Olympic Lifting and Aesthetics?

[quote]tork94 wrote:
Is it Hakan Yilmaz (spelling?) 94kg lifter?[/quote]

Tork94, you are a true weightlifting fan. Yes, it definitely is Hakan Yilmaz, and you got his weight class right. Hakan looked as if he might be Turkey’s best-ever lifter in the heavier categories, but his career was cut short for reasons I know nothing about.

[quote]Paperclip wrote:
Funny that Sagir has a BMI score of 26.6 (170cm, 77kg) but looks thinner that Hui (BMI 24.4, 168cm, 69kg).


[/quote]

We know that weight is not equal to muscle size or physique. Sagir or for that matter anyone with any reasonable size is dense according to the BMI and Hui is pretty ripped.

[quote]delikurt wrote:

[quote]Koing wrote:

I agree that some lifters have slight builds but I bet if you were to stand next to them it would be a different.

No, not really. I have a picture of myself standing next to every single member of the Turkish national team, and some of them were/are definitely of slight build.

I have to dig up my pics with Sagir, but here’s one of me with Mutlu. Mutlu was very dense, but Reyhan Arabicoglu and Taner Sagir were not. They had average physiques, which of course doesn’t matter to weightlifters. Still, it’s worth pointing out that neither Reyhan nor Taner ‘had’ legs or any muscle group, any more than an average gym-goer who puts some effort into training. I think it’s a bit of WL propaganda to suggest that ‘we’ have the best aesthetics. No, we don’t, and oftentimes WLs are of demonstrably slight build. Again, not that it matters. [/quote]

I said he has legs, back, traps and lats. I’m sure at the top of his Clean rack he had some reasonable lats. Sure his build is slight by weightlifting standards but it’s not god awful rubbish. He isn’t as muscled as other lifters.

I’m willing to bet if he took his shirt of his erectors spinae would be impressive.

I have seen a shift in the past Euro/ Worlds that most of the winners were not particularly muscled. Of course you always had a few freak shows that could pass off for lower tiered BB though! But also interesting to note that a bunch of them struggled up out of the Cleans and that the slighter guys did not. Goes to show mechanical and technique efficiency counts for a lot still and hypertrophy is not always needed/ evident.

Anyway I don’t care about his physique. I only care that he can teleport from the top of his Sn to the bottom :smiley:

[quote]delikurt wrote:
On a tangential note, Taner Sagir’s career ended after a positive doping test and, from what I remember from the Turkish media, a bizarre and public death threat against the tester. I can’t think of another WL who flamed out that quickly–from Olympic gold to whacked-out oblivion in short order.

All the Turkish national coaches were replaced at around the same time; I don’t know the current coaches. Apparently the entire Turkish Weightlifting Federation came under sanctions in 2006. A lot of prospects on the national team also flamed out at around the same time and were not heard from again.

I’ve always felt bad that Mutlu couldn’t get it together for another gold medal in 2008. [/quote]

Such a shame. One of my favorite lifters for sure!

The Chinese lifters are ALWAYS muscled. Sure the 85 looks softer but from 56, 62, 69 and 77 they are lean and stacked. They do seeminly do a lot of upperbody work though.

Koing

Apparently Sagir had very little funding in his earlier WL career and lived largely on bread, which might account for his physique. Even on the Turkish team, there were highly muscled guys (like Celil) next to less muscled guys (Arabacioglu) in the same weight class. No doubt diet and genetic factors came into play here.

The Turkish team has to stay in the same hotel while they are in training for competitions. It would be interesting to learn if the coaches watch or standardize the athletes’ diet at the hotel. I’ll find out next time I’m there.

i think this thread needs more pics.

[quote]alexus wrote:
i think this thread needs more pics.[/quote]

Apparently most of my pictures are on my old computer. However, you can see a few pictures of the old Turkish team in action in my Milo article:

I’ll look around for some pictures later.

In the meantime, here’s a guy (Pervushin) who had an amazing, grainy, cross-striated look in the 1970s.

look at some of pendlay’s athletes Donny Shankle and jon north dont look that ripped there a little soft if anything from the front. But then others look pretty ripped like the guy that set a PR double.

suppose its just a matter of what they eat and train in their own time.

