Gymnastics Biceps

Off Topic
141

[quote]Jessman wrote:
westclock your an idiot if you think gymnasts are not impressively strong haha… you fucking fool[/quote]

An impressive job of reviving a very old thread to do nothing but attack me.

I will not reopen this debate further, formulate some real opinions of your own instead of following the socio-politically correct crowd of lemmings.

Who’s the “fucking fool” now ?

And yes I also think Amanda needs to make good on her “threat”, most of us would very much enjoy it until we blacked out.

142

Ok,

Who says small guys can’t be impressive AT ALL?

It is very impressive to see Brian Schwab bench 600lb at a weight of what… <170lb?.
It is even MORE impressive to see Ryan Kennelly bench 1075lb, even though he is heavier. It is just a shit ton of weight.

143

kinda agree with prof x on this, but as amanda says if your doing a movement every day you will become better(stronger at that movement but only to a point, and so what if body building isnt functional, thats not the point

144

[quote]AmandaSC wrote:
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]

That sounds…well…a little exciting. Have any pics/vids?

145

I think too many people worry about the opinions of others, shouldnt’ we all just be pushing for our personal bests? If I could tack on a few more inches of height I know I would, even if it means I have to work harder in the gym. (lol) But till then I’ll work with what I’ve got.

It’s so funny to read all the defensiveness, reminds me of the steriod forums. Apparently everyone has an excuse why they aren’t where they want to be.

  1. If you’re tall it’s because you aren’t short
  2. If your short it’s because you aren’t tall
  3. If your natural it’s because you don’t use juice
  4. And if you see anyone doing something you haven’t dedicated the effort to yet, it’s because they have it easier (see 1-3)
146

wow, its still alive…

147

[quote]Westclock wrote:
strength relative to bodyweight is not the same thing as strength.

Those guys are probably weaker than most guys who just go to the gym and lift half assed on a steady diet of fast food, simply because of how small they are. Granted they are highly developed for their size, but thats like saying a jacked midget is impressive, hes still a midget.

this is mostly because the average male gymnast is 5’6" and 140. many are as low as 5’4 and 125 pounds. Thats a female like build to say the least.

For most women it would like dating a child.

I will never be jealous of a male smaller than my girl.

Ill take my extra 8 inches of height, and 90 pounds of muscle thank you very much.

[/quote]

Can you do lateral raises with 70 lbs dumbbells and hold them at the top for 3-5 seconds? That is the kind of strength required for a 140 lbs male to do an inverted iron cross. And many Olympic gymnasts can do much harder moves.

148

[quote]Gael wrote:
Westclock wrote:
strength relative to bodyweight is not the same thing as strength.

Those guys are probably weaker than most guys who just go to the gym and lift half assed on a steady diet of fast food, simply because of how small they are. Granted they are highly developed for their size, but thats like saying a jacked midget is impressive, hes still a midget.

this is mostly because the average male gymnast is 5’6" and 140. many are as low as 5’4 and 125 pounds. Thats a female like build to say the least.

For most women it would like dating a child.

I will never be jealous of a male smaller than my girl.

Ill take my extra 8 inches of height, and 90 pounds of muscle thank you very much.

Can you do lateral raises with 70 lbs dumbbells and hold them at the top for 3-5 seconds? That is the kind of strength required for a 140 lbs male to do an inverted iron cross. And many Olympic gymnasts can do much harder moves.[/quote]

It is not equivalent to an iron cross unless you take into account the length of my arm versus their shorter arms.

Nor do I specifically train that particular movement.

That said I have done lateral raises with a 60 before with a much longer arm.

I use steroids and now have over 100 pounds on these guys, it doesn’t seem like a very fair comparison.

Why dont we have a deadlift contest ? Or a bench ? or a squat ? or Rows ? or Farmer Walks ?

Id love to see these guys attempt the movements I do on a weekly basis.

You cant compare us so directly, they couldn’t do what I do any more than I could do what they do, as my joints could never support my weight in those movements.

149

[quote]Westclock wrote:
Gael wrote:
Westclock wrote:
strength relative to bodyweight is not the same thing as strength.

Those guys are probably weaker than most guys who just go to the gym and lift half assed on a steady diet of fast food, simply because of how small they are. Granted they are highly developed for their size, but thats like saying a jacked midget is impressive, hes still a midget.

this is mostly because the average male gymnast is 5’6" and 140. many are as low as 5’4 and 125 pounds. Thats a female like build to say the least.

