Join 3,524 readers in helping fund MetaFilter (Hide)


Round One... Fight!
March 22, 2005 7:05 PM   Subscribe

Pop Quiz Hotshot: You're in the middle of an arena. You're being attacked by 5 year olds who will stop at nothing to kill you. How many can you take on before they overcome you? (from twobytwo forums)
posted by Arch Stanton (122 comments total) 44 users marked this as a favorite

 
Not having testicles improves your chances of survival infinitely.

That being said, I think I could take down a lot more if I got to choose the 5 year olds. Run up and down the aisle during my 6 hour flight, eh? Punch in the throat for you, skippy.
posted by unsupervised at 7:12 PM on March 22, 2005 [1 favorite]


I love how this has spread around. This is good shite...

I have a low pain threshold, so I would say 15 - and since the rules don't stipulate, I will be wearing headphones playing G'n'R so I can get really fired up.
posted by Quartermass at 7:14 PM on March 22, 2005


I'd just tell them about the time I told my cow a joke, and she laughed so hard milk came out her nose.
That'd knock out any five-year-old.
Taking this seriously is more than a bit sick.
posted by weapons-grade pandemonium at 7:16 PM on March 22, 2005


A sick little exercise, but really they are just 5 and you could take on a number limited solely by your energy to keep knocking them out. Mind you, you will probably kill half of them.
posted by caddis at 7:21 PM on March 22, 2005


This is what distinguishes us from the enemy.
posted by weapons-grade pandemonium at 7:23 PM on March 22, 2005


This is sort of like a dead baby joke.

What is grosser than a barrel full of dead babies? A live one at the bottom eating its way out.
posted by caddis at 7:23 PM on March 22, 2005


As the father of a 70 lb five year old whose roundhouse right lines up perfectly with the family jewels, I applaud the wisdom of supplying me with a cup in this exercise. For a few weeks there I considered wearing one around the house.

My magic number is about 30. I agree with the idea that their training is going to focus on bringing you down, and once you're down, you're dead meat.
posted by stupidsexyFlanders at 7:25 PM on March 22, 2005


It all depends on the first one, if you can incapacitate that one, you could then pick them up and use them as a club.
Using a 5 year-old like a warhammer would be key. I say 30, maybe 40 before i fall to the little devils.
posted by schyler523 at 7:30 PM on March 22, 2005


I think around 15. If they really weigh 70 pounds, I wouldn't be able to use one as a club, so that's out. Can you imagine, though, if 10 or 12 of them came running as fast as they could at your legs? They'd surely knock you down, and then you'd be toast.
posted by goatdog at 7:45 PM on March 22, 2005


I've seen pictures of some MeFi meet-ups, and I'm thinking the average here would be about 4. Not saying most couldn't kick ass and take out a good 30 of the little bastards, but I'm talking AVERAGE.

That said, using what I call the Schyler523 technique, I think I could take on a good 80-90.
posted by Doug at 7:45 PM on March 22, 2005


This is what distinguishes us from the enemy.

A total lack of humor?
posted by eyeballkid at 7:48 PM on March 22, 2005


I propose renaming said technique to WhirlyBird.
After Doug's comment, i'm afraid i've sold myself short...revise to 50-60.
posted by schyler523 at 7:49 PM on March 22, 2005


Man, no way to they have an attention span long enough to stay focused on task. They'd start fighting with each other, pick their nose or start bawling once you "got their nose."
posted by DonnieSticks at 7:50 PM on March 22, 2005


8 tops. You've only got two legs and unless you're huge, you've got to figure it can only take 4 of the 70lb critters to take one out (280lbs*however fast a 5 year old can run, all impacting your knee in the direction it's meant to bend). While you're preoccupied with preventing 4 of them from unbalancing leg #1, the other 4 get leg #2.
posted by juv3nal at 7:51 PM on March 22, 2005


There is no way anybody short of a football player is gonna grab a 70lb deadweight (figuratively speaking, simmer down) and just swing it around like a baseball bat. And even workout freaks are gonna get tired pretty quick, if the kids just chill a while you'll tire yourself out just holding up the unconscious kid in a ready to swing position.

I just realized how odd it is to qualify the "deadweight" comment the way I did in the context of this discussion.
posted by oddman at 8:08 PM on March 22, 2005


My magic number is 3.
(I'm pretty big - 6', 250lbs, and I've been taken down by 4 5 year olds with NO shots to the jumblies.)

My favorite is, "how many kittens would it take to bring you down." Magic number: 100 (or maybe it's just my mad desire to be buried in kittens)
posted by zerokey at 8:11 PM on March 22, 2005


This hypothetical would be a lot cooler if I could have a baseball bat and/or a hatchet.
posted by Kwantsar at 8:12 PM on March 22, 2005


or a chainsawy (F8).
posted by caddis at 8:15 PM on March 22, 2005


But what if Spider-man was wearing a kryptonite suit? Who would win then?
posted by yhbc at 8:15 PM on March 22, 2005


chainsawy?

