The debate is over size does NOT=strength!!!!

[RusPA81]

Bottomline though...I would ASSUME that most reading this board would much rather have the "look" of strength than the actual numbers. Am I right? You could give a shit what you curl if your arms are a ripped 20", correct? And probably vice versa, if benching 700 meant looking like some of the SHW powerlifters out there you could probably live with 405 I'd imagine.

Image: http://prodtn.cafepress.com/8/4810398_F_tn.jpg

I don't know. 700 would be pretty cool.

 

[chanmanfoo]

You would be amazed at the number of people on the boards that lift purely for cosemetics and could care less about strength/functionality. These are the same ones that spend hours debating whether chicks dig the Arnold look or the Zane look. Read some of the ridiculousness on th anabolic board sometime. Shit like: "I want that to look like a men's health model, do you think 2 grams of test, 800 mg of deca,150 mg of tren ed, 10iu's of growth and 20 iu's of slin ed is enough to get me there? BTW I am 5'6'' 135 lbs with 18% bf

who cares why someone lifts? bodybuilder or powerlifter for most its vanity/ego. i have respect for anyone willing to stick it out no matter what their motivation.
foo

 

[spatts]

I can't speak for everyone, but I do what I love, and want it all.

Typical woman, eh?

 

[coolcolj]

well it basicly boils down to this -

if you can recruit more of your existing pool of fibers your stronger - without gaining any size

if you increase the size of your existing recruited fibers your bigger and stronger.

if you increase the size of non-contractile elements or unrecruited fibers then your bigger but no stronger

 

[revexrevex]

so for max size gains you want

increase size of recruited fibers + unrecruited fibers?

 

[BodybuildingUniverse]

I don't know. 700 would be pretty cool.

agreed. but MOST of the big benchers are built like this.

JM Blakley and Glen Chabot are a different story of course...

 

[coolcolj]

so for max size gains you want

increase size of recruited fibers + unrecruited fibers?

yes, plus extra goo size from bits and pieces in the msucle that aren't actually fibers

off course any muscle fibers you don't recruit and fatigue don't get bigger - usually... so becoming more nuerally effecient at recruiting more of your fibers makes you get bigger faster!
That is why if you train for strength to improve nueral effeciency you will be able to grow faster later on.

 

[RusPA81]

I don't know. 700 would be pretty cool.

agreed. but MOST of the big benchers are built like this.

Image: http://www.powermagonline.com/latest-news/images/clay-pose.jpg
JM Blakley and Glen Chabot are a different story of course...

Dude. That guys looks great.

 

[vinylgroover]

You're comparing two different people. As an INDIVIDUAL gets stronger, he tends to get bigger than he was. Add 50 pounds to your raw bench (using the same lifting technique) and you most likely will notice bigger muscles. There are a few exceptions out there, but the vast majority of people get bigger as they get stronger.

You can as technical as you want, but the above quote sums it up pretty well.

 

[IronLion]

worst thread ever