Re: Powerlifting vs Bodybuilding Approaches?

[Guest guest]

Evan wrote,

>

>What exactly is the difference between a bodybuilding approach and a

>powerliting approach? Is it just more of everthing and less weight? And was

>he right, should I change my routine? Thank you in advance for any advice.

Bodybuilders train for hypertrophy and low body fat. Powerlifters train to

maximize their total for 1RM in the squat, bench press and deadlift, within

parameters of a designated weight class. Which you train for depends on

what you want out of your training. Do you want to be strong in certain key

movements or look good? Or a combination of the two? What you want out of

your training dictates how you train.

ly I don't think he is giving you good advice. I think you should

determine what you want and then build a program to achieve it. For a

person who isn't sure I would include olympic lifting movements to build

speed, strength and flexibility, powerlifting movements to build strength,

some bodybuilding movements for specific areas that need development and

interval training for endurance.

IMO a person who wants to be athletic with good characteristics of speed,

strength and endurance bodybuilding is a poor way to go. Train to be good,

not look good.

Hobman

Saskatoon, Canada

[Guest guest]

Hi, Evan.

First, the difference is in focus. Bodybuilding focuses on the apearance of the

body from the weightlifting, while powerlifting focuses on strengh without

regard for aesthetics. As for following that person's advice, it is up to you.

That person was most probably a bodybuilder type, so he would naturally want you

to emulate him. If you are getting the results that you want following the

training you are doing and you are happy, then stick with it.

Tommy O'Brien

Grand Rapids, MI USA

> Hello everyone,

>

> First I would like to thank Dr. Siff for hosting this forum and give a

> brief introduction. My name is Evan Shochat and I joined the list a couple

> of months ago. I have enjoyed all the posts although I must admit that many

> of the discussions have been a bit over my head. For 20 years I did my best

> impersonation of a couch potato and at 5'10 " and over 250 lbs with a

> cholesterol level in excess of 500 I was in pretty bad shape. A couple of

> years ago I decided to change my life. Since then I have dropped 50 lbs,

> gone from a waist of 44 down to (almost) 36 and my cholesterol, while still

> not at an optimum level is quite a bit lower. Most important I feel so much

> better and my wife says I look better too (a nice bonus I guess).

>

> I fell in love with weightlifting and have been lifting at home for about a

> year now. For the last two months I've been using 's intermediate

> routine. Since I don't have a leg press at home I decided to try using a

> local gym that has more equipment than I do. I must have looked somewhat

> confused because one of the larger guys there came over and offered some

> help and advice. When he looked at the routine I was using he mentioned that

> I was not really physically equipped to use a power lifting routine and that

> I should switch to a bodybuilding type of approach. He said that I should

> lower the weight I was using a bit and do more exercises per bodypart, more

> sets per exercise and more reps per set and that it would build more size

> and endurance than what I was currently using. He said that after I had

> built myself up I would be better equipped to handle a powerlifting routine.

> I thanked him for the advice and told him I would definitely look into it

> more. I assume he was more of a bodybuilder than a powerlifter because he

> kept " posing " in the mirror (not that that's a bad thing).

>

> What exactly is the difference between a bodybuilding approach and a

> powerliting approach? Is it just more of everthing and less weight? And was

> he right, should I change my routine? Thank you in advance for any advice.

>

> Evan Shochat

> Lawrence, MA

[Guest guest]

What is your goal to get bigger or get stronger? If you are looking for

increases in mass than I would assume he is pointing you in the right

direction. If you want to get stronger than intermediate routine

should work well for you. I am assuming that you are talking about

Broeg.

HTH

Clint Bateman

Houston Tx

Powerlifting vs Bodybuilding Approaches?

Hello everyone,

First I would like to thank Dr. Siff for hosting this forum and give a

brief introduction. My name is Evan Shochat and I joined the list a couple

of months ago. I have enjoyed all the posts although I must admit that many

of the discussions have been a bit over my head. For 20 years I did my best

impersonation of a couch potato and at 5'10 " and over 250 lbs with a

cholesterol level in excess of 500 I was in pretty bad shape. A couple of

years ago I decided to change my life. Since then I have dropped 50 lbs,

gone from a waist of 44 down to (almost) 36 and my cholesterol, while still

not at an optimum level is quite a bit lower. Most important I feel so much

better and my wife says I look better too (a nice bonus I guess).

I fell in love with weightlifting and have been lifting at home for about a

year now. For the last two months I've been using 's intermediate

routine. Since I don't have a leg press at home I decided to try using a

local gym that has more equipment than I do. I must have looked somewhat

confused because one of the larger guys there came over and offered some

help and advice. When he looked at the routine I was using he mentioned that

I was not really physically equipped to use a power lifting routine and that

I should switch to a bodybuilding type of approach. He said that I should

lower the weight I was using a bit and do more exercises per bodypart, more

sets per exercise and more reps per set and that it would build more size

and endurance than what I was currently using. He said that after I had

built myself up I would be better equipped to handle a powerlifting routine.

I thanked him for the advice and told him I would definitely look into it

more. I assume he was more of a bodybuilder than a powerlifter because he

kept " posing " in the mirror (not that that's a bad thing).

What exactly is the difference between a bodybuilding approach and a

powerliting approach? Is it just more of everthing and less weight? And was

he right, should I change my routine? Thank you in advance for any advice.

Evan Shochat

Lawrence, MA

Modify or cancel your subscription here:

mygroups

[Guest guest]

A powerlifting approach tends to differ from a bodybuilding approach

in a few ways. First is what you mentioned, powerlifting tends to

have fewer reps with higher weights. A powerlifting routine also

tends to have fewer " shaping " type exercises like flyes or the pec

deck and more of an emphasis on power moves like bench press, squats

etc. There are advantages and disadvantages to both. If you look at

many professional powerlifters you will see that there is not a lot

of emphasis on symmetry or shape, not many people get into

bodybuilding to look like a powerlifter.

[i presume that you mean " competitive powerlifters " , because there are no

professional powerlifters or powerlifting teams. Mel Siff]

Strict powerlifting also doesn't do much for isolating a particular muscle. The

advantages of

a power type routine are that it can consist of some basic moves and

be done quickly. It is also a good way to put on some overall size

and strength so that you have some muscle mass and size to work with

before you start trying to refine the shape of your muscles.

Chance Donohue

Dillon MT

www.edsgym.com

angus_young74@...