[quote]Swolegasm wrote:

look at some of pendlay’s athletes Donny Shankle and jon north dont look that ripped there a little soft if anything from the front. But then others look pretty ripped like the guy that set a PR double.

suppose its just a matter of what they eat and train in their own time.[/quote]

Donny and Jon don’t look rip because they aren’t.

Jon is very thick built. It’s very deceiptive in the videos. If you ever meet him he has thick thick ass wrists and is just thick overall so that gives the illusion he isn’t that big.

Also to note, you find few 94+ lifters that are lean. Sure you get them like in the pic of that other dude and Klokov but few are really ever ripped 94+

Koing


Koing is right about the aesthetics of the heavier lifters. Here’s an exception, though, 2000 Gold medalist in the 105 class, Hossein Tavakoli.

Most Oly lifters aren’t really “built” in the traditional sense of the word. Sure a couple are (Hui, Stoitsov, Milo, etc.) but those really are exceptions to the rule. Even then, a guy like Stoitsov really doesn’t have an exceptionally good build, he’d probably be blown out of the water in any natty show (especially considering he’s only like 5’6). Watch the weightlifting event next time the Olympics are on and see how many guys look “big”.

Most won’t, hell a lot of them look like they don’t even lift (you definitely wouldn’t notice if they were wearing clothes).
If you want to train for looks, then train like a bodybuilder. Don’t try and reinvent the wheel when there are plenty of tried and true methods already found.

[quote]Carlito Gambino wrote:
Even then, a guy like Stoitsov really doesn’t have an exceptionally good build [/quote]

Can you post pictures of natural bodybuilders weighing 170 pounds or less whom you consider to blow Stoitsov out of the water? You can try repetrope or musclememory to look for pictures.

[quote]Carlito Gambino wrote:
Most Oly lifters aren’t really “built” in the traditional sense of the word. Sure a couple are (Hui, Stoitsov, Milo, etc.) but those really are exceptions to the rule. Even then, a guy like Stoitsov really doesn’t have an exceptionally good build, he’d probably be blown out of the water in any natty show (especially considering he’s only like 5’6). Watch the weightlifting event next time the Olympics are on and see how many guys look “big”.

Most won’t, hell a lot of them look like they don’t even lift (you definitely wouldn’t notice if they were wearing clothes).
If you want to train for looks, then train like a bodybuilder. Don’t try and reinvent the wheel when there are plenty of tried and true methods already found.[/quote]

Stoitsov is built. He is NOT built like a BB but thats a given. He is muscular and ripped/ very lean and could get on a cover of any mens health magazine etc withtout looking out of place.

Probably about 1-2 lifters out of 10 will look like they are built.

It’s funny, you have Klokov in the 105’s and Armanu lol. Klokov looks like he hits the gym hard. Armanu looks like he doesn’t do ANY training LOL but he SHIFTS WEIGHTS BLISTERINGLY FAST and is a beautiful lifter to watch.

Koing

[quote]delikurt wrote:

[quote]Carlito Gambino wrote:
Even then, a guy like Stoitsov really doesn’t have an exceptionally good build [/quote]

Can you post pictures of natural bodybuilders weighing 170 pounds or less whom you consider to blow Stoitsov out of the water? You can try repetrope or musclememory to look for pictures. [/quote]

I’m not one to look at bodybuilding shows because the contests themselves don’t interest me, but take your pick here:

usamuscle.com/bodybuilders/browse.asp?full=0&WeightClass=Lightweight&offset=0

Pretty much all those guys look at least as good, some of them weigh even less and keep in mind none of them are on gear (unlike Stoitsov). I think you’re getting me wrong here, of course he has a good look to him and I’m not saying he has a shit physique or anything to that degree.

It’s just that a regular guy that wants to train for aesthetics shouldn’t think in terms of “WOW STOITSOV LOOKS GOOD AND HE OLY LIFTS SO IF I TRAIN OLY LIFTS AS WELL I’LL END UP LOOKING LIKE HIM”. That train of thought in itself is wrong anyway because by that logic if I did Arnold’s 6x a week routine I’d end up looking like him which ain’t true either (and believe me I’ve tried).

