Siamand Rahman 305 kg Bench Press

Training Powerlifting
61

[quote]heavythrower wrote:
i dont know americaninsweden, good question.

i dont disagree with you, i am just saying that IOC testing policy is a bear. cumbersome, invasive, and way too picky.

i think it is ridiculous, most average people could not pass IOC doping standards if they were tested in that way in their day to day lives, lol.

too much caffeine, take a prescription pain or sleep medication, over the counter cold medications, whatever, you will get busted. [/quote]

i find the testing absolutely ridiculous

here we have a whole institution run off taxpayer money to test for the use of some arbitrarily defined substances. “but 30,000 people died from prescription drug use last year? yeh but this guy might bench 30 lbs more because of steroids, we better stop him ! for the kids you know…”

62

[quote]rehanb_bl wrote:

[quote]heavythrower wrote:
i dont know americaninsweden, good question.

i dont disagree with you, i am just saying that IOC testing policy is a bear. cumbersome, invasive, and way too picky.

i think it is ridiculous, most average people could not pass IOC doping standards if they were tested in that way in their day to day lives, lol.

too much caffeine, take a prescription pain or sleep medication, over the counter cold medications, whatever, you will get busted. [/quote]

i find the testing absolutely ridiculous

here we have a whole institution run off taxpayer money to test for the use of some arbitrarily defined substances. “but 30,000 people died from prescription drug use last year? yeh but this guy might bench 30 lbs more because of steroids, we better stop him ! for the kids you know…”[/quote]

i never understand why some people massively downplay the effects of steroids - eg “bench 30lbs more because of steroids”

drug testing is a good idea.

it stops the athletes from abusing themselves - they have to keep a lid on things and also stay off certain compounds and drugs in general to pass tests

look at the example of East Germany - the State takes a more aggressive approach to drugs and a number of women end up becoming men.

look at BB - unlimited drugs and a HUGE number of deaths and/or extremely serious heart/major organ problems for athletes in their 40s and 50s. DC posted the Nationals line up from 1995 a few weeks ago and out of the 10 i think at least 5 were known to have major health issues with a couple unaccounted for.

IOC tests protect athletes from themselves and their countries - think how much more aggressive everywhere but especially say China would be with their athletes drugs regimens if there were no tests ever.

it is incorrect to downplay the effects of these compounds on peoples long term health - especially at serious abuse levels, which would happen alot more without testing.

63

[quote]yolo84 wrote:

[quote]rehanb_bl wrote:

[quote]heavythrower wrote:
i dont know americaninsweden, good question.

i dont disagree with you, i am just saying that IOC testing policy is a bear. cumbersome, invasive, and way too picky.

i think it is ridiculous, most average people could not pass IOC doping standards if they were tested in that way in their day to day lives, lol.

too much caffeine, take a prescription pain or sleep medication, over the counter cold medications, whatever, you will get busted. [/quote]

i find the testing absolutely ridiculous

here we have a whole institution run off taxpayer money to test for the use of some arbitrarily defined substances. “but 30,000 people died from prescription drug use last year? yeh but this guy might bench 30 lbs more because of steroids, we better stop him ! for the kids you know…”[/quote]

i never understand why some people massively downplay the effects of steroids - eg “bench 30lbs more because of steroids”

drug testing is a good idea.

it stops the athletes from abusing themselves - they have to keep a lid on things and also stay off certain compounds and drugs in general to pass tests

look at the example of East Germany - the State takes a more aggressive approach to drugs and a number of women end up becoming men.

look at BB - unlimited drugs and a HUGE number of deaths and/or extremely serious heart/major organ problems for athletes in their 40s and 50s. DC posted the Nationals line up from 1995 a few weeks ago and out of the 10 i think at least 5 were known to have major health issues with a couple unaccounted for.

IOC tests protect athletes from themselves and their countries - think how much more aggressive everywhere but especially say China would be with their athletes drugs regimens if there were no tests ever.

it is incorrect to downplay the effects of these compounds on peoples long term health - especially at serious abuse levels, which would happen alot more without testing.

