This is for all you morons who think bodybuilders are a bunch of giant, lumbering weaklings…
http://media.putfile.com/200lb-Dumb-bells
-Sep
1.) That’s already been posted.
2.) Nobody fucking thinks that. Please stop telling us how strong bodybuilders are.
[quote]Sepukku wrote:
This is for all you morons who think bodybuilders are a bunch of giant, lumbering weaklings…
http://media.putfile.com/200lb-Dumb-bells
-Sep[/quote]
What does that video have to do with being functional? Is he going to chase down the guy who just stole his wife’s purse because he can rep out 200lb d-bell presses?
What does that video have to do with being functional? Is he going to chase down the guy who just stole his wife’s purse because he can rep out 200lb d-bell presses?
[/quote]
How does being able to chase someone down equate to functional muscle?
I’m not suggesting that body builders are big lumbering and weak, but firstly what the hell does dumbell pressing have to do with functional strength? or put correctly how does a dumbell press exhibit to onlookers a level of “functional” strength.
Also Ronnie Coleman in no way represents the majority of the body building population, he is obviously much larger and stronger than people who label themselves as body builders…anyway this functional strength junk has been blown way out of proportion. big and strong will always equal big and strong.
Getstrength: good post.
For the record, can we DEFINE “functional strength”? Seriously, not being snarky at all.
Because, it’s been argued and bitched about for months now and it’s still kind if an abstract concept to me.
If it’s a real thing, then cool. But for right now, it still seems like a marketing concept
OK OK
Time to put this to rest once and for all!
Whenever people decide what to get into in the weight room, they always compare the best in the buisness, and think about who they want to have traits of.
For this case, I’ll use Big Gene and Ronnie. Ronnie is bigger and leaner, but gene benches more.
So the moron newbies go “OMG I wanna be a strong ass powerlifter! Way stronger than those stupid meatheads!”.
They then post on every forum on the internet that “I’m a powerlifter, and we powerlifters are way stronger than you bodybuilders!!!”.
All because one man is stronger than another.
That’s how it started, and that is why it has continued. Every dumbass athlete in the world thinks he’s the shit because he can run 5 miles. So what?
“LOL YOU COULDNT CATCH A GUY STEALING A PURSE”
I don’t carry a purse. Even if I did, no one would say shit, I’m bigger and stronger than the average man, and I have no problems demonstrating so.
[quote]GETSTRENGTH wrote:
I’m not suggesting that body builders are big lumbering and weak, but firstly what the hell does dumbell pressing have to do with functional strength? or put correctly how does a dumbell press exhibit to onlookers a level of “functional” strength.
Also Ronnie Coleman in no way represents the majority of the body building population, he is obviously much larger and stronger than people who label themselves as body builders…anyway this functional strength junk has been blown way out of proportion. big and strong will always equal big and strong.[/quote]
Uhhhh it was proving how strong he was. Show me one other person here who weighs under 250lbs who could do that.
Ronnie may not represent the whole biz, but neither does that fatass big gene. Most everyday-BBers and everyday-PLers are shit anyways, so we might aswell compare the best in the game.
Just because he is strong doesn’t mean he is functional. What do mean by functional? I have never doubted Ronnie Coleman’s strength. I know what your trying to say. People say Bodybuilders are weak for their muscle’s cross-sectional area. Ronnie is not.
[quote]Churchill wrote:
OK OK
Time to put this to rest once and for all!
Whenever people decide what to get into in the weight room, they always compare the best in the buisness, and think about who they want to have traits of.
For this case, I’ll use Big Gene and Ronnie. Ronnie is bigger and leaner, but gene benches more.
So the moron newbies go “OMG I wanna be a strong ass powerlifter! Way stronger than those stupid meatheads!”.
They then post on every forum on the internet that “I’m a powerlifter, and we powerlifters are way stronger than you bodybuilders!!!”.
All because one man is stronger than another.
That’s how it started, and that is why it has continued. Every dumbass athlete in the world thinks he’s the shit because he can run 5 miles. So what?
“LOL YOU COULDNT CATCH A GUY STEALING A PURSE”
I don’t carry a purse. Even if I did, no one would say shit, I’m bigger and stronger than the average man, and I have no problems demonstrating so.
[/quote]
Sorry this puts nothing to rest and barely borders on reality. My guess is most newbies never heard of Gene, and have little idea of what goes into bodybuilding.
I’m glad you think you’re so big. It may help compensate for your over the top tough guy (internet) persona.
[quote]silverback3433 wrote:
Just because he is strong doesn’t mean he is functional. [/quote]
THATS WHAT FUNCTIONAL MEANS DUMBASS. People use that term to define how much strength one can produce from their muscles. Most athletes think they can produce more from their small muscles than big sarcoplasm filled muscles of bodybuilders.
[quote]Churchill wrote:
OK OK
Time to put this to rest once and for all!
Whenever people decide what to get into in the weight room, they always compare the best in the buisness, and think about who they want to have traits of.
For this case, I’ll use Big Gene and Ronnie. Ronnie is bigger and leaner, but gene benches more.
So the moron newbies go “OMG I wanna be a strong ass powerlifter! Way stronger than those stupid meatheads!”.
They then post on every forum on the internet that “I’m a powerlifter, and we powerlifters are way stronger than you bodybuilders!!!”.
All because one man is stronger than another.
That’s how it started, and that is why it has continued. Every dumbass athlete in the world thinks he’s the shit because he can run 5 miles. So what?
“LOL YOU COULDNT CATCH A GUY STEALING A PURSE”
I don’t carry a purse. Even if I did, no one would say shit, I’m bigger and stronger than the average man, and I have no problems demonstrating so.
[/quote]
Where the hell did I say you personally were carrying a purse?