Jeeez! That was embarrassing.
posted by caddis at 8:15 PM on March 22, 2005


I don't know what kind of crack you guys are smoking, but the average 5-year-old boy weighs less than 30 pounds. Totally swingable. Don't know where this 70-lbs thing came from, but stupidsexyFlanders, if your kid really weighs 70 lbs. and is 5, it's time to see a doctor, if you haven't already.

Growth curves
posted by LittleMissCranky at 8:18 PM on March 22, 2005


See a doctor? Pffft. See Montel!
posted by graventy at 8:22 PM on March 22, 2005


Don't forget these creatures pack a fearsome bite. I'd say twenty to twenty-five.
posted by rotifer at 8:24 PM on March 22, 2005


Oh, and 60. Then I'd get tired.
posted by LittleMissCranky at 8:24 PM on March 22, 2005


the average 5-year-old boy weighs less than 30 pounds.

Huh? I would think 50-60 by that age.
posted by clevershark at 8:24 PM on March 22, 2005


See the link, baby.
posted by LittleMissCranky at 8:26 PM on March 22, 2005


Rrrrark . . .except it should say under 40 lbs. Sometimes my sausage fingers get in the way.
posted by LittleMissCranky at 8:29 PM on March 22, 2005


i'd bring a chainsaw then i could take 50 or so...
posted by Elim at 8:38 PM on March 22, 2005


I don't know, man. Five-year olds are wily.

If you could manage to break off some Whirlybird action with the first kid, you'd likely clear out a circular area roughly ten feet in diameter. Assuming that the kids weren't coming in successive waves, you could then throw your child-club at the strongest kid (i.e. the one who gets up the quickest) and proceed to stompin' on the ones that remain on the ground.

Still, pulling off that first move is crucial. You fuck that up, kiss your ass goodbye. And then you're that guy who tried to beat up a bunch of five-year-olds and got owned.
posted by Tullius at 8:41 PM on March 22, 2005 [1 favorite]


If they really weigh 70 pounds, I wouldn't be able to use one as a club, so that's out

Who says you have to swing the whole kid? Just a leg would be a good club. If you swing a whole kid by the arm and get a few good hits in, odds are you'd be left holding just an arm (and maybe a nice bit of shoulder to use as a mace-head) anyhows.

Geez, people, gotta think outside the box here.
posted by ROU_Xenophobe at 8:46 PM on March 22, 2005


Once you knock out a few of them, you could build a sort of bunker or something I like to call Lil' Guy Igloo(tm) out of the bodies to defend against the remaining horde. I think creative use of the bodies is essential after the first 10 or so.
posted by nomad at 8:48 PM on March 22, 2005


And then you're that guy who tried to beat up a bunch of five-year-olds and got owned.

*hangs head in shame*
posted by Stauf at 8:55 PM on March 22, 2005


It really depends on if you could lead 'em around into one of those soccer mobs. People keep saying you'd get tired, but if you were in decent shape at all you could out-endure a crowd of five-year-olds. Then you could circle around and pick off stragglers at leisure.

I think I could take a lot more 5-year-olds than I could cats.
posted by furiousthought at 8:56 PM on March 22, 2005


Zerokey, the kitten thing really made me laugh.

As to the 5 year olds, I think the key would be getting in a good stance, and crouching low enough that you can hit their heads hard as they come at you.
posted by deafmute at 9:07 PM on March 22, 2005


You can Herd People, I imagine you can herd 5 yr old people too.
I want heavy boots. ! real heavy steel toed, then I could take 40 or so, sans chain-saw
posted by Elim at 9:07 PM on March 22, 2005


ive been watching shows like csi, you know the kind - the ones where good looking tanned people investigate the worst most disturbing crimes - and i realized a strange trend.
all the criminals who are involved in the most disgusting acts are all computer / book / comic nerds.
Threads like this remind me why we got this image.

and I would say that the I could take on about 20, assuming that part of my training was a removal of any sense of guilt. You would just have to keep low and keep throwing them over your back as they ran to you.
posted by klik99 at 9:08 PM on March 22, 2005


"As to the 5 year olds, I think the key would be getting in a good stance, and crouching low enough that you can hit their heads hard as they come at you."

Well the problem with a low stance is that you can't swing, but you're in a good position to use their own youthful exuberence against them, Ie toss them as they run at you.
posted by klik99 at 9:10 PM on March 22, 2005


I'm embarrassed at how easy it is for me to think this out. First, there is the stipulation that they must knock you out. How are they going to do that. I guess if they keep biting until you lose enough blood. Even if they get you down on the floor, they are not going to be able to pile on you efficiently enough to stop your breathing. They're not going to be able to hit you hard enough to knock you out.
At that age, they're not going to be able to maintain an organized attack, regardless of a day's worth of training. I think the important factor is just wearing you out, which is time, not number. Even if there's a hundred, it's not like a hundred can be at you at once. It would become the maximum that could make up an attack force and that number being replenished. I think a hundred, easily. But then I'm kind of on the strong side.
posted by dances_with_sneetches at 9:19 PM on March 22, 2005


Once, when I was young,
I carried 10 at once. Now?
Eamondalys fall
posted by eamondaly at 9:24 PM on March 22, 2005


Am I wrong in thinking this is an entirely male exercise?
posted by thefixedstars at 9:32 PM on March 22, 2005


Well the problem with a low stance is that you can't swing, but you're in a good position to use their own youthful exuberence against them, Ie toss them as they run at you.


