Page 2 of 2 [ 22 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2

Icyclan
Sea Gull
Sea Gull

User avatar

Joined: 19 Jun 2011
Age: 39
Gender: Male
Posts: 231

17 Jan 2015, 5:48 pm

Kurgan wrote:
Icyclan wrote:
Kurgan wrote:
Icyclan wrote:
Kurgan wrote:
The big elephant in the room nobody talks about when it comes to deadlifting, is that leverage is more important than actual muscle strength. Moreover, the exercise itself only meassures how much you can lift from just below your knees to just above your knees.


That's true for the all of the three big lifts, for benching much more so than for deadlifting. All Gene Rychlak has to do to get a rep is unrack the weight and suck his gut in. His ROM is about two inches.

Kurgan wrote:
Kirk Kaworski has more muscle than Phil Heath, which he built by powerlifting, not bodybuilding.


Jay Cutler, Ronnie Coleman and other (former) Olympians have more muscle mass than the top powerlifters (save Karychev and a couple of others) yet they're not as strong. People on Halotestin have reported increases of 60+ lbs. on their main lifts without noticeable muscle gain. More muscle mass equals more strength, but more strength doesn't necessarily equal more muscle mass.


Derek Poundstone is a good 30-40 kgs heavier than Jay Cutler, and isn't much taller--and I have yet to see a bodybuilders who comes even close to Arild Haugen at the age of 22. While he has a little more bodyfat, it's still low enough for him to have visible abs. Strongmen and powerlifters have larger waists (as a result of larger core musculature), giving them an inferior V shape. Furthermore, they won't have the dry, paper-thin skin look due to the fact that most of them do not use Winstrol. In terms of 1RM lifts, IFBB bodybuilders are just as strong as most strongmen out there (Kim Kold can bench press the same as Mariuz Pudzianowski did in his prime, at an age of almost 50).

I said that strength and mass were ALMOST correlated; some of it still depends on the nervous system. The reason why you won't see much muscle gain on Halotestin, is because of the very short half-life. For the very same reason, strength built on Halotestin will also fade away very quickly once you stop taking it. With more glucogen in his muscles, Richard Hawthorne would have a BMI on par with a classic bodybuilder.

The stuff you said about leverage is true. No base lift is as dependent on this as the first inches of the deadlift, though. When it comes to bench pressing, shoulder width is more important than arm length. :P


Poundstone is 15 kgs heavier than Cutler, and he's a good 10 cm taller. He undoubtedly has more bodyfat than Cutler though, and whether he has more muscle mass is up in the air. Regardless of individuals, my point was that people with less muscle mass can be significantly stronger than people with much more muscle mass. Rick Weil benched 556 lbs. raw at a bodyweight of 181, while not even arching his back. That's just pure power with relatively little muscle mass.

Also, the first couple of inches play a far bigger part on the bench than on the deadlift when it comes to leverage. You can completely eliminate the hardest part of the bench just by having a big gut and Tyrannosaurus arms.


Derek Poundstone is 155 kgs at 183 cm. Jay Cutler off-season (significantly higher bodyfat percentage than Derek Poundstone) is 140 kgs at 177 cm. Rick Weil had massive front delts, triceps, and pecs, and being 181 lbs makes him almost as heavy as Franco Columbu, only benchpressing slightly more weight.

The nervous system plays a part as well, but that's inherently genetic and has nothing whatsoever to do with whether or not you train for "hypertrophy" or "strength", Arild Haugen again being a great example of this.

In the bench press, the last inches are the hardest, not the first ones. When it comes to deadlifting, the first two inches is all about leverage; some people cannot lift 100 lbs with a straight back, but can still lift 500 lbs if they round their backs.

Image


All the sources I've checked have Cutler at 175 cm and Poundstone at 185. As for weight, I don't know where you got your initial 30-40 kgs of difference from.

Weil's best bench is 31 lbs. more than Columbu's best, while weighing 13 lbs. less. But it doesn't matter; it just proves that Columbu is another lifter with relatively little muscle mass who's stronger than people who are more muscular than him. That was my point all along. Surely you do not dispute that Weil and Columbu have smaller delts, triceps and pecs than Ronnie Coleman and Jay Cutler?

As for the hardest part in benching, anecdotal evidence would suggest that the lockout being the biggest sticking point is only true for shirted lifters. Raw lifters tend to fail at the bottom much more frequently.



Kurgan
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Apr 2012
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,132
Location: Scandinavia

18 Jan 2015, 6:15 am

Icyclan wrote:
All the sources I've checked have Cutler at 175 cm and Poundstone at 185.


