Meh, relative strength is a very usefull thing if you have to climb a mountain. Not very usefull if you have to move a truck.
It has its place. whether or not it is important depends on the sport you are doing or what forum you are trolling. The later being the most common sport for people with an opinion on the topic. Everyone else within a sport that needs it just takes it for granted.
It could be fun to start a thread about performance cars and we can all gush about how important the power to weight ratio is.
Only bodybuilders can not understand how usefull ratios can be.
[quote]undeadlift wrote:
DanErickson wrote:
Brant_Drake wrote:
Even Bruce Lee said “A stronger muscle, is a bigger muscle.”
Scroll down to the physical fitness section.
I hate it when people quote wikipedia, what a useless piece of shit that thing is.
Wiki has some truths in it, but you’re right in the broader sense because wiki is too unreliable. It can be used at the start of any research, but it must certainly be left out of the bibliography.[/quote]
Look at it this way. Relatively an ant is about 100 times as strong as a gorilla. But if you would enlarge the ant to the size of the gorilla the pull of gravity would be too great for its body to bear. Goes to demonstrate how silly “relative” strength is. If the people here would rather be an ant than a gorilla I think it’s safe to assume you went to the wrong site. Do you really wanna be an ant?
Gravity can’t have that big of an effect on insects, there used to be huge ones during the Late Carboniferous and Early Permian eras. I’m pretty sure the reason insects don’t get big anymore has to do with the concentration of atmospheric oxygen and the insects respiration system. Either way I’m pretty sure gorillas and ants have little to do with human sporting events.
I have seen a physicist claim that if ants were the size of humans they could not stand up due to gravity.
Exactly. It’s the same reason humans can’t be 30 feet tall.