Other than elite athletes, most of us don’t have a huge carry over from the gym to everyday life, with regards to strength application. Is lifting weights necassary in order to conduct everyday objectives? Probably not. However, weightlifting can increase overall health both mentally and physically.
Sure, we could say the hell with it and simply maintain a moderate physique through the methods you mentioned.
Personally, I enjoy lifting, I enjoy manipulating my diet and exercise in order to increase lean body mass.
Furthermore, simple post-workout stretching can prevent a great deal of inflexibility. Combing agility exercises can maintain an overall agile frame, so there is no absolute that weightlifting will lead to any of the negatives sides you listed.
[quote]Pound4Pound wrote:
baretta wrote:
Sports have changed and athletes have become bigger, stronger and faster because of better training.
Bigger stronger, faster…and more cumbersome, less limber, less agile, less coordinated and less athletic. There is a trade-off for bigger and stronger my friends.[/quote]
Pound,
Your profile says you have been training for 5 years.
Why?
Bulking Machine, where are you when we need you?
[quote]Pound4Pound wrote:
baretta wrote:
Sports have changed and athletes have become bigger, stronger and faster because of better training.
Bigger stronger, faster…and more cumbersome, less limber, less agile, less coordinated and less athletic. There is a trade-off for bigger and stronger my friends.[/quote]
So, let me sum this thread up here. You start off by saying that lifting weights makes people shitty athletes. Then, people challenge you and you bring out a bunch of shitty examples about how players of the past are supposedly better than they are today. Now that people have countered your point, you’re back to just stating that weights make athletes shitty. Obviously you don’t have a case, so just go back to eating soy and doing calisthenics. Nobody ever said that athletes should just ignore their other training and start to dopowerlifting to become better, so I’m not sure what point you’re trying to prove.
There’s always some one like this on each board that needs some inspiration and what not. The truth is, however, if you have to ask “Why lift weights?” then you, my friend, are in the wrong sport. This never crosses my mind except for when I see people like you post a thread about it. None of what you wrote really makes sense anyway. I lift because I know it is my calling. I lift because it is my therapy. I lift because it teaches my valuable life lessons. I lift because everyone else is to lazy to. I lift because on fucking day, I will be a champion.
Maybe you should take up pilates.
[quote]Pound4Pound wrote:
baretta wrote:
Sports have changed and athletes have become bigger, stronger and faster because of better training.
Bigger stronger, faster…and more cumbersome, less limber, less agile, less coordinated and less athletic. There is a trade-off for bigger and stronger my friends.[/quote]
Not neccessarily. You can certainly get bigger, stronger and faster without the negative side effects. The downsides are typically experienced by those who neglect this part of their training.
Weight training doesn’t make you less athletic; lack of specific athletic training makes you less athletic. Same as if you don’t do cardio, your cardio will suck.
I train with weights to help me be bigger, stronger, leaner, more powerful and faster. I build bigger, stronger, more powerful muscles, and then use other athletic training to learn how to use them.
[quote]Pound4Pound wrote:
baretta wrote:
I dont remember seeing any athlete of professional caliber that doesn’t incorporate some sort of weight program…hockey, basketball, football…etc.
Why do some people feel the need to come to a “bodybuilding think tank” and then continue to berate bodybuilding? I dont understand your motives, but your’re an idiot.
Some of the greatest hockey players of all time didn’t lift…Rocket Richard, Gretzky, #4 Bobby Orr, Gordie Howe etc etc
Specifically Gretzky. Do you think any of the stronger, weight trained modern hockey players are going to ever have 3 sonsecutive 200+ point seasons?? Nope.
Larry Bird, Kareem, McHale, Walton, West, Chamberlain…yeah they sucked. Too bad they didn’t lift weights so they could have been half descent.
Who’s the idiot now?
[/quote]
Your pretty much still the only idiot in ths thread
[quote]Pound4Pound wrote:
baretta wrote:
Sports have changed and athletes have become bigger, stronger and faster because of better training.