[/quote]

i find it ironic that they need to protect us from ourselves by banning substances like steroids and then making alcohol legal and taxing it

Steroid use has shown no link to any adverse health effects in any of the well conducted studies, amongst MEN.
I agree no woman or child should ever touch the stuff. Abuse may lead to problems but so does abuse of anything else.

64

[quote]rehanb_bl wrote:
i find it ironic that they need to protect us from ourselves by banning substances like steroids and then making alcohol legal and taxing it

Steroid use has shown no link to any adverse health effects in any of the well conducted studies, amongst MEN.
I agree no woman or child should ever touch the stuff. Abuse may lead to problems but so does abuse of anything else.
[/quote]

it really isn’t that ironic and it is not the same thing at all. the comparison with alcohol does not make sense.

also “steroid use has shown no link to any adverse health effects.” - this could not be more ignorant and incorrect. just go to steroid boards and you will see how stupid this is. there are dozens of threads all the time about a variety of health problems, many very serious.

steroids do and can cause a huge multitude of health problems.

yes i agree that the general media are very ignorant and wrong about many aspects of steroids but at the same time comments like steroids don’t help much or there are no health problems linked with steroids are just totally wrong.

btw i am typing this quite quick so sorry if there are any issues with my tone, none are intended.

65

[quote]yolo84 wrote:

also “steroid use has shown no link to any adverse health effects.” - this could not be more ignorant and incorrect. just go to steroid boards and you will see how stupid this is. there are dozens of threads all the time about a variety of health problems, many very serious.

[/quote]

be honest now, must people on steroid boards are much further on the continuum towards abuse than use. There are definitely side effects but in the grand scheme of things they are not any more severe than even thing as innocuous as vitamin C use.

Let me clarify there have been no links to adverse effects long term with serious USE (not abuse).

66

[quote]rehanb_bl wrote:

[quote]yolo84 wrote:

also “steroid use has shown no link to any adverse health effects.” - this could not be more ignorant and incorrect. just go to steroid boards and you will see how stupid this is. there are dozens of threads all the time about a variety of health problems, many very serious.

[/quote]

be honest now, must people on steroid boards are much further on the continuum towards abuse than use. There are definitely side effects but in the grand scheme of things they are not any more severe than even thing as innocuous as vitamin C use.

Let me clarify there have been no links to adverse effects long term with serious USE (not abuse).[/quote]

true they abuse more - but honestly NOT always.

also “side effects same as Vit C” - high BP is extremely common with steroid users and is very dangerous. there are tons of others i could list. comparison with vit C is dumb unless you are talking lorry load amounts.

also - if the IOC stopped testing what is gonna happen? abuse would go through the fucking roof.

67

If health is the issue, why not stop all drug testing and require physicals to compete? If you have a huge enlarged heart, or are so fat you might keel over, you can’t compete. Why discuss the health implications of drugs when there are 400 pound obese lifters, who are that way to increase their total too.

68

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
If health is the issue, why not stop all drug testing and require physicals to compete? If you have a huge enlarged heart, or are so fat you might keel over, you can’t compete. Why discuss the health implications of drugs when there are 400 pound obese lifters, who are that way to increase their total too.[/quote]

this doesn’t make much sense. what exactly is your argument? why would they have to stop tests if they implemented physicals?

how many competing under the IOC are so fat they are about to keel over lol.

and yes - if you have an enlarged heart you shouldn’t be allowed to compete - tests for this are being introduced in soccer due to high profile cases where a couple have died and one came very close to. it would be a good idea for this to be introduced in all sports and maybe save some lives. are you saying it wouldn’t?

of all the athletes under the IOC banner - 400lb obese lifters constitute a miniscule number. a MAJOR reason they are that weight is due to their drug regimes too btw.

i fail to see how it can be disputed that if there were no tests abuse would be absolutely rampant at every level.

it is a good idea on health alone for there to be tests.

