http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BrmSoPKgYEs

Oh shit. Then i better stop my powerlifting/bodybuilding since i'm lifting very light weights. I got no strength or power.

This post has been edited by darklight79: Jun 22 2006, 11:30 PM

I disagree. You don't know how wrong you are mate.

Granted yes. The point is, i do bodybuilding for myself, and not to impress other women. But it doesn't mean i don't have many female friends. How are you with women? Just curious. If you don't have the means to back up your statement about women not prefering muscular guys, i don't think you should assume anything in the first place.

This post has been edited by darklight79: Jun 23 2006, 12:16 AM

Lol at the example. I get what you're saying. Thanks.
Let me tell you guys out there who just think bodybuilding is for cosmetics.
--------------> Bodybuilding is a LIFESTYLE, not just something done on the side. The discipline is there 24/7. You're in the gym, you're bodybuilding, when you're out of the gym, you're STILL bodybuilding. It's 70% diet, 30% the rest.
Watching what you eat outside the gym is also bodybuilding, constantly making sure you consume enough calories and watching your macronutrients is bodybuilding. So are making use of recovery methods and applying science and theories such as periodization, concepts of muscular, fibrillar and sarcoplasmic hypertrophy is part of bodybuilding.
What? Those people who think bodybuilding is so easy assume we just go to the gym, pump iron and get out? Sheesh.... But then, i guess the majority would never understand us because the people who appreciate bodybuilding contests are also those who bust their damn asses in the gym. They know how hard it is attaining those physiques on the stage. Please don't assume bodybuilders lift LIGHT weights.
Take football, some of you love watching it, but it doesn't mean you have to play football to enjoy watching the game right?
'Nuff said.

Btw, there are many women who like muscular guys. You just haven't met them, that's why a few individuals in this thread make assumptions.

This post has been edited by darklight79: Jun 23 2006, 12:39 AM

LMAO!!! Prepare to get owned!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WS0GGC_LD2U...0lifting%20lift

^^^^^^^^
These guys in the video are powerlifters AND bodybuilders and they can carry more weights than your friend EVER will. And there are skinny guys in there who still can own your "army friend"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uSNvEpH2L1o...onnie%20coleman

Ronnie Coleman, leg pressing 2300lbs, again, more than your friend will ever lift.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6wIX5v4_V4o...onnie%20coleman

Again, same as line above.

You have no facts to back up your statements. Show me videos, show me articles, show me proof, then come back and argue.
Quit talking smack till you come up with a video or a picture.

This post has been edited by darklight79: Jun 23 2006, 01:36 AM

Yah, i bet living in a jungle naked for a month carrying a knife, rope and 3 matches make them really strong. Haha.

Not really. An article from a US friend of mine.

What is up with people and their constant need to perpetuate the "muscle/speed" myth?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

So I have a friend who blogged about weight training in his blog thing. He is primarily a practitioner of Aikido but he is wondering whether he should continue weight training, and this nerd pops in and says "You know, weight trainin's gonna slow you down for Aikido!" And you know the guy hasn't even read an article in men's fitness, he's just parroting some crap he heard elsewhere. I know impliciltly that this is a stupid myth but I am at a loss for the direct science required to disprove it, beyond the physics of F=MA. Especially the biological/neurological aspects. Anyone know that stuff?

I mean even if greater mass IS harder to accelerate, the two are multiplicative, so wouldn't it stand to reason that a practitioner of a non-scored martial art would be interested in greater FORCE production per strike, and therefore the greatest multiplicative value of mass and acceleration? So if mass can be increased (good mass) without too significant of a drop in acceleration, force will go UP and the person will become more powerful and more dangerous. So long as the mass does not drop their acceleration below that of the norm, as far as defense goes, they are good to go.

I know that at some point even muscle slows acceleration, for instance, a very strong, lean horse can't beat a world class sprinter in a 3 meter race. But the assumptions people make about this concept are annoying and ignorant. And up to a certain point, I am quite sure that weight training INCREASES acceleration and allows you to hit faster, especially endurance/circuit training because it allows you to hit quickly with less fatigue.

Have you seen the physiques of sprinters compared to long distance marathon runners? I can tell you that the sprinters are very muscular indeed and they are in no way slow when it comes to doing the 100 metre race.