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

" Evan Shochat " <fenway82@h...> wrote:

> Hello everyone,

>

> First I would like to thank Dr. Siff for hosting this forum and

give a

> brief introduction. My name is Evan Shochat and I joined the list a

couple

> of months ago. I have enjoyed all the posts although I must admit

that many

> of the discussions have been a bit over my head. For 20 years I did

my best

> impersonation of a couch potato and at 5'10 " and over 250 lbs with

a

> cholesterol level in excess of 500 I was in pretty bad shape. A

couple of

> years ago I decided to change my life. Since then I have dropped 50

lbs,

> gone from a waist of 44 down to (almost) 36 and my cholesterol,

while still

> not at an optimum level is quite a bit lower. Most important I feel

so much

> better and my wife says I look better too (a nice bonus I guess).

>

> I fell in love with weightlifting and have been lifting at home for

about a

> year now. For the last two months I've been using 's

intermediate

> routine. Since I don't have a leg press at home I decided to try

using a

> local gym that has more equipment than I do. I must have looked

somewhat

> confused because one of the larger guys there came over and offered

some

> help and advice. When he looked at the routine I was using he

mentioned that

> I was not really physically equipped to use a power lifting routine

and that

> I should switch to a bodybuilding type of approach. He said that I

should

> lower the weight I was using a bit and do more exercises per

bodypart, more

> sets per exercise and more reps per set and that it would build

more size

> and endurance than what I was currently using. He said that after I

had

> built myself up I would be better equipped to handle a powerlifting

routine.

> I thanked him for the advice and told him I would definitely look

into it

> more. I assume he was more of a bodybuilder than a powerlifter

because he

> kept " posing " in the mirror (not that that's a bad thing).

>

> What exactly is the difference between a bodybuilding approach and

a

> powerliting approach? Is it just more of everthing and less weight?

And was

> he right, should I change my routine? Thank you in advance for any

advice.

>

> Evan Shochat

[Guest guest]

Re: Powerlifting vs Bodybuilding Approaches?

> Evan wrote,

> >

> >What exactly is the difference between a bodybuilding approach and a

> >powerliting approach? Is it just more of everthing and less weight? And

was

> >he right, should I change my routine? Thank you in advance for any

advice.

>

> Bodybuilders train for hypertrophy and low body fat. Powerlifters train to

> maximize their total for 1RM in the squat, bench press and deadlift,

within

> parameters of a designated weight class. Which you train for depends on

> what you want out of your training. Do you want to be strong in certain

key

> movements or look good? Or a combination of the two? What you want out of

> your training dictates how you train.

>

> ly I don't think he is giving you good advice. I think you should

> determine what you want and then build a program to achieve it. For a

> person who isn't sure I would include olympic lifting movements to build

> speed, strength and flexibility, powerlifting movements to build strength,

> some bodybuilding movements for specific areas that need development and

> interval training for endurance.

>

> IMO a person who wants to be athletic with good characteristics of speed,

> strength and endurance bodybuilding is a poor way to go. Train to be good,

> not look good.

>

> Hobman

> Saskatoon, Canada

This is true, and knows his stuff. It *is* a matter of opinion, as to

which sport one chooses (bbing, pling, oling, etc.) but it is definitely

true that if you want to be a PLer, don't train with a BBing routine, and

vice-versa.

Define your goals, then design a program around it. I know many people who

start out wanting to train for bigger, better muscles - bbing - and later

change to pling or oling. Other people do the opposite - change from a

strength sport to a bbing. Any bbing routine that increases mass WILL make

you stronger than you are now. It is just a matter of what you want to

emphasize - size, aesthetic balance, explosive power, etc. Plenty of

routines can improve all factors, but it is always a tradeoff. Decide which

factors are most important for you, and go from there.

Whitney Richtmyer

Seattle, WA

>

>

>

>

>

> Modify or cancel your subscription here:

>

> mygroups

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

This one is my favorite question, because it is one of the biggest

paradoxes in strength training world.

Purpose of bodybuilding is to look good, and purpose of powerlifting is to

be strong.

Because of that their training methodology is different. Bodybuilders do

not need to concentrate on few exercises, they train anything that helps

them to become bigger.

Conversely, powerlifters (and O-lifters) train very few exercises in 1RM

form, which allows them effective demonstration of strength and

specialisation. Now, the problems ...

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

1RM is not very reasonable training goal, our bodies are not constructed

for something like that, injuries are frequent, CNS is easily overtrained,

it is harder to organize productive training, it requires great efforts and

specialization, skill improvement etc. to force the body to be good in

something for which it is not made. Their training is not efficient because

of that.

[The body is a highly adaptive organism and through appropriately constructed

training programs, using regimes such as gradual progressive overload and

periodisation, many lifters can become extremely strong and successful without

serious or persistent injury. In previous discussions, several of us quoted

actual

injury figures in the lifting sports and showed that they are considerably lower

than in many other sports, including running, recreational aerobics and team

sports

such as soccer, baseball, basketball and football. If you are going to make

statements

about " frequent " injuries, please cite some suitable references. Olympic

lifting

training happens to be very efficient in terms of enhancing strength and power,

so

what exactly do you mean by " not efficient " ?

Bodybuilders training is much more natural, closer to real purpose of

muscles, and because of that they progress much easier and in much bigger

variety of exercises and volume schemes. Their training is more efficient,

and in neutral collection of exercises (for example: high rep squats, low

reps squats, high rep bench, low rep bench, high rep chins, low rep chins,

high rep calf raises, low rep calf raises) we can expect that powerlifters

(or O-lifters) are better only in two (low reps squats and bench presses)

of eight mentioned strength features, and their real world strength is also

smaller, because they are not adapted on big volumes.

[This is entirely a matter of opinion until you are able to cite suitable

scientific

and practical evidence. Some might contend that bodybuilding (i.e. developing

massive

muscle hypertrophy and extremely low levels of bodyfat) is far less " natural "

and

" functional " than many other athletic endeavours.

So, not only that bodybuilders appear stronger than powerlifters,

bodybuilders are *actually* stronger.

[i am not going to comment much on this misleading statement, because my

powerlifting

colleagues undoubtedly are going to address this in no uncertain fashion. I,

for one, would

be interested to know of any bodybuilders who can squat over 900lbs at the age

of 53, like

the indomitable Louie . Let me assure you, too, that many top

powerlifters are not

strong in only one or two lifts. Anyway, this sort of comparison is completely

odious and we have discussed

it at some length in the past. There is no such thing as general strength - for

comparisons to be

acceptable, they have to be made within a given situation or type of physical

activity. There are

also several different types of specific strength and power, and in our previous

discussions, this

point was eventually acknowledged and we moved on.

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

On the other side, bodybuilders are so freaky big, 'ripped', dehydrated,

tanned and so artificial that they do not appear good at all. At the moment

of the show, they should impress as best specimens human specie posses, but

they do not look good at all, and they are obviously weak and exhausted. As

additional paradox for bodybuilders, training with goal to appear though is

in contradiction with notion. You cannot imagine some really though guy

like Dirty Harry that he train for appearance, can you?

