Author Topic: If you're under 6 feet, your relative strength is irrelevant  (Read 19104 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

adarqui

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 34034
  • who run it.
  • Respect: +9111
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: If you're under 6 feet, your relative strength is irrelevant
« Reply #15 on: March 22, 2011, 04:23:01 am »
0
i get abused by manlets daily on bodybuilding.com, because they are ATG squatters with no athleticism, so they are disgruntled, and mad.


LBSS

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12850
  • plugging away...
  • Respect: +7956
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: If you're under 6 feet, your relative strength is irrelevant
« Reply #16 on: March 22, 2011, 05:41:29 am »
+1
i get abused by manlets daily on bodybuilding.com, because they are ATG squatters with no athleticism, so they are disgruntled, and mad.



you mad, adarq? haters gonna hate.

unathletic atg squatters UNITE, ATG NATION 4 LYFE!!!!!!!!!
Muscles are nonsensical they have nothing to do with this bullshit.

- Avishek

https://www.savannahstate.edu/cost/nrotc/documents/Inform2010-thearmstrongworkout_Enclosure15_5-2-10.pdf

black lives matter

Flander

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2706
  • One beast coming up
  • Respect: +312
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: If you're under 6 feet, your relative strength is irrelevant
« Reply #17 on: March 22, 2011, 05:52:47 am »
0
are you talking to me, because I am NOT bitching.

Do you think hes talking to you when he quotes someone else and not you?

On topic. Manlets is a cool word. I like manlings as well.

Shorter people do have a biomechanical advantage, but then off course I can carry more bw than them without looking huge.

But I like your point JC. Shorter people often wants to compare their lifts to their bw. I always tell them to get a bigger ROM.

Raptor

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 14560
  • Respect: +2477
    • Yahoo Instant Messenger - raptorescu
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: If you're under 6 feet, your relative strength is irrelevant
« Reply #18 on: March 22, 2011, 06:45:37 am »
0
How about dwarves?

Flander

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2706
  • One beast coming up
  • Respect: +312
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: If you're under 6 feet, your relative strength is irrelevant
« Reply #19 on: March 22, 2011, 07:04:30 am »
+1
How about dwarves?

Denmark has a benchpresser whos a dwarf. He holds the WR for his weightclass and has won several international titles. Honestly I think its bull. He cant fully extend his elbows (some dwarves has this problem) and he cant touch the ground when on the bench. So they bend the rules for him. And he keeps yapping about he stronger pound for pound in the bench than anyone in the world. All I can say is, I can get the cookies from the top shelf. Go fuck of stupid midget.

TheSituation

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1335
  • Just remember me when I make it shine
  • Respect: +215
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: If you're under 6 feet, your relative strength is irrelevant
« Reply #20 on: March 22, 2011, 09:45:38 am »
0
Manlet raggggeeeee

Give me a formula to use that apparently everyone uses already. I've never heard anyone use a bodyweight adjusted formula (whatever that even means). All I hear is manlets bragging about how they can bench 2x their bodyweight (thats why when manlets post strength videos, they'll put @160 pounds or whatever. Never seen someone of normal height do that) and thinking they are better than everyone else. But I guess manlets need something to be happy about.

Used at pretty much any competition:

Powerlifting
Wilks http://www.wimwam.nl/wilkscalculator.htm
Siff http://tsampa.org/training/scripts/siff/
Both can be used for totals or single lifts. Wilks
Malone-Meltzer to age adjust for junior and masters

Weightlifting
Sinclair
Sinclair-Malone-Meltzer

Wilks total is often used to compare a single lift anyway so you can use it for any exercise you want.

Blenderate, 6'1 250lb elite raw powerlifter posting his weight in a youtube title:
#Invalid YouTube Link#



Most major powerlifting competitions use weight classes, not a handicap formula. I'm not too sure about olympic lifting, but I'm assuming the olympics uses weight classes as well. Lamar Gant is in the Guiness Book of World records for deadlifting 5x his bodyweight. Sure it sounds impressive, but he's 5'1 123 pounds. No man of normal height would be able to deadlift 5x their bodyweight. Yet if Lamar Gant was 6 feet, with a proportionate amount of muscle (can't think of the words to use but I think you get me), his deadlift wouldn't be so impressive.
« Last Edit: March 22, 2011, 09:49:11 am by JC »
I don't lift for girls, I lift for guys on the internet



[7:31pm] adarq: ripp, being honest, it's hard for u to beat jcsbck, he's on fire lately
[7:31pm] adarq: he's just
[7:31pm] adarq: wrecking people
[7:31pm] adarq: daily




Say NO to Maroko

And also NO to anyone who associates with him. No Taylor Allan. No Adam Scammenauger. No Kelly Baggett. No Elliot Hulse. No Jtrinsey. NO JUMP USA


Don't PM me asking me training questions. I'm here for the lulz. If you want help, post on the forums and get help from all the members, maybe even me.

joejoe22

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 477
  • Respect: +9
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: If you're under 6 feet, your relative strength is irrelevant
« Reply #21 on: March 22, 2011, 09:46:55 am »
0
How many chicks walk around going, "Man, I wish that 5'1" guy would come talk to me!"

