I can’t believe we have two separate threads right now debating the term “functional.” When do we get to the part about who will win a fight?
[quote]malonetd wrote:
I can’t believe we have two separate threads right now debating the term “functional.” When do we get to the part about who will win a fight?
[/quote]
I will, always!
And I have learned my lesson, NEVER use the word functional on this board. All the fat powerlifters get their hizzy fits:P
[quote]Adamsson wrote:
All the fat powerlifters get their hizzy fits:P[/quote]
So do the skinny weak guys.
[quote]malonetd wrote:
Adamsson wrote:
All the fat powerlifters get their hizzy fits:P
So do the skinny weak guys.[/quote]
Gymnast dude does it all but has match stic legs 
Koing
For the record, I have no problem with the original poster or the video he posted. I think some of the stuff that gymnast does is impressive. I am impressed with a lot of strength and training feats.
I just don’t get the word “functional.” I don’t think anything from the first video is anymore functional than the video of Mendleson benching.
So, Adamsson, or anyone else, I’m not trying to pick a fight. It just seems like whenever anyone gets called out for using the word functional, soon after come the insults about fat powerliters and so on, and so on.
Both videos are cool. And, yes, both of them have been shown on this website plenty.
[quote]Koing wrote:
malonetd wrote:
Adamsson wrote:
All the fat powerlifters get their hizzy fits:P
So do the skinny weak guys.
Gymnast dude does it all but has match stic legs
Koing[/quote]
What about a gymnast who also OLs? Care to chime in on this one Koing? 
[quote]malonetd wrote:
For the record, I have no problem with the original poster or the video he posted. I think some of the stuff that gymnast does is impressive. I am impressed with a lot of strength and training feats.
I just don’t get the word “functional.” I don’t think anything from the first video is anymore functional than the video of Mendleson benching.
So, Adamsson, or anyone else, I’m not trying to pick a fight. It just seems like whenever anyone gets called out for using the word functional, soon after come the insults about fat powerliters and so on, and so on.
Both videos are cool. And, yes, both of them have been shown on this website plenty.[/quote]
i AM a fat powerlifter… it was a joke… (or, powerlifter in spe… )
[quote]Agressive Napkin wrote:
wonder how many pull ups he can do[/quote]
All of them.
That sideways pull-up is crazy.
[quote]malonetd wrote:
That’s petty good, but check out this amazing display of functional strength:
Scott Mendelson World Record 715lb Raw Bench Press - YouTube [/quote]
That is insane. I can’t imagne what 700lbs feels like.
However, I’m equally impressed by the size of the guy spotting in the green shirt. Good Lord!
[quote]malonetd wrote:
For the record, I have no problem with the original poster or the video he posted. I think some of the stuff that gymnast does is impressive. I am impressed with a lot of strength and training feats.
I just don’t get the word “functional.” I don’t think anything from the first video is anymore functional than the video of Mendleson benching.
So, Adamsson, or anyone else, I’m not trying to pick a fight. It just seems like whenever anyone gets called out for using the word functional, soon after come the insults about fat powerliters and so on, and so on.
Both videos are cool. And, yes, both of them have been shown on this website plenty.[/quote]
I think when people say ‘functional’ they mean what tends to be more useufl in ‘everyday life’. Most people aren’t out for a massive BP, DL or Squat etc. Specialise and be King at what you do 
[quote]Krollmonster wrote:
Koing wrote:
malonetd wrote:
Adamsson wrote:
All the fat powerlifters get their hizzy fits:P
So do the skinny weak guys.
Gymnast dude does it all but has match stic legs
Koing
What about a gymnast who also OLs? Care to chime in on this one Koing? :)[/quote]
Hmmmm…he’d be a freak Gymnast with big legs!
Koing
[quote]Koing wrote:
I think when people say ‘functional’ they mean what tends to be more useufl in ‘everyday life’.[/quote]
I get that, but how is anything in the first video more useful for everyday life. In this day and age, a person can get by with little or know physical skills or strengths. You don’t have to answer, like I said, I’m not trying to pick a fight.