Bigger stronger, faster…and more cumbersome, less limber, less agile, less coordinated and less athletic. There is a trade-off for bigger and stronger my friends.[/quote]
Where do you get this notion from? Maybe YOU’RE “cumbersome, less limber and less athletic” from lifting, but that doesn’t mean that everyone else gets this way.
This is why I lift…
The True Believer
Somewhere a True Believer is training to kill you.
He is training with minimum food or water, in austere conditions, day and night.
The only thing clean on him is his weapon.
He doesn’t worry about what workout to do…
His rucksack weighs what he weighs, and he runs until the enemy stops chasing him.
The True believer doesn’t care ‘how hard it is’… he knows he either wins or he dies.
He doesn’t go home at 1700… he is home.
He knows only the cause…
Now, who wants to quit?
Author Unknown
Pound4Pound wrote:
Bigger stronger, faster…and more cumbersome, less limber, less agile, less coordinated and less athletic. There is a trade-off for bigger and stronger my friends.
Bullshit. You know nothing. The wrong kind of weight training combined with neglecting your other skills will hamper athletic ability. But long distance running will also hamper the athletic ability of someone whose sport is primarily anaerobic. You have to use an intelligent program that attacks sports requirements and addresses weaknesses.
Countless studies have shown that Olympic weightlifters have sprinting times, jumping heights, and jumping distances equal to Olympic track and field athletes. Are you saying that all of these Olympic athletes are “unathletic?”
All professional MMA fighters use weights, and they’re constantly getting faster, stronger, more agile, and more flexible. My sprints got faster when I started lifting properly, my agility improved, and so did my flexibility. Some guys lose athletic qualities when they lift weights, but some guys are idiots.
As far as doing calisthenics, calisthenics don’t always relate as well to a sport. Linebackers, for instance have to use force against external resistance in their sport, hence weight training. Quinton “Rampage” Jackson picks up opponents and slams them. Can’t train that with calisthenics. Hell, even many jobs. You mentioned lumberjacks in your first post. WTF do you think that they’re doing all day? USING EXTERNAL RESISTANCE!!! So, what, instead of mimicking those motions with weights in the gym we should all go and chop down trees for 8 hours a day?
Not to mention economy of time. Let’s say I do 300 bodyweight squats, 100 push-ups, 100 divebombers, and 20 pullups. To keep progressing, I have to increase those numbers. Maybe I get to 500 squats, 300 pushups, 150 divebombers, and 40 pullups. Well, that workout just took twice as long. Eventually, I have to work out for three hours to get the workout that I used to get in an hour (not to mention destroying my joints from over-repetition). Instead, I can bench press or barbell squat and increase the weight gradually, still only training for an hour at a time.
Bottom line: athletes need to train multiple qualities through different means. Here’s an example:
Strength Endurance: Calisthenics
Speed: Sprinting
Agility: Ladder work
Flexibility: Stretching
Maximal Strength: Squatting, Deadlifting
Power/Speed Strength: Olympic Lifts
Skills/Technique: Specific skill, technique work
All things being equal going into a training program, the athlete that uses a comprehensive approach will always smoke the one that doesn’t.
You seem to forget that you’re on a website where the cutting edge strength and conditioning science is available, so all that you’re doing is showing your ignorance.
Of course, as anti-weightlifting as you seem, I wonder if one of the following things has happened:
A) A weightlifter kicked your ass
B) A weightlifter has taken your girlfriend
C) A weightlifter turned you down for a date
You may wonder why we’re all so hostile to you. Well, consider your first post. There is a gulf of difference between an informed, curious criticism and an ignorant, arrogant, bitter insult.
[quote]Pound4Pound wrote:
baretta wrote:
Sports have changed and athletes have become bigger, stronger and faster because of better training.
Bigger stronger, faster…and more cumbersome, less limber, less agile, less coordinated and less athletic. There is a trade-off for bigger and stronger my friends.[/quote]
There isn’t much point in arguing with one of you “non fucntional” people. You refuse to even see the other side.
