Show Entries

How many 5 year olds can you take on?
Entered on: April 15, 2005 11:28 AM by Ross
This is so fucking funny, I can barely stand it. Bone, I can't wait for your analysis. Fatty and I are somewhere in the neighborhood of 20-30. Read here for the specifics:

NEWS 277 - 23 Comments
From: The Bone Entered on: April 15, 2005 11:47 AM
Wow, this is interesting, I'm about to leave for work so I'll have to discuss a little later. Man, that shit would be fun.
From: Jackzilla Entered on: April 15, 2005 12:29 PM
I gave this some thought during lunch. I'm still working on the numbers but I know the technique I would use. The setup -- dropped dead center and surrounded with randomly placed enemies -- sounds very much like the old arcade videogame Robotron. Hence, I dub my strategy...  
The Robotron Technique: First, you'd want to immediately strike down the nearest 5-year-olds (you want to get their numbers down FAST). Quickly work yourself via the path of least resistance to the outer perimeter of the room (so you can protect your back). Then follow an orbiting pattern around the room -- all the while taking down the kids as they approach. Keep moving! Also, if possible, grab a kid by the foot and using him as a weapon strike down other kids. If too many swarm at once, be sure to push the front kid knocking down the rest like bowling pins.  
That's all I got. Hmmm... 30 kids is probably tops for me too.
From: The Bone Entered on: April 16, 2005 12:46 AM
I agree with Jack's strategy. You would want to make an initial charge to the perimeter to so you can get your back to the wall and limit avenues of attack. Also, it is very important to continuously change direction of your attack to keep the kids off guard and hesitant. Maneuver is your ally in this case because the minute you get bogged down by a large group, it's over. Your ability to maneuver is directly related to strength and conditioning (endurance).  
Let?s take a look at the adversary. One day of training would be insufficient for them to be able to deal with my discombobulating devastating style. Also, you have to assume that the retention of a 5 yr old is limited. As a side note, there isn't any realistic way you could motivate them to continue with a coordinated attack once the bloodshed began. However, for the sake of argument we'll say they've been hypnotized or somehow brainwashed. The average weight of a 5 yr old is somewhere in the 40 - 50 lbs area - a huge disadvantage in one on one against my 208 lbs. An additional consideration is the strength to weight ratio. I am far, far stronger proportionally than any 5 yr old. Finally, the mental capacity for combat strategy and execution is limited in a 5 yr old. Although limited individually, the 5 yr olds have sheer numbers as their greatest weapon. So the question is how many would it take for the advantage to swing in their favor.  
The dimension of a regulation NBA basketball court is 94' by 50' resulting in a 4700 sq ft area. Assuming each 5 yr old occupies a space of 4 sq ft, you could fit 1175 kids in the space with 100 percent occupancy. Since maneuver and conditioning are key to your success, you will need to figure out the maximum number of kids you could maneuver around and how long you could keep it up.  
Thirty kids take up approximately 3 percent of the surface area of the arena. Plenty of room to maneuver. I estimate that you would need at least at least 70 percent of the arena clear to allow room to maneuver. That equates to about 300 kids. This number however is too large to deal with based on my level of physical condition and endurance. I think 40 to 50 kids would be about the most I could handle before exhaustion sets in.  
As for strategy; assuming the start position for the scenario is you in the center surrounded by a ring of kids. I would plow though making my way to a corner. Several kids would be taken out in the initial charge. I would wait for the first couple of kids to reach me and take them out immediately as they are probably the quickest and most dangerous. Next I?d run to the nearest corner while taking out kids that are trying to close off my avenue of escape. I would continue around the room in this fashion until I had them down to a small enough number, say 10, then I?d start hunting them down.  
Kicks should be used as a last resort as they will slow your movement and render you susceptible to being captured and bogged down. Punches would be most effective but you would eventually break knuckles on kid?s skulls. I?d use a combination of open palm slap and punches as necessary. You wouldn?t necessarily need to knock the kid out or kill him right away, just a mission kill so he is no longer a factor as you make your way around the room. Swinging a kid would wear you out sooner and slow you down. Not a good idea. My final answer is the 40 ? 50 mark although obviously it doesn?t factor in tripping or some other mistake in execution. This would be fun as hell to try.  

