Yellow Bamboo Challenge

[thaiboxerken]

Wow, it would be very nice if this idiot was in Oregon. I haven't kicked a person full force for a while.

 

[baliwesternman]

this is the latest email I sent in reply to CFLarsens mail.
sent 01-19:

If a test occurs I will wear protection.

Yes what I mean by repel is that the attacker will not be able to hit me (or the protection) at all.

I have emailed with Peter, and the ball is in his court. He is probably away for the weekend.


__________________
SkepticReport.com
Email: editor@skepticreport.com



Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

01-23-2005 11:37 AM

Mr Larsen

WHy is it that Peter responded to you on 19th but as of 23rd claim he had not contacted you?

Did you miss his email or are you already practicing deception on this gig?

BWM

 

[Zep]

Here's a thing...

We were unable to knock him down, we asked him to really try to hurt us and punch with all his strength, but he said he could not do that with the fear that we might get hurt. Now he has changed his mind and promised us he would cause us harm without problem, so we will see the 30th if we can knock him down or not.

OK, Peter, this is an utterly confusing paragraph so let's try to make this quite clear. Who is knocking who down for this test? Who tried to knock who down last time? Who was the attacker, who was using YB power?

And everyone can also see that baliwesternman is looking for an escape hatch here - he's somehow going to claim Claus woosed out on challenging Peter. Or something like that. Actually, BWM, I'd be willing to bet Peter is having heaps of second thoughts now. And if this "testing" is at all feasible, I don't think Claus will let him off the hook that easily.

Incidentally, why don't YOU get your own Yellowbamboozle powers tested by a skeptic? Instead of letting this misguided idiot get pounded on your behalf. Don't you really think it will work after all??

Hey, Ken! I'd like to see your kicks! We practice full-force on each other but with kick-pads, and even us 3rd kyus can knock a first dan backwards if it's done right. So I can only imagine what effect they would have on a fresh-meat unprotected stationary off-balance target!

 

[DevilsAdvocate]

Just to interject needlessly: FREAKING HELL! I posted some small bit on this thread weeks ago. And there is still NO PROTOCOL? I'm getting an inkling of what KRAMER must go through every day.

How hard can it be to agree to stand there and get punched? We draw a circle on the ground. The YB guy stands there and does his YB stuff. Attacker guy (with intention of hurting YB guy, which is sort of the point) makes contact with YB guy. If attacker guy makes contact with YB guy, then game is over.

If you want to get in to specifics, lets say circle around YB guy is 2 foot diameter. And time for attacker guy to make contact is 10 minutes.

The only question would be about attacker guy's intention to hurt. Meaning that attacker guy is not just reaching out to touch YB guy's hair, but is actually throwing a punch or kick, etc. Well, the difference between a "touch" and a "punch" might be subjective, but for an informal test I think we could know the difference.

C'mon. Simple, simple stuff. YB guy stands there. Attacker guy punches or kicks YB guy. Does YB guy not get touched. Simple as that. Simple.

 

[baliwesternman]

Here's a thing...

Here is a thing............

I am just curious........all I am asking is this

Peter claims he emailed cf back on 19th

cf claims as of 23rd not to have heard back from peter.

Either Peter is mis representing, cf is misrepresenting or the email was lost in transition

Just curious is all- this is Peters gig after all. No matter what

I believe about the yb test this is for sure- I do give credit to those who believe enough in their practice to allow it to be tested.

On 30 January there will be some important yb tests- it will be very interesting to see the outcomes.

From the correspondence cf and peter seem to agree on the basics so for my part I am going to let them agree to a format between themselves and watch what happens.

After all it is their gig.

BWM

 

[CFLarsen]

this is the latest email I sent in reply to CFLarsens mail.
sent 01-19:

I'm afraid I haven't received it. But thanks for posting your email. I assume you want to discuss matters here?

If a test occurs I will wear protection.

The protection must be enough to ensure that you don't get hurt.

Yes what I mean by repel is that the attacker will not be able to hit me (or the protection) at all.

Excellent. I suggest that we cover the attacker's hands, knees, feet, whatever, with blue chalk. If, after the attack, there is even a smidgen of blue chalk on you, you lose.

I have tested before and know it works but I haven’t tested with a sceptic.

