I am far from a bodybuilder, have no interest in being one, but I don’t understand why nearly every article seems to use “only good for bodybuilders” to describe creative easy exercises yet everytime I see a training video on YouTube of a bodybuilder they are doing Squats, Deadlifts, Bench press and Rows.
Then I see Phil Phister clips of him balancing on 2 swiss balls.
Can somebody please explain why bodybuilders get dogged?
Yeah, I don’t kow why that is. Truth be told, a lot of great PLers come from BB background. At the end of the day, the kind of training that makes you big, usually makes you strong as well and the the kind of training that makes you strong usually makes you big. True- there is some specialization. But, usually guys who look real strong are pretty strong.
I don’t think that they’re getting dogged as much as the authors are being clear what goal their program focuses on.
[quote]Airtruth wrote:
I am far from a bodybuilder, have no interest in being one, but I don’t understand why nearly every article seems to use “only good for bodybuilders” to describe creative easy exercises yet everytime I see a training video on YouTube of a bodybuilder they are doing Squats, Deadlifts, Bench press and Rows.
Then I see Phil Phister clips of him balancing on 2 swiss balls.
Can somebody please explain why bodybuilders get dogged?[/quote]
Probably that the contests have guys flexing in tiny underwear for the enjoyment of other guys among other things.
HaHa
Never thought about it that way, I think I understand now.
Usually it seems like it’s a backlash against guys trying to train for one thing while trying to apply a program (i.e. something from a muscle mag) that doesn’t work as well for it.
And the whole shiny underwear thing.
They are athletes that train for looks. Sure, they are strong, but they don’t get sweaty to win.
[quote]Bantam wrote:
They are athletes that train for looks. Sure, they are strong, but they don’t get sweaty to win.[/quote]
?
[quote]Airtruth wrote:
I am far from a bodybuilder, have no interest in being one, but I don’t understand why nearly every article seems to use “only good for bodybuilders” to describe creative easy exercises yet everytime I see a training video on YouTube of a bodybuilder they are doing Squats, Deadlifts, Bench press and Rows.
Then I see Phil Phister clips of him balancing on 2 swiss balls.
Can somebody please explain why bodybuilders get dogged?[/quote]
Why do you consider this “dogged”? You’re looking at it the wrong way. They’re saying that “easier” (lighter weights, relatively?) isolation exercises will not benefit newbies as much as bodybuilders who are in a condition to benefit from higher volume with more specialized exercises.
[quote]allNatural wrote:
Airtruth wrote:
I am far from a bodybuilder, have no interest in being one, but I don’t understand why nearly every article seems to use “only good for bodybuilders” to describe creative easy exercises yet everytime I see a training video on YouTube of a bodybuilder they are doing Squats, Deadlifts, Bench press and Rows.
Then I see Phil Phister clips of him balancing on 2 swiss balls.
Can somebody please explain why bodybuilders get dogged?
Why do you consider this “dogged”? You’re looking at it the wrong way. They’re saying that “easier” (lighter weights, relatively?) isolation exercises will not benefit newbies as much as bodybuilders who are in a condition to benefit from higher volume with more specialized exercises.
[/quote]
It is “dogging” bodybuilders because even most bodybuilders would NEVER tell someone they need to ONLY do isolation movements. that makes pointing out exercises as being only good for bodybuilders completely retarded…because it is ALL needed for full development. I don’t know any huge bodybuilders who aren’t strong, and I mean MUCH stronger than any average weight lifter in the gym. Many bodybuilders also have powerlifting backgrounds.
I honestly believe this trend started just so certain authors or trainers could stand out among others. The only way to do that in this day and age is make a statement against something just to get you noticed.
Controversy breeds celebrity.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
allNatural wrote:
Airtruth wrote:
I am far from a bodybuilder, have no interest in being one, but I don’t understand why nearly every article seems to use “only good for bodybuilders” to describe creative easy exercises yet everytime I see a training video on YouTube of a bodybuilder they are doing Squats, Deadlifts, Bench press and Rows.
Then I see Phil Phister clips of him balancing on 2 swiss balls.
Can somebody please explain why bodybuilders get dogged?
Why do you consider this “dogged”? You’re looking at it the wrong way. They’re saying that “easier” (lighter weights, relatively?) isolation exercises will not benefit newbies as much as bodybuilders who are in a condition to benefit from higher volume with more specialized exercises.
It is “dogging” bodybuilders because even most bodybuilders would NEVER tell someone they need to ONLY do isolation movements. [/quote]
If the other extreme of that analogy was the point asserted by the articles the OP was referring to, then yea, that would be “dogging”. I thought he was referring to articles not recommending “special” isolation movements to very undeveloped athletes until they have a base built on compound movements.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
I honestly believe this trend started just so certain authors or trainers could stand out among others. The only way to do that in this day and age is make a statement against something just to get you noticed.