69

[quote]rehanb_bl wrote:

[quote]heavythrower wrote:
i dont know americaninsweden, good question.

i dont disagree with you, i am just saying that IOC testing policy is a bear. cumbersome, invasive, and way too picky.

i think it is ridiculous, most average people could not pass IOC doping standards if they were tested in that way in their day to day lives, lol.

too much caffeine, take a prescription pain or sleep medication, over the counter cold medications, whatever, you will get busted. [/quote]

i find the testing absolutely ridiculous

here we have a whole institution run off taxpayer money to test for the use of some arbitrarily defined substances. “but 30,000 people died from prescription drug use last year? yeh but this guy might bench 30 lbs more because of steroids, we better stop him ! for the kids you know…”[/quote]

haha, my thoughts exactly.

70

i agree with duce and rehanb on this stuff

smoking kills more people than could ever ever ever be accredited to any kind of performance enhancing drug. i work in a field where i see prescription drugs kill people EVER SINGLE DAY.

not just the sexy stuff that gets press, like prescription sleep and pain meds, but stuff you probably never heard of, like commonly prescribed anti clotting medication, blood pressure meds.

your drive to work is inherently more dangerous to your life than any drug you can take.

i am sick of the government protecting me from myself. fuck, there are NO RUNNING signs in parks, NO DIVING signs at pools, pretty soon we will be regulated to the point of paralysis.

71

[quote]yolo84 wrote:

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
If health is the issue, why not stop all drug testing and require physicals to compete? If you have a huge enlarged heart, or are so fat you might keel over, you can’t compete. Why discuss the health implications of drugs when there are 400 pound obese lifters, who are that way to increase their total too.[/quote]

this doesn’t make much sense. what exactly is your argument? why would they have to stop tests if they implemented physicals?

how many competing under the IOC are so fat they are about to keel over lol.

and yes - if you have an enlarged heart you shouldn’t be allowed to compete - tests for this are being introduced in soccer due to high profile cases where a couple have died and one came very close to. it would be a good idea for this to be introduced in all sports and maybe save some lives. are you saying it wouldn’t?

of all the athletes under the IOC banner - 400lb obese lifters constitute a miniscule number. a MAJOR reason they are that weight is due to their drug regimes too btw.

i fail to see how it can be disputed that if there were no tests abuse would be absolutely rampant at every level.

it is a good idea on health alone for there to be tests.[/quote]

his argument makes LOTS of sense to LOTS of people.

you are entitled to your opinion but what I am sick of is people(I am not singling you out btw) who think their opinion is the intrinsically right one all the time.

its a big world and their are lots of different personalities.

right now it seems political power is more leaning toward the way you are thinking on this particular issue, seems western society in general is hell bent on regulating peoples lives more and more, but trust me, their are millions of people who do not see it this way and i hope enough will get fed up with it to swing the pendulum the other way some in my lifetime.

keep it up, you are heading toward Professor X territory.

72

[quote]heavythrower wrote:

[quote]yolo84 wrote:

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
If health is the issue, why not stop all drug testing and require physicals to compete? If you have a huge enlarged heart, or are so fat you might keel over, you can’t compete. Why discuss the health implications of drugs when there are 400 pound obese lifters, who are that way to increase their total too.[/quote]

this doesn’t make much sense. what exactly is your argument? why would they have to stop tests if they implemented physicals?

how many competing under the IOC are so fat they are about to keel over lol.

and yes - if you have an enlarged heart you shouldn’t be allowed to compete - tests for this are being introduced in soccer due to high profile cases where a couple have died and one came very close to. it would be a good idea for this to be introduced in all sports and maybe save some lives. are you saying it wouldn’t?

of all the athletes under the IOC banner - 400lb obese lifters constitute a miniscule number. a MAJOR reason they are that weight is due to their drug regimes too btw.