For most women it would like dating a child.

I will never be jealous of a male smaller than my girl.

Ill take my extra 8 inches of height, and 90 pounds of muscle thank you very much.

Can you do lateral raises with 70 lbs dumbbells and hold them at the top for 3-5 seconds? That is the kind of strength required for a 140 lbs male to do an inverted iron cross. And many Olympic gymnasts can do much harder moves.

It is not equivalent to an iron cross unless you take into account the length of my arm versus their shorter arms.

Nor do I specifically train that particular movement.

That said I have done lateral raises with a 60 before with a much longer arm.

I use steroids and now have over 100 pounds on these guys, it doesn’t seem like a very fair comparison.

Why dont we have a deadlift contest ? Or a bench ? or a squat ? or Rows ? or Farmer Walks ?

Id love to see these guys attempt the movements I do on a weekly basis.

You cant compare us so directly, they couldn’t do what I do any more than I could do what they do, as my joints could never support my weight in those movements.

[/quote]

Did he mean 1 rep with 70 lbs db’s holding them 3-5 sec at the top?
That would be a joke.

I doubt that those gymnasts can do a standing (reasonably strict) set of 8-12 or whatever laterals with the 70’s… Or does anyone have a vid of that ? (I’m seriously interested, not for arguments sake or anything… But you’d need some pretty damn short arms to do that and not have huge delts at the same time imo…)

150

[quote]Westclock wrote:
Jessman wrote:
westclock your an idiot if you think gymnasts are not impressively strong haha… you fucking fool

An impressive job of reviving a very old thread to do nothing but attack me.

I will not reopen this debate further, formulate some real opinions of your own instead of following the socio-politically correct crowd of lemmings.

Who’s the “fucking fool” now ?

And yes I also think Amanda needs to make good on her “threat”, most of us would very much enjoy it until we blacked out.[/quote]

hahaha for what it’s worth I missed it the first time and I enjoyed your comments. Something about truthful bluntness makes me chuckle.

The relative weight-strength guys are the same ones that think a guy working out with 500 lbs at a body weight of 225 is under the same stress as a guy working out with 260 lbs at a body weight of 130 because they are both “really trying just as hard”. Ummmm, no. The guy moving weights that could actually kill a person is probably under just a bit more strain.

Oh and I’m 5’9" but what ya gonna do? My dad is 6’4" and it’s not like I can kick my mom in the womb. At least not this close to Thanksgiving.

151

[quote]Cephalic_Carnage wrote:

Did he mean 1 rep with 70 lbs db’s holding them 3-5 sec at the top?
That would be a joke.

I doubt that those gymnasts can do a standing (reasonably strict) set of 8-12 or whatever laterals with the 70’s… Or does anyone have a vid of that ? (I’m seriously interested, not for arguments sake or anything… But you’d need some pretty damn short arms to do that and not have huge delts at the same time imo…)
[/quote]

That goes back to these guys acting like these are tiny supermen. I use 70’s for lateral raises. I would like to think my delts LOOK like it too.

I doubt any of these guys are using that much weight for exercises like that unless, as you pointed out, their arms are about 5 inches long.

152

An amateur bodybuilder that placed in the top 20 of a contest would blow “gymnastic biceps” out of the water. I see people walking around and everyday gym with better biceps than that guy. Curls are gonna build bigger and better biceps than any ring exercise or training can.

Also forgot the other threads where people are all amazed at the size of speed-skater things. Work your legs for a couple years and you will have legs bigger than most speed skaters

153

Although I agree in what has been said above (that BB style weight training is the best way to build muscle), I think there is a point in observing how different athletes have specific body parts that hypertrophy to an amazing level (considering the fact that they are not concerned with hypertrophy). For example: Swimmer lats, Speed Skating Quads, Gymnasts arms and abs, Olympic lifter traps… and the list goes on. It should be common knowledge that if you are training directly to gain mass, you are going to gain more mass than an athlete whose concern is to do better in his sport.

Now, coming back to the point, I find that it is possible to analyze a few things, speed skater have good quads and cyclists have good calves, these sports require a lot of explosion and time under tension, so it would be nice to include these concep´ts in your workout (not 100% effective all the time but still worth trying). Another example are the big shoulders from gymnasts, they apply force in several different angles to their shoulder. I believe this is worth considering.