But it's a perfect position to eat the first one.
How many 5 year olds do you know that wouldn't just -cry- if someone ate the first one? Gotta get all psykulojical n stuff.

deafmute: :) It's something I think WAY too much about!
posted by zerokey at 9:33 PM on March 22, 2005


awesome.

I just had a lengthy conversation with my roomate regarding this. Then I decided that it would be a perfect mefi post. I'm glad I got beat to the punch, this is too great not to be disseminated here.

As for my number I would put it in the area of 70-75. All you really have to do is inflict enough pain to get each to pause thier attack. then a swift kick to the head would put them out.

I briefly considered marching around NativeNazi style (too soon?) and discarded that for running kicks and wicked ninja moves.

Ninja moves are the key.
posted by kou5oku at 9:40 PM on March 22, 2005


*tests zerokey by burying self in kittens...

purrrrrrr.....
posted by schyler523 at 9:40 PM on March 22, 2005


Since the quiz stated I'd be wearing a cup, I think I could take out at lest fifty of the five year olds.
A good shot to the nose or jaw would break either.
Swinging one around by the feet, using the head as a type of mace could take out many of the scoundrels.
After fifty the task would become boring.
posted by flatlander at 9:42 PM on March 22, 2005


I'm more disturbed by the idea of being attacked by a mob of kids than I am at the idea of having to knock them out. What the hell does that say about me?

thefixedstars -- nah. Two X chromosomes here and I'm trying to work this out with physics and psychology.
posted by cmyk at 9:47 PM on March 22, 2005


Snap their little arms in half with use of your foot, then pull their shirt over their head hockey-style so they can't bite you. They'll be left running in circles crashing to the ground.
posted by Mach3avelli at 9:47 PM on March 22, 2005


The linked discussion stipulates that you can have any weapon you want as long as each kid gets the same weapon.

I want a 9mm hand-gun with one clip and a child-safety lock.

:) I could take out an unlimited number of kids in that scenario.
posted by oddman at 9:51 PM on March 22, 2005


OK. I'd say my magic number was 3. More if I was equipped with mirrors and a dog whistle.
posted by thefixedstars at 9:59 PM on March 22, 2005


This shit is so easy.

Bring an X-Box and 12 pack of Mountain Dew (would those be considered "foreign objects since I'm not hitting them with said items?). Put it in the middle of the arena and the little shits will be so rapt that you can sneak up on em' and IF you're ninja-like, you can take them out one at a time without the others noticing.

Either that or the Helecopter routine would work nicely. If you can get one by the ankles and get up a nice head of steam, I think I'd be unstoppable.
posted by KevinSkomsvold at 10:00 PM on March 22, 2005


Am I wrong in thinking this is an entirely male exercise?

Uh, no.
posted by LittleMissCranky at 10:00 PM on March 22, 2005


You don't have to knock them out immediately. You just have to hobble them. The instep or Achilles tendon will do. That stops a good attack from them, you have time.
posted by dances_with_sneetches at 10:01 PM on March 22, 2005


aHA! WEDGIES!!
No 5 year old can withstand the power of the wedgie!

Wedgify 2 at a time until they pass out (using them as a shield in the meantime...you could also slip in a headbutt here and there, but that makes me kind of sad, so I'll just stick to the wedgies, and I'll raise you 40)

schyler523: if only *dreams on*
posted by zerokey at 10:01 PM on March 22, 2005


You have to get their eyes out first. Much less effort than throwing them around. They are just left wandering around the arena and you can pick them off at will. I reckon I could gouge out eyes at the rate of 3 sets a minute easily.
posted by tellurian at 10:02 PM on March 22, 2005


thefixedstars: no.


<groucho>A child of five could understand this. Fetch me a child of five.</groucho>
posted by polyglot at 10:05 PM on March 22, 2005


I don't see 5-year olds as all that durable, so it won't take much more than one, solid kick or punch to the noggin to lay 'em down. I think a great strategy would be to slam their heads together. Just grab one melon in each hand and SMACK! You're eliminating two at a time.
I really see the only limit on the number you could defeat being your own stamina. Only a certain number can attack you at once, so if you can survive that, you can go on until you're just too tired.
posted by PhatLobley at 10:08 PM on March 22, 2005


They may have a day's worth of combat and swarming tactics training, but that won't be enough to turn them into emotionless fighting machines. If I picked one up, swung him/her around airplane-style by an arm and a leg and then hurled the kid at a wall, I think more than a few of them would start to miss their friend.

Make an example out of one of them, and that'll make your job easier.
posted by emelenjr at 10:15 PM on March 22, 2005


The real question is how many could you pork before petering out?

Does a furry suit count as a weapon?

posted by berek at 10:20 PM on March 22, 2005


All this talk of helicoptering kids reminds of the scene from (I think) Bernardo Bertolucci's 1900. [shudder]
posted by tellurian at 10:26 PM on March 22, 2005


If they come from all directions you don't have a chance -- maybe you can take out the two that come at you from the front, but that's it, after that they crowd around your legs and push you down. As soon as you're down they'll probably go for kicks to the head, which is highly debilitating.
posted by clevershark at 10:31 PM on March 22, 2005


how many could you pork before petering out?