From: The Bone Entered on: April 15, 2005 11:09 PM
Also, I ran this scenario through the class I was eaching today. At the end of my lecture on Diesel submarine search tactics, I explained the scenario of the 5 yr olds to the class and let them generate their answers. The room was divided into 10 - 12 kids or in the hundreds.  
I actually drew out a basketball court on the dry erase board and diagramed the entire scenario as I saw it. They were finally convinced I had come up with a great strategy.  
If you can imagine a group of Naval officers in a room talking about the scenario with the same seriousness that they had previously exhibited in the Diesel scenario, you would have shit yourself laughing.
From: Jackzilla Entered on: April 15, 2005 11:17 PM
I agree with Bone's execution and take back my idea of swinging one of the kids as a makeshift weapon. Indeed, that would tire you out more than it would be worth. "Open palm slaps and punches" is definately the way to go. It would be crucial to get their numbers down fast. No lollygaggin' or the young mob will drag you down.  
Also, fast and constant moving to new areas of the arena would be crucial. You wouldn't want to get hung up on or trip over the piles of tiny bodies that will inevitably stack up.  
Lastly, I would add a constant stream of screamed obsceneties to the mix. I know if I were a 5 year old, I would find that particularly unnerving. It's bound to lessen the effectiveness of a little one's style.  
Upwards of 50 kids, Bone? Impressive.
From: The Bone Entered on: April 15, 2005 11:49 PM
Well my condition and strength right now is pretty fucking good. I have been boxing and kickboxing for almost a year now.
From: Ross Entered on: April 16, 2005 12:30 AM
Bone --  
Will, Heather and I have been laughing our asses off reading this. This is quite possibly the funniest thing I've read on JA in over a year. I can't wait till I am of more sound mind to add my comments - needless to say your analysis is amazing and I cannot argue with it at all. I can't wait to report to the people who told me about this that Navy guys were discussing this as a serious tactical scenario. Priceless!!  
One thing I will say, even drunk, is that the morons in your class thinking that they could take on 100 fivers are fucking insane. Who would think such a thing? They're not even paying attention, aware of the basics of humanity, to purport such absurdities.
From: The Bone Entered on: April 16, 2005 12:41 AM
Yeah, they were the enlisted guys. Generally not regarded for their tactical savvy.
From: Ross Entered on: April 19, 2005 1:05 PM
I would like to add to this discussion by noting that the number you could take on would increase greatly if you could either refine your techniques through practice, or even by watching other people go first. It's largely a psychological experiment, I think, too, because no one really knows beforehand how the little ones are going to react "once the bloodshed begins" as Bone puts it.  
I agree, I would love to test this!
From: BigFatty Entered on: April 19, 2005 3:02 PM
Maybe the test sounds fun, unless you miscalculate the critical mass of 5 year-olds you can handle by one. They end up beating you up. Their little tennis shoe's soles lighting up each time they kick you in the head. The ensuing shame you'd have to bare, explaining to people about your condition - I got beat up by a bunch of 5 year-olds.
From: Jackzilla Entered on: April 19, 2005 3:45 PM
HA HA HA! (re: "their little tennis shoes lighting up")
From: Ross Entered on: April 19, 2005 3:45 PM
I fully expect that I'd get beat up if I miscalculated. Therefore, if I had an infinite supply of faceless fivers, I'd start small and gradually increase the numbers, maybe fighting once a day to keep strong. This could be a whole new sport.
From: The Bone Entered on: April 19, 2005 4:42 PM
I saw Kristen's 7 yr old niece and her little 7 yr old buddy. Based on that, I'd be whuppin up on some 5 yr olds. They are pretty uncoordinated. I'd be movin around causing them to crash into each other. They aren't going to be as smooth as a swarm of bees.
From: Ross Entered on: December 14, 2007 10:13 AM

This is crazy - I was discussing this thread with people at work yesterday, and lo and behold by total coincidence, this site shows up on

From: NickNick Entered on: December 14, 2007 10:25 AM

Wow, it won't even let me on the site.  I still hold by my earlier estimate that an even 5 could take me down.  Now remember, we're not talking about your normal 5 year olds.  We're talking about 5 year old killers that are willing to bite and claw.  They're willing to put themselves in situation that might hurt themselves in order to take you on.

 Maybe I'm underestimating, but I think 5 could do it.  Definitely 10.

From: Jackzilla Entered on: December 14, 2007 10:46 AM

This topic is classic JA.

I still laugh at the mental image of 5-year-olds kicking someone that's down and their little shoes lighting up.

From: NickNick Entered on: December 14, 2007 11:09 AM
And don't forget the girls pig tails bouncing all around.  Hey, Hunter will be 5 in one more year.  Maybe I should train her to be lethal killer and we can put this to the test.
From: Radmobile Entered on: December 14, 2007 2:53 PM
Well, I could take 16 apparently.
From: Ross Entered on: December 14, 2007 5:00 PM

 Their analysis is flawed and comes nowhere near Bone-level mastery, but it's fun nonetheless.  They give me 20 which is about what I figured in the first place.

From: BigFatty Entered on: December 14, 2007 5:09 PM
I can take up to 22-24 (I did not like being lumped into the 36-55 year olds!).  I think I got extra fivers because of my height (Tall) and having Long reach.  I expect Bone's to max the chart out....
From: The Bone Entered on: December 14, 2007 8:50 PM
I scored 33. Not unreasonable. I think I could do better on game day though. I think I have enough one punch knockout power to run and gun to stay alive. What a great topic.
From: Heather Entered on: December 15, 2007 10:55 AM
I can take 15.  What does this say about Rad? 
From: NickNick Entered on: December 17, 2007 8:35 AM
Wow.... I can only take 12.  That site is rather optimistic I think.

[Log In to Add Comment]

a division of

© 2003 Ross Johnson
RSS Feed