or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Culture › Health & Body › What is the 'athletic' size?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

What is the 'athletic' size? - Page 3

post #31 of 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rosenberg View Post
yeah, i see that as a major difference between old and new generations of bodybuilders. the guys today walk on stage at 290, but back then (forgive me, i can't think of his name) could do backflips holding like 30lb dumbbells or something like that. lots of the oldschool guys had some really athletic trick they could do

Eugen Sandow did one finger chin ups at 195lbs.

Marvin Eder's feats of strength and athleticism are fucking ridiculous. He was almost like an oversized gymnast.
post #32 of 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hangdog View Post
I think some of you are totally off your mark when you clamor about the lack of athleticism in bodybuilders. 275lb. modern roid monsters are one thing, but Marvin Eder, Steve Reeves and Reg Park were nothing if not VERY athletic. Mavin Eder could hold an iron cross.

Erm. Those people were bodybuilders, yes. But they considered themselves first and foremost, strength athletes. Of course their fitness/strength levels are far removed from roids monstrosities of today's.

I was mainly referring to the current slate of professional bodybuilders in my previous post.

Modern day bodybuilding is too much about sheer size. It's missing the aesthetic appeal of ideal proportions, and the hundreds of pounds of muscles the competitors packed on are oddly inefficient.

W. A. Pullum didn't look big, but he did overhead lifts of >200% BW numerous times and various events. He is, AFAIK, the only person who has done that. He could also hold an iron cross @ 200% BW. Yes, holding a crucifix position with a load equivalent to his bodyweight. He wasn't big (~120-125 lbs), and he won't win today's BB competitions in his weight class, but damn was he strong.

Or consider Jasper Benincasa. Almost never trained in a gym. Doesn't lift weights. Did mostly bodyweight exercises, eg. chin-ups. Again, a lean mofo at 130 lbs. Lacked muscle definition in today's BB context. If you thought one can't gain much strength training with just a bar, Benincasa did this:



He held that position for 3-4 seconds. I'd wager no gymnast today can do that. Nor his >300% BW chins, nor his 20 consecutive one-arm chins with either arm.
post #33 of 47
I've read all about the exploits of Jasper Benincasa. He was one of my motivations for getting more interested in weighted bodyweight exercises. I can just get a 2x bodyweight chin-up for a 1RM today, and his advice for doing one-armed chins can't be beat. Really, these exercises aren't even as hard as some people think, it's just that no one is interested in doing them when they can do cable crossovers instead. I was just miffed that guys have to go on about how a "bodybuilder" look, which in this case is simply wide lats tapering to a small waist is somehow unbalanced and not really athletic when compared to some string bean distance runner or bicyclist. I think bicyclists especially have gotten more than their fair share of praise and this hater-influenced backlash to a classic mesomorphic build is getting old.
post #34 of 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hangdog View Post
I was just miffed that guys have to go on about how a "bodybuilder" look, which in this case is simply wide lats tapering to a small waist is somehow unbalanced and not really athletic when compared to some string bean distance runner or bicyclist. I think bicyclists especially have gotten more than their fair share of praise and this hater-influenced backlash to a classic mesomorphic build is getting old.

Just to clarify, I do not hold that belief.

Those little guys are crazy and extremely impressive. I was practicing one arm chin progressions until I tweaked my shoulder and never really got back into it.
post #35 of 47
Watch some EPL soccer and you will get a very good idea of what "athletic" looks like. In all senses of the word.
post #36 of 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hangdog View Post
I've read all about the exploits of Jasper Benincasa. He was one of my motivations for getting more interested in weighted bodyweight exercises. I can just get a 2x bodyweight chin-up for a 1RM today, and his advice for doing one-armed chins can't be beat. Really, these exercises aren't even as hard as some people think, it's just that no one is interested in doing them when they can do cable crossovers instead. I was just miffed that guys have to go on about how a "bodybuilder" look, which in this case is simply wide lats tapering to a small waist is somehow unbalanced and not really athletic when compared to some string bean distance runner or bicyclist. I think bicyclists especially have gotten more than their fair share of praise and this hater-influenced backlash to a classic mesomorphic build is getting old.

Ah we are on the same frequency then.