Powerlifter - if he is not obese - and he is not if he is not 'superheavy'

- looks significantly better, and more self-confident for sure.

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

So, you see:

Bodybuilders train for appearance, but powerlifters look better.

Powerlifters train for strength, but bodybuilders are stronger.

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

Of course, they tend not to agree with me. Lifters tend to use semantic

tricks, like claim that only 1RM is strength, and everything else is 'only'

endurance (until asked for 1RM in farmers walk), bodybuilders are simpler,

they want to see the picture of my biceps.

[There is no semantic trick about definitions of strength - peruse any textbook

on the

various scientific definitions used in specific situations and you will note

that strength

is the ability to exert force and that maximal strength is the ability to

produce maximal

strength in a given physical action. Other strength and power qualities are

also carefully

defined in each given context. I have gone into great detail on this topic in

my

" Supertraining " textbook. Mel Siff]

For the average man who wants to train because of all supposed benefits of

balanced strength training, it is best by far to ignore both groups and

search his own way. One can take measurable approach of lifters and

principles from their sophisticated training routines, and balanced

exercise choice and strength goals of bodybuilders. It is much funnier, also.

[instead of ignoring both groups, he should use methods taken from as many

different

regimes of strength and sports training as he wishes. I covered this approach

to training

in my recent presentation at the NSCA conference in Spokane ( " Supertraining - A

Unified Field theoretical

approach to Strength Training " ) in an attempt to dismantle the huge biases in

different approaches

to strength training and to show how one may very productively devise training

programs which

integrate the principles and methods of many forms of strength training and

rehabilitation. Mel Siff]

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

Kazimir Majorinc,

Zagreb, Croatia

http://public.srce.hr/~kmajor

[Guest guest]

> > Evan wrote,

> > >

> > >What exactly is the difference between a bodybuilding approach and a

> > >powerliting approach? Is it just more of everything and less weight?

>And

>was

> > >he right, should I change my routine? Thank you in advance for any

>advice.

> >

> > Bodybuilders train for hypertrophy and low body fat. Powerlifters train

>to

> > maximize their total for 1RM in the squat, bench press and deadlift,

>within

> > parameters of a designated weight class. Which you train for depends on

> > what you want out of your training. Do you want to be strong in certain

>key

> > movements or look good? Or a combination of the two? What you want out

>of

> > your training dictates how you train.

> >

> > ly I don't think he is giving you good advice. I think you should

> > determine what you want and then build a program to achieve it. For a

> > person who isn't sure I would include olympic lifting movements to build

> > speed, strength and flexibility, powerlifting movements to build

>strength,

> > some bodybuilding movements for specific areas that need development and

> > interval training for endurance.

> >

> > IMO a person who wants to be athletic with good characteristics of

>speed,

> > strength and endurance bodybuilding is a poor way to go. Train to be

>good,

> > not look good.

> >

> > Hobman

> > Saskatoon, Canada

>

>This is true, and knows his stuff. It *is* a matter of opinion, as

>to

>which sport one chooses (bbing, pling, oling, etc.) but it is definitely

>true that if you want to be a PLer, don't train with a BBing routine, and

>vice-versa.

>

>Define your goals, then design a program around it. I know many people who

>start out wanting to train for bigger, better muscles - bbing - and later

>change to pling or oling. Other people do the opposite - change from a

>strength sport to a bbing. Any bbing routine that increases mass WILL make

>you stronger than you are now. It is just a matter of what you want to

>emphasize - size, aesthetic balance, explosive power, etc. Plenty of

>routines can improve all factors, but it is always a tradeoff. Decide

>which

>factors are most important for you, and go from there.

I'd like to thank everyone who responded to my question (including in

another forum). It seems as if my best bet would be to stick to the routine

I have been following and at the very least build a base from which to

start. I'm not exactly sure which type of weightlifting sport I will

eventually gravitate to but at the moment I find I enjoy squats, deadlifts,

benches, presses etc. The main reason I train is for health reasons and the

gratification of seeing my ability to increase reps and weight. What that

will lead to I don't know but what I do know is that I won't be going back

to where I came from.

Evan Shochat

Lawrence, MA

[Guest guest]

" Whit " <whittt@e...> wrote:

>

> Hobman <khobman@s...> wrote:

> <Supertraining@y...>

> > Do you want to be strong in certain key

> > movements or look good? Or a combination of the two?

> > What you want out of your training dictates how you train.

> > * * *

> > IMO a person who wants to be athletic with good characteristics

> > of speed, strength and endurance bodybuilding is a poor way to

> > go. Train to be good, not look good.

>

> This is true, and knows his stuff. It *is* a matter of

> opinion, as to which sport one chooses (bbing, pling, oling, etc.)

> but it is definitely true that if you want to be a PLer, don't

> train with a BBing routine, and vice-versa.

I, too, agree with ... that it is a matter of OPINION which

way one chooses. However, his opinion of " train to be good, not

look good " is short-sighted. My bias, of course, is toward the

bodybuilding end of the spectrum, though my current strength and

endurance are far beyond what they were in my youth. But my bias

is not without scientific basis. Like it or not, when it comes

to what is important in today's world, social perception, as well

as self-perception, are a lot more important than functional

strength. And when it comes to males being heterosexually

attractive, and having an appearance of success, a lean, muscular

physique rules:

" Playgirl centerfold models became increasingly 'dense' and more

muscular over time, as indicated by the significant correlations

between BMI, FFMI, and year of publication. * * * These

observations, in combination with previous studies, suggest that

cultural norms of the ideal male body are growing increasingly

muscular. " Leit RA; Pope HG; Gray JJ; Cultural expectations of

muscularity in men: the evolution of playgirl centerfolds;

Int J Eat Disord; 2001 Jan;29(1):90-3.

" The purposes of this research were (1) to explore gender

differences in the evaluation of physical attractiveness stimuli

developed to represent commonly occurring real builds[.] * * *

Gender differences were in emphasis only. Women emphasized

lean/broad-shouldered and average/balanced male types. Men

emphasized the muscular bulk male type. " Salusso-Deonier CJ;

Markee NL; Pedersen EL. Gender differences in the evaluation of

physical attractiveness ideals for male and female body builds.

Percept Mot Skills. 1993 Jun;76(3 Pt 2):1155-67

" eing perceived as physically attractive created positive

impressions of achievement-related traits for men[.] " Chia RC;

Allred LJ; Grossnickle WF; Lee GW; Effects of attractiveness and

gender on the perception of achievement-related variables;

J Soc Psychol; 1998 Aug; 138(4):471-7.

And if you don't like that, compare the ticket prices and

attendance between a major bodybuilding competition and a

major powerlifting competition. One can complain all he or

she wants about how none of this " right, " and that the emphasis

should be reversed, but as my mama told me when I was just wee

lad: " Wishin' doesn't make it so. "

--

M.