The main problem with carrying a lot of muscle, when it comes to endurance, is not the greater amount of mass that slows you down, its the inherent difference of the muscle fibers size. The extra bulk is secondary to the real reason why skinny guys can run marathons better than big BBers. But they can't run as fast.

However, obviously there IS a cut off point where mass starts becoming a negative rather than a positive, but the two can work together until a certain degree of mass. It's about prioritising what you want most. Explosive weight lifting movements are great for strength and speed, combining the best of both worlds. I fail to see why anyone would think weightlifting 'slows you down'. Having huge slabs of lets call it 'bodybuilding muscle' would, but if you're training for speed and gaining mass it isn't going to be a problem, only a problem if you're training specifically for mass while trying to get quicker.


This post has been edited by darklight79: Jun 23 2006, 01:53 AM

Yes, you're using the wrong method. There are programs which enhance performance in sports. You're probably overtraining.

Well said pizzaboy. There's a difference between strength and endurance. Compare 2 martial arts exponents. One who does strength training and the other who doesn't. I'll bet you any damn day that the one who weight trains will KICK the ass of the one who doesn't, provided they are both on the same skill level.
It just irks me to hell when people come in and talk smack about bodybuilding and strength training when they obviously don't know anything about it.
Probably because they've been doing nothing but chest and biceps every day and whining about no growth when they're obviously overtraining.

Hey..... insects are high in protein.

The plain simple fact is, if you don't have videos or articles to back up your statements...... don't even bother.
The fact is, you came in and deliberately insinuated that bodybuilders/powerlifters are weak and cosmetic, hence the deliberate insult to our lifestyle.
I don't get it, you friend says this, your friend says that. Ask him to take a video of his strength feats.
Videos (actual proof) > E-stats.

Everyone can brag about how much they lift, how tough they are, but at the end of the day, those claims are nothing without videos.

This post has been edited by darklight79: Jun 23 2006, 05:54 PM

You guys all have a point. Bodybuilding is not an ABSOLUTE prerequisite for being healthy BUT it does promote a healthy lifestyle. But there are athletes who lift weights to enhance their performance in sports.
Granted, you can't mimic a sports skill in the gym (eg. swinging a loaded barbell like a golf club thinking you'll get stronger cos that's stupid) but doing particular exercises there can improve performance significantly. (eg. squats help sprinting, military pressing and bench pressing, etc help track and field athletes tremendously)

At the end of the day, whatever you guys prefer, "bodybuilding or just fitness" is up to personal preference. There's no problem with that.

What i DO have a problem with are individuals who come in just to diss the bodybuilding lifestyle and make derogatory comments about it. I think that's what heated up a few regulars here like Flesh Wound, pizzaboy, iDk, me and a fw others.

*I'd like to think that the LYN Health and Fitness members are much better at resolving disputes compared to the people who frequent the other sections of LYN (*cough* Cupid's *cough*).
After all, no matter how varying our opinions, we're still in pursuit of the same goal ----------------> Maintaining a healthy lifestyle. 'Nuff said.

Peace.

This post has been edited by darklight79: Jun 24 2006, 07:47 PM

Well. It's a matter of preference. I know a lot of guys would go with the flow of which type of physique women prefer. My sig says i bodybuild for myself, not to please women. Let's not compare 2 crazy extremes. I'm no Syed Fazli or Ronnie Coleman, I'm a natural bodybuilder and steroid free, but people would still call me pretty big. My pics say another story:-

http://www.friendster.com/6323938

So, there are women who like bodybuilder physiques and women who like fitness physiques. 'Nuff said.

Peace.

This post has been edited by darklight79: Jun 25 2006, 01:43 AM

Hey bro. Thanks for the compliments in the second post from this. I'm glad we could find common ground.

Anyway, as for your questions, the rod is called a barbell. And that movement you're describing is called the barbell bench press.
And no, it's harder than push ups but a lot more effective because it has added resistance.
You see, in push ups, the resistance is your bodyweight. Your chest will grow for a while, but after that it'll be more of an endurance exercise since your body would have adapted to the same resistance. Adaptation.
The bench press allows you to add resistance, hence the logic heavier weights = bigger muscles.
I'll find a link to the barbell bench press for you tomorrow. Pretty damn tired now. Lol. Need sleep.