[quote]mejho wrote:
Do any of you know that muscles are strongest in a position of length (bottom of bench), as they shorten(contract) they mechanically get weaker, however the skeletal system design is at the same time moving the insertion closer to the origin and fulcrum point thus providing an increased lever advantage to compensate for the decreased muscular advantage.
Keeping this in mind, why do you think most lifts are missed at somewhere near the midway point of a bench? Most people are strong off their chest, other than those suffering from delusions of grandeur and trying to press well beyond their capabilities. This would result in making sub maximal attempts very easy from chest to midpoint. It is science, moving a given weight over a longer distance requires more energy thus making half reps easier when not controlled with TUT (PERIOD)[/quote]
Did you know that generally, where people miss a bench press is related to which set of muscles (chest, tris or shoulders) is weaker? If most people are strong off their chest, why do many lifters 3-board press far more than their bench press as a whole?
This thread started off pretty cool, but has slowly morphed into the gay. That guy is obviously strong as fuck, he is not lifting in any official competition, and he is lifting more in one set than the majority of you poptarts would lift in an whole workout. He is a bodybuilder doing bodybuilder reps.
[quote]mejho wrote:
Do any of you know that muscles are strongest in a position of length (bottom of bench), as they shorten(contract) they mechanically get weaker, however the skeletal system design is at the same time moving the insertion closer to the origin and fulcrum point thus providing an increased lever advantage to compensate for the decreased muscular advantage.
Keeping this in mind, why do you think most lifts are missed at somewhere near the midway point of a bench? Most people are strong off their chest, other than those suffering from delusions of grandeur and trying to press well beyond their capabilities. This would result in making sub maximal attempts very easy from chest to midpoint. It is science, moving a given weight over a longer distance requires more energy thus making half reps easier when not controlled with TUT (PERIOD)[/quote]
You seem to be in the dark. A bodybuilder’s goal, as has already been explained to you several times now, during a bench press is to WORK THE DAMN CHEST. The top of the movement largely requires the triceps to work harder. I have no desire to work my triceps to the point of fatigue if my main goal is to kill the shit out of my chest when training it. Do you understand now? No one gives a shit that FOR YOU, the top of the movement may be harder. It implies that your triceps are lagging. It does not mean that bench pressing like that is less effective or “easier” when training chest for maximum development.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
tom63 wrote:
It was just a silly tv show. It’s not like if the reps aren’t correct, a puppy would be killed or cancer would forge ahead.
It was done at the last Olympia contest as one of the “side events”. It wasn’t ever meant to be a legit powerlifting contest.[/quote]
I stand corrected, but still maintain the content of my post. I’m talking of the rep contest with the football players, not Rychlak’s 1000 lb bench attempt.
If a guy can do 40 + half ass reps with 225, he’s trong. stronger than me.
One thing to remember about “football” lifts, is that they notoriously lie about reps, weights, and time, ie, the 40 yd. dash. some are timed with a running start. Some are hand timed. some weights are just filled in cards, as ooposed to done.
Some maxs are team efforts, and so on. The numbers to trust are at official pro days and the NFL combine. You’ll see guys running slower times than their time from high school and still being at the top of the pack position wise.
[quote]ruglayer09052000 wrote:
You say tomato, I say what’s the fuckin difference. All the internet cowboys that are calling it bullshit, partialreps, whatever, let’s see you do it. Otherwise, shut the fuck up. You all sound like whiny little brats. I couldn’t do that, full or half. So who am I to say anything about what he did. I think most of you all just like to read your words. Oh, and you can bash me all you want, I don’t give a fuck.[/quote]
LOL; I’ll put up any amount of money you can wager that I can go for AT LEAST 30 reps in the manner shown on that video. I’ll post video proof. PM me.
You guys are killing me. Who said this guy wasn’t strong or that this was an unimpressive display? People pointed out that the reps were not full reps (closer to half reps). What’s the big deal? Why get your panties in a wad over someone pointing out what is the truth?
Also, does ANYBODY here think it would be easier for him to lock out each rep? Does ANYBODY think it’d be human nature to make the movement harder on yourself condsidering the circumstances? This is just ridiculous. If anybody here thinks this is the same thing as 46 locked out reps, you are crazy. If anybody here thinks this is a weak person, you too are crazy.