i fail to see how it can be disputed that if there were no tests abuse would be absolutely rampant at every level.

it is a good idea on health alone for there to be tests.[/quote]

his argument makes LOTS of sense to LOTS of people.

you are entitled to your opinion but what I am sick of is people(I am not singling you out btw) who think their opinion is the intrinsically right one all the time.

its a big world and their are lots of different personalities.

right now it seems political power is more leaning toward the way you are thinking on this particular issue, seems western society in general is hell bent on regulating peoples lives more and more, but trust me, their are millions of people who do not see it this way and i hope enough will get fed up with it to swing the pendulum the other way some in my lifetime.

keep it up, you are heading toward Professor X territory.
[/quote]

erm… you are also entitled to your opinion too - where did I say anyone wasn’t?

it is called having a debate and discussion - it’s not like I am screaming and swearing at people in this thread.

my point was he doesn’t have an argument. what is his argument exactly - that if you have an enlarged heart you can’t compete? that if you are so fat you are about to keel over you can’t compete?

in all seriousness can you explain to me because his argument is literally nonsensical from what i can see.

also - to the earlier post about cars and other medication being more dangerous - what % of adults abuse steroids and what % of adults drive cars? you can’t make an intelligent conparison. if the same % of adults abused steroids as drove cars then yes i would expect a monumental upsurge in medical problems as a result.

im not saying i must be right but all of these examples do not compare in any way whatsoever and make no sense.

73

[quote]heavythrower wrote:
i agree with duce and rehanb on this stuff

smoking kills more people than could ever ever ever be accredited to any kind of performance enhancing drug. i work in a field where i see prescription drugs kill people EVER SINGLE DAY.

not just the sexy stuff that gets press, like prescription sleep and pain meds, but stuff you probably never heard of, like commonly prescribed anti clotting medication, blood pressure meds.

your drive to work is inherently more dangerous to your life than any drug you can take.

i am sick of the government protecting me from myself. fuck, there are NO RUNNING signs in parks, NO DIVING signs at pools, pretty soon we will be regulated to the point of paralysis. [/quote]

again - what % of adults smoke and what % of adults abuse PEDs - if it was the same % the no. of health problems would be an awful lot closer in comparison.

my whole point on this topic is that if there are no drug tests drugs will immediately be massively abused by everyone leading to health problems. I have given examples where this has happened before.

i am not saying steroids are the devil.

i am saying that without tests steroid ABUSE would be rampant and that it is a fact this can and will lead to major health problems for many.

Comparing it to cars or cigarettes across national populations makes zero fucking sense because a miniscule no. pf people abuse PEDs in comparison to cigs, cars etc.

74

[quote]yolo84 wrote:

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
If health is the issue, why not stop all drug testing and require physicals to compete? If you have a huge enlarged heart, or are so fat you might keel over, you can’t compete. Why discuss the health implications of drugs when there are 400 pound obese lifters, who are that way to increase their total too.[/quote]

this doesn’t make much sense. what exactly is your argument? why would they have to stop tests if they implemented physicals?

how many competing under the IOC are so fat they are about to keel over lol.

and yes - if you have an enlarged heart you shouldn’t be allowed to compete - tests for this are being introduced in soccer due to high profile cases where a couple have died and one came very close to. it would be a good idea for this to be introduced in all sports and maybe save some lives. are you saying it wouldn’t?

of all the athletes under the IOC banner - 400lb obese lifters constitute a miniscule number. a MAJOR reason they are that weight is due to their drug regimes too btw.

i fail to see how it can be disputed that if there were no tests abuse would be absolutely rampant at every level.

it is a good idea on health alone for there to be tests.[/quote]

it makes sense then seeing as steroid abuse would cause you to fail a physical and thus you end abuse. Everytime you push for extremes there is a risk associated with it, just the way it works.

75

hmmm my first response to you yolo is not showing up…too tired to type it all again damnit.

