gwern comments on Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality discussion thread, part 5 - Less Wrong

6 Post author: NihilCredo 02 November 2010 06:57PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Article Navigation

Comments (648)
Tags: harry potter hpmor fiction fanfiction discussion harry_potter

Comments (648)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: gwern 14 November 2010 09:34:13PM 0 points [-]

Being a relatively weak move doesn't preclude it being effective against an opponent incapacitated by both fatigue and rules that preclude all the most appropriate responses.

I think you're equivocating on 'weak' and 'strong'. Your first comment clearly was using it in a sense of physical or mechanical force measure, which struck me as deeply implausible given the length of the leg-lever and the long time period in which one can power up a roundhouse kick, and given my own personal experiences with being kicked in the head. But now you seem to be using it in some sort of strategic or game-theoretic sense and claiming a roundhouse to the head is dominated by other moves in most situations.

Comment author: wedrifid 14 November 2010 10:17:17PM *  1 point [-]

I think you're equivocating on 'weak' and 'strong'.

On that you are mistaken (and there is nothing that I have said that implies such meaning). Of course, I did also discuss strategic relevance - because that was the whole point of the analogy.

which struck me as deeply implausible given the length of the leg-lever and the long time period in which one can power up a roundhouse kick

You appear to be leaving off the to the head part, which is precisely what ensures that the move is not a strong one. I am surprised that this is even remotely controversial, particularly among those who profess personal expertise. Every instructor I have trained under has taken care to point out how much power is lost when trying to kick so high and I have no particular qualms in suggesting that if you have been advised to the contrary you need a better instructor.

and given my own personal experiences with being kicked in the head.

I refrained from mentioning my own experience being kicked in the head because I didn't consider it particularly strong evidence. I had a saw jaw for days after I won that bout. I'm lucky he didn't hit me in the head with a solid punch instead, I would quite probably have been hospitalised or worse!

Comment author: gwern 16 November 2010 10:47:10PM 0 points [-]

I am surprised that this is even remotely controversial, particularly among those who profess personal expertise. Every instructor I have trained under has taken care to point out how much power is lost when trying to kick so high and I have no particular qualms in suggesting that if you have been advised to the contrary you need a better instructor.

I think we have gone as far as we can here, and there's no point discussing it further without citations.

Comment author: wedrifid 16 November 2010 11:45:34PM 0 points [-]

I think we have gone as far as we can here,

That had been my conclusion.

and there's no point discussing it further without citations.

But now that you mention it, I took a glance at the old faithful reference. Brief, but it seems well balanced. This part in particular seemed spot on:

On the other hand, the high kicks practised in traditional martial arts or the flying/jumping kicks performed in synthesis styles are primarily performed for conditioning or aesthetic reasons.

Buyer beware.

Powered by Reddit Powered by Reddit