OK.

January 30 I am conducting a knocking down test in Stockholm, Sweden with several martial artists from the Swedish martial arts forum (www.kampsport.se/forum)

Anyone who wished to try attacking can come. We will have several video cameras recording it.

This will be the second knocking down test we do with the Swedish martial arts forum people.

In the first test (which you can see here: www.yellowbamboo.net/testet) we let the forum moderator “monkeyBoy” attack me and Elisabette,

We were unable to knock him down, we asked him to really try to hurt us and punch with all his strength, but he said he could not do that with the fear that we might get hurt. Now he has changed his mind and promised us he would cause us harm without problem, so we will see the 30th if we can knock him down or not.

Judging from the videos, you are not successful in repelling an attacker. Let's see if it works on Jan 30th. I assume that the test with us is still on, regardless of what happens on the 30th?

 

[CFLarsen]

Mr Larsen

WHy is it that Peter responded to you on 19th but as of 23rd claim he had not contacted you?

Did you miss his email or are you already practicing deception on this gig?

No deception at all. I don't know why I haven't received his mail, but he has posted it here. So, everything's fine.

 

[Zep]

HAJIME!

 

[petpower_2k]

I'm afraid I haven't received it. But thanks for posting your email. I assume you want to discuss matters here?

The protection must be enough to ensure that you don't get hurt.

Excellent. I suggest that we cover the attacker's hands, knees, feet, whatever, with blue chalk. If, after the attack, there is even a smidgen of blue chalk on you, you lose.

OK.

Judging from the videos, you are not successful in repelling an attacker. Let's see if it works on Jan 30th. I assume that the test with us is still on, regardless of what happens on the 30th?

the email must have been lost in transition I guess.

something like this?:
NO-Touch-KO Test Protocol
----------------------------------

YB person= me or any other YB teacher.
Attacker=whoever does the attacking.
YB assistant= a YB assistant that is with the attacker making sure he is angry, then when the YB Person is ready the YB assistant tells the Attacker that he can attack.

Preparations for the test:
1) YB person and Attacker sign a waiver so nobody gets problems incase someone gets hurt.
2) YB person wear a protection vest over chest and stomach area.
3) Attacker punches at something to show that he indeed can punch witch considerable force.
4) Attacker stands minimum 20 meters away from YB person.
5) YB person or his assistant do their best to make the attacker angry so he can attack with the intention to harm the YB person.
6) Attacker runs towards the YB person to punch him in the chest and stomach area.

notes about the attack point nr 6:
a)Attacker is required to be running or jogging towards the YB person.
b)Attacker does his best to stop infront of YB person to deliver full force blows to the body of YB person. He keeps hitting YB person for minimum 30 seconds with full force.

the test is sucessful (YB person win) if any of these things happen:

a) Attacker falls to the ground before he gets infront of YB person.
b) Attacker falls to the ground suddenly while hitting YB person during the 30 second punch time.

the test is failed if:
the attacker is not knocked down before the time runs out.

note:
the 30 seconds that the attacker is required to punch at the YB guy start counting when the attacker has stopped infront of YB guy and threw his first punch.

And finally:
a) The test happens in full day light or equally good conditions,

b) Atleast one digital video camera records the test when the
Attacker begins his attack.

c)No people are allowed to be closer than 5 meters from YB person or Attacker during the test. with the exception from the YB assistant that is with the Attack minimum 20 meters away from YB person before attacker starts running, the assistant is not allowed to run with the Attacker, he/she must stay put.
The function of the assistant is to make sure that the Attacker is ready to attack, and to tell the Attacker when he can attack.

-End of protocol-

 

[steenkh]

It seems to me that this protocol is flawed:

YB assistant= a YB assistant that is with the attacker making sure he is angry, then when the YB Person is ready the YB assistant tells the Attacker that he can attack.

This requirement opens up for fraud from the YB assistant. Nobody should be close to the attacker or the YB person. Th YB person could give some sign when he is ready to be attacked, but only the attacker can decide when he is ready. Any incitement from any YB assistant could damage the attacker's judgement and make him commit mistakes. It is also possible that threads, tasers or similar could be employed by th YB assistant.

b)Attacker does his best to stop infront of YB person to deliver full force blows to the body of YB person. He keeps hitting YB person for minimum 30 seconds with full force.