Wooster, Ohio

[Guest guest]

wrote,

>

>I, too, agree with ... that it is a matter of OPINION which

>way one chooses. However, his opinion of " train to be good, not

>look good " is short-sighted. My bias, of course, is toward the

>bodybuilding end of the spectrum, though my current strength and

>endurance are far beyond what they were in my youth. But my bias

>is not without scientific basis. Like it or not, when it comes

>to what is important in today's world, social perception, as well

>as self-perception, are a lot more important than functional

>strength. And when it comes to males being heterosexually

>attractive, and having an appearance of success, a lean, muscular

>physique rules:

Your bias is showing. Most people would prefer an athletic physique to the

extreme hypertrophy of a top notch bodybuilder. Personally I'd much rather

look like most wrestlers than Arnold S.

>And if you don't like that, compare the ticket prices and

>attendance between a major bodybuilding competition and a

>major powerlifting competition. One can complain all he or

>she wants about how none of this " right, " and that the emphasis

>should be reversed, but as my mama told me when I was just wee

>lad: " Wishin' doesn't make it so. "

Now go compare the same in Finland. Be careful not to confuse your culture with

the

entire world.

Hobman

Saskatoon, Canada

[Guest guest]

Re: Powerlifting vs Bodybuilding Approaches?

> " Whit " <whittt@e...> wrote:

> >

> > Hobman <khobman@s...> wrote:

> > <Supertraining@y...>

> > > Do you want to be strong in certain key

> > > movements or look good? Or a combination of the two?

> > > What you want out of your training dictates how you train.

> > > * * *

> > > IMO a person who wants to be athletic with good characteristics

> > > of speed, strength and endurance bodybuilding is a poor way to

> > > go. Train to be good, not look good.

> >

> > This is true, and knows his stuff. It *is* a matter of

> > opinion, as to which sport one chooses (bbing, pling, oling, etc.)

> > but it is definitely true that if you want to be a PLer, don't

> > train with a BBing routine, and vice-versa.

>

> I, too, agree with ... that it is a matter of OPINION which

> way one chooses. However, his opinion of " train to be good, not

> look good " is short-sighted. My bias, of course, is toward the

> bodybuilding end of the spectrum, though my current strength and

> endurance are far beyond what they were in my youth. But my bias

> is not without scientific basis. Like it or not, when it comes

> to what is important in today's world, social perception, as well

> as self-perception, are a lot more important than functional

> strength. And when it comes to males being heterosexually

> attractive, and having an appearance of success, a lean, muscular

> physique rules:

>

I agree. I hear a lot of comments like " I'd rather look strong than be

strong " or derisive comments about a bbers " fake muscles " etc. from many

strength athletes. I rarely hear similar comments from BBers criticizing

strength athletes.

I think part of the reason that strength athletes (some of them, if not

most) have a chip on their shoulder when it comes to BBing, is that BBing

*is* the Big Dawg in the USA. Everybody in the US knows who Arnold is, but

how many people know who Ed Coan or Pyrros Dimas are?

One thing about building a physique is the individuality of it. A 200 kilo

bench press is a 200 kilo bench press is a 200 kilo bench press. No matter

what level you reach as a strength athlete, there are a zillion guys (or

gals) stronger than you doing the same thing. With BBing, it is a personal

achievement in a different way. Nobody can say that they have the same

physique as you. Sure, Zane may have better symmetry, or better

size, but your physique is uniquely your own and you carry it with you

whereever you go. It is unique, personal beauty.

The biological and cultural reality is that looks matter. Looking like " a

God " or coming as close as we can *is* a noble task. Sure, in some

professions and lifestyles that superior (usually) functional strength of a

PLer vs. a BBer might come in handy, but BBers are both Strong *and*

" pretty " . They can carry around the results of their work 24/7 and it is

always there for others to see. Beauty and Strength are a powerful

combination and have been since the dawn of time.

Whitney Richtmyer

Seattle, WA

[Guest guest]

wrote:

> >I, too, agree with ... that it is a matter of OPINION which

> >way one chooses. However, his opinion of " train to be good, not

> >look good " is short-sighted. My bias, of course, is toward the

> >bodybuilding end of the spectrum, though my current strength and

> >endurance are far beyond what they were in my youth. But my bias

> >is not without scientific basis. Like it or not, when it comes

> >to what is important in today's world, social perception, as well

> >as self-perception, are a lot more important than functional

> >strength. And when it comes to males being heterosexually

> >attractive, and having an appearance of success, a lean, muscular

> >physique rules....

Hobman:

> Your bias is showing. Most people would prefer an athletic physique to the

> extreme hypertrophy of a top notch bodybuilder. Personally I'd much rather

> look like most wrestlers than Arnold S.

Most men (and the women that love them) would rather have the physique of a

Muscle Media, Men's Fitness etc. cover model than a PLer, or a PROFESSIONAL

BBer, etc. That is the look that men seek, and women want, generally

speaking. Arnold is not representative of what most guys who lift weights

for looks actually look like. Most guys want decent size arms, a six pack,

etc. and they can get that.....

The point is about a lean, muscular physique. Yes, a PLer CAN have a

physique like this, but if one wants a good physique,. then there are ways

to optimally train for same, as opposed to pling.

> >And if you don't like that, compare the ticket prices and

> >attendance between a major bodybuilding competition and a

> >major powerlifting competition. One can complain all he or

> >she wants about how none of this " right, " and that the emphasis

> >should be reversed, but as my mama told me when I was just wee

> >lad: " Wishin' doesn't make it so. "

Hobman:

> Now go compare the same in Finland. Be careful not to confuse your culture

> with the entire world.

Finland is too cold for people to care about what they look like nekkid.

While I agree with about the importance for most men of lookin' good

(and more so for most women), I don't think the BBer show receipts is a very

good indication. Pro BBing is a niche audience. Most men who go to the gym

want to look good, not compete in the PLifts, but they are not that

interested in BBing as a sport, or who the latest steroid monster is.

Whitney Richtmyer

Seattle, WA

[Guest guest]

>

> > >I, too, agree with ... that it is a matter of OPINION which

> > >way one chooses. However, his opinion of " train to be good, not

> > >look good " is short-sighted. My bias, of course, is toward the

> > >bodybuilding end of the spectrum, though my current strength and

> > >endurance are far beyond what they were in my youth. But my bias

> > >is not without scientific basis. Like it or not, when it comes

> > >to what is important in today's world, social perception, as well

> > >as self-perception, are a lot more important than functional

> > >strength. And when it comes to males being heterosexually

> > >attractive, and having an appearance of success, a lean, muscular

> > >physique rules....