76

[quote]rehanb_bl wrote:

[quote]yolo84 wrote:

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
If health is the issue, why not stop all drug testing and require physicals to compete? If you have a huge enlarged heart, or are so fat you might keel over, you can’t compete. Why discuss the health implications of drugs when there are 400 pound obese lifters, who are that way to increase their total too.[/quote]

this doesn’t make much sense. what exactly is your argument? why would they have to stop tests if they implemented physicals?

how many competing under the IOC are so fat they are about to keel over lol.

and yes - if you have an enlarged heart you shouldn’t be allowed to compete - tests for this are being introduced in soccer due to high profile cases where a couple have died and one came very close to. it would be a good idea for this to be introduced in all sports and maybe save some lives. are you saying it wouldn’t?

of all the athletes under the IOC banner - 400lb obese lifters constitute a miniscule number. a MAJOR reason they are that weight is due to their drug regimes too btw.

i fail to see how it can be disputed that if there were no tests abuse would be absolutely rampant at every level.

it is a good idea on health alone for there to be tests.[/quote]

it makes sense then seeing as steroid abuse would cause you to fail a physical and thus you end abuse. Everytime you push for extremes there is a risk associated with it, just the way it works.
[/quote]

ok i didn’t get that at all the first time around lol, thanks.

i just think athletes should be protected from themselves abit.

the perfect example ia bodybuilding - the amount of guys with very serious health problems (or dead) is sky high. that particular sport i just don’t know how things can ever be reigned in now bar people getting scared of these stories amd being more conservative themselves.

DC posts on this very very often, with loooooong list of guy’s who are in poor health.

i personally would not want that in most/all other sports. yeah people can chase their dreams and do as they please, this is only my opinion on the subject.

77

By any means I’m not down playing the fact this man has probably the strongest bench in the world because he has no arck and no leg drive and can bench the same thateric spoto does and 10 less than Scot Mendelson does. But one thing that I dont think is addressed is what haveing no legs does.

His body has to feed no nutrients to his legs so most of what he gets goes to his upper body and also his body is over compensatiing for haveing no legs. So he has a better upper body than any man in the world for the pure fact he has no legs. The man is an absolute monster and I don’t think any man in the world will touch what he does for many many years. That is just my take on it though i maybe wrong.

78

[quote]Umbrata Fortis wrote:
By any means I’m not down playing the fact this man has probably the strongest bench in the world because he has no arck and no leg drive and can bench the same thateric spoto does and 10 less than Scot Mendelson does. But one thing that I dont think is addressed is what haveing no legs does. His body has to feed no nutrients to his legs so most of what he gets goes to his upper body and also his body is over compensatiing for haveing no legs. So he has a better upper body than any man in the world for the pure fact he has no legs. The man is an absolute monster and I don’t think any man in the world will touch what he does for many many years. That is just my take on it though i maybe wrong.[/quote]

I remember Kennelly saying he started training lower body and squatting because his bench was stuck and it’s the only way he could progress on his bench.

For a super heavy, I don’t think there is any benefit at all to weaker legs and back.

79

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[quote]Umbrata Fortis wrote:
By any means I’m not down playing the fact this man has probably the strongest bench in the world because he has no arck and no leg drive and can bench the same thateric spoto does and 10 less than Scot Mendelson does. But one thing that I dont think is addressed is what haveing no legs does. His body has to feed no nutrients to his legs so most of what he gets goes to his upper body and also his body is over compensatiing for haveing no legs. So he has a better upper body than any man in the world for the pure fact he has no legs. The man is an absolute monster and I don’t think any man in the world will touch what he does for many many years. That is just my take on it though i maybe wrong.[/quote]

I remember Kennelly saying he started training lower body and squatting because his bench was stuck and it’s the only way he could progress on his bench.

For a super heavy, I don’t think there is any benefit at all to weaker legs and back.
[/quote]
You may be right. None the less the man is a total beast and should deserve all the respect in the world. Not to mention he is also only 24 and is press world record weight like that.

80

nvm