Apparently Bodybuilders Are Not Very Strong

Training
82

Wilhelm got a 250. It was lead and water and they had to press from the bottom as staggered hands weren’t allowed. You also couldn’t push press the weight and had to hold it at the chest and at lockout.

The other thing is people didn’t train implements back then. No one had access to implements like they do today and I hardly doubt they even knew what they were doing prior to showing up. Strongman is a sport filled with strongman athletes now where back then it was a contest filled athletes who were just strong at their sport/job competing on random shit.

Last point, at the ‘77 Wilhelm was the heaviest guy and IIRC he was around 300-325. I can’t remember who, but there were a couple of 200 pound guys there. The sport has came a long way, but it’s also became a sport.

3 Likes
83

Hello. Are you me?

84

Also pointing out the lack of depth the dragon had and the over arching curvature of his spine. The dragon was clearly packing his shirt…

85

I’ll offer this:

Bodybuilders are weak compared to what most (untrained or uninformed) people THINK someone who looks like an impressive bodybuilder should lift.

(Now go back to watching DBZ or reading superhero comics for measures of strength vs physiques)

S

3 Likes
86

There seems to be a bit of the reductio ad absurdum quality to the “strong people aren’t very strong” argument. That said, I think a lot of it is driven by humility and respect for 90+% percentile achievements.

What’s more senseless to me is this guy Gordon Ryan. Top no gi grappler in the world. But his primary taunt is that everybody else sucks at jiu-jitsu which, if true, would tend to undermine his greatness.

87

Do you pull the bar, or hold on and push the floor?

Or thrust your hips while straightening the legs?

It never ends!

1 Like
88

That’s occasionally happened to me, as well. In a gym I used to lift at, it seemed there were a couple of people who viewed the two back extension machines as their personal gym closets - duffel bags hung from the handles, jackets draped over the hip pads, and water bottles were placed under the protective shield of the foot platforms. I’ve no idea whose stuff it was, because they were never using the machines!

Do you ever use a GHR as a back extension? That’s my preference nowadays.

89

RE: original topic.

As many peeps have discussed, definitions and sample groups determine the outcome of this inquiry. How do we define “strong”? Who qualifies as a bodybuilder? Whose strength levels are those bodybuilders’ strength levels compared against? I suggest the following parameters -

Strong - 1RM on squat, deadlift, bench press, military press; max number of strict bodyweight pull-ups. I chose 1RM and max number because those are the standard measures used by the majority of people with whom I discuss strength and lifting; many articles about strength are directions about increasing 1RM; and the general American public and Olympics weightlifting viewers worldwide appear to equate strength with 1RM.

I selected those five lifts because they’re commonly performed on a regular basis in the many gyms I’ve trained at through the decades (subjective view); powerlifting is a professional sport that measures three of those five lifts (objective factor); strongman is a professional sport, and the barbell overhead press is a lift readily available to commercial gym-goers that expresses strength similar to what’s used in strongman competitions; and maximum rep, strict pull-ups are a measure of strength in various military training groups, are commonly performed in gyms, and were used in federal childhood fitness standards. For instance, in order to pass P.E. class, we boys had to do a minimum of five when I was in the fifth grade.

The next question is who qualifies as a bodybuilder. I suggest anyone who’s competed on stage, whether paid or unpaid. It’s a very open-ended measure, for sure. For the sake of the OP, if we were actually going to quantify data, I’d suggest limiting the sample to IFBB card holders.

For the last question, I think a two-part two comparison of relative strength level is valid. Since strength is relative to the group being compared against, measure bodybuilders against the general population, which will include untrained and trained people, and also measure against other pro athletes.

Compared to the general population, the average competitive bodybuilder (mean 1RM strength) will likely be very high. Compared to pro athletes in general, everyone from golfers to World’s Strongest Man competitors, I’d guess bodybuilders’ mean strength would be higher than the general poplulation’s mean. Compared to strength athletes though, I’d presume bodybuilders would not express greater strength and would, in fact, show lower mean strength at the five prospective lifts.

