Gymnastics Biceps

Off Topic
121

THIS IS A GODDAMNED BODYBUILDING FORUM,
WHO THE FUCK WANTS TO HAVE ARMS LIKE A GYMNAST ON A FRIGGIN BODYBUILDING FORUM ???

Go post this shit in “Beginners” or over at “Strength Sports” (if gymnastics can be considered such?).

Also, seriously, Rack Chins beat the fuck out of chin-ups for back-width, and we all know how to get big biceps, right?

Gymnasts are good at what Gymnasts do, Bodybuilders are good at what Bodybuilders do, that’s it.

Small and big dudes still need to do pretty much the same shit in order to get big and strong.

So why is this topic so damn interesting that you all have to argue about it?

122

[quote]Enjoy The Pain wrote:
Of course a big guy will never be able to do as many chins as a small guy [/quote]

so we’re in agreeance?

123

[quote]Professor X wrote:
WhiteFlash wrote:
But, no one [unless i missed it] is calling the “bigger” guys out for not being able to do anything but push heavy weights.

Gee, they actually do it all of the time. Even the authors here do it which is why there has been so much debate about the uselessness of the word “functional”. They basically claim that bodybuilders aren’t functional with every bodybuilding related article from at least two of the authors here…yet you have missed this?[/quote]

Prof, you and I both know how stupid that is. So why wouldn’t the same hold true when the roles are reversed? Someone who’s 250 [Hell 220] and strong as an ox is impressive to me. So is someone who’s damn near half that size and is strong as an ox. Discounting one’s achievements due to their size is foolish and arrogant. Not puting that on you, puting out there for those that have and will.

124

Enjoythe pain, thanks for posting that.

125

[quote]WhiteFlash wrote:
Professor X wrote:
WhiteFlash wrote:
But, no one [unless i missed it] is calling the “bigger” guys out for not being able to do anything but push heavy weights.

Gee, they actually do it all of the time. Even the authors here do it which is why there has been so much debate about the uselessness of the word “functional”. They basically claim that bodybuilders aren’t functional with every bodybuilding related article from at least two of the authors here…yet you have missed this?

Prof, you and I both know how stupid that is. So why wouldn’t the same hold true when the roles are reversed? Someone who’s 250 [Hell 220] and strong as an ox is impressive to me. So is someone who’s damn near half that size and is strong as an ox. Discounting one’s achievements due to their size is foolish and arrogant. Not puting that on you, puting out there for those that have and will.[/quote]

“Strong as an ox” is apparently relative now? I don’t consider being able to hold yourself in the air at only 130lbs “strong as an ox”. It is RESPECTED because these are professional athletes and it takes more heart and drive to reach that level than most people on the planet could ever put together…but this attempt by some of you to make them even more impressive than they are by trying to make it all “relative” makes no sense at all.

These are short guys who are well trained. They can do what they do in part because they don’t have much body mass at all. If you want to pretend that they are all “strong as oxen”, then so be it. I won’t be joining that party.

I don’t need to bestow any additional superpowers onto someone simply because they are good at gymnastics.

They are great gymnasts. Anyone adding much more than that may have some personal issues to work out.

126

[quote]WhiteFlash wrote:
Professor X wrote:
WhiteFlash wrote:
But, no one [unless i missed it] is calling the “bigger” guys out for not being able to do anything but push heavy weights.

Gee, they actually do it all of the time. Even the authors here do it which is why there has been so much debate about the uselessness of the word “functional”. They basically claim that bodybuilders aren’t functional with every bodybuilding related article from at least two of the authors here…yet you have missed this?

Prof, you and I both know how stupid that is. So why wouldn’t the same hold true when the roles are reversed? Someone who’s 250 [Hell 220] and strong as an ox is impressive to me. So is someone who’s damn near half that size and is strong as an ox. Discounting one’s achievements due to their size is foolish and arrogant. Not puting that on you, puting out there for those that have and will.[/quote]

It’s foolish to group “all” bodybuilders as being not functional; I’ve seen a lot of bodybuilders who are extreemly good athletes AS well as huge guys, and are quite “functional”. Also there’s some that aren’t as gifted with things outside of the weight room.

You can’t deny that past a certain point your height to weight ratio plays a role in general functionality outside of the weight room. Functional deffinatly IS a something to consider but a lot of smaller guys use it as something to throw in the face of bigger guys. Which is really stupid.

Each of us individually trains their own way, our past history such as the sports we played, how we trained and our activity level all determine how “functional” we grow up to be.

In reality, to be elite at any sport you have to specialize. To specialize means sacraficing variety. Gymnasts like bodybuilders sacrafice (for example) leg size (most elite ringsmen look VERY hypertrophic up top but comparably very little hypertrophy in the legs) It makes them great ringsmen but not so great powerlifters for example.

You can’t be an elite gymnast and a bodybuilder at the same time, same as you can’t be a body builder and sprinter or swimmer.

We all have goals, those goals determine our function.

