today's important question

[lauralh]

from here:

How many 5 year-olds could you take on at once?

rules:

- You are in an enclosed area, roughly the size of a basketball court. There are no foreign objects.
- You are not allowed to touch a wall.
- When you are knocked unconscious, you lose. When they are all knocked unconscious, they lose. Once a kid is knocked unconscious, that kid is "out."
- I (or someone else intent on seeing to it you fail) get to choose the kids from a pool that is twice the size of your magic number. The pool will be 50/50 in terms of gender and will have no discernable abnormalities in terms of demographics, other than they are all healthy Americans.
- The kids receive one day of training from hand-to-hand combat experts who will train them specifically to team up to take down one adult. You will receive one hour of "counter-tactics" training.
- There is no protective padding for any combatant other than the standard-issue cup.
* The kids are motivated enough to not get scared, regardless of the bloodshed. Even the very last one will give it his/her best to take you down.

[Poll #465493]

thanks to iamdonte

edit: I am fucking ashamed of you men. Five-year-olds have no stamina; one punch and they are DOWN. Revise your answers.

Comments

[perich.livejournal.com]

I submit that anyone who put a number larger than "1" has never dealt with an angry five-year-old.

[harryh.livejournal.com]

I haven't.
In which case I am clearly doomed by my far above average vote.

[perich.livejournal.com]

Fortunately, herbaliser has no plans to lock you in a basketball court with 46 five-year-olds.

THAT WE KNOW OF.

[asabass.livejournal.com]

I think my actual number would be "3".

without their training I would up that.

[herbaliser.livejournal.com]

They still don't fucking come up to your waist.

[herbaliser.livejournal.com]

nah, I think yours (of the males) is the most realistic so far...

[herbaliser.livejournal.com]

just one day of training, shit, they'd forget most of it!

[verybadlady.livejournal.com]

I had to change my results since I'm pregnant. :P

[asabass.livejournal.com]

you're right

I think I was being overly conservatve

but realisicly, I'm in pretty bad shape. I'd worry about geting too tired too quickly. If I could train for a couple weeks beforehand...

[skiplogic.livejournal.com]

The kids are motivated enough to not get scared, regardless of the bloodshed. Even the very last one will give it his/her best to take you down.

This is the part that gets me... any animal as large as a 5-year-old human, if motivated enough not to get scared, is deadly. Your primary weapon in a fight with anything smaller than you is fear, disable that and it's anyone's guess.

[perich.livejournal.com]

You're right. There's nothing vulnerable below the waist.

you get a cup!

[herbaliser.livejournal.com]

well, not for me...

taking this question seriously makes me sound like a sicko

[jimbojones.livejournal.com]

I went for the full 96. No matter what you do in a day, even if you magically de-fear them, you aren't going to turn 5-year-olds into effective team combatants. (Ever watched a peewee soccer game?)

They aren't going to be able to get more than five maximum to bear on you at any given time, three of those are going to get in each others' way, and if we're assuming absolute brutality here it takes very little energy to deliver a knee to a skull. One of those per customer will do pretty nicely.

Finally, given that the rules specify "knockout" - how the hell is any size group of five year olds going to knock an adult male out? They can't possibly muster enough concussive force, and they aren't physically strong enough or dextrous enough for a chokehold. Even if you fuck up and let 'em trip you up and get you down, the only way they can win is through bloodloss, and the only way they have to infict bleeding wounds is through biting... and no matter how much nobody wants to get bitten by a shithead little kid, let's face it, homo sapiens isn't exactly designed for dental warfare.

So, yeah. Ninety-six, with possible stalemate if I fuck up, but no chance of a win for the rug-rats.

(But don't ask me how much THERAPY I'd need afterwards... ::shudder::)

[jimbojones.livejournal.com]

pffff, normally you aren't ALLOWED to get violent with 'em.

now if you asked me how many angered five year olds I could REASON with simultaneously, that would be an entirely different answer...

[duckierose.livejournal.com]

I've run a daycare center.

You are wrong.

[herbaliser.livejournal.com]

THANK you

[herbaliser.livejournal.com]

you mean you wouldn't be laughing with glee all the way to the hospital?

[bewing.livejournal.com]

As a scientist, I must say that you clearly are totally clueless about the vulnerability of the human knee joint to sideways pressure.

[herbaliser.livejournal.com]

so are they, thankfully

[duckierose.livejournal.com]

the hard part would be knocking out the first...2 or 3. after that, the guilt would die and it would be...fun? no, that's not the right word. But similar to a runner's high, where it's painful and exhilerating. Just knocking them out, one by one.

Unless they were trained to emotionally manipulate. But that would require a different brain than that of a five year old.

[herbaliser.livejournal.com]

FATTY FATTY FAT FAT

[perich.livejournal.com]

I was being sarcastic.

You're Kidding, Right?

[perich.livejournal.com]

The guy below had it right. Imagine if I lock you in a basketball court with twenty rottweilers which have roughly the same mass as five-year-olds.

[perich.livejournal.com]

How much does a five-year-old weigh? Forty pounds, let's say?

How far can you run with a forty-pound weight strapped to each ankle and elbow?

Re: You're Kidding, Right?

[duckierose.livejournal.com]

if kids had claws and fangs and jaws that were capable of clamping, and the ability to leap that high, I'd be more concerned.