Congrats on the 2x BW chin. You are in a pretty exclusive club. I recently did a 1RM of OAC with additional 20kg attached. The aftermath is pure elation followed by a bad lat ache the next day. But I cannot imagine attaining this state without lifting iron. Climbing up the rungs of a scaffolding with 1 arm is a priceless substitution, but what Benincasa considered training, I consider pure insanity.

I've now switched to more orthodox training methods eg. deadlifts, as my school gym barred my entry. My current gym is more stringent on safety and noise control, and under watchful eyes I wouldn't want to break any rules here. I'm now aiming for 300% BW deadlift, and hopefully, with regular bodyweight OACs, I won't lose my 1RM chinning ability.

BTW, cyclists are athletic in their own way. Few strength athletes can match the lung capacity or the cardiovascular endurance of Lance Armstrong for example. All in all, the correlation between physical appeal of body shape and athleticism is shady at best. And all sportpeople at the top of the game are athletic in their own unique ways. The strongest bodybuilders are not very flexible or agile. Horses for courses, I say.
post #37 of 47
the rail thin look is only possible if you have narrow shoulders to begin with... i have like a 9-10 inch drop but pretty narrow shoulders so i still look skinny
post #38 of 47
I've always found that a 8-9inch drop is the most aesthetically pleasing. Beckham looks great in suits and his chest isn't all that different from his waist. When you look at Arnold, it looks really awkward with such a huge chest and narrow waist (not to mention it's a complete bitch to find a suit that will fit that bill). If you look up athletes online, the best looking ones generally have a more stream-lined body versus a really bulky one.
post #39 of 47
Suits, and tailored clothing in general, always looks better on men who are "aristocratically slender". Athletic builds look better in athletic clothes.
post #40 of 47
I thought it was wide shoulders, narrow waist. The whole triangle thing. But not exaggerated like basketball players who generally look crappy in suits.

I think Tennis players have the best of both, athletic yet able to wear a suit.
post #41 of 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by underwearer View Post
I thought it was wide shoulders, narrow waist. The whole triangle thing. But not exaggerated like basketball players who generally look crappy in suits.

basketball players look crappy in suits mostly because they buy the wrong sizes. Lebron, who actually wears suits that fits, looks great.

http://api.ning.com/files/JjEhzw70Py...ebron_suit.jpg
post #42 of 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by aguydude View Post
basketball players look crappy in suits mostly because they buy the wrong sizes. Lebron, who actually wears suits that fits, looks great.

http://api.ning.com/files/JjEhzw70Py...ebron_suit.jpg

Yeah I think you're right. Kobe Bryant wears a suit very well, but Phil Jackson looks like Frankensteins uglier brother.
post #43 of 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by underwearer View Post
Yeah I think you're right. Kobe Bryant wears a suit very well, but Phil Jackson looks like Frankensteins uglier brother.

If you want to see a basketball player who who wears poorly fitting suits look no further than the GOAT. The suit that Jordan wore to his hall of fame induction is comically huge.
post #44 of 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by aguydude View Post
If you want to see a basketball player who who wears poorly fitting suits look no further than the GOAT. The suit that Jordan wore to his hall of fame induction is comically huge.

If you think thats bad...



^actually not THAT bad but looks ridiculous nonetheless
post #45 of 47
What the heck is all this body builder crap? NOT athletes. If someone devotes himself to hanging from bars and iron crosses then he will be able to outperform others who otherwise could do such things much longer than the typical dude. The same cannot be said of throwing, hitting, kicking, jumping, running, tackling, shooting, etc., because those activities require a combination of athleticism. Athleticism equals quickness, leaping ability, speed, strength, coordination or some combination thereof (where lacking in category thing means ultra superiority in another). Scouts in professional sports know what a good athlete is just by how a person walks or moves. "Athletic" in suits means broad shoulders and a slender waist. I know guys with "really good bodies" but just really look too muscular and therefore kind of silly in suits. For the ideal, think special ops--they usually have the body type called "mesomporph," with varying degrees of "chiseled-ness." Quick, fast and coordinated, unlike body builders (watch one play basketball sometime).
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Health & Body
Styleforum › Forums › Culture › Health & Body › What is the 'athletic' size?