Why this requirement? A single hit should be enough! Again it opens up for fraud from anybody standing close to the attacker.

 

[CFLarsen]

Peter,

Thanks for your suggestion for a protocol. I have a few comments.

YB assistant= a YB assistant that is with the attacker making sure he is angry, then when the YB Person is ready the YB assistant tells the Attacker that he can attack.

How does the assistant decide if the attacker is "angry"?

3) Attacker punches at something to show that he indeed can punch witch considerable force.

How do we determine this?

5) YB person or his assistant do their best to make the attacker angry so he can attack with the intention to harm the YB person.

And if they fail? We need to determine when the attacker is "angry".

6) Attacker runs towards the YB person to punch him in the chest and stomach area.

Assuming that YB person does absolutely nothing to avoid it, other than scream at attacker. The YB person cannot fend for himself, touch the attacker, move out of the way, or in any other way seek to avoid the punch.

a)Attacker is required to be running or jogging towards the YB person.

We need to establish when the attacker is running or jogging. Jogging, I believe, is running. Suggestion: The attacker has to move from X to Y within P seconds.

b)Attacker does his best to stop infront of YB person to deliver full force blows to the body of YB person. He keeps hitting YB person for minimum 30 seconds with full force.

I think that the claim has been altered. The claim was that the attacker could not even touch the YB person:

Yes what I mean by repel is that the attacker will not be able to hit me (or the protection) at all.

It will be sufficient if the attacker simply doesn't hit the YB person at all.

the test is sucessful (YB person win) if any of these things happen:

a) Attacker falls to the ground before he gets infront of YB person.
b) Attacker falls to the ground suddenly while hitting YB person during the 30 second punch time.

Now you are definitely changing the claim. There are way too many ways that someone could trick the attacker to fall to the ground. It is far better, if we simply stick with the original claim, and see if the YB person can prevent the attacker from hitting him.

the test is failed if:
the attacker is not knocked down before the time runs out.

This will open up for the possibility of the attacker either tripping, or is tripped. The assistant could also "psych" the attacker in such a way that the attacker gets nervous and trips. I think we should stick to the old claim that the attacker is not able to touch the YB person at all.

note:
the 30 seconds that the attacker is required to punch at the YB guy start counting when the attacker has stopped infront of YB guy and threw his first punch.

This will put the two persons in full contact for 30 seconds. How do you suggest we avoid the possibility of the YB person simply pushing the attacker in the scuffle?

Again, we should stick to the original claim.

And finally:
a) The test happens in full day light or equally good conditions,

Full day light, period. It will most likely be outdoors. We have an excellent park in Central Copenhagen that will suit the test perfectly.

b) Atleast one digital video camera records the test when the
Attacker begins his attack.

I suggest that one camera record the test, and another record everything. As many cameras as possible, in fact. All video tapes are copied, unaltered in any way, and both you and I get a copy. All tapes can be distributed freely by anyone.

c)No people are allowed to be closer than 5 meters from YB person or Attacker during the test. with the exception from the YB assistant that is with the Attack minimum 20 meters away from YB person before attacker starts running, the assistant is not allowed to run with the Attacker, he/she must stay put.
The function of the assistant is to make sure that the Attacker is ready to attack, and to tell the Attacker when he can attack.

The assistant must be sufficiently away from the attacker, so there is no chance of the assistant tripping or pushing the attacker.

What do you think of this?

 

[SezMe]

5) YB person or his assistant do their best to make the attacker angry so he can attack with the intention to harm the YB person.

Uh-oh, this is a problem. Imagine this scenario:

Test begins. CFL runs up to YB, stops just in front of him, gathers his strength, plants feet, and wacks the crap out of YB.

Rebuttal: You weren't angry enough to have intention to hurt because you cooly and logically stopped before striking YB so the test is no good.

The problem is the word "intention" because it makes the test subject to interpretation.

 

[steenkh]

The problem is the word "intention" because it makes the test subject to interpretation.

You are right. This one word is the escape hatch for the YB. I believe that the assistant must be eliminated from the procedure, and there must be some stipulation of how fast everything must happen. The running must be accomplished in X seconds, and the single hit must be performed immediately when possible.