154

[quote]Player wrote:
Although I agree in what has been said above (that BB style weight training is the best way to build muscle), I think there is a point in observing how different athletes have specific body parts that hypertrophy to an amazing level (considering the fact that they are not concerned with hypertrophy). For example: Swimmer lats, Speed Skating Quads, Gymnasts arms and abs, Olympic lifter traps… and the list goes on. It should be common knowledge that if you are training directly to gain mass, you are going to gain more mass than an athlete whose concern is to do better in his sport.

Now, coming back to the point, I find that it is possible to analyze a few things, speed skater have good quads and cyclists have good calves, these sports require a lot of explosion and time under tension, so it would be nice to include these concep´ts in your workout (not 100% effective all the time but still worth trying). Another example are the big shoulders from gymnasts, they apply force in several different angles to their shoulder. I believe this is worth considering.[/quote]

You may want to spend more time on the concept that no one is made an Olympic caliber athlete from no talent and no genetic proficiency at the events in the first place.

It doesn’t matter if Billy Nobody does gymnastics in his free time. Unless he is genetically predisposed through height, muscle adaptation and athletic talent, he will not be building much of anything impressive by training like that.

When it comes to bodybuilders, they are quick to scream, “genetics!!”. Yet everyone somehow thinks they can look like an Olympic gymnast as if genetics aren’t the primary reason they are even good at that sport.

155

[quote]Professor X wrote:
Player wrote:
Although I agree in what has been said above (that BB style weight training is the best way to build muscle), I think there is a point in observing how different athletes have specific body parts that hypertrophy to an amazing level (considering the fact that they are not concerned with hypertrophy). For example: Swimmer lats, Speed Skating Quads, Gymnasts arms and abs, Olympic lifter traps… and the list goes on. It should be common knowledge that if you are training directly to gain mass, you are going to gain more mass than an athlete whose concern is to do better in his sport.

Now, coming back to the point, I find that it is possible to analyze a few things, speed skater have good quads and cyclists have good calves, these sports require a lot of explosion and time under tension, so it would be nice to include these concep´ts in your workout (not 100% effective all the time but still worth trying). Another example are the big shoulders from gymnasts, they apply force in several different angles to their shoulder. I believe this is worth considering.

You may want to spend more time on the concept that no one is made an Olympic caliber athlete from no talent and no genetic proficiency at the events in the first place.

It doesn’t matter if Billy Nobody does gymnastics in his free time. Unless he is genetically predisposed through height, muscle adaptation and athletic talent, he will not be building much of anything impressive by training like that.

When it comes to bodybuilders, they are quick to scream, “genetics!!”. Yet everyone somehow thinks they can look like an Olympic gymnast as if genetics aren’t the primary reason they are even good at that sport.
[/quote]

That makes sense, genetics do play a big role on how somebody develops, I am not stating that if you train like a gymnast you’ll get huge biceps, I am actually just pointin out that if a large number of athletes in one sport have a specific muscle that is more developed it may have to do with the points of flexion, angles of contraction, force, but that is just speculation. And it is true that high level athletes tend to be genetically predisposed towards their sport and therefore the muscles who are mostly needed and used in the sport tend to hypertrophy more.

156

I think I have a brain tumour.

157

This thread has gone on way too long, but like a car accident I feel obliged to contribute.

Lets take a few well known body building principals to get big:

  1. Frequency has something to do with with building muscle. DC, HFT, etc all rely on working out as often as your body allows you to recover based on CNS.

  2. Some muscles respond to higher reps and longer time under tension. We all know biceps and quads fall under this range, e.g. DC widowmakers or going down the rack with bicep curls.

  3. Progression is king.

  4. You need to eat lots.

  5. You need great recovery skills, Ronnie was notorious for his recovery.

Now lets tie that to gymnastics. Your average Olympic level gymnast:

  1. Trains their body at an incredibly high level of frequency.

  2. Does high-rep, longer time under tension work on some upper body moves, e.g. iron cross and bicep/shoulder, tumbling on quads.

  3. Progresses, moves from simple moves to holding moves longer with more strength (e.g. handstand to iron cross)

  4. Eat gigantic amounts of protein and calories.

  5. Incredible recovery skills by nature of having olympic athlete level genes and by nurture of training very frequently since they were 4 years old.

  6. Perform 3-5 similar holds in a short set… sounds kind of like rest-pause

  7. Often does static holds (i.e. negatives)

Ta-da, gymnasts are buff because they incorporate some of the exact same principals of body building. Some body parts are more buff than others based on the movements a gymnast does.

158

It’s also a time issue…most gymnast have been doing the exercises their whole life. If you start doing body weight exercises when you 8 years old the muscles start to grow into what your doing.

I know some ex-gymnasts that haven’t been on the mats in years nor do they use weights but they still have the cuts in their arms and legs…how is that possible? I see the same with female sprinters…even after they retire, they still have the shape…pretty interesting

159

[quote]Westclock wrote:
Gael wrote:
Westclock wrote:
strength relative to bodyweight is not the same thing as strength.

Those guys are probably weaker than most guys who just go to the gym and lift half assed on a steady diet of fast food, simply because of how small they are. Granted they are highly developed for their size, but thats like saying a jacked midget is impressive, hes still a midget.

this is mostly because the average male gymnast is 5’6" and 140. many are as low as 5’4 and 125 pounds. Thats a female like build to say the least.

For most women it would like dating a child.

I will never be jealous of a male smaller than my girl.

Ill take my extra 8 inches of height, and 90 pounds of muscle thank you very much.

Can you do lateral raises with 70 lbs dumbbells and hold them at the top for 3-5 seconds? That is the kind of strength required for a 140 lbs male to do an inverted iron cross. And many Olympic gymnasts can do much harder moves.

It is not equivalent to an iron cross unless you take into account the length of my arm versus their shorter arms.

Nor do I specifically train that particular movement.

That said I have done lateral raises with a 60 before with a much longer arm.

I use steroids and now have over 100 pounds on these guys, it doesn’t seem like a very fair comparison.

Why dont we have a deadlift contest ? Or a bench ? or a squat ? or Rows ? or Farmer Walks ?

Id love to see these guys attempt the movements I do on a weekly basis.

You cant compare us so directly, they couldn’t do what I do any more than I could do what they do, as my joints could never support my weight in those movements.

[/quote]

Dude, you’re the one who started making comparisons.

You wrote:

Those guys are probably weaker than most guys who just go to the gym and lift half assed on a steady diet of fast food

Hopefully you have realized that you are wrong. “Most guys” are nowhere near the strength of Olympic gymnasts.

It was you who started ripping on the goals of others in an effort to show that you aren’t jealous and that in fact girls like you more.

You started out trying to claim that ‘the average fast food junkie is stronger than an olympic gymnast’ and now you have changed your tune to ‘I am stronger than an olympic gymnast.’

I have nothing but respect for people who are able to climb to the top of the world in their particular sport. Apparently you feel like you have to remind people that their achievements aren’t all that, because hey you’re taller and chicks dig you.

A midget can’t ever be impressive, because, well, he’s a midget. Duh. If only Andrzej Stanaszek had realized this before he squatted 662 @ 114 completely raw so he could have realized he was wasting his time and pursued better things like mediocre lifting and fast food.

160

[quote]Professor X wrote:
Cephalic_Carnage wrote:

Did he mean 1 rep with 70 lbs db’s holding them 3-5 sec at the top?
That would be a joke.

I doubt that those gymnasts can do a standing (reasonably strict) set of 8-12 or whatever laterals with the 70’s… Or does anyone have a vid of that ? (I’m seriously interested, not for arguments sake or anything… But you’d need some pretty damn short arms to do that and not have huge delts at the same time imo…)

That goes back to these guys acting like these are tiny supermen. I use 70’s for lateral raises. I would like to think my delts LOOK like it too.

I doubt any of these guys are using that much weight for exercises like that unless, as you pointed out, their arms are about 5 inches long.[/quote]

If a 140 lbs person does an inverted iron cross – how is that any easier than the same guy doing 70 lbs lateral raise? I don’t know which is harder, but I am sure they are in the same ballpark.

Your delts are huge and strong, but remember, westclock wrote:

Those guys are probably weaker than most guys who just go to the gym and lift half assed on a steady diet of fast food

This is the object of discussion, and it is absurd.