SHORT PEOPLE ARE CREEPY!   :P :P

John Stamos

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3570
  • Respect: +1457
    • View Profile
Re: If you're under 6 feet, your relative strength is irrelevant
« Reply #22 on: March 22, 2011, 11:40:57 am »
0
How about dwarves?
All I can say is, I can get the cookies from the top shelf. Go fuck of stupid midget.

lmao
Every Monday
50 JR
10-1
BURPEES
WALLBALL X 20LB
JJ

PR: 19:51 --> 17:41

TheSituation

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1335
  • Just remember me when I make it shine
  • Respect: +215
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: If you're under 6 feet, your relative strength is irrelevant
« Reply #23 on: March 22, 2011, 11:54:28 am »
0
Also tychever, I think you're missing the point. The point wasn't that 2x bodyweight squat was more impressive for a 200 pound man than it is for a 150 pound manlet, it was that manlets compare their relative strength to people of the same weight, even if they are much taller.

If that point isn't clear enough for you, I'll try explaining it again.

A 5'6 160 pound manlet squats 320 pounds. So that's 2x his bodyweight. A 6'2 160 pound man squats 240 pounds. That's 1.5x his bodyweight. For some crazy reason, the 5'6 manlet thinks he's superior to the 6'2 man purely for relative strength reasons. He should be happy that he has more muscle on him than the 6'2 man, but he's not because a 320 squat isn't impressive.
« Last Edit: March 22, 2011, 12:00:23 pm by JC »
I don't lift for girls, I lift for guys on the internet



[7:31pm] adarq: ripp, being honest, it's hard for u to beat jcsbck, he's on fire lately
[7:31pm] adarq: he's just
[7:31pm] adarq: wrecking people
[7:31pm] adarq: daily




Say NO to Maroko

And also NO to anyone who associates with him. No Taylor Allan. No Adam Scammenauger. No Kelly Baggett. No Elliot Hulse. No Jtrinsey. NO JUMP USA


Don't PM me asking me training questions. I'm here for the lulz. If you want help, post on the forums and get help from all the members, maybe even me.

tychver

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 451
  • Respect: +11
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: If you're under 6 feet, your relative strength is irrelevant
« Reply #24 on: March 22, 2011, 05:44:26 pm »
0
Manlet raggggeeeee

Give me a formula to use that apparently everyone uses already. I've never heard anyone use a bodyweight adjusted formula (whatever that even means). All I hear is manlets bragging about how they can bench 2x their bodyweight (thats why when manlets post strength videos, they'll put @160 pounds or whatever. Never seen someone of normal height do that) and thinking they are better than everyone else. But I guess manlets need something to be happy about.

Used at pretty much any competition:

Powerlifting
Wilks http://www.wimwam.nl/wilkscalculator.htm
Siff http://tsampa.org/training/scripts/siff/
Both can be used for totals or single lifts. Wilks
Malone-Meltzer to age adjust for junior and masters

Weightlifting
Sinclair
Sinclair-Malone-Meltzer

Wilks total is often used to compare a single lift anyway so you can use it for any exercise you want.

Blenderate, 6'1 250lb elite raw powerlifter posting his weight in a youtube title:
#Invalid YouTube Link#



Most major powerlifting competitions use weight classes, not a handicap formula. I'm not too sure about olympic lifting, but I'm assuming the olympics uses weight classes as well. Lamar Gant is in the Guiness Book of World records for deadlifting 5x his bodyweight. Sure it sounds impressive, but he's 5'1 123 pounds. No man of normal height would be able to deadlift 5x their bodyweight. Yet if Lamar Gant was 6 feet, with a proportionate amount of muscle (can't think of the words to use but I think you get me), his deadlift wouldn't be so impressive.

Yes they use weight classes. I'm kinda aware of this having come second in 94kg class at the national weightlifting championships, done a couple of novice level IPF events and been a spotter/load at a heap of them. Our club does IPF powerlifting as well as weightlifting.

You're missing the point. What this allows you to do is compare between weight classes:
IPF WR John Kuc 395kg deadlift @ 110kg is 3.6*BW gives 232.4575 wilks score
IPF WR Lamar Grant 300kg deadlift @ 60kg is 5.2*BW gives 264.399 wilks score

So Lamar Grant is still fucking awesome at deadlifting but John would only need to lift about 450kg to be comparatively as good rather than the 572 if you were to just go by lift/BW.

