I ask this seriously, where did this idea/notion/rumor start? And if it was started, with what evidence/proof was it backed up with. Was there a point in bodybuilding’s history that all of a sudden its top competitors achieved their physique devoid of any respectable strength?
Who was the weak ass bodybuilder that perpetuated this myth?
It seems like people commonly associate strength with powerlifting and size with bodybuilding. But a 495x3 bench by Levrone seems like a pretty significant feat if you ask me? Considering a lot of powerlifters seem pressed(no pun intended) to achieve that with bench shirts for even a single rep, let alone RAW.
This is something that I initially bit on hook line and sinker as I was just starting out, but now, cant believe I bought into given the amount of video proof showing countless bodybuilders moving some incredible weight for reps with impeccable form. Decade after decade!
Are these the same people who got me to buy the ab lounge? that work for fox news? that started national kick a ginger day?
My guess is that the ignorant public, when comparing, say, elite-level BBs and PLs, naturally assume the BBs are stronger b/c they look so much stronger. Then upon seeing the #s put up by the Coans of the world, wonder why the massive BBs can’t do the same.
In fact, the ONLY people they appear “weak” next to are elite, national-level PLs.
I would venture a guess that it started in the fitness industry. There’s a lot of hate on BBing in the fitness industry, in which I took part in, in the past.
I first heard it through Pavel Tsatsouline. He was comparing relative strength levels. Don’t know whether he picked it up elsewhere or not. Don’t have a clue as to who started it.
Who was the weak ass bodybuilder that perpetuated this myth?
[/quote]
Paul Dillett. He did train with weights that many would consider “light”. The part that people seem to forget is that he could probably deadlift a Ford F150 if he wanted.
Who was the weak ass bodybuilder that perpetuated this myth?
[/quote]
Paul Dillett. He did train with weights that many would consider “light”. The part that people seem to forget is that he could probably deadlift a Ford F150 if he wanted.
[/quote]
Dillet was never associated with being weak. You only hear this crap today from “fitness trainers” in justification of “relative strength”…two things that are equally full of shit.
The truth is, some of the biggest guys here are also some of the strongest and no body gets huge without getting a hell of a lot stronger even if strength itself isn’t the main goal.
I also know Poliquin made some statement about bodybuilders who were huge yet could only curl 35lbs dumbbells…something I have NEVER seen in any gym I’ve ever trained in.
I guess any time some newb sees me warming up, they think that is ALL I can lift.
As I was saying, to be fair, Levrone benched 500 x 4 on M3, yes with a slight spot on rep 4 but still. In that movie, and I’ll double check, he is 2 weeks out from the O, 2 fucking weeks out, dieted down, and “weak,” that’s bad ass and one strong mother fucker.
I saw vids of Branch Warren seated military press 315 x 20. Fucking monster. These dudes are some of the strongest in the world.
Many feel a psychological need, when seeing someone that they feel (but perhaps will not consciously admit) is superior to them in some quality, to denigrate the quality in question, or the person.
Dillet was never associated with being weak. You only hear this crap today from “fitness trainers” in justification of “relative strength”…two things that are equally full of shit.
[/quote]
Could be mistaken, but didn’t Tom Prince and a few other bodybuilders at the time make the claim that Paul was very weak for his size?
[quote]Bill Roberts wrote:
Many feel a psychological need, when seeing someone that they feel (but perhaps will not consciously admit) is superior to them in some quality, to denigrate the quality in question, or the person.[/quote]
Yes. Its at the source of every identifiable conflict in history and how humans are capable of being biased toward their own social group so what big whoop wanna fight about it?
[quote]Bill Roberts wrote:
Many feel a psychological need, when seeing someone that they feel (but perhaps will not consciously admit) is superior to them in some quality, to denigrate the quality in question, or the person.[/quote]
I suspect it may stem from the whole, bodybuilders aren’t maxing all the time, so on any given day, on any given set, they’re not lifting AS much weight as, say, a somwhat comparable powerlifter. And then rift went from not AS heavy to light versus heavy, maybe as bodybuilding became less prominent in popular media? All pure conjecture on my part. Though at my (university) gym, it would seem like the only way to get big arms is with heavy partials. Just my two cents, though.
[quote]elano wrote:
Where are all these people calling bbers weak? Anyone have a link to a site or article claiming this?[/quote]
I just mentioned Poliquin but I have to go find the specific article for you too?
When personal trainers go on about how bodybuilders can’t climb stairs, you don’t see the connection?
Hell, on this site we got comments like that frequently in the bodybuilding forum from newbs who got this impression from whatever trainer’s article they were reading.
When so many got the impression that doing biceps curls was for weaklings or pretty boys (as if they were unnecessary or didn’t aid in strength enough to worry about), you didn’t see who this was aimed at?
Someone literally has to go find all of this for you in order to notice it?
Part of it probably stems from just ignorance of people not understanding how rep strength correlates to max effort strength, and that the general population doesn’t see top end bodybuilders, they see low level aspiring BBers and the weights they’re using and convince themselves that “it’s not that much more than I do.”
Or they just pick apart 1 video from someone like Brandon Ray with a very controlled style of lifting and say “there, bbers are so weak, most PLers kill that guys numbers.”
I’m pretty sure this started with bodybuilding mags shockingly… When I was a kid and I read all the mags, they never ever stressed progression. It was always stressed that the wieght on the bar didn’t matter. What mattered was straight sets, perfect form, slow reps, hold the stretch, squeeze the muscle hard at the contraction. Basically… if you get a burn and a pump your doing it right. They never said anything like "If you do the same weight… session after session, week after week, month after month, you won’t grow.
You get a little stronger but progression is very slow when you train like that. So after a while you switch to the next program they give you. Which is all the same as above with different exercises and/or order.
It started like that and then was taken way too far buy certain authors. Authors are under pressure to come up with something new everytime they come out with an article. It’s like a huge game of telephone. The years go by and there is so much BS intertwined with common knowledge on training its shocking.