Foo - How many five years could you take in a fight?

How many five year olds could you take in a fight?

http://www.howmanyfiveyearoldscouldyoutakeinafight.com/


Me? About 24.

Apparently, it would take 37 of the little monsters.......

Then again, I can be pretty ruthless ;)

14... Wtf?

22...I'm not much for violence

26. Not morally opposed to using a child as a blunt weapon, but I would not maliciously beat them back into kindergarden {enthusiastically**. Perhaps previous trampling and swarm experience helps up the count as well.

25 for me.

Whomever made this test has obviously never tried to coach munch kins this age. There is no way you could get more than two of them to actually attack, the others would all be off screwing around somewhere, or crying, or playing in the dirt etc.

25 for me, I think I am more ruthless than that. 25 seems low, got to work on my children beating skills. :)

24 for me

How many bullets do I get?

23, but I'm sure it would be higher if I had any martial arts training and weren't average height, reach, etc. I could take out far more five year olds than I could house cats or dogs. Now there's a real challenge.

29 for me

I got 33 on mine....

I figured that I could be as ruthless as Tom but only scored 33...I also had to think of them as zombie 5 year olds as I could never beat up on little kids.

In other news...I have a 76% chance of surviving a zombie apocalypse.

Wow, I am a pacifist compared to all of you.

I could only take on 12!

What am I doing in P & R :eek: ?

East Hill

also 29.

i think a lot would depend on the 5-year-olds. some of them are more evil than others.

33

30

EH -Think zombies... your score will improve.

Mind you..even when I took it easy on them I could still take on 16... I think the martial arts and fighting experience will keep me from being too merciful. LOL

My Starcraft skills helped me out a little...

34 little snots would eat dirt

11. Not that I would ever hurt a child, though.

28

It says 29, but I bet that's bare-handed.

I'd have a chainsaw. It's only fair.

EH -Think zombies... your score will improve.

Mind you..even when I took it easy on them I could still take on 16... I think the martial arts and fighting experience will keep me from being too merciful. LOL

Well, I think it was--lack of fighting experience, having stubby little arms, very short, and I just couldn't bring myself to see them as zombies.

Clearly, the last indicates that I have no children myself :p .

East Hill

31

It says 29, but I bet that's bare-handed.

I'd have a chainsaw. It's only fair.

Or a pile of pokemon cards to throw up in the air--when
they all reach down to start picking up the cards kick
the little effers in the head.

Wait--did I just think of that? No--
I meant to say bikes are cool. Um, yeah.
Bikes are my fave.

EH -Think zombies... your score will improve.

Mind you..even when I took it easy on them I could still take on 16... I think the martial arts and fighting experience will keep me from being too merciful. LOL

See the moral questions didn't hurt me in the least, it was the lack of fighting experience and my average stature that really lowered my score.

See the moral questions didn't hurt me in the least, it was the lack of fighting experience and my average stature that really lowered my score.

30. Yeah, thinking about zombies would help. In that many, at least one of them's a biter.

I'm a short wussy, so I can only take 14.

All I did was answer the questions like a Martial Arts trained Sociopath that is tall, has good reach and hung out in Mosh Pits and slam danced. ;)

29

Oh, I did this a while ago on another forum.

35 5-year-olds for me

$5125 for my dead body.

92% alcoholic.

58% chance of surviving a zombie apocalypse.

And I am 75% geeky. :eek:

20 little bass turds.

All I did was answer the questions like a Martial Arts trained Sociopath that is tall, has good reach and hung out in Mosh Pits and slam danced. ;)

I think I paid a penalty for being of average height and because I am not in an optimal age range... after changing a single variable at a time I found you get actually get a hit bonus for being older,taller, and bigger.

Other than that, I also answered the questions like a martial arts trained sociopath who also had no problem with using a body as a weapon.

And strangely enough, I am only 70% geeky.

34 of the vicious little monsters would meet their maker in an encounter with me! Muuuhahahaha!!

I got a 89% chance of surviving a zombie attack. Everybody head to my house if zombies are trying to take over. Unless you're a zombie of course!

Just 20 for me

14... Wtf?

22 5-year olds or 1 1/2 skinnyones. :D

I'm not so sure age range had a lot to do with it unless you are Geriatric.....

I used my correct range of age.
I think I paid a penalty for being of average height and because I am not in an optimal age range... after changing a single variable at a time I found you get actually get a hit bonus for being older,taller, and bigger.

Other than that, I also answered the questions like a martial arts trained sociopath who also had no problem with using a body as a weapon.

And strangely enough, I am only 70% geeky.

When I was truthful, I was battling 33 squids, lied my arse off and got to take on 39 of the little picky eating, not cleaning their rooms, back talking, going to bed without brushing their teeth, getting a note from their teacher for talking in class little bastiges.

When I was truthful, I was battling 33 squids, lied my arse off and got to take on 39 of the little picky eating, not cleaning their rooms, back talking, going to bed without brushing their teeth, getting a note from their teacher for talking in class little bastiges.

Spoken like a parent of youngsters!:p:eek::D