>

> Hobman:

>

> > Your bias is showing. Most people would prefer an athletic

> > physique to the extreme hypertrophy of a top notch bodybuilder.

> > Personally I'd much rather look like most wrestlers than

> > Arnold S.

>

> Most men (and the women that love them) would rather have the

> physique of a Muscle Media, Men's Fitness etc. cover model than

> a PLer, or a PROFESSIONAL BBer, etc. That is the look that men

> seek, and women want, generally speaking. Arnold is not

> representative of what most guys who lift weights for looks

> actually look like. Most guys want decent size arms, a six pack,

> etc. and they can get that.....

My point exactly. I have neither the ability nor the desire to go

to the extreme of Arnold S. or Dorian Yates. But what I wish to

accomplish is within that genre. For that matter, will never

lift as much as Fred Hatfield. The fact remains that amongst

non-elite weightlifters, the " athletic physique " to which he

refers is much more likely to be perceived as that of a lean,

muscular, bodybuilding type than that of a " strong fat guy "

powerlifting type.

> While I agree with about the importance for most men of

> lookin' good (and more so for most women), I don't think the

> BBer show receipts is a very good indication. Pro BBing is a

> niche audience. Most men who go to the gym want to look good,

> not compete in the PLifts, but they are not that interested in

> BBing as a sport, or who the latest steroid monster is.

I used an example on the outside fringes. OK. Compare the sales

of Muscle Media, or *any* major bodybuilding mag, to that of PLUSA,

the premier powerlifting mag. The same results occur. And then

consider the fact that most magazine buyers purchase the mags as

instructional information for their desired goals. Perhaps

powerlifting mags sell better in Canada ... or Finland. But I

doubt it.

--

M.

Wooster, Ohio, USA

[Guest guest]

Mel wrote:

If you are going to make statements about " frequent " injuries (of

powerlifters - KM), please cite some suitable references.

Kazimir:

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

Sportverletz Sportschaden 1989 Mar;3(1):32

Injuries and damage caused by excess stress in body building and power

lifting. [Article in German]

Goertzen M, Schoppe K, Lange G, Schulitz KP.

Orthopadische Klinik und Poliklinik der Medizinischen Einrichtungen der

Universitat Dusseldorf.

A questionnaire, designed to elict information about training programs,

experience and injury profile, was administered to 358 bodybuilders and 60

powerlifters. This was followed by a clinical orthopedic and radiological

examination. The upper extremity, particularly the shoulder and elbow joint,

showed the highest injury rate. More than 40% of all injuries occurred in

this area. The low back region and the knee were other sites of elevated

injury occurrences. Muscular injuries (muscle pulls, tendonitis, sprains)

were perceived to account for 83.6% of all injury types.

Powerlifting showed a twice as high injury rate as bodybuilding, probably of

grounds of

a more uniform training program. Weight-training should be associated

with a sports-related medical care and supervised by knowledgeable people,

who can instruct the athletes in proper lifting techniques and protect them

from injury which can result from incorrect weight-training.

[Did this study make any attempt to examine the total amount of work (load

volume) and

the training intensity done by each group? Any significant disparities in

training intensity and volume

between the two groups would render the study misleading and invalid. For

example, if we compared

injury rates between sprinters and distance runners without examining factors

such as mean running velocity

and distance per day, the results could not prove whether a higher injury rate

in one group is due to

the precise form of running or the training regimen used. In fact, the above

study concluded that the injury issue

was more one of poor technique, poor program design and lack of competent

coaching - it did not state that

powerlifting in general is a very unsafe sport. And I would fully agree with

this conclusion. Mel Siff]

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

Pediatrics 1983 Nov;72(5):636-44

Medical history associated with adolescent powerlifting.

Brown EW, Kimball RG.

A questionnaire, designed to elicit information about the training,

experience, and medical history of adolescent powerlifters, was

administered to 71 contestants entered in the 1981 Michigan Teenage

Powerlifting Championship. The average subject had participated in 4.1

workouts per week for 17.1 months. Each workout lasted an average of 99.2

minutes. The population sustained 98 powerlifting injuries which caused a

discontinuance of training for a total of 1126 days. The incidence and

severity of pain in 13 regions of the body, as well as the site and type of

powerlifting injury, were investigated. The low back region was shown to be

the site with the greatest number of injuries (49). This region also had

the highest percent of subjects recording an elevated occurrence and level

of pain associated with powerlifting.

[if we divide 1126 days by 98, we note that powerlifters in this study lost

about

12 days over a period of up to 17.1 months due to injury. There are many

footballers,

soccer players, rugby players and numerous other athletes who would love to lose

less

than 2 weeks in approximately 18 months of training and competition. Mel Siff]

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

Mel:

<..... what exactly do you mean by <powerlifters training is " not efficient " ?>

Kazimir:

Investing same time and effort, one can expect bigger amount of

non-specific adaptations (condition, working ability, useful hypertrophy)

with bodybuilding type training, because.

1) injuries are more frequent in powerlifting.

2) maximal lifts require specific adaptations more than sub-maximal lifts

3) it is easier to overtrain CNS with (relatively) big weights. Avoiding

1RM one can train more frequently, with more volume and more variety, and

it is easier to construct productive training.

4) there is more freedom in choice of exercises.

Platz-Hatfield squat duel is good example of bigger efficiency of

bodybuilders training. Bodybuilder can expect even relatively better

results in exercises powerlifter does not train.

[i'm not exactly sure of what you mean here - are you suggesting that Platz

exceeded

Fred Hatfield's 1014lb squat (I think that is what it was)? Mel Siff]

I'm surprised with your example for longevity of powerlifters. His

lifestyle and training style decrease chances for his longevity.

[i did not make any remarks about longevity - you have misquoted me. No sport

whatsoever has been shown to definitely increase or decrease lifespan, since

death not due to trauma seems to be more strongly related to genetics, absence

from disease

and adequate food intake. Anyway, all the critics said much about the heavy

drinking, cigar-smoking

and sleep deprived Winston Churchill, wartime Prime Minister of Britain, who

outlived many of his

critics by many years! As has been said: " Man proposes, God disposes. " Mel

Siff ]

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

Int J Sports Med 2000 Apr;21(3):225-7

Increased premature mortality of competitive powerlifters suspected to have

used anabolic agents.

Parssinen M, Kujala U, Vartiainen E, Sarna S, Seppala T.

National Public Health Institute, Laboratory of Substance Abuse, Helsinki,

Finland. miia.parssinen@...