I think it is a good precaution to have the attacker been coated in chalk. In this way, there will be no doubt that the YB person is hit, even if the YB person tries to evade so that the impact is not clear enough on the film.

Personally I would have preferred a pillow fight!

 

[CFLarsen]

Uh-oh, this is a problem. Imagine this scenario:

Test begins. CFL runs up to YB, stops just in front of him, gathers his strength, plants feet, and wacks the crap out of YB.

Rebuttal: You weren't angry enough to have intention to hurt because you cooly and logically stopped before striking YB so the test is no good.

The problem is the word "intention" because it makes the test subject to interpretation.

Well, yes and no. Peter specifically stated that the assistant decides when the attacker is angry enough. Once that has happened, the attacker can start running. And then, there can be no doubt that the attacker was angry enough.

How we determine this level of anger, is a good question, though.

 

[steenkh]

Well, yes and no. Peter specifically stated that the assistant decides when the attacker is angry enough.

No the role of the assistant is more than that! Look at

5) YB person or his assistant do their best to make the attacker angry so he can attack with the intention to harm the YB person.

What exactly are they doing? Calling names? Pinching?

 

[CFLarsen]

What exactly are they doing? Calling names? Pinching?

That is to be determined. However, there will be no physical contact whatsoever between the assistant and the attacker.

Perhaps it would be a good idea to have the participants wear microphones as well.

 

[steenkh]

That is to be determined. However, there will be no physical contact whatsoever between the assistant and the attacker.

I think that the YB person and assistant need to be searched for hidden devices, and that nobody - not even the assistant - may come closer to the attacker than a certain distance, like, say, 5 meters. We need to be sure that the assistant cannot throw an invisible thread around the legs of the attacker or fire a dart or whatever.

 

[steenkh]

I would like to add that the precautions are also to protect the YB from accusations made later if the test succeeds.

 

[T'ai Chi]

That is to be determined. However, there will be no physical contact whatsoever between the assistant and the attacker.

Perhaps it would be a good idea to have the participants wear microphones as well.

If it even happens. I doubt it will..

 

[petpower_2k]

Peter,

Thanks for your suggestion for a protocol. I have a few comments.



How does the assistant decide if the attacker is "angry"?



How do we determine this?



And if they fail? We need to determine when the attacker is "angry".



Assuming that YB person does absolutely nothing to avoid it, other than scream at attacker. The YB person cannot fend for himself, touch the attacker, move out of the way, or in any other way seek to avoid the punch.



We need to establish when the attacker is running or jogging. Jogging, I believe, is running. Suggestion: The attacker has to move from X to Y within P seconds.



I think that the claim has been altered. The claim was that the attacker could not even touch the YB person:



It will be sufficient if the attacker simply doesn't hit the YB person at all.



Now you are definitely changing the claim. There are way too many ways that someone could trick the attacker to fall to the ground. It is far better, if we simply stick with the original claim, and see if the YB person can prevent the attacker from hitting him.



This will open up for the possibility of the attacker either tripping, or is tripped. The assistant could also "psych" the attacker in such a way that the attacker gets nervous and trips. I think we should stick to the old claim that the attacker is not able to touch the YB person at all.



This will put the two persons in full contact for 30 seconds. How do you suggest we avoid the possibility of the YB person simply pushing the attacker in the scuffle?

Again, we should stick to the original claim.



Full day light, period. It will most likely be outdoors. We have an excellent park in Central Copenhagen that will suit the test perfectly.



I suggest that one camera record the test, and another record everything. As many cameras as possible, in fact. All video tapes are copied, unaltered in any way, and both you and I get a copy. All tapes can be distributed freely by anyone.



The assistant must be sufficiently away from the attacker, so there is no chance of the assistant tripping or pushing the attacker.

What do you think of this?

I think all of your points are good.
we can remove the 30 second punching thing, simply let the attacker attack, and if he hits I loose the test, if attacker is unable to hit YB person or attacker is knocked down then we win.

About determining if the attacker is angry or not.
I believe it is impossible to know for sure how angry the attacker is.
Since it is impossible to know the intention of the attacker, all we can do is to do our best, and then see what happen.
Before and after the test we can ask the attacker if he is angry, and if he was angry during the attack. thats all we can do.