There are many sources (let's say the difference is 8 cm), but this is splitting hairs. The weight of IFBB pros is frequently exaggerated, and one magazine who decided to weigh a few pros reported Jay Cutler's weight as a "mere" 117 kgs completely water depleted and stage ready.

Quote:
As for weight, I don't know where you got your initial 30-40 kgs of difference from.


Derek Poundstone is 155 kgs.

Quote:
Weil's best bench is 31 lbs. more than Columbu's best, while weighing 13 lbs. less.


4 lbs less, to be precise, which hints that Weil has fairly massive upper body muscles, even if he has smaller bones than a typical bodybuilder and does not have the dry Winstrol look.

Quote:
But it doesn't matter; it just proves that Columbu is another lifter with relatively little muscle mass who's stronger than people who are more muscular than him. That was my point all along. Surely you do not dispute that Weil and Columbu have smaller delts, triceps and pecs than Ronnie Coleman and Jay Cutler?


Yes, a little smaller, but the proportions are completely different, and pecs, tris, and front delts haven't grown much since the 1970s. Most of the weight gain of bodybuilders since the 1980s has been in the gut and in the legs. Ronnie Coleman can dumbbell press 110 kgs in each hand for reps, and has unofficially bench pressed 300 kgs (30 kgs more than Pudzianowski did in his prime) and squatted 370 kgs, so pound-for-pound, he was still freakishly strong.

Like I said: The nervous system plays a small role as well, but this has nothing to do with whether you train for strength or hypertrophy.

Quote:
As for the hardest part in benching, anecdotal evidence would suggest that the lockout being the biggest sticking point is only true for shirted lifters. Raw lifters tend to fail at the bottom much more frequently.


This is of course wrong, based on own experiences, and by simply watching other people at the gym. This is also why most injuries happen when attempting to rack the bar again.


_________________
“He who controls the spice controls the universe.”


Icyclan
Sea Gull
Sea Gull

User avatar

Joined: 19 Jun 2011
Age: 39
Gender: Male
Posts: 231

18 Jan 2015, 7:56 am

Kurgan wrote:
There are many sources (let's say the difference is 8 cm), but this is splitting hairs. The weight of IFBB pros is frequently exaggerated, and one magazine who decided to weigh a few pros reported Jay Cutler's weight as a "mere" 117 kgs completely water depleted and stage ready.


That was Muscle & Fitness right? The same magazine also said that Cutler only eat 170 grams of protein a day.

Quote:
As for weight, I don't know where you got your initial 30-40 kgs of difference from.


Kurgan wrote:
Derek Poundstone is 155 kgs.


An off-season Jay Cutler is 140 kgs. An off-season Cutler probably still has a lower fat percentage than Poundstone, while also being shorter of course.

Quote:
Weil's best bench is 31 lbs. more than Columbu's best, while weighing 13 lbs. less.


Kurgan wrote:
4 lbs less, to be precise, which hints that Weil has fairly massive upper body muscles, even if he has smaller bones than a typical bodybuilder and does not have the dry Winstrol look.


Wiki has Columbu at 194 lbs. Obviously he didn't bench his personal record of 525 at his competition weight.

Quote:
But it doesn't matter; it just proves that Columbu is another lifter with relatively little muscle mass who's stronger than people who are more muscular than him. That was my point all along. Surely you do not dispute that Weil and Columbu have smaller delts, triceps and pecs than Ronnie Coleman and Jay Cutler?


Kurgan wrote:
Yes, a little smaller, but the proportions are completely different, and pecs, tris, and front delts haven't grown much since the 1970s. Most of the weight gain of bodybuilders since the 1980s has been in the gut and in the legs. Ronnie Coleman can dumbbell press 110 kgs in each hand for reps, and has unofficially bench pressed 300 kgs (30 kgs more than Pudzianowski did in his prime) and squatted 370 kgs, so pound-for-pound, he was still freakishly strong.


Coleman benched 300 kgs? I'll believe it when I see it. He was undoubtedly one of the strongest bodybuilders, but I think that's a bit exaggerated. Also, Coleman's triceps and delts are massive compared to Weil's. The 160 lbs. difference between Coleman and Weil is hardly just in the legs and gut.

Quote:
As for the hardest part in benching, anecdotal evidence would suggest that the lockout being the biggest sticking point is only true for shirted lifters. Raw lifters tend to fail at the bottom much more frequently.


Kurgan wrote:
This is of course wrong, based on own experiences, and by simply watching other people at the gym.