So let me get this straight. You think because you are big and strong that you are immune to any type of violence against you? You think that because you lift weights everybody is afraid of you? I don’t know where you come from but that is not how it is where I live. You have to be able to use the size that you have, not be a big pile of muscle and not be able to get out of your own way. That is how I define functional.
[quote]Churchill wrote:
GETSTRENGTH wrote:
I’m not suggesting that body builders are big lumbering and weak, but firstly what the hell does dumbell pressing have to do with functional strength? or put correctly how does a dumbell press exhibit to onlookers a level of “functional” strength.
Also Ronnie Coleman in no way represents the majority of the body building population, he is obviously much larger and stronger than people who label themselves as body builders…anyway this functional strength junk has been blown way out of proportion. big and strong will always equal big and strong.
Uhhhh it was proving how strong he was. Show me one other person here who weighs under 250lbs who could do that.
Ronnie may not represent the whole biz, but neither does that fatass big gene. Most everyday-BBers and everyday-PLers are shit anyways, so we might aswell compare the best in the game.[/quote]
I agree it proves how strong he is…no doubt. the original post said functional strength. IMO there is no such thing as functional strength. strength is strength. I was just trying to show how out of control the whole functional strength thing is…we are now using dumbells to exhibit it. hey i know why do’t we scrap the functional srength thing and stick with strength
[quote]Churchill wrote:
silverback3433 wrote:
Just because he is strong doesn’t mean he is functional.
THATS WHAT FUNCTIONAL MEANS DUMBASS. People use that term to define how much strength one can produce from their muscles. Most athletes think they can produce more from their small muscles than big sarcoplasm filled muscles of bodybuilders.[/quote]No, being strong is not what functional means.
Dumbass Hah? You have a meathead personality, probably very insecure and started to lift weights because being bigger than everyone else make’s you feel good. Probably got your ass kicked a lot when you were young and now that you have put on some size you think you can beat everybody up. You really have no clue do you?
I just re-read the first post, there was no mention of functional strength…my bad
Functional strength is having strength in daily activites and in sports. If you can lift heavy weights, you will have strength in your daily activities. If you have athleticism, the same applies to sports. That’s not to say that athletes don’t benefit from sports-specific weight training that may differ from those whose goals are just to be as big and strong as possible.
[quote]silverback3433 wrote:
Where the hell did I say you personally were carrying a purse?
So let me get this straight. You think because you are big and strong that you are immune to any type of violence against you? You think that because you lift weights everybody is afraid of you? I don’t know where you come from but that is not how it is where I live. You have to be able to use the size that you have, not be a big pile of muscle and not be able to get out of your own way. That is how I define functional. [/quote]
How many big piles of muscle have you met that are weak and can’t use that muscle? There are few to none.
[quote]GETSTRENGTH wrote:
Churchill wrote:
GETSTRENGTH wrote:
I’m not suggesting that body builders are big lumbering and weak, but firstly what the hell does dumbell pressing have to do with functional strength? or put correctly how does a dumbell press exhibit to onlookers a level of “functional” strength.
Also Ronnie Coleman in no way represents the majority of the body building population, he is obviously much larger and stronger than people who label themselves as body builders…anyway this functional strength junk has been blown way out of proportion. big and strong will always equal big and strong.
Uhhhh it was proving how strong he was. Show me one other person here who weighs under 250lbs who could do that.
Ronnie may not represent the whole biz, but neither does that fatass big gene. Most everyday-BBers and everyday-PLers are shit anyways, so we might aswell compare the best in the game.
I agree it proves how strong he is…no doubt. the original post said functional strength. IMO there is no such thing as functional strength. strength is strength. I was just trying to show how out of control the whole functional strength thing is…we are now using dumbells to exhibit it. hey i know why do’t we scrap the functional srength thing and stick with strength[/quote]
Functional strength is bullshit. The idea of functional strength is only relative to your goals.If you goal is not to be winded when your moving the f’n couch then train for that reason.
Is someone who can run a 10k marathon more fuctional than someone who can deadlift 700 pounds?
Here’s what the idea of being fuctional has become its an excuse for the fat guy who benches 450 pounds but can’t lose his fat gut so he hides behind the fact that he’s training to be functional. Its also for the 145 pound guy who can’t seem to gain weight so he hides behind the “who wants to be lumbered down with all those muscles anyways moniker” Its become nothing more than an excuse for the lack of results people get in the gym.
Dealifting 600 pounds is deadlifting 600 pounds whether your a bodybuilder,powerlifter,cop,accountant,grandma or whatever the fuck. If I see someone who deadlifts 600 pounds I’m gonna say hey that sombitch is pretty strong ,not I bet that peice of that bastard couldn’t ride a bike up a mountain as well as Lance Armstrong.
Finally…for good fucking sake,no one who claims to be a bodybuilder and posts on these boards has the goal of getting so huge that they can’t move or play hoops with their boys or whatever so let that whole stereotype go…
I think we’ve all overlooked the point of the video. Not Ronnie’s impressive strength…it was to showcase the ugliest pants in the world.
[quote]jsbrook wrote:
silverback3433 wrote:
Where the hell did I say you personally were carrying a purse?
So let me get this straight. You think because you are big and strong that you are immune to any type of violence against you? You think that because you lift weights everybody is afraid of you? I don’t know where you come from but that is not how it is where I live. You have to be able to use the size that you have, not be a big pile of muscle and not be able to get out of your own way. That is how I define functional.
How many big piles of muscle have you met that are weak and can’t use that muscle? There are few to none.
[/quote]
We’ll have to ask Craig Titus about that in the years to come. A true test of ‘fuck-tionality’ is about to be empirically tested. I say he gets owned like a little schoolgirl