I know of only one man with the resources, skills, predilection, and shamelessness necessary to answer this question. Unfortunately, he has to be in court tomorrow morning, so I guess we'll never know.
posted by trondant at 10:32 PM on March 22, 2005


Just a quibble - it's "two PLUS two", not twobytwo - the site is a poker forum, where this one random question has crept in.
posted by jonson at 10:37 PM on March 22, 2005


Indeed, trondant. I'm so cynical I thought the FPP was an oblique reference to the Wacko Jacko trial.
posted by clevershark at 10:37 PM on March 22, 2005


"I briefly considered marching around NativeNazi style (too soon?)"

Apparently, because i just read about that poor deluded kid...school shootings are teh suck.
posted by schyler523 at 10:43 PM on March 22, 2005


MeTa link.
posted by Arch Stanton at 10:54 PM on March 22, 2005


Tried this yesterday. 19.
posted by Hildago at 10:58 PM on March 22, 2005


This website you link to, is it like that proposed DoD "terrorism futures" thing, a covert way to obtain the national zeitgeist to refine torture policy?

"See, Americans have no problem entertaining ideas about killing five year olds, and that "24" episode where Jack Bauer threatens to kill the terrorist's seven year old got great ratings, so I think we can institute this at Gitmo, sir!"
posted by orthogonality at 11:06 PM on March 22, 2005


They may have a day's worth of combat and swarming tactics training, but that won't be enough to turn them into emotionless fighting machines.

The site says:
The kids are motivated enough to not get scared, regardless of the bloodshed. Even the very last one will give it his/her best to take you down.

This is a given of the whole hypothetical scenario.
And any kid who won't get scared regardless of potentially 50+ of his buddies getting bloodied has to bean "emotionless fighting machine. "

I think those of you who think you can take 30+ of them are missing the point: these are by no stretch of the imagination ordinary kids with a day's worth of training.
To be completely unafraid regardless of the degree of carnage takes something quite out of the ordinary.

We're talking demon spawn here, not children.
posted by juv3nal at 11:23 PM on March 22, 2005


It would only take one kid before my uterus tied itself into a knot, leaving me in a pathetic shamble of fear.
posted by idiotfactory at 11:37 PM on March 22, 2005


The most important thing would be to keep moving and make them tired. Also, I wouldn't even bother trying to knock them out or kill them since this is largely unnecessary. The goal would be debilitating attacks: a lot of eye gouging, ear ripping, arm breaking, and knee stompings. Every once and a while, to get your spirits up, a good solid kick to a head.

If you played your cards right, you could probably keep at it for hours and disable several dozen.
posted by nixerman at 12:01 AM on March 23, 2005


I feel like if I moved fast, I could take out enough temporarily that I could move around and knock them out. You know, running around, kicking shins and punching them in the ear, it's pretty easy. They may be pumped but they are 5 and will collapse if they are brought to pain. Also, it is worth considering that their hands are small and can't grip that hard. I don't think using one as a bat would be efficient, it would be easier and faster to just pop each one in the nose. The secret I believe is to keep moving so they can't mob you. I think I could take on quite a few with these guidelines and a cup.

Also: Dead baby joke:
What do you call a baby that's been hit by a truck and crushed like roadkill?




... Breakfast
:D
posted by BlackLeotardFront at 12:13 AM on March 23, 2005


We're talking demon spawn here, not children.
posted by Tenuki at 12:14 AM on March 23, 2005


*thwock* Boot to the head.

Repeat as necessary.
posted by dirtynumbangelboy at 12:15 AM on March 23, 2005


This question is a lot more interesting if you swith it around, I think.

So... how would you train a horde of 5 year olds in order to take down your average college-age guy??
posted by nixerman at 12:45 AM on March 23, 2005


So... how would you train a horde of 5 year olds in order to take down your average college-age guy??

Easy. Arm them with beer (or train them to due a reasonable impression of one).
posted by lacus at 1:06 AM on March 23, 2005


So... how would you train a horde of 5 year olds in order to take down your average college-age guy??


A Clockwork Barney?
posted by zerokey at 1:15 AM on March 23, 2005


Fifty to sixty if I'm allowed to also kill/maim. If I got really really lucky and worked out heavily for months beforehand focusing solely on stamina I could maybe pull off the full hundred to one hundred and twenty (two times my magical number) but it would be fucking hard as hell. It's harder to keep pulling off exactly the right move the more tired you get. In any all-out fight against multiple opponents you will be utterly exhausted after five-ten minutes - I was a long distance runner back when I was 17-18 and constantly getting into fights.

This is strictly for informational purposes relevant to this thread, and I really don't want to come off like I'm bragging (people will shout that I'm doing so no matter what), but I've been in a whole hell of a lot of fights. Some were against people with martial arts training, people with weapons, and some with multiple opponents (I've beaten four opponents of equal or greater height/weight/age simultaneously which is why I know about the five minutes). I have never lost a fight, which is a pretty good thing because some of them sincerely wanted to kill me. In this fuzzy photo from five years back you can make out the 3-layers of 25 stitches scar on my eyebrow where my sister's boyfriend got me with his 6" blade Bowie knife.

