PDA

View Full Version : New sport idea: Debate-jutsu



Pages : [1] 2

Hedgehogey
9/22/2004 5:59pm,
Not a play on words, just a contraction of "Debate brazilian jiujitsu". Inspired by chess.

There are two fighters in Gis, one ref to score the grappling, and a panel of debate team judges.

The competitors may win by:

1: Tapout, towel thrown in, etc.

2: All judges agreeing that the debate has been won.

Points are awarded for positioning and forcing your opponent to concede points. No debate is allowed during breaks.

Debate topics are chosen a few days in advance, either randomly, or with one competitor choosing the category and the other the individual question, then a coin for for and against.

Up to five minute overtime. If that is exceeded, the ref and judges combine their scores to choose a winner.

Traditional Tom
9/22/2004 6:00pm,
I'm sure theres a good reason it hasn't been marketed yet.

WalkOn
9/22/2004 6:08pm,
The only possible flaw I can see here is the pure jiu-jitsu angle. Would a Vale Tudo debate be possible?

The idea of being able beat someone's face into a mealy red pulp AND shoving my left wing rhetoric down their throat at the same time... that's the kind of stuff dreams are made of.

Little Idea
9/22/2004 6:26pm,
http://www.chessboxing.com/

disciple
9/22/2004 6:31pm,
How do we make this thread go away?

WalkOn
9/22/2004 7:02pm,
By clicking on another one.

PizDoff
9/22/2004 7:23pm,
I normally like to carry on a conversation while rolling.

Traditional Tom
9/22/2004 8:17pm,
Who is that in your avatar Piz?

Hedgehogey
9/22/2004 8:24pm,
Originally posted by WalkOn
The only possible flaw I can see here is the pure jiu-jitsu angle. Would a Vale Tudo debate be possible?

The idea of being able beat someone's face into a mealy red pulp AND shoving my left wing rhetoric down their throat at the same time... that's the kind of stuff dreams are made of.

Well I chose jiujitsu because of it's relatively slow pace. Trying to talk with a mouthpiece on would be impractical.

fouls:

1: Stalling, neither making a point nor attempting a technique

2: Failing to address opponent's points

3: Godwin's law applies

4: No dirty tactics: ad hominem attacks, comparing opponent to hitler, appeals to authority or other fallacies, biting, gouging eyes, or attacking the groin

5: God's existence is not allowed as a subject for debate.

6: Competitors may not use a smother or crossface to attempt to silence the opponent. Chokes and non smothering crossfaces are still legal.

7: Corners may only offer advice on grappling. They may not offer debating advice, with the exception of dictionary definitions. Debate is not allowed between rounds.

OneWingedAngel
9/22/2004 9:11pm,
I kinda like this idea, though I realize that it will never work. Though I must say, I do love these rules;


Originally posted by hedgehogey
1: Stalling, neither making a point nor attempting a technique

4: No dirty tactics: ad hominem attacks, comparing opponent to hitler, appeals to authority or other fallacies, biting, gouging eyes, or attacking the groin

No comparing opponent to Hitler; damn, there goes my entire debate plan.

Shuma-Gorath
9/22/2004 9:14pm,
I believe debate would be encouraged by implementing some Judo rules.


-Red herring fallacy or gross fallacy of composition may be used to set up a submission by taking advantage of the opponent's brief moment of incredulousness. Failure to submit the opponent before he is able to excalim "What the **** does that have to do with anything" or some equivalent results in a Shido penalty.

-The contestant may win by pinning the opponent in the indefensible position. If the opponent remains in this position for 25 seconds the judge will award an Ippon.

-If the opponent does not score an Ippon via throw, upon landing they may initiate any combination of arguments in an effort to defeat the opponent. If no point is made within 25 seconds or the opponent manages to stand up, the argument must be restarted from a standing position.

Hedgehogey
9/22/2004 9:19pm,
The first one would make Tai-Gip a debate master. We don't want that.

The second one is implied in the rules.

Smirking and saying "silly stylists." will be grounds for immediate disqualification.

Shuma-Gorath
9/22/2004 9:37pm,
tai-gip would be unable to realistically compete due to another rule:



The contestant is prohibitted from making a baseless conjecture. This will be considered a false attack and will result in a Shido penalty.


He'd give up the Hansokou-make in a heartbeat with his FTL punching and "make it real in your reality" crap.

Moving on:

-The contestant is not allowed to apply debate of foul tactics as a counter to a technique. Claiming that a foul tactic is capable of stopping a throw/takedown or reversing position will not only freely award the dominant position to the opponent but will also start the countdown for the indefensible position.

Hedgehogey
9/22/2004 9:57pm,
Straying off topic or attempting to debate by criticizing opponent's spelling will incur a penalty. If pronunciation help is needed, it will be provided by the referees.

Crying, acting as if your world has been shattered, or other such sympathy tactics to stop the opponent from debating are prohibited.

If a contestant attempts to draw the opponent into contradicting themselves, he has a maximum of forty five seconds in which he can force his opponent to continue by saying "Please explain ___". If he does not start his dissection of his opponent's hypocrisy within that time he will incur a penalty.

Attempting to close the opponent's mouth in order to stop their speaking will incur a penalty.

A contestant may concede a point in order to keep from being trapped in an indefensible position.

Appeals to the wisdom of a deity will incur a penalty.

Slams are allowed, but not on the head, since the opponent's brain will be too rattled to debate. Contestants may apply jerking motions such as rapid tugs on the collars, but they will be told to stop if it is determined that such a motion will rattle the opponent's brain, rendering them unable to debate. Repeated rattling after warning will result in penalty or disqualification.

Arguing that all knowledge is relative anyway(such as the use of postmodernist moral relativism) will start the countdown for indefensible position.

Shuma-Gorath
9/22/2004 10:17pm,
Contestants will be allowed to move up in weight class if they exceed the mean IQ for the desired class by at least ten points.

Use of verbally-pronounced internet slang ("lol", "noob", etc), if determined to be non-sarcastic by the judges (even in split decision) will result in a two-minute stoppage of activity where the offending contestant must kneel in the centre of the ring and accept assault with a 24, administered by the referee.

Recitation or citation of a large passage of text or other source without any relevant use of the material contained in the given article will result in a penalty. Repeated infractions will result in the contestant's disqualification at the discretion of the judges. The opponent is, of course, allowed and encouraged to attack the credibility of the source. In severe cases (Michael Moore, Ann Coulter, Fox News, etc) the opponent will be awarded a Yuko for smirking and repeating the name of the source with sarcastic intonnation and rolling of the eyes.

Shuma-Gorath
9/22/2004 10:51pm,
The contestant may interrupt any long argument by the opponent via heckling or a sufficiently tight strangulation technique. Heckling deemed non-sequitor or excessively frequent will result in a penalty and start the countdown for the indefensible position.