And how about I go try this to see how much it would benefit me? I’d like to do that. So guys, help me out here, how would I go about recreating these non-locked out reps? At what point do I stop the rep? At my weakpoint? Or should I measure the distance he moved the bar and go from there? Perhaps I should measure the angle of his upper arms relative to his torso, get out a protractor and use that as my guide. See, this is the problem - there is no objective way to compare this performance to other people’s. THAT is why people made comments about the partial reps. We would just like to see full reps so we can get a better idea of how strong this guy really is.
All this thread proves is that reps are gay to begin with. hahaha.
[quote]jehovasfitness wrote:
No one is saying that it isn’t impressive, every one keeps trying to make that debate.
The fact is, saying that is 46 reps is a bit misleading. So, can I just put 225 on the bar and move it 1" and count those as reps? I mean, we have to draw the line somewhere right?[/quote]
[quote]randman wrote:
For every dick-smack that is complaining about his form, saying he didn’t lockout, saying they were half-reps; you’re all little Internet “arm-chair” bitches.
I’d like to see one of you whiners do even a third of his total reps at that weight using the same ROM, you couldn’t fucking do it.
Every time there is some video posted of a great strength or strength-endurance effort, there are a dozen “arm-chair” pansies that complain about the form. Since the form wasn’t “perfect”, these small-minded eunuchs thinks it negates the effort. “It’s simply not impressive to me”, says the “no-dick” boy wonder.
The “arm-chair” critics on this thread are 150 lb ass-pipes.[/quote]
The last time I did 225 for reps, I got 19 completely locked out reps before my triceps tired. I am not very strong. I am in the 5 weakest lifters in a gym of 15 guys. 2 of those 15 bench over 600 raw, and I assure you, they would laugh at the “reps” done in this video as well.
[quote]RickJames wrote:
You guys are killing me. Who said this guy wasn’t strong or that this was an unimpressive display? People pointed out that the reps were not full reps (closer to half reps). What’s the big deal? Why get your panties in a wad over someone pointing out what is the truth?
Also, does ANYBODY here think it would be easier for him to lock out each rep? Does ANYBODY think it’d be human nature to make the movement harder on yourself condsidering the circumstances? This is just ridiculous. If anybody here thinks this is the same thing as 46 locked out reps, you are crazy. If anybody here thinks this is a weak person, you too are crazy.
And how about I go try this to see how much it would benefit me? I’d like to do that. So guys, help me out here, how would I go about recreating these non-locked out reps? At what point do I stop the rep? At my weakpoint? Or should I measure the distance he moved the bar and go from there? Perhaps I should measure the angle of his upper arms relative to his torso, get out a protractor and use that as my guide. See, this is the problem - there is no objective way to compare this performance to other people’s. THAT is why people made comments about the partial reps. We would just like to see full reps so we can get a better idea of how strong this guy really is.
All this thread proves is that reps are gay to begin with. hahaha.[/quote]
Bravo! If someone posts a video of himself doing 46 worse reps with the same weight, will he get defenders also? Doubtful.
Bravo! If someone posts a video of himself doing 46 worse reps with the same weight, will he get defenders also? Doubtful.[/quote]
LOL. I want to see the development of anyone claiming they can do the same and how easy it is. Please post pictures of yourself. There seems to be much talk. Where are the cameras? Stop talking and do it.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
harris447 wrote:
I’d rather have Phil Heath’s chest than that of the douchebag who got crushed under the thousand pounds at the Olympia.
LOL. I want to see the people here who are so proud of their range of motion that have surpassed his development regardless of your numbers. This is where you seperate bodybuilding from powerlifting.
To tell Ronnie Coleman he is training “wrong” when it wins him several Mr. Olympia contests simply because his technique wouldn’t win a powerlifting meet is retarded.[/quote]
The point is not that the guy is weak, it’s that this whole thing was silly. It’s no longer a benchpress if you do half the range of motion. Would you feel the same if some guy got up there and half squatted 600 lbs for reps?
I’m just sick of the NFL and it’s fake feats of strength. Yep, everyone can squat 700 lbs and bench over 500. As long as you don’t hold them to any standard at all.