I think that most people who say this are unwilling to put in the time you need to be big, strong and agile. Instead you stick to your bench and curl routine and walk around with your collar popped, spouting this crap.
bottom line, the outcome of your physique will be the culmination of the effort you put into it. You train for a specific activity, you get good at it.
[quote]Fenris wrote:
Bottom line: athletes need to train multiple qualities through different means. Here’s an example:
Strength Endurance: Calisthenics
Speed: Sprinting
Agility: Ladder work
Flexibility: Stretching
Maximal Strength: Squatting, Deadlifting
Power/Speed Strength: Olympic Lifts
Skills/Technique: Specific skill, technique work
[/quote]
You know, with all the flak that CrossFit took around here originally, it’s funny to note that what you have just put down looks exactly like CrossFit.
[quote]Pound4Pound wrote:
baretta wrote:
Sports have changed and athletes have become bigger, stronger and faster because of better training.
Bigger stronger, faster…and more cumbersome, less limber, less agile, less coordinated and less athletic. There is a trade-off for bigger and stronger my friends.[/quote]
Not necessarily. If you lift slow, sure you’ll be slow. But if you lift fast using plyo’s and stretch, weightliftting can make you faster and more agile.
You’ve been on this site for a while, why don’t you know this?
I’m pretty sure Barry Bonds is and definetly was a better athlete than Babe Ruth.
To look good neekid
Dezz
AgentOrange wrote:
Fenris wrote:
Bottom line: athletes need to train multiple qualities through different means. Here’s an example:
Strength Endurance: Calisthenics
Speed: Sprinting
Agility: Ladder work
Flexibility: Stretching
Maximal Strength: Squatting, Deadlifting
Power/Speed Strength: Olympic Lifts
Skills/Technique: Specific skill, technique work
You know, with all the flak that CrossFit took around here originally, it’s funny to note that what you have just put down looks exactly like CrossFit.
DAMMIT!!!
[quote]Pound4Pound wrote:
RaspberryCookie wrote:
Because it feels great! And yeah, to say I added ten pounds and just pushed my body to a state where mental toughness defines you and blasted through a plateau where 90% of the population would have given up is pretty sweet.
Good, so you agree with me. Because it’s fun and feels good are about the only things it’s good for.[/quote]
Haha yeah uhh, put the stuff that disagrees with you back into your quote there, buddy-boy.
[quote]Pound4Pound wrote:
Bigger stronger, faster…and more cumbersome, less limber, less agile, less coordinated and less athletic. There is a trade-off for bigger and stronger my friends.[/quote]
modern tennis player are bigger, stronger, and faster (thanks to time spent in the gym) now than tennis players in the 50’s…are you saying that tennis players in the 50’s would stomp all over a moder tennis great?
modern running backs in the NFL are bigger, stronger, and faster (thanks to time spent in the gym) than running backs were in the 50’s…are you saying that a modern NFL running back great couldn’t be a great running back in the 50’s?
you’re making claims but not backing any of your claims up with solid evidence (for instance…comparing athletes that lift weights today to athletes from say fifty years ago that did not).
do you have any scientific data to back up your claims…do you have any concrete empirical data comparing athletes of today to athletes of fifty years ago that didn’t lift weights? or are you just going to use your typical “my friends in the gym I work out at”?
ok, you’ve convinced us. Congratulations. Everyone, put down the weight and get yourselves to a McDonald’s, stat!
[quote]Pound4Pound wrote:
jsbrook wrote:
I think you’re pretty stupid. Every good athlete I’ve ever known has incorporated some kind of lifting into their training, even distance runners. And the coach of every team I’ve ever been on has made it an integral part of our training.
They no doubt would have been as good or probably better by using sprinting, plyos and bodyweight excercises instead of the weights.[/quote]
Yeah-plyos and sprinting were used. they were sprinters. Duh. Why do bodyweight when you have access to a prefectly good weightroom. Your post makes zero sense. Lifting is part of proper training program for most sports. There are other ways maybe to achieve the same ends. Why use them instead? The question is Why NOT lift?