tools he uses during his "night job". But there's more to it.
Wayne can out-think any of his opponents. His schtick is that he's 5-10 steps ahead of anyone. If he gets into a fight, he's already out-thought the opponent and knows exactly how the fight's going to end.
That's harder to teach. You could work someone for years so that they're at the peak of physical ability, and then dump a cubic f'load of cash on top of them. But they'd still be missing that keen tactical mind that Wayne has.
I don't care how good you are... (Score:5, Informative)
...more than a couple of attackers, and you're in trouble. Facing ten bad guys, short of some super-exo-skeleton that boosts your strength and armours your body against instantaneous impact and sustained pressure and torsion, you're going down hard, quickly. And no, they don't always helpfully attack one or two at a time: watch half a dozen cops taking down a violent drunk some time.
And if you're facing multiple bad guys with no possibility of escape, the only credible strategy is to try to put at least all-but-one of them down so hard they no longer present a threat. That means at least knocked out or injured seriously enough that they can't fight, not the cutesy pain compliance stuff. If they are weak and clueless when it comes to fight, you are fit and highly skilled when it comes to fighting, you can find some sort of weapon, you are lucky with the environment, and there aren't too many of them, you might just do this for long enough to create an opportunity to escape. Maybe, if you're really lucky.
But it's a fun read, I'll give it that. :-)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
"And if you're facing multiple bad guys with no possibility of escape, the only credible strategy is to try to put at least all-but-one of them down so hard they no longer present a threat."
That's why we make firearms. All that unarmed combat bullshit is entertaining, but if you want to stop an opponent from functioning, kill him.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
That's why we make firearms.
I wondered whether someone would come up with that. You're going to need one heck of a weapon to take down ten opponents at close range before they get close enough to grab you, though.
Then again, you're Batman. Maybe you really do have some funky combination of flashbangs, smoke bombs, and defensive equipment that renders you immune to their effects. :-)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
You're going to need one heck of a weapon to take down ten opponents at close range before they get close enough to grab you, though.
This is my BOOMSTICK [midamericarecreation.com]
Don't forget to factor in human nature. At most, you'll only need to take down 2-3 before they get close enough to grab you.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
you've got it exactly right. I trained in martial arts for 10 years... 1st degree black belt (didn't have time or dedication to go another 10 years to get 2nd degree ;-)
If you find yourself in a fight like described you have to aim to put your opponents down... immobilize them. Break knees, break necks, knock them out and down... as fast as possible, then when their buddies are reeling from your viciousness you run like hell. (assuming they didn't all just dog-pile you)
If the fight is not going to happen (a
Re:I don't care how good you are... (Score:4, Insightful)
10 attackers is quite a few, and is very difficult, but not at all impossible if you're well trained and well prepared.
If you honestly believe everything you wrote in that post, then I can't help but think that you've trained some sort of martial art or self-defence class that teaches basic tactics for dealing with multiple opponents, but never really tried it in a free-for-all, full-contact, anything-goes experiment. I promise you, it's an experiment you'll only ever need to do once, because the result is absolutely guaranteed.
Multiple opponents (Score:5, Insightful)
The trick behind multiple attackers is moving around enough so that they eventually line up and come at you one or two at a time.
Yeah I had my martial arts instructors tell me that too. Problem is that realistically you'll never be on favorable terrain and you aren't good enough to put your opponents down quickly or avoid entanglement. The human body can take a lot of abuse and odd are you'll get tied up with one opponent long enough for the others to get to you.
You *might* escape but that's the best you can hope for. Pretty much you have to hope the exit is close and you can get somewhere safe quickly. I'm not saying you shouldn't defend yourself but recognize that the odds are heavily against you.
Disclosure: I've been a martial arts student for about 20 years. I'm not any sort of exceptional talent but I do have enough experience (including real world) to understand what is possible. Multiple opponent situations are VERY difficult even if you are better armed and much better trained than those you are facing.
You wouldn't be batman ... (Score:4, Insightful)
For those of us already in our 30s, we'd be over the hill in 10-12 years.
It's much more likely that we'd be end up more like Captain Jackson [captainjackson.org], Zetaman [wweek.com], Captain Prospect [washingtonpost.com] or some other "real life superhero" [wikipedia.org]
I can see it now..... (Score:5, Funny)
How much will you pay for this?
900$?
NO!
500$?
NO!
For a limited time, just two easy payments of one parent!
Batman has more then strength and speed (Score:4, Insightful)
I think what I liked most about Batman Begins is that it gave a reasonable explanation as to why Bruce Wayne would dress up like a bat. As much as Batman is a skilled fighter, he is also good at using psychological warfare on his opponents. Consider that during the fight at the docks, he had been playing enough mind games on the crooks that they were off balanced when he attacked them in a large group.