127

[quote]kensai01 wrote:
WhiteFlash wrote:
Professor X wrote:
WhiteFlash wrote:
But, no one [unless i missed it] is calling the “bigger” guys out for not being able to do anything but push heavy weights.

Gee, they actually do it all of the time. Even the authors here do it which is why there has been so much debate about the uselessness of the word “functional”. They basically claim that bodybuilders aren’t functional with every bodybuilding related article from at least two of the authors here…yet you have missed this?

Prof, you and I both know how stupid that is. So why wouldn’t the same hold true when the roles are reversed? Someone who’s 250 [Hell 220] and strong as an ox is impressive to me. So is someone who’s damn near half that size and is strong as an ox. Discounting one’s achievements due to their size is foolish and arrogant. Not puting that on you, puting out there for those that have and will.

It’s foolish to group “all” bodybuilders as being not functional; I’ve seen a lot of bodybuilders who are extreemly good athletes AS well as huge guys, and are quite “functional”. Also there’s some that aren’t as gifted with things outside of the weight room.

You can’t deny that past a certain point your height to weight ratio plays a role in general functionality outside of the weight room. Functional deffinatly IS a something to consider but a lot of smaller guys use it as something to throw in the face of bigger guys. Which is really stupid.

Each of us individually trains their own way, our past history such as the sports we played, how we trained and our activity level all determine how “functional” we grow up to be.

In reality, to be elite at any sport you have to specialize. To specialize means sacraficing variety. Gymnasts like bodybuilders sacrafice (for example) leg size (most elite ringsmen look VERY hypertrophic up top but comparably very little hypertrophy in the legs) It makes them great ringsmen but not so great powerlifters for example.

You can’t be an elite gymnast and a bodybuilder at the same time, same as you can’t be a body builder and sprinter or swimmer.

We all have goals, those goals determine our function.

[/quote]

For the record, I can still run up the stairs in my house without getting winded, same for running around with the dog (a rottweiler is built for short sprints, not lame endurance walks ;P) and I can wipe my ass just fine, no weird implements necessary.

I can also open jars and all that without any trouble…
And if anything, then I’m more flexible than I used to be (thanks extreme stretches and broomstick stretch). How am I not functional?

As long as you do some cardio and are active enough to allow your body to get used to the weight it’s carrying, then I just fail to see how my bodyweight would be an impediment in regards to daily life…
With the exception that I have to sleep on my back. Wow.

The only thing I’m really sacrificing is money for all the food I need…

Bodybuilding does not make you non-functional or anything like that.
It makes you bigger and stronger.
If you also want to get better at something else, you’ll just have to go and do that other thing. Big deal.

(I’m not directing this towards kensai01 here, just a general rant)

128

I call shenanigans. Prove it.

[quote]Cephalic_Carnage wrote:

I can also open jars and all that without any trouble… [/quote]

129

[quote]Enjoy The Pain wrote:
zephead4747 wrote:
regressing in muscle mass do to chin ups is totally different then progressing in muscle mass to use more weight.

as in, for a big guy to do more chins, he would ultimately have to get weaker and lose size to so it(no one 250+ pounds is doing 60 chins). Whereas a small guy would actually have to make progress to do what the big guy does.

Nobody said you’d have to regress in muscle mass to do more chins. The following paragraph is from an article by John Allstadt. Here is the link: 404 | Dragon Door

"John Grimek and Olympic lifting legend John Davis could both chin themselves six or seven times with EITHER ARM, at bodyweights of around 200 pounds. Eugene Sandow could perform a one-arm chin with ANY ONE OF HIS TEN FINGERS, at a bodyweight of around 190.

Marvin Eder could perform 11 one-arm pullups at a bodyweight of no less than 195, and also do 80 (that’s right, 80) consecutive two-arm pullups. For you smaller guys, consider the many gymnasts out there who can perform numerous one-arm pullups, or even more frightening, the rock climbers of today who can chin themselves with as much as 150% of bodyweight… with ONE arm!

And of course, for you really big guys, think about this: Bert Assarti, a strength legend from the early 1940’s, could chin himself three times with either arm at a bodyweight of 265 pounds! Mr. Assarti could also do a two-arm pullup with over 200 pounds of additional weight strapped to his body."

I see some of your points, but the assumption that you have to lose muscle mass to do more chins is just stupid. Of course a big guy will never be able to do as many chins as a small guy, but you clearly stated that he’d have to lose muscle mass to do more chins. How about gaining more strenght?

However, the whole discussion is pointless. Yes, gymnasts are amazingly strong. Yes, they are not nearly as strong as powerlifters or strongmen. Who cares? After all, they are gymnasts, they have to be good at gymnastics. The whole thing reminds me of the stupid but often asked question “who is stronger, powerlifters or strongmen”, just worse.[/quote]

Is that article even true come on a rock climber can pull himself up with one arm with an added 150% of weight? Hard to believe and Sandow could lift himself up with any one of his fingers…lol if he did it with his index finger could he stick his pinky out at the same time to look fancy?