Stoitsov’s musculature is denser and grainier, probably because of the thickening of muscle fibers minus junk materials in the cells. Yes, he clearly loses in a comparison of arms and chest, but I think he hangs on quads, hams, calves, glutes, and back.

Now the comparison is skewed by drug use, to be sure. I agree with you there.

I also agree that anyone who wants overall muscle size and a full muscular look should choose BB.

Finally, it is not the training that made Stoitsov into Stoitsov, but genetics, diet, and drugs. Lots of people train just like Stoitsov and do not look nearly as good.

Still, any WL I know would want both the strength and look of Stoitsov, and would choose this physique over that of a BB.

[quote]delikurt wrote:
Stoitsov’s musculature is denser and grainier, probably because of the thickening of muscle fibers minus junk materials in the cells.[/quote]

Hasn’t this already been considered broscience nowadays?

For whatever it’s worth, off the top of my head I can think of John Grimek, Tommy Kono, Roy Hilligenn, Bob Gajda, and (of course) Sergio Oliva as guys who either started off with competitive high-level Olympic lifting and then successfully transitioned to high-level bodybuilding or, in some of their cases, were competing in weightlifting and bodybuilding at the same time.

Granted, that was in the '50s and '60s, but it still reinforces the idea that Olympic lifting is definitely not the worst aesthetic base to start out from, and you can “turn” an Olympic lifter into a bodybuilder just as easily (maybe moreso? Now there’s a hot button topic!) as you can transition a powerlifter into bodybuilding.

[quote]delikurt wrote:
Stoitsov’s musculature is denser and grainier, probably because of the thickening of muscle fibers minus junk materials in the cells. Yes, he clearly loses in a comparison of arms and chest, but I think he hangs on quads, hams, calves, glutes, and back.

Now the comparison is skewed by drug use, to be sure. I agree with you there.

I also agree that anyone who wants overall muscle size and a full muscular look should choose BB.

Finally, it is not the training that made Stoitsov into Stoitsov, but genetics, diet, and drugs. Lots of people train just like Stoitsov and do not look nearly as good.

Still, any WL I know would want both the strength and look of Stoitsov, and would choose this physique over that of a BB. [/quote]

I’d rather look like a POS and Sn 200 CJ 240 thank you…

Koing

[quote]cubuff2028 wrote:
i don’t think that many 135lb guys or girls are considered hot. maybe some taller girls.
[/quote]

heh. and i’d rather not look like a marathon runner.

Would adding in a couple of sets 2-3x week of the neglected body parts harm your training? Don’t see how it would

[quote]Chris Colucci wrote:
For whatever it’s worth, off the top of my head I can think of John Grimek, Tommy Kono, Roy Hilligenn, Bob Gajda, and (of course) Sergio Oliva as guys who either started off with competitive high-level Olympic lifting and then successfully transitioned to high-level bodybuilding or, in some of their cases, were competing in weightlifting and bodybuilding at the same time.

Granted, that was in the '50s and '60s, but it still reinforces the idea that Olympic lifting is definitely not the worst aesthetic base to start out from, and you can “turn” an Olympic lifter into a bodybuilder just as easily (maybe moreso? Now there’s a hot button topic!) as you can transition a powerlifter into bodybuilding.[/quote]

There’s a fucking insightful post finally worth discussing

[quote]cubuff2028 wrote:

[quote]Chris Colucci wrote:
For whatever it’s worth, off the top of my head I can think of John Grimek, Tommy Kono, Roy Hilligenn, Bob Gajda, and (of course) Sergio Oliva as guys who either started off with competitive high-level Olympic lifting and then successfully transitioned to high-level bodybuilding or, in some of their cases, were competing in weightlifting and bodybuilding at the same time.

Granted, that was in the '50s and '60s, but it still reinforces the idea that Olympic lifting is definitely not the worst aesthetic base to start out from, and you can “turn” an Olympic lifter into a bodybuilder just as easily (maybe moreso? Now there’s a hot button topic!) as you can transition a powerlifter into bodybuilding.[/quote]

There’s a fucking insightful post finally worth discussing[/quote]

probly worth mentioning Christian Thibaudeau