There are five ways (that I am aware of) to *easily* kill someone barehanded and dozens of ways to permanently injure a limb (which would incapacitate) that would be pathetically easy to pull off against a five-year-old. Catching punches/kicks from anybody under ten is *INCREDIBLY* easy if you've any reflexes at all (I did it to nearly all of my brother's friends when they were ten - twist the wrist and when their arms are behind their backs you can do whatever you want to them). A simple pull of an arm/leg later you've got them on the ground where a stomp on any sensitive area will do them in for a good while - probably long enough for you to come back and finish them off.

Ground fighting technique will be absolutely critical during this fight because at some point you WILL go down to sheer mass accumulation if for no other reason than the later kids running up the pile of bodies and coming down on you from up high. I'm not so big on the club thing because I can't realistically see it working but it's a cute idea if nothing else. Probably the best tactic would be to take the fight to them rather than waiting for them to come to you en masse - the running/jumping would wear you out MUCH more quickly, but if you jump forward instead of upward with your arms folded over your head and legs tucked in such that you only presented knees/elbows you might be able to take down several at a time that way during the initial clash.

So... how would you train a horde of 5 year olds in order to take down your average college-age guy??

Easy. Train them to act in assigned teams.

Assuming, again, fifty to sixty fearless five-year-olds if the guy stays in one position have twenty concentrate on providing cannon fodder engaging the guy from the front, ten from each side diving and attempting to grab the ankles football player style - and holding on. Additionally, if any of them (once two are on each ankle) can latch onto a wrist for any length of time after the follow through on a punch, it'll make it that much easier for the twenty in front to bowl the guy over via mass. Finally, have the remaining ten of the fifty circle around behind and charge literally head-first at the part of the leg directly behind the knee cap. A solid blow their will cause the leg to buckle.

The guy will go down backwards with his legs folded under him in a very awkward position. After that, it's simply a matter of jumping on him with their legs tucked so that their knees strike the groin, solar plexus, and neck/head (or lower ribcage if he's on his side/back). My younger sister, younger brother and I used to wrestle my (huge) father every single night until I was ten, and one night when I was eight I dropped both knees on his solar plexus - he wound up in a ball gasping and moaning in pain for a good five minutes afterwards.

If the guy moves around - just pile on via diving for ankles as best they can, and try to topple him via sheer mass. If he goes down, jumping with knees technique.
posted by Ryvar at 1:28 AM on March 23, 2005 [3 favorites]


Hee hee. Sorted by recent comments, this thread is just above the one about the school shootings.

Good work, people!

(I guess since it's above, we care more about killing fictional five year olds than real fifteen year olds! Way to go, America!)
posted by orthogonality at 2:24 AM on March 23, 2005


Fearless five-year-olds are the new zombies.
posted by Ryvar at 2:32 AM on March 23, 2005


A colleague of mine just forwarded this to his mum who works in a daycare centre, her reply

"between 5 and 10 at most, they are relentless"
posted by fullerine at 2:36 AM on March 23, 2005


Catching punches/kicks from anybody under ten is *INCREDIBLY* easy if you've any reflexes at all

sure. so you catch two limbs, one with each hand and kick a third kid, while the fourth one rips out the hamstring on your non-kicking leg with his teeth...
posted by juv3nal at 2:47 AM on March 23, 2005


Just to clarify my point from way up there, I'm not saying 70 lbs is typical for this type of warrior. That's just what mine weighs. (Yes, that's off the charts, but he's fine, just very tall, and very dense.)
posted by stupidsexyFlanders at 3:58 AM on March 23, 2005


Hee hee. Sorted by recent comments, this thread is just above the one about the school shootings.

Good work, people!

(I guess since it's above, we care more about killing fictional five year olds than real fifteen year olds! Way to go, America!)
posted by orthogonality at 5:24 AM EST on March 23 [!]


orthogonality:
You are right. We are all unfeeling, soulless monsters. Thank you for pointing out our moral failings.

No, actually, this is just more interesting. I am sad for the real loss of life, but what you're saying is on par with "Don't read and talk about the comics page in the newspaper, just read the stuff about tsunamis and school shootings."


That said, I'm banking on at least 60. If you can grab and crush a trachea, (which isn't hard at all), or as Ryvar said, get ahold of an arm, it's pretty easy to incapacitate.

People, especially children, are much more fragile than most people think. Break someone's pinky finger (by grabbing and jerking) and they will not be able to grasp or make a fist. Try holding your pinky in one hand and see whether you can make a fist. You can't.

A strong snap to the head will knock out any five-year-old, no question.

They will eventually win, because they will keep coming, and you will reach a point of exhaustion.
posted by exlotuseater at 4:39 AM on March 23, 2005


Whoever made this game up - and whomever here thinks that they can handle any number of 5 year olds greater than zero - has never seen the sheer, unbridled, unhuman carnage generated by a sugar-saturated 5 year old in the middle of an outright tantrum orgy.