In all the gyms I've trained in, all the meets I've competed in, and all the people I've talked to, I've never once seen a shirted lifter fail at the bottom (except when the shirt was too stiff and the weight wouldn't compress it) and conversely I've hardly ever seen a raw lifter not get the lockout after he pushed his elbows past parallel. I googled 'sticking point bench' just to be sure, and nearly everything I've found corroborated with what I've seen in person.

Kurgan wrote:
This is also why most injuries happen when attempting to rack the bar again.


This is just plain wrong. The most common injuries when benching are pec and rotator cuff injuries, which happen at the bottom when they're strained the most. At the top the triceps take over, and they are far less frequently injured.



Kurgan
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Apr 2012
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,132
Location: Scandinavia

18 Jan 2015, 8:47 am

Icyclan wrote:
That was Muscle & Fitness right? The same magazine also said that Cutler only eat 170 grams of protein a day.


Which might be entirely true. You can not force a muscle to grow quicker by simply adding more protein once you got your daily needs covered.

Kurgan wrote:
Derek Poundstone is 155 kgs.


An off-season Jay Cutler is 140 kgs. An off-season Cutler probably still has a lower fat percentage than Poundstone, while also being shorter of course.
[/quote]

Derek Poundstone is usually between 8 and 12% bodyfat. An off-season Jay Cutler (at 177 cm and 140 kg) looks like this:

Image

While not fat per se, he's still above 15% bodyfat and holds A LOT of water.

Quote:
Wiki has Columbu at 194 lbs. Obviously he didn't bench his personal record of 525 at his competition weight.


And bodybuilding magazines have him at 185 lbs. He entered professional powerlifting events looking like this:

Image

Being on-cycle for years meant that he gained very little fat off-season.

Quote:
Coleman benched 300 kgs? I'll believe it when I see it. He was undoubtedly one of the strongest bodybuilders, but I think that's a bit exaggerated. Also, Coleman's triceps and delts are massive compared to Weil's. The 160 lbs. difference between Coleman and Weil is hardly just in the legs and gut.


He can't have done that on-season, but rumour has it that he managed it with good form off-season. The difference is also in the back, the glutes, the side delts, and many other muscles. His proportions are different from those of a lightweight powerlifter or golden age bodybuilder, though.

Quote:
In all the gyms I've trained in, all the meets I've competed in, and all the people I've talked to, I've never once seen a shirted lifter fail at the bottom (except when the shirt was too stiff and the weight wouldn't compress it)


Makes sense, since it's supposed to create a slingshot effect.

Quote:
and conversely I've hardly ever seen a raw lifter not get the lockout after he pushed his elbows past parallel. I googled 'sticking point bench' just to be sure, and nearly everything I've found corroborated with what I've seen in person.


I rarely see someone fail at the bottom; that's the easy part, which is why you can do so much more with a wide grip than with a narrow grip.

Quote:
This is just plain wrong. The most common injuries when benching are pec and rotator cuff injuries, which happen at the bottom when they're strained the most. At the top the triceps take over, and they are far less frequently injured.


Rotator cuff injuries happen when you have your arms in the wrong position, and whether or not you're at the bottom of the lift is irrelevant. Pec injuries almost exclusively happen when a person is lifting heavy for too many reps.

Every time I train to failure with a spotter, it's the last few inches I need help with.


_________________
“He who controls the spice controls the universe.”


nomoretears
Sea Gull
Sea Gull

User avatar

Joined: 28 Nov 2014
Gender: Female
Posts: 208

18 Jan 2015, 2:42 pm

Icyclan wrote:
170 push-ups is extremely good. I could only do 125 at most back when I still did them, though I was thin as a rail back then. Now I can do maybe 50, I don't know. I'm not about to find out.


Thanks. I break them up into sets. I've never tried to do that many pushups (not even regular ones)straight.

For the OP, my shoulders are getting a nice round look from the pushups, if that helps. I train for strength as well as aesthetics. My traps also look better.



elladylan
Emu Egg
Emu Egg

Joined: 14 Oct 2015
Age: 33
Posts: 2
Location: California

14 Oct 2015, 12:25 am

In the United States, are the gymnastic exercises consisting of a variety of simple movements, usually performed without weights or equipment, which are intended to increase the strength and flexibility of the body using the weight of her own body for resistance. Repeated movements of gymnastics performed on an extended period of time developing muscular endurance. The history of gymnastics is related to gymnastics. Followers of Friedrich Ludwig Jahn brought their version of gymnastics in the United States, while Catherine Beecher and Dio Lewis put in place programmes of physical education for women in the 19th century. Organized systems of gymnastics in America have taken a backseat to sports competition after the battle of the systems, when the States mandated physical education systems.