Misuse of supraphysiological doses of anabolic steroids is claimed to have

serious side effects. The aim of the study was to determine the mortality,

and the cause of premature deaths among a group of subjects who are

strongly suspected to have used anabolic steroids for a non-medical purpose

over several years. The mortality of 62 male powerlifters placed 1st-5th in

weight series 82.5-125 kg in Finnish championships during 1977-1982 was

compared with the mortality of population controls. The mortality during

the 12-year follow-up was 12.9% for the powerlifters compared to 3.1% in

the control population. By 1993 eight of 62 powerlifters and 34 of 1094

population controls had died, thus the risk of death among the powerlifters

was 4.6 times higher (95% CI 2.04-10.45; p = 0.0002).

The causes of premature death among the powerlifters were suicide (3), acute

myocardial

infarction (3), hepatic coma (1) and non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (1). These

findings add to the growing amount of evidence of an association between

anabolic steroid abuse and premature death, and support the view that

measures to decrease AAS misuse among both competitive and amateur athletes

are justified.

[This study has nothing to do with powerlifting as a cause of injury - it

concerns drug abuse,

so it has no relevance whatsoever to the discussion. Mel Siff]

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

Kazimir Majorinc,

Zagreb, Croatia

http://public.srce.hr/~kmajor

[Guest guest]

<These findings add to the growing amount of evidence of an association between

anabolic steroid abuse and premature death, and support the view that

measures to decrease AAS misuse among both competitive and amateur athletes

are justified.>

Who were " strongly suspected " ? -does that really comprise the foundation for a

solid scientific argument-I think not. This is pseudoscience at its height.

As for decreasing use of performence enhancing agents- you won't. They have

been around since the dawn of time (gladiators eating bulls testicles) and

will continue to be used. The intelligent route is education.

Currently there are around 6457 casualities per week on the roads in the UK

alone. Now imagine how high this figure would be if people were not first

given a driving test... Imagine the mortality rate from paracetamol-and

again, not people " strongly suspected of analgesic agents " but real world

findings..

How many people die from AAS use? Few. How many people die from insulin use

and possibly diuertic usage? Marginally more. However, whilst you can quote

crass studies trying to blame a heart attack on AAS, I can give you MILLIONS

of examples of people who suffered heart attacks who never smoked, drank

alcohol, or used AAS. So now, express the % rate of heart attack victims who

have used AAS. Pathetic, isn't it?

Doctors prescribe these compounds to people to build tissue, and often the

patients suffer no deleterious side effects - yet I know more than my doctor

about this subject. Can you counter by saying that " These people have a need

for these medications? " No. Because that is an issue of morality.

Please excuse my 'rant', but I am sick and tired of people talking about

subjects that they apparently know little or nothing about. I do not know

anything about

powerlifting, (I do have a 300kg hack squat at 70kg lean), which is why I

joined this board-to learn. You do yourself a great disservice to believe

you have nothing to learn about a subject because of a handfull of half

baked studies in the media.

" Just because something is illegal, does not mean that it is immoral "

Sammuel Damon

Gobi ......

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

From: " Majorinc, Kazimir " <kmajor@...>

Mel wrote:

>If you are going to make statements about " frequent " injuries (of

>powerlifters - KM), please cite some suitable references.

>Kazimir:

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

>Sportverletz Sportschaden 1989 Mar;3(1):32

>

>Injuries and damage caused by excess stress in body building and power

>lifting. [Article in German]

>

>Goertzen M, Schoppe K, Lange G, Schulitz KP.

>

>Orthopadische Klinik und Poliklinik der Medizinischen Einrichtungen der

>Universitat Dusseldorf.

>

>A questionnaire, designed to elict information about training programs,

>experience and injury profile, was administered to 358 bodybuilders and 60

>powerlifters. This was followed by a clinical orthopedic and radiological

>examination. The upper extremity, particularly the shoulder and elbow

>joint,

>showed the highest injury rate. More than 40% of all injuries occurred in

>this area. The low back region and the knee were other sites of elevated

>injury occurrences. Muscular injuries (muscle pulls, tendonitis, sprains)

>were perceived to account for 83.6% of all injury types.

>

>Powerlifting showed a twice as high injury rate as bodybuilding, probably

>of grounds of

>a more uniform training program. Weight-training should be associated

>with a sports-related medical care and supervised by knowledgeable people,

>who can instruct the athletes in proper lifting techniques and protect them

>from injury which can result from incorrect weight-training.

>

>[Did this study make any attempt to examine the total amount of work (load

>volume) and

>the training intensity done by each group? Any significant disparities in

>training intensity and volume

>between the two groups would render the study misleading and invalid. For

>example, if we compared

>injury rates between sprinters and distance runners without examining

>factors such as mean running velocity

>and distance per day, the results could not prove whether a higher injury

>rate in one group is due to

>the precise form of running or the training regimen used. In fact, the

>above study concluded that the injury issue

>was more one of poor technique, poor program design and lack of competent

>coaching - it did not state that

>powerlifting in general is a very unsafe sport. And I would fully agree

>with this conclusion. Mel Siff]

>

>---------------

>

>Pediatrics 1983 Nov;72(5):636-44

>

>Medical history associated with adolescent powerlifting.

>Brown EW, Kimball RG.

>

>A questionnaire, designed to elicit information about the training,

>experience, and medical history of adolescent powerlifters, was

>administered to 71 contestants entered in the 1981 Michigan Teenage

>Powerlifting Championship. The average subject had participated in 4.1

>workouts per week for 17.1 months. Each workout lasted an average of 99.2

>minutes. The population sustained 98 powerlifting injuries which caused a

>discontinuance of training for a total of 1126 days. The incidence and

>severity of pain in 13 regions of the body, as well as the site and type of

>powerlifting injury, were investigated. The low back region was shown to be

>the site with the greatest number of injuries (49). This region also had

>the highest percent of subjects recording an elevated occurrence and level

>of pain associated with powerlifting.

>

>[if we divide 1126 days by 98, we note that powerlifters in this study lost

>about 12 days over a period of up to 17.1 months due to injury. There are

many

>footballers, soccer players, rugby players and numerous other athletes who

would love to

>lose less than 2 weeks in approximately 18 months of training and competition.

Mel Siff]

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

Mel:

>

>..... what exactly do you mean by <powerlifters training is " not

>efficient " ?

Kazimir:

>Investing same time and effort, one can expect bigger amount of

>non-specific adaptations (condition, working ability, useful hypertrophy)

>with bodybuilding type training, because.

>

>1) injuries are more frequent in powerlifting.

>

>2) maximal lifts require specific adaptations more than sub-maximal lifts

>

>3) it is easier to overtrain CNS with (relatively) big weights. Avoiding

>1RM one can train more frequently, with more volume and more variety, and

>it is easier to construct productive training.

>

>4) there is more freedom in choice of exercises.

>

>Platz-Hatfield squat duel is good example of bigger efficiency of

>bodybuilders training. Bodybuilder can expect even relatively better

>results in exercises powerlifter does not train.