And it's a well known fact that children under the age of 16 or so aren't made of flesh and bone, but indestructible rubber. When content they bounce off of concrete like four-square balls.

Plus, the volume of space 5 year olds occupy and the average index of violence associated with them increases exponentially with each additional 5 year old.

With judicious and conservative calculations, 30 sugar-saturated 5 year olds can occupy a volume equal to that of a major sports stadium, and has an energy potential equal to or greater than a 25 megaton thermonuclear device.

You have no chance; Make your time.

5 year olds taken down = zero.
posted by loquacious at 5:04 AM on March 23, 2005


Ooh, I forgot the tantrum/sugar angle. I still say I could take 3, if I could bring my Bop-It.
posted by LittleMissCranky at 6:17 AM on March 23, 2005


see the link, baby.

LittleMissCranky, The average range for kilos is 15 to 22 or so. The pound range for a 5-year old is mid-30's to mid 50's
posted by jalexei at 6:31 AM on March 23, 2005


(though I missed your "40 pound" update, which is much more ballpark...)
posted by jalexei at 7:13 AM on March 23, 2005


Well, I'm a sucker for kids. If one of them walked up to me and said "Papercake, I love you" or something equally heart-warming I'd bend down to hug the kid and then WHAMMO! they'd take me out. So, I'm going to have to go with zero.
posted by papercake at 7:20 AM on March 23, 2005


You woosies! I fancy my chances against 200 or so.
posted by nthdegx at 7:32 AM on March 23, 2005


I think you ought to build a bunker, start heaving them like grenades and eat one to keep your energy up.

I'm just sayin'.
posted by dflemingdotorg at 7:38 AM on March 23, 2005


The number would be limited only by my need for food and sleep.

Assuming there wasn't sleep time or Gatorade and Powerbars, I'd put the number anywhere from 100-200. If I could stop to power up, the number would be limitless.

It would be simple. Nerf bats. Give me a nerf bat and all the kids a nerf bat. I have a nephew who used to pound on me with a nerf bat: these 5 year old kids can swing and hit me all they want with a nerf bat and I won't get hurt. But give me a shot at them with a nerf bat; that kid will go down. I would just focus on disarming the kids and bopping them to injure them. I take away their bats really easily and throw them over a fence or something. Then, when the opportunity presented itself, I give them the knockout shot. It would be easy work limited only by my own exhaustion.

You defintely don't want to punch them. Anyone who has ever been in a fight can tell you that you hurt your hand when you punch someone. So after 20 or so punches to these kids, your fist would be either broken or too sore to use. If you must strike them, I would slap/spank them. Openhanded strikes don't hurt you very much, but it is plenty enough to injure the kid.

I wouldn't do any kicking either. Stomping on one if it is already on the floor would be ok. But not any leg-raising kicks. It would leave you too vulnerable.

And forget swinging a kid. Even at 20 pounds you will get real tired quickly. If they are up to 50 lbs? Not a chance.
posted by dios at 7:39 AM on March 23, 2005


It's too bad you're limited to an arena; my years of Grand Theft Auto research have led me to believe that I can hold off pretty much any number of enemies as long as I stay mobile. If I modified the rules to give myself access to the entire city of Minneapolis, I could chalk up thousands.

And provide some wonderful cinematic moments, like when I lure a bunch of them into the Metrodome and collapse the roof on them...
posted by COBRA! at 7:50 AM on March 23, 2005 [1 favorite]


Pick the biggest one. Knock him down and plant your foot in the center of his chest. Mightily yank both of his arms out of their sockets and free from his torso.
This gives you have several advantages: among them, you have two jointed clubs that are absolutely grisly and horrifying, and you have the terror factor clearly on your side. Any number 5-year-olds that see you rip the arms from a child and begin swinging them will immediately forget any day of training and immediately piss his or her pants. Using this method, I could take 50 kids.

Also, if I could have any weapon that they could have, I would chose a 10 Kilo mace. How many five year olds could even pick one up, eh?

I'm glad we've had this discussion. I'll sleep the smug, satisfied sleep of a man who knows he is safe.
posted by squirrel at 8:36 AM on March 23, 2005 [2 favorites]


COBRA!: Lure a bunch of them? What, like 5 or so? And how're you going to get clear of the resulting 25 megaton blast after you compress them to critical mass?
posted by loquacious at 8:37 AM on March 23, 2005


Oh, also, I would choose healthy Vietnamese kids, who at five tip the scales at about 7 pounds soaking wet.
posted by squirrel at 8:41 AM on March 23, 2005


I think most are forgetting about the fact that the children are relentless and are trained to not get scared. Like demon spawn or vicious zombie children. You can get the first one or two with a solid hit, but if you even slightly miss it's going to be coming back at you. While that is going on, you have two or three coming at you from behind. If you're lucky, I'd say ten, but if you don't get the first two or three and get into a rhythm then I'd say less than five.
posted by Arch Stanton at 8:42 AM on March 23, 2005


COBRA!: Lure a bunch of them? What, like 5 or so?

