One man or a 100 men

[workyworky]

With a 100 men if you have to change direction it will take a long time or it will not happen but with one man you can change in a matter of seconds .
Even if you are only one you can still take on a 100 .
What do you have to say one or many ?

[Cymru Am Byth]

Always the many split into smaller groups with a good command structure 100 can react as quick as 1. It works for the military it will work for security companies

[attagirl]

I think that it really depends on how they are trained and what type of reaction times they have as a group or individually. Some people can respond quicker than others but as stated above the military does it in groups all the time.

[drew8882]

It depends on what you're going to be doing. If you can put that into a scenerio that we could relate it to. What is the objective of the 100 men or 1 man?

[harvcr]

I agree, that depends. If you know that those 100 person are willing to do their job then it is not such a bad idea to try to train them. Small groups work the best when you have a large number of people.

[easternBrain]

i agree with Cymru Am Byth.. if 100 or for that matter 1000 men have the capability to or are trained to work in small and efficient groups one man can never equal them

[workyworky]

If there are a 100 trained men what had to go and fight the one man , they would be told what to do and leave on the way the one man changes his direction and uses a hill or a forest to his advantage then to get these 100 men to change plan will take time and in that time he runs away or plans his attack

[easternBrain]

i think training can be given for self action when on ground as well.. so that the situation you are thinking of does not happen.
you be right if the one man was NEO in Matrix :P

[workyworky]

In the movie 300 a small group of 300 men fight a army of 1,00,000 may be even more . They use the hill and the ocean to help them , what about that ?

[easternBrain]

exactly my point mate.. small integrated well trained group can work as one man (unit).. however think of the plight of just one man against zarksi's (or whatever his name was) army.

[jamesb]

I absolutely agree with the other posters that smaller size groups often perform better. The same can be seen in the armed service. Special troops often fight in small groups or teams.

[Zordani]

Small integrated groups work better than bulky 100 people detachments. However, one man can't possibly expect to survive 100 trained men. So mixed feelings about this topic.

[jamesb]

I agree with you there. Real life and combat is not like some Rambo movie. However smaller units do tend to operate more efficiently as the chain of command is also a lot smaller.