>

>[i'm not exactly sure of what you mean here - are you suggesting that Platz

>exceeded

>Fred Hatfield's 1014lb squat (I think that is what it was)? Mel Siff]

>

>I'm surprised with your example for longevity of powerlifters. His

>lifestyle and training style decrease chances for his longevity.

>

>[i did not make any remarks about longevity - you have misquoted me. No

>sport whatsoever has been shown to definitely increase or decrease lifespan,

>since death not due to trauma seems to be more strongly related to genetics,

>absence from disease and adequate food intake. Anyway, all the critics said

much about the

>heavy drinking, cigar-smoking and sleep deprived Winston Churchill, wartime

Prime Minister of Britain,

>who outlived many of his critics by many years! As has been said: " Man

proposes, God disposes. " Mel Siff ]

>

>----------------------------------

>

>Int J Sports Med 2000 Apr;21(3):225-7

>

>Increased premature mortality of competitive powerlifters suspected to have

>used anabolic agents.

>Parssinen M, Kujala U, Vartiainen E, Sarna S, Seppala T.

>

>National Public Health Institute, Laboratory of Substance Abuse, Helsinki,

>Finland. miia.parssinen@...

>

>Misuse of supraphysiological doses of anabolic steroids is claimed to have

>serious side effects. The aim of the study was to determine the mortality,

>and the cause of premature deaths among a group of subjects who are

>strongly suspected to have used anabolic steroids for a non-medical purpose

>over several years. The mortality of 62 male powerlifters placed 1st-5th in

>weight series 82.5-125 kg in Finnish championships during 1977-1982 was

>compared with the mortality of population controls. The mortality during

>the 12-year follow-up was 12.9% for the powerlifters compared to 3.1% in

>the control population. By 1993 eight of 62 powerlifters and 34 of 1094

>population controls had died, thus the risk of death among the powerlifters

>was 4.6 times higher (95% CI 2.04-10.45; p = 0.0002).

>

>The causes of premature death among the powerlifters were suicide (3),

>acute myocardial infarction (3), hepatic coma (1) and non-Hodgkin's lymphoma

(1). These

>findings add to the growing amount of evidence of an association between

>anabolic steroid abuse and premature death, and support the view that

>measures to decrease AAS misuse among both competitive and amateur athletes are

justified.

>[This study has nothing to do with powerlifting as a cause of injury - it

>concerns drug abuse, so it has no relevance whatsoever to the discussion. Mel

Siff]

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

[Guest guest]

I agree with you, Whit. Unfortunately, bodybuilding as a sport dies a quick

death sans the

Chemical enhancement. As for Arnold, most if not all, know him as the movie

star, not Mr. " O " . I'd much rather look like Pyrros Dimas, Ivan Chakarov or

Marc Huster than any walking (barely) chemistry set disguised as a

bodybuilder!

With the possible exception of gymnasts, Olympic lifters are the most graceful,

talented athletes in the Olympic games. Bodybuilders (pros) usually are as

ungraceful, un-athletic creatures as there are in all the weight training

world! The sub-culture called pro bodybuilding more closely resembles Rome

under Caligula, than it does any athletic event.

I happen to be a powerlifter, 220 lbs, 16 years on the competitive platform.

if i could do it again, I'd go the Olympic lifting route. If one wants to

see some impressive physiques and athletic grace and beyond human strength,

just watch any of Randy Strossens training hall tapes and enjoy!

Just my subjective opinion.

Robbie Stark

Muscle Beach?

----- Original Message -----

From: Whit <whittt@...>

> wrote:

>

> > >I, too, agree with ... that it is a matter of OPINION which

> > >way one chooses. However, his opinion of " train to be good, not

> > >look good " is short-sighted. My bias, of course, is toward the

> > >bodybuilding end of the spectrum, though my current strength and

> > >endurance are far beyond what they were in my youth. But my bias

> > >is not without scientific basis. Like it or not, when it comes

> > >to what is important in today's world, social perception, as well

> > >as self-perception, are a lot more important than functional

> > >strength. And when it comes to males being heterosexually

> > >attractive, and having an appearance of success, a lean, muscular

> > >physique rules....

>

> Hobman:

>

> > Your bias is showing. Most people would prefer an athletic physique to

the

> > extreme hypertrophy of a top notch bodybuilder. Personally I'd much

rather

> > look like most wrestlers than Arnold S.

>

> Most men (and the women that love them) would rather have the physique of

a

> Muscle Media, Men's Fitness etc. cover model than a PLer, or a

PROFESSIONAL

> BBer, etc. That is the look that men seek, and women want, generally

> speaking. Arnold is not representative of what most guys who lift weights

> for looks actually look like. Most guys want decent size arms, a six

pack,

> etc. and they can get that.....

>

> The point is about a lean, muscular physique. Yes, a PLer CAN have a

> physique like this, but if one wants a good physique,. then there are ways

> to optimally train for same, as opposed to pling.

>

> > >And if you don't like that, compare the ticket prices and

> > >attendance between a major bodybuilding competition and a

> > >major powerlifting competition. One can complain all he or

> > >she wants about how none of this " right, " and that the emphasis

> > >should be reversed, but as my mama told me when I was just wee

> > >lad: " Wishin' doesn't make it so. "

>

> Hobman:

>

> > Now go compare the same in Finland. Be careful not to confuse your

culture

> > with the entire world.

>

> Finland is too cold for people to care about what they look like nekkid.

>

> While I agree with about the importance for most men of lookin' good

> (and more so for most women), I don't think the BBer show receipts is a

very

> good indication. Pro BBing is a niche audience. Most men who go to the

gym

> want to look good, not compete in the PLifts, but they are not that

> interested in BBing as a sport, or who the latest steroid monster is.

>

> Whitney Richtmyer

[Guest guest]

From: Robbie Stark <igrus@...>

<I agree with you, Whit. Unfortunately, bodybuilding as a sport dies a

quick death sans the Chemical enhancement. As for Arnold, most if not all,

know him as the

movie star, not Mr. " O " . I'd much rather look like Pyrros Dimas, Ivan Chakarov

or Marc Huster than any walking (barely) chemistry set disguised as a

bodybuilder!>

I agree with you. But, it's not just Arnold. Many of our " action stars "

sport great, resistance trained physiques e.g. Sylvester Stallone, Jean

Claude Van Damme, Clint Eastwood, etc. I think a constant problem is this

debate is when you mention " bodybuilder " , the only sort mentioned by the

people who discuss this point is the IFBB extreme. Everybody who goes to a

gym and lifts PRIMARILY to approve appearance, as opposed to performance of

a group of lifts (OLing, PLing) or sports perfomance (football, etc.) is a

bodybuilder. For every 'roided out super-freak who is a pro-BBer or looks

like one, there are scores of guys and gals who build decent physiques

through bodybuilding, who are not interested in the competitive lifts. For

every hyoooge BBer, there are scores of guys who don't even know steroids

look like, and who just want chiseled arms and some nice abs.