Just throwin it out my definition of “functional” is the shit the cave man had to do to survive, so any strength with just your bare body is what personally impresses me the most. for example type in parkour in youtube and check out some of those videos, that shit blows my mind!
Not to take away from that sick bench, but I see that as brute strength not so much functional; but I still have mad respect for a man like that cause I know that shit is about as easy as those sideways pullups!
Check this video out if you havent seen it (from the movie District b13):
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=8970008800328106389&q=parkour&total=88767&start=0&num=100&so=0&type=search&plindex=4
I’m just constantly searching for some “unfunctional” strength.
“Nonfunctional” would be something like the leg press. So you leg press 1,000 lbs. So what? If you tried to squat with 50% that amount on your back, you’d snap in half. That’s nonfunctional because there’s no transfer, as has been said. It’s only useful in that one position.
Not that one video is “better” or more impressive than the other, they’re worlds apart. However, that is what is generally meant by the label “functional.” The confusing thing is that people have started labeling things “functional” or “nonfunctional” and leaving it at that.
Any exercise can be functional or nonfunctional, depending on the purpose which it is meant to serve. If you’re a gymanst, the bench press is nonfunctional. If you’re a shotputter, it’s not only functional, it’s essential. It’s practically the most important part of your training aside from the actual throwing.
So really it just boils down to choosing appropriate exercises to improve your performance in a given area.
[quote]rmccart1 wrote:
“Nonfunctional” would be something like the leg press. So you leg press 1,000 lbs. So what? If you tried to squat with 50% that amount on your back, you’d snap in half. That’s nonfunctional because there’s no transfer, as has been said. It’s only useful in that one position.
Not that one video is “better” or more impressive than the other, they’re worlds apart. However, that is what is generally meant by the label “functional.” The confusing thing is that people have started labeling things “functional” or “nonfunctional” and leaving it at that.
Any exercise can be functional or nonfunctional, depending on the purpose which it is meant to serve. If you’re a gymanst, the bench press is nonfunctional. If you’re a shotputter, it’s not only functional, it’s essential. It’s practically the most important part of your training aside from the actual throwing.
So really it just boils down to choosing appropriate exercises to improve your performance in a given area.[/quote]
great post
Here’s a couple of functional strength vids-
How about this?
Others have posted these before; just in case some of you haven’t seen them.
Cheers Chris
This debate’s always silly. They’re both ‘FUNCTIONAL’. Both guys can certainly do everyday tasks the majority of the population finds difficult with greater ease, although in different ways. While Scott Mendelson may be able to pull a car out of a ditch, he would not be able to climb up the side of an apartment building using only the drainage pipe in 6 seconds if he forgot his keys.
They’re EQUAL but NOT the SAME.
In a fight perspective, imagine Hulk vs. Spiderman, both could win, but in different ways.
[quote]Shoebolt wrote:
This debate’s always silly. They’re both ‘FUNCTIONAL’. Both guys can certainly do everyday tasks the majority of the population finds difficult with greater ease, although in different ways. While Scott Mendelson may be able to pull a car out of a ditch, he would not be able to climb up the side of an apartment building using only the drainage pipe in 6 seconds if he forgot his keys.
They’re EQUAL but NOT the SAME.
In a fight perspective, imagine Hulk vs. Spiderman, both could win, but in different ways.
[/quote]
Everyday you pull a car out of a ditch and climb a drainage pipe? Holy crap!
[quote]Shoebolt wrote:
This debate’s always silly. They’re both ‘FUNCTIONAL’. Both guys can certainly do everyday tasks the majority of the population finds difficult with greater ease, although in different ways. While Scott Mendelson may be able to pull a car out of a ditch, he would not be able to climb up the side of an apartment building using only the drainage pipe in 6 seconds if he forgot his keys.
They’re EQUAL but NOT the SAME.
In a fight perspective, imagine Hulk vs. Spiderman, both could win, but in different ways.
[/quote]
You know scott could go upstairs and break the door. Then hammer the hinges back in with his bare hands. While the other guy will climb all the pipes get to the window and not be able to open it because he can’t deadlift the window. Plus in a fight, I don’t think the guy has a web or spidey sense.
They do have weight classes for a reason.
Are you for real? You’re actually talking about which one would win in a fight?