[flingha]

I know both power and speed are important, but if a person with speed fights another person with the same technique level but slower and stronger, who would most-likely win?

[Gatorade]

I rather have power cause one punch can end the fight by K.O But Speed very important take Manny Pacquiao for example that man ain't human when he's throwing punches, his last fight was against a power hitter Miguel Cotto, Manny was faster and accurate with his punches and had Cotto guessing after the fight cotto was interview and said he couldn't see Manny punches.

[stuart]

Id say speed- their more likely to land the punches. And even without power a punch in the face is still a punch in the face, at the end of the day it still hurts some.

But if the power person happens to get in a luckier punch... Goodnight.

[Toxic]

Precision

Most important part of any attack.

[KrazyWelshLad]

What toxic said tbh

Doesnt matter how fast or strong your punches are if they aint hitting the target they are useless

[Toxic]

I had a rant brewing about this actually, specifically in terms of punching attributes. Maybe I'll type it up when my computer's not constantly freezing.

[Cromwell]

I find it interesting everyone assumes the question is about punches. I read it to be about overall attributes.

Anyway, this question is like asking, "Which is better: a hammer or a screwdriver?" Obviously, the answer depends on the situation, the job, what you intend to do, etc. It also depends on the person.

A very small person should not rely on power. At best, his power will be only on par with an average opponent. Similarly, a naturally powerful person need not focus much on power, as it will be present in whatever he does.

Speed is naturally suited more to a smaller person in most cases. Really, I see power and speed as being in many ways inversely correlated--when one goes up, the other goes down.

In the end, I have to say that efficiency and technique play the most important role and vary from person to person and situation to situation. Efficiency is important, because you want to use what you have in the simplest, most direct way to achieve your goal with the least possible effort on your part. Technique plays a significant role in achieving such efficiency. It allows you to practice such that your actions and reactions are very efficient, capitalizing even on momentum, gravity, etc. Moreover, if you're like me, you don't want to spend all this time training and learning in your youth only to find it mostly useless when you're old and decrepit. Therefore, efficiency and technique are, again, the most important to my mind. Even as your speed and power decline with age, the aforementioned emphasis on efficiency and technique will still leave you making the most of what you have, likely allowing you to overcome a younger, more fit attacker.

Cromwell

[Toxic]

I broke it down to punching simply because it's the simplest example, but I did state "any attack."

And I'm afraid I have to disagree completely with the inversely proportional idea as, though they do seem to be separate concepts, the two have quite the overlap with each other, sort of like a venn diagram.

This isn't Dragonball Z where getting more muscles means you're going to be slower. Human bodies work via muscle fibers which individuals have varying amounts of. Because this is a measurement of amount, as opposed to a general concept of density, it doesn't suddenly become an issue of being weighed down but actually contribute both to speed AND strength naturally.

[Cromwell]

Originally Posted by Toxic

I'm afraid I have to disagree completely with the inversely proportional idea as, though they do seem to be separate concepts, the two have quite the overlap with each other, sort of like a venn diagram.

You'll note I said, "in many ways". I agree there is significant overlap, but I think that overlap comes mostly into play with a fighter using proper technique. If you are not generating the speed or power with technique, then I contend that the inversely proportional relationship tends to hold. Technique failing, power often means winding up and following strongly through with a big grunt!...lol And, again, technique failing, speed often means nearly worthless tapping, loss of balance, tiring oneself substantially, etc.

Regarding the Venn diagram, that is not a reference one often encounters. May I ask how/why you are acquainted with it? My guess would be Philosophy, but I suppose one might encounter it in any field dealing with logic. In my case, Philosophy would be the answer...=)

Cromwell

[Toxic]

Ok, I understand the whole point when subtracting the idea of technique. The overlap is there, but there are times, especially once noted by instructors when they say things like "Hit the pad harder, not faster." If we take out the idea of technique, then I can see the whole inverse proportion being more prevalent.

I used venn diagram which may not be 100% accurate but provided a certain visual that most people understand.
Like how someone can throw a punch faster, but not stronger, and how someone can throw a punch strong, but not particularly fast. And despite that comparison, it doesn't immediately mean that a punch can't have neither/both.