130

[quote]zephead4747 wrote:
Enjoy The Pain wrote:
Of course a big guy will never be able to do as many chins as a small guy

so we’re in agreeance?[/quote]

I think so. Sorry, seems like I missed the point.

131

[quote]xXSeraphimXx wrote:
Is that article even true come on a rock climber can pull himself up with one arm with an added 150% of weight? Hard to believe and Sandow could lift himself up with any one of his fingers…lol if he did it with his index finger could he stick his pinky out at the same time to look fancy?[/quote]

Of course I have no proof that Sandow could perform this skill, but from what I’ve seen it’s not so hard to believe. The former gymnast I’ve mentioned in my first post on this thread can perform 3 one-arm pullups with either arm at a BW of 220.

132

[quote]tribunaldude wrote:
I call shenanigans. Prove it.

Cephalic_Carnage wrote:

I can also open jars and all that without any trouble…

[/quote]

Ok, ok, so I lied about that one…

But if I can’t, no gymnast in this world can!

        ;-)
133

[quote]Professor X wrote:
WhiteFlash wrote:
Professor X wrote:
WhiteFlash wrote:
But, no one [unless i missed it] is calling the “bigger” guys out for not being able to do anything but push heavy weights.

Gee, they actually do it all of the time. Even the authors here do it which is why there has been so much debate about the uselessness of the word “functional”. They basically claim that bodybuilders aren’t functional with every bodybuilding related article from at least two of the authors here…yet you have missed this?

Prof, you and I both know how stupid that is. So why wouldn’t the same hold true when the roles are reversed? Someone who’s 250 [Hell 220] and strong as an ox is impressive to me. So is someone who’s damn near half that size and is strong as an ox.

Discounting one’s achievements due to their size is foolish and arrogant. Not puting that on you, puting out there for those that have and will.

“Strong as an ox” is apparently relative now? I don’t consider being able to hold yourself in the air at only 130lbs “strong as an ox”.

It is RESPECTED because these are professional athletes and it takes more heart and drive to reach that level than most people on the planet could ever put together…but this attempt by some of you to make them even more impressive than they are by trying to make it all “relative” makes no sense at all.

These are short guys who are well trained. They can do what they do in part because they don’t have much body mass at all. If you want to pretend that they are all “strong as oxen”, then so be it. I won’t be joining that party.

I don’t need to bestow any additional superpowers onto someone simply because they are good at gymnastics.

They are great gymnasts. Anyone adding much more than that may have some personal issues to work out.[/quote]

Sounds to me like the “bigger” guys need work with their insecurities. If you think these guys are only strong 'cause they’re small, you have “personal issues” you need to work on. There’s no other way around it.

134

[quote]WhiteFlash wrote:

Sounds to me like the “bigger” guys need work with their insecurities. If you think these guys are only strong 'cause they’re small, you have “personal issues” you need to work on. There’s no other way around it.[/quote]

What? I didn’t write that they were strong because they were small. In fact, I wrote that they clearly train harder than most ever could…yet you skipped all of that because I wrote that they can do many of those movements BECAUSE THEY AREN’T CARRYING MUCH BODY MASS.

Are you insane enough to deny that? There is a reason there aren’t 6’3" gymnasts hitting the Olympics. Are you saying you think body weight is not a factor in being a Olympic caliber gymnast?

Are you going to pretend that doing an Iron Cross at 130lbs is the same as someone 3 times that size doing it?

Please.

135

Today I learned from T-Nation that everyone is special. I’m gonna be a gymnast power lifter when I grow up. I will get the world record in the Iron Cross for twenty days and I will win the gold. Then a scientist and everyone and even Steven will say I’m the strongest and then there will be no more wars. And I’ll own a ninja school.

136

[quote]Qthulhu wrote:
Today I learned from T-Nation that everyone is special. I’m gonna be a gymnast power lifter when I grow up. I will get the world record in the Iron Cross for twenty days and I will win the gold. Then a scientist and everyone and even Steven will say I’m the strongest and then there will be no more wars. And I’ll own a ninja school.[/quote]

you’re gonna train tbt to accomplish this right? <_<

137

gymnastics super heavyweight division? That’d be a gas.

Love to see a big bellied powerlifter doing that silly rhythmic dancing crap.

138

[quote]Brown_Lifter wrote:
Qthulhu wrote:
Today I learned from T-Nation that everyone is special. I’m gonna be a gymnast power lifter when I grow up. I will get the world record in the Iron Cross for twenty days and I will win the gold. Then a scientist and everyone and even Steven will say I’m the strongest and then there will be no more wars. And I’ll own a ninja school.

you’re gonna train tbt to accomplish this right? <_<[/quote]

Go full retard? Everybody knows you never do a full retard. Never go full retard.

139

westclock your an idiot if you think gymnasts are not impressively strong haha… you fucking fool

140

[quote]AmandaSC wrote:
When you use the same muscle for hours at a time you better believe you get strong. I used to ride horses every day and I could have probably choked out a 200 lb man with my thighs back in the day. [/quote]

Bucket list:

  1. Get choked out by Amanda’s thighs.
  2. …
  3. …