If for example you wanted to know how much at 6'1 245lbs you would have to lift to be as good as Lamar Grant there's your answer.

tychver

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 451
  • Respect: +11
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: If you're under 6 feet, your relative strength is irrelevant
« Reply #25 on: March 22, 2011, 05:53:43 pm »
0
Also tychever, I think you're missing the point. The point wasn't that 2x bodyweight squat was more impressive for a 200 pound man than it is for a 150 pound manlet, it was that manlets compare their relative strength to people of the same weight, even if they are much taller.

If that point isn't clear enough for you, I'll try explaining it again.

A 5'6 160 pound manlet squats 320 pounds. So that's 2x his bodyweight. A 6'2 160 pound man squats 240 pounds. That's 1.5x his bodyweight. For some crazy reason, the 5'6 manlet thinks he's superior to the 6'2 man purely for relative strength reasons. He should be happy that he has more muscle on him than the 6'2 man, but he's not because a 320 squat isn't impressive.

That's because the 6'2 160lb guy lifting 240lb needs to shut the fuck up and lift ~360lb at ~225lb giving an equal wilks score.

TheSituation

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1335
  • Just remember me when I make it shine
  • Respect: +215
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: If you're under 6 feet, your relative strength is irrelevant
« Reply #26 on: March 22, 2011, 06:55:07 pm »
0
Also tychever, I think you're missing the point. The point wasn't that 2x bodyweight squat was more impressive for a 200 pound man than it is for a 150 pound manlet, it was that manlets compare their relative strength to people of the same weight, even if they are much taller.

If that point isn't clear enough for you, I'll try explaining it again.

A 5'6 160 pound manlet squats 320 pounds. So that's 2x his bodyweight. A 6'2 160 pound man squats 240 pounds. That's 1.5x his bodyweight. For some crazy reason, the 5'6 manlet thinks he's superior to the 6'2 man purely for relative strength reasons. He should be happy that he has more muscle on him than the 6'2 man, but he's not because a 320 squat isn't impressive.

That's because the 6'2 160lb guy lifting 240lb needs to shut the fuck up and lift ~360lb at ~225lb giving an equal wilks score.

Ok.

From now on, I want every person to just put their wilks score in their youtube videos. I don't care how much they weight or how much weight they lifted.
I don't lift for girls, I lift for guys on the internet



[7:31pm] adarq: ripp, being honest, it's hard for u to beat jcsbck, he's on fire lately
[7:31pm] adarq: he's just
[7:31pm] adarq: wrecking people
[7:31pm] adarq: daily




Say NO to Maroko

And also NO to anyone who associates with him. No Taylor Allan. No Adam Scammenauger. No Kelly Baggett. No Elliot Hulse. No Jtrinsey. NO JUMP USA


Don't PM me asking me training questions. I'm here for the lulz. If you want help, post on the forums and get help from all the members, maybe even me.

JelloPuddinPup

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 340
  • No Sir Mr. Ref, you did miss that call.
  • Respect: +34
    • View Profile
    • Call Your Own Fouls
Re: If you're under 6 feet, your relative strength is irrelevant
« Reply #27 on: March 23, 2011, 08:53:17 am »
0
I accidentally stepped over a midget in Walmart once. Talk about awkward... There's no way to walk away from that smoothly.
My real name is Daniel. (6'5" - 217lbs.)

Website: http://www.nbachat.co (Coming Soon) [40/100% Complete]
Blog: http://www.callyourownfouls.com (Coming Soon) [65/100% Complete]
YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/jellopuddinpup

dirksilver

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 296
  • Respect: +6
    • View Profile
Re: If you're under 6 feet, your relative strength is irrelevant
« Reply #28 on: March 23, 2011, 12:11:52 pm »
0
How about dwarves?

Denmark has a benchpresser whos a dwarf. He holds the WR for his weightclass and has won several international titles. Honestly I think its bull. He cant fully extend his elbows (some dwarves has this problem) and he cant touch the ground when on the bench. So they bend the rules for him. And he keeps yapping about he stronger pound for pound in the bench than anyone in the world. All I can say is, I can get the cookies from the top shelf. Go fuck of stupid midget.

this might be the best post i've ever read in my entire life! hahaha...that was great! screw midgets!

Raptor

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 14560
  • Respect: +2477
    • Yahoo Instant Messenger - raptorescu
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: If you're under 6 feet, your relative strength is irrelevant
« Reply #29 on: March 23, 2011, 02:12:08 pm »
0
midget_hops