How many 5 year-olds.....

[Cubswin]

How many 5 year-old ninjas?

[Cancuk]

[ QUOTE ]
How many 5 year-old ninjas?

[/ QUOTE ]

15 - 20. How long have they been honing their Ninja skills?

[ApeAttack]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I think this question is way more interesting if the kids aren't trained. Then you could take on a ton.

-Michael

[/ QUOTE ]

naw, without training it would be to easy, it would basically last until you ran out of stregnth from dropping them like flies.

[/ QUOTE ]

You guys aren't really thinking about how little training a 5-year old can retain and utilize.

[ThePost]

Does the number go up with additional motivation?

[yeehaa]

Can I opt to have the same training as the kids instead?

For a start if you trained in defense only you're already at a disadvantage. Taking the exact same training they took would do the following.

1) You'd know exactly what to expect.
2) You'd be the aggressor rather then the other way around.

These two are significant advantages over the 5 year olds. A few reasons, the most of which is sheer strength. There is no doubt about it, you will be stronger then a 5 year old.

Not to mention even in an organized circular assault from toddlers, there is only so many that can get to you at one point. And that is probably less then 10. The rest of the time they are pushing and shoving to get to you.

These mindless, fearless kids attacking you are still weak in structure, let me explain.

My first few seconds on battle.

Grab the closest kid and snap his arms like twigs. Grab the next kid do the same. By this time the kids are probably all around you. This is when you start picking them up and hurling them at the other kids. I mean really tossing them.
You would easily start just punting them away from you.

If it starts to get too much I'd make my way over to a wall by just up and charging, stomping the kids along the way. Now they can't get to me from all angles.

My number - 40 if it's defensive trained, 80 if it's the same training as the kids took. Knowing what to expect is by far the biggest advantage in any fight.

According to the "Percentiles" what doctors use to chart the averages for all kids.

5 year old male will be 3'7"(50%) tall, and be 41lbs (52%)

[ChuckyB]

My one star came from posting a similar thread a while back.

DOUBLE STANDARD!!!

[Uncle_Billy]

Awesome thread.

My wife, a kindergarten teacher surrounded by 5 year olds on a daily basis, thinks 15, for a healthy young man to take on. She gives herself 8-10 before she goes down.

Her argument is that when they surround her to hug her, she's already knocked off balance. Change these kids into little fighters out for blood, and she thinks one would go down pretty quickly. Then if they start kicking your head / suffocating you, you'll be done pretty quick.

I'm thinking slightly higher: 20-25 - mainly because I can keep my distance and take out several before they close and take me down.

[BigPoppa]

The guys saying triple digits/infinite are idiots:


You start out essentially surrounded.
They come at you from all sides while you can only strike one at a time.
You can't run around, as some have suggested you do, because you run into a solid wall of the little [censored] everywhere you turn.
Eventually, they grab onto your legs and start biting.
Then it's only a matter of time.
You punch one kid loose and he's immediately replaced by another.
Then a couple grab an arm and start biting it.
Then you go down to the ground.
Then you die.

[DBSpecial]

Stamina would be the limiting factor. Fighting is incredibly tiring and you'd be running around a small area at top speed. Throw in the constant punching/kicking/biting/gouging. Finally you've got many kids grappling/impeding you - they don't hurt much but they'd tire you.

There's no way an average person could beat a hundred or more kids, and even less for the 'average' OOT nerd.

[Klompy]

I bet I can take about 20, and I'm larger and stronger then the average 2+2er. It would be hard to move any limbs with a ton of kids hanging all over you.