Now granted in real life most people would piss their pants laughing at a guy dressed up like a giant bat (also a viable attack strategy) but the idea is that batman is such a terrifying character that you are thrown off and are easier to take down.
Fuck that. (Score:5, Funny)
Hang out in the YMCA locker room and you can be Robin in under 5 minutes.
Become a super villain instead! (Score:5, Insightful)
That just takes a spray of acid to the face or a dunk in a chemical vat. No training time whatsoever.
On another note, I get peeved by everyone ignoring Batman's "World's Greatest Detective" moniker and generally accepted reputation as one of DC Universe's smartest humans. Everyone focuses on Batman's physical skills where, in "reality", having keen observational skills and an intellect allowing superior strategems probably alleviates a lot of the need for ultimate physical skills.
One Minor Problem... (Score:3, Insightful)
Batman's really only cool because of his enemies.
Batman vs the purse snatcher or Batman vs the social welfare fraudster etc, would get pretty boring after about a week.
Clearly "You, Too, Could Be The Joker In 10 To 12 Years" is required , or maybe just some freaky chemistry.
Then again, an "if you build it, they will come" universal harmony thing might apply...
"The Cost of Being Batman" (Forbes) (Score:4, Interesting)
http://www.forbes.com/digitalentertainment/2005/06/20/batman-movies-superheroes-cx_de_0620batman.html [forbes.com]
http://xrl.us/batman [xrl.us]
Being Batman
David M. Ewalt, 06.20.05, 7:28 PM ET
Dark clouds have gathered over Gotham. Crime is rampant, despair is
widespread and no one is safe. Who will rescue the metropolis from
itself, fight the forces of evil and save the good people of the city?
Why don't you do it?
Plenty of us would love to fight for truth and justice--if only we had
magic powers or mutant genes. We all love superheroes. Last weekend,
Batman Begins was the No. 1 film in the U.S., pulling in $71.1 million
over its first five days. The Batman movie franchise is also one of
the most lucrative of all time, with five movies (not counting Batman
Begins) grossing nearly $1 billion.
OK, so he also has a couple billion dollars. Batman's alter ego, Bruce
Wayne, is an old-money heir and the owner of Wayne Enterprises, a
massive international-technology conglomerate. In our Forbes Fictional
Fifteen, we estimated his net worth at $6.3 billion. If he were a real
guy, he'd be the 28th richest person in America, right behind News
Corp.'s (nyse: NWS - news - people ) Rupert Murdoch.
Wayne uses his riches and corporate connections to equip himself with
the latest and greatest in military hardware, and uses those tools to
help him fight villains like the Joker, the Riddler, and Ra's Al Ghul.
But you don't have to be a billionaire to become a caped crusader.
Using commercially available training, technology and domestic help,
the average guy could conceivably equip himself to become a real-world
superhero, provided he's got at least a couple million to spare.
What would it cost to become a real-world Dark Knight? Click here [forbes.com].
The Training
Cost: $30,000
You'd better be ready to defend yourself if you plan to take on all
the thugs and super-villains that call Gotham home.
In the new movie, young Bruce Wayne goes to Tibet on the mother of all
study-abroad trips and ends up learning the martial arts from a group
of vigilante ninjas called the League of Shadows. But similar training
is available to those not lucky enough to get plucked out of obscurity
by Liam Neeson.
A good place to start would be an internship at the birthplace of kung
fu, the Shaolin Temple in Henan, China. One month of training at the
prestigious Tagou school costs about $740, including a private room
and training with a personal coach. It'll take a while to get good
enough to stop the Joker's worst thugs, though, so count on spending
at least three years and about 30 grand for the trip.
The Suit
Cost: $1,585
They say the suit makes the man, and Batman's no exception. Without
his outfit, it'd just be Bruce Wayne running around out there, and
there's nothing particularly scary about a billionaire playboy in his
underpants.
Batman's suit is a modified piece of infantry armor built by the
applied sciences division of Wayne Enterprises. It's waterproof,
bulletproof, knife-proof and temperature-regulating. Paired with an
impact-resistant, graphite-composite cowl and spiked ninja-style
gauntlets, it allows Batman to protect himself against everything from
swords to machine guns. Wayne Enterprises also supplies Batman with
his cape, a specially designed nylon-derivative fabric that stiffens
when hit with an electric charge, allowing Batman to use it as a
glider. All this doesn't come cheap. In the new movie, Wayne's told
that the armor alone costs $300,000.
Real-world superhero wanna-bes will have to go with a much more
prosaic solution. We recommend a lightweight ProMAX OTV bulletproof
jacket, which will cover your ar
Street fighting (Score:3, Insightful)
Let's see some hands: How many people have been in a street fight? Against one person? Against two?