Haaaaaaaaa! Try doing those bottom presses with the weight you full bench with, ANY weight. Then try the same amount of reps and weight with bottom presses like the video. You’ll be toast at 1/2 the reps and you won’t be able to rack the bar at the end.
[quote]harris447 wrote:
I’d rather have Phil Heath’s chest than that of the douchebag who got crushed under the thousand pounds at the Olympia.[/quote]
Just wondering, have you done anything remotely impressive apart from your pathetic political arguements?
Actually that “douchebag” is the best bencher in the world. Dude has to use a ridiculous bench shirt to compete in the world of professional lifting, which makes bombing a lot more likely. Its not like he can bench 600 and then went for a 1015 lbs to try his luck, he has benched 1000 lbs easy before.
But then I’m not suprised you dont know this as your post implied that you think the powerlifting bench as a chest exercise.
There’s been a lot written on here about how whatever he did was ok because “it wasn’t a legit contest.” That it’s fair to competitors who did lock out because the winner didn’t get any prizes.
There aren’t different degrees of contests “oh, this is more of a contest than that one.” None of this subjectivist, relativist nonsense about defining it the way that you feel, or moving the bar to wherever you want: it either IS a contest or it isnt a contest. And if you’re keeping score, it’s a contest.
There’s also been a good deal written about how a bodybuilder’s goal during a bench press is pectoral stimulation, etc. and about how his pectoral development is superior to people who could do more full reps. To begin with, he’s not a bodybuilder, he’s a bodybuilder in a bench contest. This isn’t semantics, it’s a necessary distinction. Just because you participate in one endeavor almost exclusively, that doesnt mean you get to import that development’s rules to another competition.
Has anyone noticed that this board wasn’t flooded with people wringing their hands over Ronnie not locking out his reps in The Cost of Redemption, or maybe getting a litte too much elbow bend in The Unbelievable? That’s because THAT wasn’t a contest. Just an olympian filming a training video in his gym, no peckerhead with a mic in a cut-sleeve shirt in sight.
Secondly, talking about how his pec development was among the best in the contest is equally ridiculous as saying that jay cutler should get extra points at the O because he can bench more than ronnie (no idea if that’s true just an example.) It’s a different sport.
Oh, and for the record, Phil Heath is strong. I have yet to see anyone on this thread disagree with that statement.
[quote]RickJames wrote:
The last time I did 225 for reps, I got 19 completely locked out reps before my triceps tired. I am not very strong. I am in the 5 weakest lifters in a gym of 15 guys. 2 of those 15 bench over 600 raw, and I assure you, they would laugh at the “reps” done in this video as well.
[/quote]
I could give a shit. Post videos of you or your buddies doing the same exact range of motion as this guy and see if you can get over 40 reps. That’s what I thought. Answer = no. I’m waiting for the video…
[quote]randman wrote:
RickJames wrote:
The last time I did 225 for reps, I got 19 completely locked out reps before my triceps tired. I am not very strong. I am in the 5 weakest lifters in a gym of 15 guys. 2 of those 15 bench over 600 raw, and I assure you, they would laugh at the “reps” done in this video as well.
I could give a shit. Post videos of you or your buddies doing the same exact range of motion as this guy and see if you can get over 40 reps. That’s what I thought. Answer = no. I’m waiting for the video…[/quote]
You could give a shit? Then don’t go claiming stupid shit. You have zero fucking clue as to what strong is. I lift with Donnie Thompson and Marc Bartley (contributors over on Dave Tate’s site - their logs are there). If you don’t think 700 and 800+ pound shirted benchers who have both gone over 600 raw in training can’t do 225 for 46 partials, you are out of your fucking mind. There’s a video of Marc on his site doing 500x4 raw easy as a downset after some shirted board pressing. These are three lift guys that don’t even train for a raw bench, yet can do this easily.
But there won’t be any video of a stupid rep contest, sorry. Maybe after the Arnold. It has been completely explained why 225x46 in a partial rep fashion is not a world-beating performance, but you can’t understand it. You are mentally bankrupt. Please go on and respond…your stupid posts are quite entertaining. While you’re at it, post a video of your lifts. Odds are you actually do work sets with 225, which is sad. If you had any strength at all, you would understand exactly what we’ve been talking about on this thread.