5? Think big, man. I don't execute the Dome gambit until I've been toying with the little bastards for hours and have a sizable mob of them following me. The way I see it, I drive (I mean, of course I would have picked up a car by now) slow enough to keep the pursuit mob right behind me as I pull into one of the service entrances to the dome. Then, when I've led a bunch of 'em onto the field, I gun the motor, get to 90 before I hit the ramp that I built (oh yeah, I slipped in and built a ramp during some downtime when they thought I was hiding in St. Paul), and my car flies out through the dome, cutting through the Teflon and bringing the whole thing down on the kids.

Then I land and wait a while before I start trying to pick up more of them for the Minnehaha Falls plan.

You do raise a good point with the blast. I may have to look into getting a car beefy enough to withstand it.
posted by COBRA! at 8:45 AM on March 23, 2005


Everyone seems to be forgetting that the first rule of Five Year-old Fight Club is DO NOT TALK ABOUT FIVE YEAR-OLD FIGHT CLUB!

Tyler is going to be sooooo pissed when he sees this thread.
posted by filmgoerjuan at 8:52 AM on March 23, 2005 [1 favorite]


Ha! All I would need to do is take my Oliver out on his leash and harness and I'd have the kids following me like I was the Pied-piper. It happens all the time.
posted by deborah at 9:01 AM on March 23, 2005


On second thought, weapon of choice: gameboy. I could resist playing with mine, but ALL of them would immediately begin playing. Then it's like shooting fish in, well, some kind of small container full of water.
posted by squirrel at 9:17 AM on March 23, 2005


exlotuseater: Try holding your pinky in one hand and see whether you can make a fist. You can't.

Um...I can.

Now where are those five-year-olds?
posted by Katemonkey at 9:25 AM on March 23, 2005


My five year old junior paleontologist could easily take on 100 other 5 year old kids by telling them everything he knows about dinosaurs. This longwinded process would keep them tied up for somewhere in the region of two days allowing me to slip out the back door as he teaches them to correctly pronounce "archaeopteryx".

Myself - I'm a hefty lad at 6'4" and 210lbs and I reckon probably only about 20 or 30 but the tiredness issue is the killer. dios - punching doesn't hurt your hand if you do it properly. I otherwise vote for oddman's 9mm handgun with childlocks.

Ryvar - I so want to fight you now, you big girl... ;)
posted by longbaugh at 9:30 AM on March 23, 2005


I'd like a shot at Ryvar also. He looks totally harmless in that picture. And I bet he's never fought anybody who fights real dirty.
posted by nixerman at 10:01 AM on March 23, 2005


Katemonkey: I believe you, but if that's true, you are built differently than the rest of us. On further consideration, perhaps you can curl your fingers inward, but a dense, tightly held fist is critical to punching- otherwise, you end up breaking all your other fingers.

I suppose YMMV.
posted by exlotuseater at 10:06 AM on March 23, 2005


How many Ryvars could you do before that beguiling yet ever so slightly mean look overcame you and you were reduced to a puddle of over-sexualised goo?

I reckon maybe one or possibly two. It really is quite intimidating and at the same smouldering.

Rowr.
posted by longbaugh at 10:55 AM on March 23, 2005


This question should have had no sex factors in a common 5 year old is a teeth biting pitching giggling machine
What forces to we have; Pets & authority?

10 of them would flatten most here by weight alone. So the larger numbers seem way off. Maybe indefinite if you tickled each one of them to death or gave them a time out.

At 18 and being tagged teamed by the 3 & 5 year old brothers, can tell ya fitness is going to be a factor here when it comes to who poops out first. With that, run um in circles which will usually lead to the loud screeching & screaming too. Then at several minutes they’ll plop down and rest their little heads into nap time. Why the playful pet dog having its tail chased is great wearing down a tike, especially an Australian Sheppard.

Heck if you get them to scream loud enough, mom will save you.
posted by thomcatspike at 11:01 AM on March 23, 2005


exlotuseater: Try holding your pinky in one hand and see whether you can make a fist. You can't.
Your word phrasing here is off or count another with katemonkey. Add a pointed knuckle fist both thumb under of over.
This fist is perfect for some good head noogies.
posted by thomcatspike at 11:08 AM on March 23, 2005


I can also pull off a pretty decent pinky-fist, about as dense and tightly-held as a regular one. Probably not a good idea to rely on that technique then. Also, now that I think about it, more than a couple of the kids I knew in school had crazy flexible fingers and could bend their pinkies/thumbs all the way back and such.

I wouldn't take the 9mm gun; eventually one of the kids is going to get the idea to chuck the gun he can't work at your head, others follow suit, you're screwed. I'd probably go with a mace like squirrel said, though 10 kg is overkill. Or nice heavy bowling balls!
posted by furiousthought at 11:14 AM on March 23, 2005


I could take thousands


Give me and all the rugrats a H2. How many five year olds could climb up to reach the door? And even if they could, how many could figure out how to open the door and start the car?

Even in the event one or two do, I'm already having to pull the car over to pull all the torsos from the grill.

good times
posted by slapshot57 at 11:22 AM on March 23, 2005


All of 'em. Spit into a hanky and threaten to wash their faces. Game over.
posted by It's Raining Florence Henderson at 11:39 AM on March 23, 2005


I've seen pictures of some MeFi meet-ups, and I'm thinking the average here would be about 4.

you win.
posted by adampsyche at 12:47 PM on March 23, 2005


Okay, here's the simple way to figure this: they've got training, right? and they're FIVE, right? so the training must have been simple.