Controversy breeds celebrity.[/quote]
And somewhere along the line people started believing that bodybuilders are strange creatures that are big, non-functional and weak.
When the hell did bodybuilding become an almost swear word? It’s like all of a sudden if you perform any isolation movements then you must be a non-functional bodybuilder.
[quote]Gregatron wrote:
When the hell did bodybuilding become an almost swear word? It’s like all of a sudden if you perform any isolation movements then you must be a non-functional bodybuilder. [/quote]
What’s funniest is that all these little guys who can deadlift 200 lbs. are running around bragging about how functional they are. What function does being small and weak serve - armwrestling school-aged girls, perhaps?
[quote]CaliforniaLaw wrote:
Gregatron wrote:
When the hell did bodybuilding become an almost swear word? It’s like all of a sudden if you perform any isolation movements then you must be a non-functional bodybuilder.
What’s funniest is that all these little guys who can deadlift 200 lbs. are running around bragging about how functional they are. What function does being small and weak serve - armwrestling school-aged girls, perhaps?[/quote]
lol, no its for MMA training.
I think that generally people with differing goals tend to want to prove that their goal is superior. While a bodybuilder trains for astethic qualities, a power lifter trains to improve 3 lifts and a person engaging in organized sports tends to want to be stronger, faster for their specific sport.
All three people may train their hearts out, and have qualities that each other might want or admire, but the trend on this board, right now, is to try and prove that the way “you” train is the best, only way to train.
Instead, we should all respect the fact that we all want to “train” as opposed to “work out” to reach our goals and that we work harder than your average gym goer that spends more time reading magazines and talking then actually lifting.
The question that needs asking is how is doing the ‘dogging’?
If its a performance athlete, then chances are, its because they feel that bodybuilding / aesthetic training is somehow less valid than performance training.
If it is the avergae non-gym goer, chance are, its because they dont have the drive, commitment or inclination to do something about themselves. People are threatened by bodubuilders, whether it be the size issue or the fact that a muscular, athletic individual makes the average person feel bad about themselves or not, people attack what they are afraid of.
If its the strength coach / trainer then, it is my opinion, that they dont understand bodybuilding and bodybuilding methods. Or that they feel by trashing bodybuilding, they can promote their own methods as being better.
Now, I train athletes and people wanting to get in good shape. Ive trained a former senior Mr Britain, a junior who came second in the Universe among others. EVERYBODY wants a better looking physique. Its just some dont like to admit that one of the reasons they exercise is to look better.
The contention that bodybuilders arent hard training athletes is bullshit: bodybuilding is a lifestyle - not something you do for 4-5 hours a week or whatever.
My 2p - Rant over.
Bodybuilding and powerlifting are just 2 different ways of describing a very similar athlete. Powerlifting doesn’t even match the sport either, powerlifting should actually be called strength testing or strength lifting, weightlifting suits the name powerlifting more.
The competitive side of bodybuilding is what many people make fun of, guys posing and walking around almost naked.
The training and eating are hardcore though. I know people that bodybuild and have no interest at all in watching men parade on the stage. They just want to train and improve themselves.
The only time I dog “bodybuilders” is when they walk around telling people they are a “bodybuilder” and act like a fancy boy in the gym when they don’t even compete.
The reason being is, with the exception of a few of the internet icons around here, I know of nobody that walks around calling themself a “powerlifter,” when they don’t actually compete because they would be called out almost immediately.
Until you have done a full meet, you are not a powerlifter you are just a guy who trains. Intentions amount to a pinch of shit as I have watched dozens of guys run their mouth but never enter a meet.
Also, let’s get one thing straight. Benchers aren’t powerlifters, so bench meets don’t count.
The same applies for bodybuilders. Showing up at the gym every day sporting a tan and a string tank top looking at yourself constantly in the mirror and prancing around like a Nancyboy doesn’t count.
Otherwise, I think as a general statement comments like, “bodybuilders train for size, powerlifters train for strength,” is retarded b/c I know of no powerlifters who don’t dedicate a significant portion of their training to building mass, myself included. Ultimately there is a lot of blending of training styles.
I think the negative connotation of the word “bodybuilder” comes from the enormous amount of 17 year old dickweeds who shoot their mouths off on forums about how “swole” they are when they weigh 155 and a couple of highschool girls have told them that theyre “almost too big”. You know, the kids who swear that they eat a ton and who bench press and curl 3 times per week.
No one wants to be associated with that.