When I was young, I was sort of a bad ass. I was a "baby huey" sort of kid. Without working out, I was 6' 210lbs in high school. 32 inch waste 46 inch jacket. I was pretty strong. When I started working out, for football, I started bench press at 210lbs, my weight.
I hung out in Dorchester and South Boston and got in a lot of fights. 1:1 I could hold my own against almost anyone, even the kids who took karate. 2:1, I would usually get my ass kicked unless I could get rid of the first guy quickly. 3:1, no f-ning way you're getting out without serious bruises or broken bones.
Batman is a myth. It can't happen. Kung Foo movies are a joke. Guns are popular because you *can* take on a bunch of people at once. Hand to hand, no matter how big and strong you are, two or three guys are stronger than you.
Re:Street fighting (Score:5, Interesting)
Just because you can't beat multiple opponents doesn't mean others can't.
My grandfather was a golden gloves boxer turned weight lifter. 5'10" 225-240 lbs when he competed. Could dead lift 500 lbs with one hand. Actually came from the same area as you. :) He was a natural athlete all his life and a veteran of many street fights. He could take on 5 guys, and did on more than one occasion. Would confront gangs of punks well into his 60s.
Took 7 strong men to drag him to the old folks home. Alzheimer's + elite athletes are a dangerous combination.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
32 inch waste
Wow, TMI.
I suppose that's impressive from a physiological standpoint, but how does it make you a better fighter?
Brains as well as physical training (Score:5, Insightful)
What about the expert skills in chemistry? Forensics? Psychology? Research? His business skills? Batman is also a consumate detective, so given his expert skill in these areas how long would it take to get those levels of ability?
You would think a Scientific magazine might also be interested in the mental aspect?
I'm already a superhero! (Score:5, Funny)
The martial arts you see are all useless. (Score:3, Interesting)
The stuff you see on the screen, in the ring (including MMA) will get you killed on the street.
The real martial arts don't in fact take 10 years to train for, they only take a few months to teach the techniques, a few months to practice them until automatic and a few months to get into decent shape to apply them. You see, what you are taught 3 or 4 times a week for 10 years when you attend a typical dojo is almost certainly complete bollocks. It almost certainly isn't effective karate, it almost certainly isn't effective kung fu. In fact it almost certainly doesn't resemble the original material taught by the old masters in any way.
The addition of rules for sparring, competition have removed virtually all of the effective techniques. Few of which are taught any more in the dojo because they are forbidden in competition.
Effective (real) karate, kung fu, tai chi, boxing, wrestling etc are in fact functionally the same thing. Simple and brutal self defence techniques which are easy to apply when the addrenalin has removed all your co-ordination and your opponent's pain sensitivity. Virtually all of the "styles" you see these days are ... Ballet ... Not karate, not kung fu, not tai chi. If you are not practicing and training eye gouging, fishooking, choking, strangling, biting, stamping, headbutting, groin crushing as well as the more sophisticated stuff, you are kidding yourself (and your students if you have the gall to teach any) on.
Unless you train for effectiveness in the dojo, you are seriously going to get your backside handed to you the first time you attempt a spinning reverse head kick on a damp, slippy pavement when some moron and his 4 mates decide you looked at them wrong.
Re:Where do we sign up? (Score:5, Funny)
Well, given the size and scope of Bruce Wayne's awesome shit, I'd say quite well.
That, or its being a self-loathing billionaire industrialist that pays out.
Frankly, its probably not even in the scope of most slashdotters to end up being ATHF's Meatwad... after all, Meatwad makes the money, see; Meatwad gets the honeys, G...
and we don't :(
Re:Where do we sign up? (Score:5, Funny)
Alright, that does not add to the conversation. You're just using this opportunity to gloat.
Re:Where do we sign up? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Where do we sign up? (Score:4, Insightful)
I've made many a greasy anime nerd scoff in disbelief before, so perhaps, for public health concerns, as well as the general welfare, its best that I don't.
Re:Where do we sign up? (Score:4, Insightful)
goth chicks... And the original copy of her birth certificate... with out that, she's dead, right?
Making her a better goth?
On a more serious note, does any one care? I'm very happy your in a (slightly) happy relationship, but it doesn't matter, a lot of other people are as well. If you can't be happy without telling others, then you probably aren't happy.
Re:Where do we sign up? (Score:4, Funny)
But that's my best line!
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
I went to a midnight showing of The Dark Knight last night and managed to fall asleep with an hour left in the movie and wake up just in time for the credits to roll.
What kind of city do you live in where you can see a midnight showing of Dark Knight and not also have access to coffee 24 hours a day?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Shouldn't take long, just go in to politics.