90

That’s what the Smith Machine is for. What kind of barbarians are in your gym?

1 Like
91

Depends on the year. Franco had a refrigerator carry setup that he practiced with prior to competing. He hurt his knee using it and then blew it out in the actual WSM, because he competed injured. The subsequent lawsuit is why the show was sold and left the US for a long time.

92

That would be senseless if Gordon’s making the claim that he’s great. I’m unfamiliar with him, and therefore I must ask if he is? If yes, I agree, otherwise I posit that he’s merely suggestion that everyone else sucks and his level is “acceptable”. Personally, I do not know any top-tier athletes but my experience with people who are somewhat above and beyond is that a lot of them consider themselves garbage.

Or maybe, has there historically been a figure much greater than him? Like a Louis Cyr of grappling? Because, I’d presume that if you were the greatest person alive at some activity, but not the greatest person that ever lived that’ll leave your very disappointed in an activity where you are measured against the accomplishment of your peers (somewhat cyclical argument I guess).

1 Like
93

Akira Toriyama’s “anatomy” can at least be excused because he was drawing a lot of aliens. The same cannot be said for Rob Liefeld. I’ll quote an “appreciation” article,

“Hey dudes, how many abs are on a guy? Like a million? […]”

1 Like
94

This entire argument is absurd. Professional (and even amateur) bodybuilders are all very strong. Is their 500# squat as heavy as some powerlifter’s 800# squats? No, obviously. But it’s a lot higher than a novice’s 150# squat.

You have to be “strong” to get big. Period.

3 Likes
95

Royce Gracie was far better than nearly everybody (maybe those who trained with him were about the same), when he was in his prime. He is not great by today’s standards though. He was the first to use Jui Jitsu in MMA, and nobody really understood what he was doing. He won UFC tournaments against guys 100 lbs heavier than him. Then he retired, and the sport grew (introduced weight classes, more rules). He came back a few years later and fought in his weight class and got his ass whooped.

96

I haven’t run into the ad hoc gym locker but it’s often someone leisurely standing over it or doing set after set after set, which is fine, but I often think “omg, why is someone always on this?”

Actually when I’m pressed for time I just do GHR’s instead, not back extensions on the GHR, because hardly anyone uses it.

97

Bodybuilders like to be strong, and powerlifters like to have good physiques, so there’s a lot of crossover between the two sports. An example is pro bodybuilder Eddie Robinson, who benched 610 at 220, when he was 19. This was an unofficial world record, as it was done in an exhibition, and also makes Eddie the first teen to bench over 600 (Anthony clark was the first to do it in a competition).
Interview.

970×546 127 KB

1 Like
98

E2 shoots up igf1 which makes it more androgenic than testosterone for sure, since it triggers 5a reductase and DHT. But it’s an indirect mechanism.

There’s a reason why AIs seem to keep acne under control. Acne is driven by androgens. Why would reducing estradiol which is great for the skin, reduce acne?

Because E2 is more androgenic than test, by way of igf1.

99

Um, no. That doesn’t change the physical properties of E2. This all falls within certain lited returns anyway. Having an E2of 150 isn’t going to do more for you than an E2 of 50, in any practical measure of strength or hypertrophy. Too little is bad, but more is not always better. Havinga total test of 3000 WILL do more for those things than having a total test of 1000 however. So, which is actually more androgenic?

100

Well I’m not here to debate on the internet. I’m only saying that’s what happens in every single human body, not “here’s my bro logic that makes sense to my bro brain”

So testosterone would be more androgenic and anabolic than the igf1-GH-E2 axis.

Fascinating.

101

Now I’m curious. Why do people take AIs if high E2 is potentially anabolic and at least not worse? This is not an area in which I know anything, so sorry if that’s a dumb question.