Here's what I would have taught the kids: everyone rush in until enough children have managed to immobilize the legs. Then everyone else break off and run towards the front of the person simultaneously.

So now you have immobile legs, and you have an onrushing wave of children, each weighing [i]x[/i] pounds. So the question is reduced to this: if you are standing with your legs immobile, how much weight can you be hit with before you'd fall over?

'cuz at that point, with your legs tightly held and a pile of five year olds on top of you, it's pretty much over.
posted by davejay at 2:40 PM on March 23, 2005


Davejay is right.

If they come at you in small clusters of two/three at a time you could beat down a good number. If they swarm you most people would succumb quickly.

Me? I taught children's Karate for years. We used to play a game like this. We called it "New York, New York". The class (of about 12 kids ages 6-10) against me. The get me to my back or belly for more than 10 seconds they win. I knock them down or get them in the coral - I win. To avoid injury we were all padded up. Still. Similar.

Five year olds don't have much coordination and no strength. That's why our cut off for lessons was 6. Still too young IMHO. i disagree about them being fragile - though if you were trained you could knock them out fairly easily.

Getting hit or kicked by them is nothing. Them swarming you would be your only concern. So you have to run and line them up. Most people would tire after only ten or fifteen minutes.

I'm 200+lbs, 6ft and still box and do Jujitsu regularly and have for a number of years. So I figure - if these creatures that are simulated 5-year olds can be injured without moral retribution - I could take out 20 or 30 before gassing out. If they came in small clusters then maybe 60-70?
posted by tkchrist at 5:58 PM on March 23, 2005


I have to say, my favorite part of this thread is people listing their fitness achievements to back up how many 5 year olds they could take out.
posted by LittleMissCranky at 7:42 PM on March 23, 2005 [1 favorite]


Listen, guys, this entire post never once came close to resembling something funny. I have this really dumb roommate who is a pokerboner and he made me read this post at 7am and it's so wildly contrived and unfunny. He laughed in my face when he found out it was posted on here. I am ashamed for all of us. I'm gonna go watch Gallagher smash some watermelons. goodnight
posted by NoamChomskyStoleMyFace at 8:11 PM on March 23, 2005


I wouldn't take the 9mm gun; eventually one of the kids is going to get the idea to chuck the gun he can't work at your head, others follow suit, you're screwed. furiousthought

Hm... I admit I hadn't thought about that. While five year olds probably can't throw very well one would probably get lucky sooner or later. And since they are fearless they aren't going to run away when I start shooting. Damn.

In that case the weapon I want is full platemail with a tower shield welded to one arm and a greatsword locked in the other gauntlet.

I figure I could take out about one kid every 10 mintues or so. I'd be extremely slow in that bulky nightmare and I'd be trying to concerve energy too. But I think the kids would just be completely unable to move.

Easy pickings, slow pickings, but easy pickings.
posted by oddman at 8:22 PM on March 23, 2005


Getting hit or kicked by them is nothing.

Again, to think of them in terms of being children is wrong.
They have teeth.

Ask yourself instead how many rabid pit bulls you could take out. Now ask yourself how many if the pit bulls were smart enough to work together.
posted by juv3nal at 9:26 PM on March 23, 2005


juv3nal, you are a chilling-thought-giving individual.
posted by squirrel at 1:11 AM on March 24, 2005


NoamChomskyStoleMyFace: I agree that this entire post is unfunny. It's dead serious. Now the comments, on the other hand.... funny as hell.
posted by exlotuseater at 3:27 AM on March 24, 2005


I have actually done this, in an assembly hall. It is not as easy as it sounds. If you protect your legs you can stay up longer but at the risk of not getting a clean knockout on all of them. You can at leat wind some of them. At best, an I'm average size, 11 or 12 is the most you can put down.
posted by tomtooter at 8:17 AM on March 24, 2005


No, I don't agree with juv3nal. You can't persuade me that psychotic determination is all it takes to make a 5-year-old the equal of a pit bull or wolverine or even the same weight in pissed-off wallaby or seabird. No way.
posted by furiousthought at 8:22 AM on March 24, 2005


OK, I'm late to this but I've been thinking carefully. You can arm yourself so long as the kids are similarly armed, right? And, assuming that includes armOUR, here's my plan:

1. Full, heavy-duty body armour EXCEPT for the head.

2. A ball peen hammer.

3. We're talking whack-a-mole until you can't whack no more, I fancy.

I win.
posted by Decani at 11:49 AM on March 24, 2005


I know I've taken on at least 10 3-8 year olds in an impromptu wrestling match. No holds barred for them, because they had no idea that they could hurt me. I had to hold back, of course, but eventually it was like that multiple Smiths scene from the second Matrix movie with kids being flung from the center of the action only to run back in. I was a fun babysitter.
posted by steelbuddha at 2:46 PM on March 24, 2005 [1 favorite]


« Older 13 things that do not make sense...  |  What's a namber?... Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments