LIMITS

Training
761

[quote]BrickHead wrote:

[quote]NikH wrote:
I don’t think it’s “scandinavian genetics” that makes a person bigger. I think it’s the lifestyle.
In the US people eat alot more food, alot more processed food, and exercise less on average than in Scandinavia.

Students in the US have generally less exercise in the school curriculum in my opinion, and also in their freetime they are less active.
In Scandinavia kids used to play soccer, basketball,icehockey etc afterschool by themselves for hours and on weekends.

When I went to middleschool in Finland, we would spend 6h in school, play soccer outside during breaks (we had a ball with us), go play more soccer after school, go play basketball during weekends, have pullup competitions etc. During winter it would be icehockey, and we even had some days organized by school when we would just play hockey the whole day once a month and the school would organize lunch etc. Also, it wasnt a “sports school”, I was in the “math-class” . Kids would join lots of sports clubs, for instance I was in the schools swimming team, track team, basketball team, soccer team, and then on my own competed in Judo and a shorter time in basketball.

When I got to US for highschool it was quite the opposite. During lunchbreak or breaks in general nobody moves around, people enjoy going to movies/out for a coffee more than exercising. Classes were longer but more slowpaced. Also, the varsity team had practise only twice a week. I am not saying it’s bad, it’s just a different lifestyle.

In general I think Scandinavian kids are more healthy, but kids in the US learn to work better. But it’s changing now probably in both countries with the computers and x-box, also at age 18 teens start to drink shitloads on average in Scandinavia (since it’s legal).

I dont think people in general are these “Vikings” you see on TV-shows anymore. Maybe when they were still chopping wood, and eating tons of fish.

on another note:

If I was to change the average American school, I would add more mandatory exercise, healthier food (seriously,- why do you serve soda, pizza and french fries to growing kids in a school cafeteria?), faster paced lectures/classes.

If I was to change the average Scandinavian school, I would add more homework and motivation (americans are better in motivating), tutorials, discussion. And there’s this strange idea that it’s ok to not do homework sometimes.[/quote]

I see what you’re saying but, from what I’ve learned (NOT an expert, and far from one), the evolution of and genetic differentiation between the branches of the white race-Alpine, Mediterranean, Nordic, East Baltic, and Dinaric–was set a LONG time ago, like during the Ice Age. And Nordics don’t only exist in Scandinavia. They’re all over Europe and the USA. A sizable chunk of Poland, Russia, Germany, Italy, France, and Spain are Nordic, as well as some other places. I don’t think lifestyle could explain the other traits the white sub-races have besides height and musculature, such as pigmentation, eye and hair color, skull shape, facial features, and so on.

Anyway, I don’t want to derail this thread, because I’m a history buff, and I can really start rambling about topics I like. [/quote]

This whole topic would make a great thread btw…

762

[quote]RATTLEHEAD wrote:

[quote]BrickHead wrote:

[quote]NikH wrote:
I don’t think it’s “scandinavian genetics” that makes a person bigger. I think it’s the lifestyle.
In the US people eat alot more food, alot more processed food, and exercise less on average than in Scandinavia.

Students in the US have generally less exercise in the school curriculum in my opinion, and also in their freetime they are less active.
In Scandinavia kids used to play soccer, basketball,icehockey etc afterschool by themselves for hours and on weekends.

When I went to middleschool in Finland, we would spend 6h in school, play soccer outside during breaks (we had a ball with us), go play more soccer after school, go play basketball during weekends, have pullup competitions etc. During winter it would be icehockey, and we even had some days organized by school when we would just play hockey the whole day once a month and the school would organize lunch etc. Also, it wasnt a “sports school”, I was in the “math-class” . Kids would join lots of sports clubs, for instance I was in the schools swimming team, track team, basketball team, soccer team, and then on my own competed in Judo and a shorter time in basketball.

When I got to US for highschool it was quite the opposite. During lunchbreak or breaks in general nobody moves around, people enjoy going to movies/out for a coffee more than exercising. Classes were longer but more slowpaced. Also, the varsity team had practise only twice a week. I am not saying it’s bad, it’s just a different lifestyle.

In general I think Scandinavian kids are more healthy, but kids in the US learn to work better. But it’s changing now probably in both countries with the computers and x-box, also at age 18 teens start to drink shitloads on average in Scandinavia (since it’s legal).

I dont think people in general are these “Vikings” you see on TV-shows anymore. Maybe when they were still chopping wood, and eating tons of fish.

on another note:

If I was to change the average American school, I would add more mandatory exercise, healthier food (seriously,- why do you serve soda, pizza and french fries to growing kids in a school cafeteria?), faster paced lectures/classes.

If I was to change the average Scandinavian school, I would add more homework and motivation (americans are better in motivating), tutorials, discussion. And there’s this strange idea that it’s ok to not do homework sometimes.[/quote]

I see what you’re saying but, from what I’ve learned (NOT an expert, and far from one), the evolution of and genetic differentiation between the branches of the white race-Alpine, Mediterranean, Nordic, East Baltic, and Dinaric–was set a LONG time ago, like during the Ice Age. And Nordics don’t only exist in Scandinavia. They’re all over Europe and the USA. A sizable chunk of Poland, Russia, Germany, Italy, France, and Spain are Nordic, as well as some other places. I don’t think lifestyle could explain the other traits the white sub-races have besides height and musculature, such as pigmentation, eye and hair color, skull shape, facial features, and so on.

Anyway, I don’t want to derail this thread, because I’m a history buff, and I can really start rambling about topics I like. [/quote]

This whole topic would make a great thread btw…
[/quote]

Thanks.

Yeah, in an off topic thread. But I hesitate to post in off topics because people in off topic threads can get VERY emotional, sensitive, and rude!

763

[quote]RATTLEHEAD wrote:
This whole topic would make a great thread btw…
[/quote]

Most definitely. Ever since I got into learning about BBing, I’ve heard people comment about certain advantages various heritages, or races have in regard to musculature or performance. I’m certainly not going to start searching for scientific studies backing any of this, because I’m sure it’s sensitive topic in some circles and proposing its findings as genuinely useful information might not go over well.

Didn’t Jimmy the Greek get in trouble for stating that black athletes had a natural advantage or something?

S

764

[quote]The Mighty Stu wrote:

[quote]RATTLEHEAD wrote:
This whole topic would make a great thread btw…
[/quote]

Most definitely. Ever since I got into learning about BBing, I’ve heard people comment about certain advantages various heritages, or races have in regard to musculature or performance. I’m certainly not going to start searching for scientific studies backing any of this, because I’m sure it’s sensitive topic in some circles and proposing its findings as genuinely useful information might not go over well.

Didn’t Jimmy the Greek get in trouble for stating that black athletes had a natural advantage or something?

S[/quote]

I remember when I was a kid, I more than once heard the rumor that black athletes were faster because they had an extra muscle in their legs. Is that what you’re talking about?

765

[quote]The Mighty Stu wrote:

[quote]RATTLEHEAD wrote:
This whole topic would make a great thread btw…
[/quote]

Most definitely. Ever since I got into learning about BBing, I’ve heard people comment about certain advantages various heritages, or races have in regard to musculature or performance. I’m certainly not going to start searching for scientific studies backing any of this, because I’m sure it’s sensitive topic in some circles and proposing its findings as genuinely useful information might not go over well.

Didn’t Jimmy the Greek get in trouble for stating that black athletes had a natural advantage or something?

S[/quote]

Over here a few years back a well knowned dr. in psychiatric or psychology(he did a radio show for many years)got in trouble for saying african americans had a lower IQ(compared to whites). He said you cannot blame me there was a study that came up with that data. It was done at McGill a real respected university.

He offered that the reason might be that years back the black who were bought and sent to the USA were the healthy and robust ones or maybe it was because their owners killed the ones who planned to escape or fight against their oppressors or a combination of these 2 factors.

As a boxing fan it is a well knowned fact that their average arm lenght gives them a small advantage.

766

[quote]cueball wrote:

[quote]The Mighty Stu wrote:

[quote]RATTLEHEAD wrote:
This whole topic would make a great thread btw…
[/quote]

Most definitely. Ever since I got into learning about BBing, I’ve heard people comment about certain advantages various heritages, or races have in regard to musculature or performance. I’m certainly not going to start searching for scientific studies backing any of this, because I’m sure it’s sensitive topic in some circles and proposing its findings as genuinely useful information might not go over well.

Didn’t Jimmy the Greek get in trouble for stating that black athletes had a natural advantage or something?

S[/quote]

I remember when I was a kid, I more than once heard the rumor that black athletes were faster because they had an extra muscle in their legs. Is that what you’re talking about?[/quote]

Something like that, moreso I think about fiber type breakdown. A black friends of mine recently remarked about his physical superiority due to ‘being selectively bred’. Certainly not a comment I’d make!!! -lol

S

767

[quote]The Mighty Stu wrote:

[quote]cueball wrote:

[quote]The Mighty Stu wrote:

[quote]RATTLEHEAD wrote:
This whole topic would make a great thread btw…
[/quote]

Most definitely. Ever since I got into learning about BBing, I’ve heard people comment about certain advantages various heritages, or races have in regard to musculature or performance. I’m certainly not going to start searching for scientific studies backing any of this, because I’m sure it’s sensitive topic in some circles and proposing its findings as genuinely useful information might not go over well.

Didn’t Jimmy the Greek get in trouble for stating that black athletes had a natural advantage or something?

S[/quote]

I remember when I was a kid, I more than once heard the rumor that black athletes were faster because they had an extra muscle in their legs. Is that what you’re talking about?[/quote]

Something like that, moreso I think about fiber type breakdown. A black friends of mine recently remarked about his physical superiority due to ‘being selectively bred’. Certainly not a comment I’d make!!! -lol

S[/quote]

Haha! Nice.

768

Just wait till an actual black guys shows up in this thread. You’ll all be in trouble then.

769

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]BrickHead wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:
There is no way at all for you to be able to tell exactly how much lean body mass someone has is actual dry muscle tissue. Your muscles are mostly water to start with and a contest depleted states are transitory.

We can calculate lean body mass, not the exact amount of dry muscle tissue without someone dying first.

[/quote]

Hence the concept of estimation.
[/quote]

? You can’t “estimate” how much dry muscle weight someone has because dry muscle weight is only around 22% of total muscle weight in a healthy person.[/quote]

Am I missing something here, or is “22%” not itself an estimate?

EDIT: That’s not meant to be sarcast BTW, just wondering.

770

[quote]Smashingweights wrote:
Just wait till an actual black guys shows up in this thread. You’ll all be in trouble then.[/quote]

Pretty sure WhiteFlash already posted.

771

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]BrickHead wrote:

Here’s what I’m going by: if you were to get very lean (not contest ready), like 10 you’d be much lighter than you think you will be, perhaps around 200 pounds give or take a few pounds.
[/quote]

That is your opinion. I don’t agree with you because I am 250lbs at about 15%. You seem to WANT me to have to diet down to 200lbs just to be 10% when nothing points to that.
[/quote]

Pretty easy way to tell if you are 15% bodyfat.

Calipers are VERY VERY prone to error…especially when you are “full house”.

Hydrostatic is the only real way to be sure.

And you are the only one who thinks you are 15% bodyfat…sorry dude, if Maiden is 15% you are well over 20%.

772

[quote]UtahLama wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]BrickHead wrote:

Here’s what I’m going by: if you were to get very lean (not contest ready), like 10 you’d be much lighter than you think you will be, perhaps around 200 pounds give or take a few pounds.
[/quote]

That is your opinion. I don’t agree with you because I am 250lbs at about 15%. You seem to WANT me to have to diet down to 200lbs just to be 10% when nothing points to that.
[/quote]

Pretty easy way to tell if you are 15% bodyfat.

Calipers are VERY VERY prone to error…especially when you are “full house”.

Hydrostatic is the only real way to be sure.

And you are the only one who thinks you are 15% bodyfat…sorry dude, if Maiden is 15% you are well over 20%.
[/quote]

Maiden took that pic on an empty stomach. If he had eaten a pizza right before, he would look just like X.

773

[quote]NikH wrote:
I don’t think it’s “scandinavian genetics” that makes a person bigger. I think it’s the lifestyle.
In the US people eat alot more food, alot more processed food, and exercise less on average than in Scandinavia.

Students in the US have generally less exercise in the school curriculum in my opinion, and also in their freetime they are less active.
In Scandinavia kids used to play soccer, basketball,icehockey etc afterschool by themselves for hours and on weekends.

When I went to middleschool in Finland, we would spend 6h in school, play soccer outside during breaks (we had a ball with us), go play more soccer after school, go play basketball during weekends, have pullup competitions etc. During winter it would be icehockey, and we even had some days organized by school when we would just play hockey the whole day once a month and the school would organize lunch etc. Also, it wasnt a “sports school”, I was in the “math-class” . Kids would join lots of sports clubs, for instance I was in the schools swimming team, track team, basketball team, soccer team, and then on my own competed in Judo and a shorter time in basketball.

When I got to US for highschool it was quite the opposite. During lunchbreak or breaks in general nobody moves around, people enjoy going to movies/out for a coffee more than exercising. Classes were longer but more slowpaced. Also, the varsity team had practise only twice a week. I am not saying it’s bad, it’s just a different lifestyle.

In general I think Scandinavian kids are more healthy, but kids in the US learn to work better. But it’s changing now probably in both countries with the computers and x-box, also at age 18 teens start to drink shitloads on average in Scandinavia (since it’s legal).

I dont think people in general are these “Vikings” you see on TV-shows anymore. Maybe when they were still chopping wood, and eating tons of fish.

on another note:

If I was to change the average American school, I would add more mandatory exercise, healthier food (seriously,- why do you serve soda, pizza and french fries to growing kids in a school cafeteria?), faster paced lectures/classes.

If I was to change the average Scandinavian school, I would add more homework and motivation (americans are better in motivating), tutorials, discussion. And there’s this strange idea that it’s ok to not do homework sometimes.[/quote]

Those activities would not give someone a bigger bone structure. I think there is such a thing as nordic or Scandinavian genetics. Like the example I gave of a coworker (who was full blooded Finnish) but lived in USA his whole life. He never worked out and was still a beast.

They just tend to be big people.

774

[quote]cueball wrote:

[quote]UtahLama wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]BrickHead wrote:

Here’s what I’m going by: if you were to get very lean (not contest ready), like 10 you’d be much lighter than you think you will be, perhaps around 200 pounds give or take a few pounds.
[/quote]

That is your opinion. I don’t agree with you because I am 250lbs at about 15%. You seem to WANT me to have to diet down to 200lbs just to be 10% when nothing points to that.
[/quote]

Pretty easy way to tell if you are 15% bodyfat.

Calipers are VERY VERY prone to error…especially when you are “full house”.

Hydrostatic is the only real way to be sure.

And you are the only one who thinks you are 15% bodyfat…sorry dude, if Maiden is 15% you are well over 20%.
[/quote]

Maiden took that pic on an empty stomach. If he had eaten a pizza right before, he would look just like X.[/quote]

LOL

775

[quote]MytchBucanan wrote:

[quote]NikH wrote:
I don’t think it’s “scandinavian genetics” that makes a person bigger. I think it’s the lifestyle.
In the US people eat alot more food, alot more processed food, and exercise less on average than in Scandinavia.

Students in the US have generally less exercise in the school curriculum in my opinion, and also in their freetime they are less active.
In Scandinavia kids used to play soccer, basketball,icehockey etc afterschool by themselves for hours and on weekends.

When I went to middleschool in Finland, we would spend 6h in school, play soccer outside during breaks (we had a ball with us), go play more soccer after school, go play basketball during weekends, have pullup competitions etc. During winter it would be icehockey, and we even had some days organized by school when we would just play hockey the whole day once a month and the school would organize lunch etc. Also, it wasnt a “sports school”, I was in the “math-class” . Kids would join lots of sports clubs, for instance I was in the schools swimming team, track team, basketball team, soccer team, and then on my own competed in Judo and a shorter time in basketball.

When I got to US for highschool it was quite the opposite. During lunchbreak or breaks in general nobody moves around, people enjoy going to movies/out for a coffee more than exercising. Classes were longer but more slowpaced. Also, the varsity team had practise only twice a week. I am not saying it’s bad, it’s just a different lifestyle.

In general I think Scandinavian kids are more healthy, but kids in the US learn to work better. But it’s changing now probably in both countries with the computers and x-box, also at age 18 teens start to drink shitloads on average in Scandinavia (since it’s legal).

I dont think people in general are these “Vikings” you see on TV-shows anymore. Maybe when they were still chopping wood, and eating tons of fish.

on another note:

If I was to change the average American school, I would add more mandatory exercise, healthier food (seriously,- why do you serve soda, pizza and french fries to growing kids in a school cafeteria?), faster paced lectures/classes.

If I was to change the average Scandinavian school, I would add more homework and motivation (americans are better in motivating), tutorials, discussion. And there’s this strange idea that it’s ok to not do homework sometimes.[/quote]

Those activities would not give someone a bigger bone structure. I think there is such a thing as nordic or Scandinavian genetics. Like the example I gave of a coworker (who was full blooded Finnish) but lived in USA his whole life. He never worked out and was still a beast.

They just tend to be big people.[/quote]

Exactly.

Just for fun we can as amateurs try to do some classifying and see who the biggest are, even though I can be wrong because I’m no anthropologist. I do find this stuff interesting though.

Nordic: Dennis Wolf, Arnold Schwarzenneger, Dorian Yates, Michael Francois, Marcus Ruhl, Gunther Schlierkamp, Larry Scott, Dave Draper, Reg Park, Gary Strydom
Mediterranean: Marc Dugdale, Rusty Jeffers, Franco Santoriello, Franco Columbu, Michael Kefelianos
Alpine: Mariusz Pudzianowski (probably some Nordic admixture)
Dinaric: Milos Sarcev
East Baltic: Zydrunas Savickas

776

Thread was TL;DR but I noticed someone suggested that PX diet down to 230 at 11% bf to demonstrate an 80 lb LBM gain. That math was wrong. Assuming he was 150 at 11% at the “start” he would have had a LBM of 133.5. In order to achieve a LBM of 213.5 LB at 11% BF, he would need to weigh nearly 240 lb total. I realize this information is f’ing useless, but I think it further illustrates how unlikely this scenerio would be.

777

[quote]Mad Martigan wrote:
Thread was TL;DR but I noticed someone suggested that PX diet down to 230 at 11% bf to demonstrate an 80 lb LBM gain. That math was wrong. Assuming he was 150 at 11% at the “start” he would have had a LBM of 133.5. In order to achieve a LBM of 213.5 LB at 11% BF, he would need to weigh nearly 240 lb total. I realize this information is f’ing useless, but I think it further illustrates how unlikely this scenerio would be. [/quote]

Correct! I pointed out something similar before too.

778

[quote]super saiyan wrote:

[quote]cueball wrote:

[quote]UtahLama wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]BrickHead wrote:

Here’s what I’m going by: if you were to get very lean (not contest ready), like 10 you’d be much lighter than you think you will be, perhaps around 200 pounds give or take a few pounds.
[/quote]

That is your opinion. I don’t agree with you because I am 250lbs at about 15%. You seem to WANT me to have to diet down to 200lbs just to be 10% when nothing points to that.
[/quote]

Pretty easy way to tell if you are 15% bodyfat.

Calipers are VERY VERY prone to error…especially when you are “full house”.

Hydrostatic is the only real way to be sure.

And you are the only one who thinks you are 15% bodyfat…sorry dude, if Maiden is 15% you are well over 20%.
[/quote]

Maiden took that pic on an empty stomach. If he had eaten a pizza right before, he would look just like X.[/quote]

LOL[/quote]

Well it i do think I was under 15% in the avi pic. I think I am around 15% area now, which is about 12 lbs heavier than the avi pic. But yes still a much leaner 15% than PX.

779

[quote]BrickHead wrote:

[quote]MytchBucanan wrote:

[quote]NikH wrote:
I don’t think it’s “scandinavian genetics” that makes a person bigger. I think it’s the lifestyle.
In the US people eat alot more food, alot more processed food, and exercise less on average than in Scandinavia.

Students in the US have generally less exercise in the school curriculum in my opinion, and also in their freetime they are less active.
In Scandinavia kids used to play soccer, basketball,icehockey etc afterschool by themselves for hours and on weekends.

When I went to middleschool in Finland, we would spend 6h in school, play soccer outside during breaks (we had a ball with us), go play more soccer after school, go play basketball during weekends, have pullup competitions etc. During winter it would be icehockey, and we even had some days organized by school when we would just play hockey the whole day once a month and the school would organize lunch etc. Also, it wasnt a “sports school”, I was in the “math-class” . Kids would join lots of sports clubs, for instance I was in the schools swimming team, track team, basketball team, soccer team, and then on my own competed in Judo and a shorter time in basketball.

When I got to US for highschool it was quite the opposite. During lunchbreak or breaks in general nobody moves around, people enjoy going to movies/out for a coffee more than exercising. Classes were longer but more slowpaced. Also, the varsity team had practise only twice a week. I am not saying it’s bad, it’s just a different lifestyle.

In general I think Scandinavian kids are more healthy, but kids in the US learn to work better. But it’s changing now probably in both countries with the computers and x-box, also at age 18 teens start to drink shitloads on average in Scandinavia (since it’s legal).

I dont think people in general are these “Vikings” you see on TV-shows anymore. Maybe when they were still chopping wood, and eating tons of fish.

on another note:

If I was to change the average American school, I would add more mandatory exercise, healthier food (seriously,- why do you serve soda, pizza and french fries to growing kids in a school cafeteria?), faster paced lectures/classes.

If I was to change the average Scandinavian school, I would add more homework and motivation (americans are better in motivating), tutorials, discussion. And there’s this strange idea that it’s ok to not do homework sometimes.[/quote]

Those activities would not give someone a bigger bone structure. I think there is such a thing as nordic or Scandinavian genetics. Like the example I gave of a coworker (who was full blooded Finnish) but lived in USA his whole life. He never worked out and was still a beast.

They just tend to be big people.[/quote]

Exactly.

Just for fun we can as amateurs try to do some classifying and see who the biggest are, even though I can be wrong because I’m no anthropologist. I do find this stuff interesting though.

Nordic: Dennis Wolf, Arnold Schwarzenneger, Dorian Yates, Michael Francois, Marcus Ruhl, Gunther Schlierkamp, Larry Scott, Dave Draper, Reg Park, Gary Strydom
Mediterranean: Marc Dugdale, Rusty Jeffers, Franco Santoriello, Franco Columbu, Michael Kefelianos
Alpine: Mariusz Pudzianowski (probably some Nordic admixture)
Dinaric: Milos Sarcev
East Baltic: Zydrunas Savickas

[/quote]

It’s so true. Huge bodybuilder Marko Savoleinen was from Finland. Plenty of the WSM winners were Scandinavian as well…Karlsen, Magnusson, Samuelsson, Sigmarsson, Virtanen. They probably all had 8.5" wrists or bigger. Even Yngwie Malmsteen has huge hands.

780

[quote]NikH wrote:
I don’t think it’s “scandinavian genetics” that makes a person bigger. I think it’s the lifestyle.
In the US people eat alot more food, alot more processed food, and exercise less on average than in Scandinavia.

Students in the US have generally less exercise in the school curriculum in my opinion, and also in their freetime they are less active.
In Scandinavia kids used to play soccer, basketball,icehockey etc afterschool by themselves for hours and on weekends.

When I went to middleschool in Finland, we would spend 6h in school, play soccer outside during breaks (we had a ball with us), go play more soccer after school, go play basketball during weekends, have pullup competitions etc. During winter it would be icehockey, and we even had some days organized by school when we would just play hockey the whole day once a month and the school would organize lunch etc. Also, it wasnt a “sports school”, I was in the “math-class” . Kids would join lots of sports clubs, for instance I was in the schools swimming team, track team, basketball team, soccer team, and then on my own competed in Judo and a shorter time in basketball.

When I got to US for highschool it was quite the opposite. During lunchbreak or breaks in general nobody moves around, people enjoy going to movies/out for a coffee more than exercising. Classes were longer but more slowpaced. Also, the varsity team had practise only twice a week. I am not saying it’s bad, it’s just a different lifestyle.

In general I think Scandinavian kids are more healthy, but kids in the US learn to work better. But it’s changing now probably in both countries with the computers and x-box, also at age 18 teens start to drink shitloads on average in Scandinavia (since it’s legal).

I dont think people in general are these “Vikings” you see on TV-shows anymore. Maybe when they were still chopping wood, and eating tons of fish.

on another note:

If I was to change the average American school, I would add more mandatory exercise, healthier food (seriously,- why do you serve soda, pizza and french fries to growing kids in a school cafeteria?), faster paced lectures/classes.

If I was to change the average Scandinavian school, I would add more homework and motivation (americans are better in motivating), tutorials, discussion. And there’s this strange idea that it’s ok to not do homework sometimes.[/quot

I agree.Few years ago,I had a Finninsh girlfriend and got to know a lot of Finnish(Suomi) people.They were the most sports-practicing people I know of.Almost everybody I knew was beside his/her main sport play other sports almost every day.They are also very focused and serious about it.The down side to that was their tendency to eat like crap and drink way too much on weekends.So they generaly dont look very athletic,but are very active sports people.