For every guy who reaches the upper echelons of competition, there are tons

of guys who plod along doing mediocre totals, etc. However, EVERY BBer can

improve their physique to levels that will make them the envy of other men,

and the desire of women (or reverse this for female bbers).

Personally, IMO Dimas and Huster have too little muscle mass on their upper

body for me to want to look like them. I would rather look like Tavakoli,

etc. However, most guys would rather have a great physique and some

strength. They are not seeking sports performance. As an OLer, I would

take Dimas' total any day *but* as an OLer I lift primarily for performance,

more specifically competition, not for looks. I have seen enough OLers with

pretty terrible physiques, who lift huge amounts, to know that OLing is not

the path to optimum physiques.

<With the possible exception of gymnasts, Olympic lifters are the most

graceful, talented athletes in the Olympic games. >

Arguable. For example, I think a pole vaulter is at least as graceful as a

OLer. Whether they are as talented is hard to say, but considering the number

of

track and field athletes in the world, I would say they probably are. There

are lots of other track and field sports I think that are as graceful as OLing.

<Bodybuilders (pros) usually are as ungraceful, un-athletic creatures as there

are in all the weight training

world! >

I disagree. Many BBers are phenomenally graceful. Posing can be beautiful

and challenging for example. It is true some BBers are not particularly

graceful. Many others (I am always suprised at how many) were quite good

athletes in some sport before they became BBers.

[We must never lose sight of the fact that individuality is a vital component of

all sport, so that

there are graceful and grotesque individuals in every pursuit known to

humankind. Possibly

a major part of the problem is that some insecure amateur and pro bodybuilders

walk around in public

with " lat spreads " , protracted shoulders, outward thrust chests and other stage

directed poses

which do not really transpose all that well to the " normal " world. The truly

great bodybuilder

has no need to parade around in that exaggerated fashion, which tends to create

a mockery

of physique training (this is a preferable term to use for this type of training

- I would reserve

" Bodybuilding " for the competitive aspects of this pursuit. One thing is for

sure - it would be

considerably more attractive if some of the 65% of Americans who are obese would

try to look a little more

like the average physique trainer. I suspect many members of the public who

find obvious

musculature unattractive are just a little bit envious! Mel Siff]

<The sub-culture called pro bodybuilding more closely resembles Rome

under Caligula, than it does any athletic event. >

And as I said again, *pro* BBing does not define the sport of BBing. Go to

a gym and look at the guys building their physiques. They are all BBers.

<I happen to be a powerlifter, 220 lbs, 16 years on the competitive

platform. If i could do it again, I'd go the Olympic lifting route.>

I agree. I just started lifting 4 years ago. I have tried both PLing and

OLing. I have been doing OLing for a year. I like PLing because it gives

you a better physique, generally speaking, because I think many OLers in the

age of the biathlon have pretty mediocre upper bodies, but as a challenging

sport, I far prefer OLing.

<If one wants to see some impressive physiques and athletic grace and beyond

human

strength, just watch any of Randy Strossens training hall tapes and enjoy! >

I own many of these tapes. I also work out with lots of OLers. I see plenty of

terrible, or at best - mediocre physiques among OLers. It is not about how

you look, and many OLers have holes in their strength, for example in Bench

Press, or whatever. A BBer can also have holes in his strength, but they

are free to develop their physiques to the ultimate by achieving symmetry,

lean muscularity. IMO, BBing is a noble endeavor. To paraphrase Arthur

Dreschler, it is the ultimate achievement in the development and

presentation of the human body as finely detailed art.

And there are guys in gyms across the country working for this ideal. It is

no less noble than working towards a total in PLing or OLing.

[And we must never lose sight of the fact that beauty is in the eye of the

beholder, so that

some might consider bodybuilders to be obscenely ugly, while others will

perceive them to be the models of perfection. Would anyone care to identify any

universal

components in Western society which determine physical attractiveness to the

majority of

people? For example, many American women (and men?) seem to find large breasts

as being

particularly attractive, while many others find them hideously disproportionate

and ugly. The

cosmetic surgery profession relies on this perception to a huge extent, so this

is an image that will

hardly be medically discouraged. Mel Siff]

Whitney Richtmyer

Seattle, WA

[Guest guest]

I believe that, for the most part, this is a misconception. People

seem to associate powerlifting with 400 pound mammoth men who look

obese in some cases. Hatfield himself writes that the average

bodyfat percentage of a powerlifter is usually about 8-10%.

Considering the above-average muscle size in a powerlifter compared

to the average joe, one might consider a powerlifter's physique

an " athletic physique " . Most powerlifter's aren't fat, and in some

cases have lower bodyfat percentages than the off-season bodybuilder.

D.A. Hammel, MSW, RSW

Calgary, Alberta, Canada

> The fact remains that amongst

> non-elite weightlifters, the " athletic physique " to which he

> refers is much more likely to be perceived as that of a lean,

> muscular, bodybuilding type than that of a " strong fat guy "

> powerlifting type.

[Guest guest]

I rise to comment on your " Just because something is illegal, does not mean

that it is immoral " .

IT IS IMMORAL TO KNOWINGLY BREAK THE RULES OF A SPORT. This includes usage

of anabolic steroids in the effort to break the RULES OF A SPORT. It's also

ILLEGAL to traffick in steroids or provide them to anyone in the USA

outside of medical usage. Hypertrophy or getting BB or other trophies does

not qualify sadly.....at least from reading your posting.

At least, to my comprehension. But then I haven't DONE anything to CHEAT.

By your statement, this makes me foolish? As for your statements suggesting

that more people die from cigarettes, that's TRUE. However, MORE PEOPLE

SMOKE THAN BODYBUILD OR USE/ABUSE THE SUBSTANCES IN QUESTION. AND

statistics can always be wielded to defend the steroid user's hopeful view

that he or she will not be in the affected population...just as the

cigarette smoker too thinks it will be " someone else " ... (also driving is

far more prevalent than bodybuilding or other pursuits you feel should be

enhanced by anabolics?)

Therefore the NUMBER of persons DYING from cigarettes will ALWAYS be HIGHER.

More victims in the gross numbers, after all, to draw from. Let the abusers

feel free to

defend the abuse of steroids and other substances - I will continue to

compete in drug tested federations and compete as the rules state, without

such substances. Thankfully the abusers of such substances are in the

minority in the drug tested powerlifting federations....still, our suspended

lists appear lengthy. Not suspended for morality - but for breaking rules.

Legality?

Best of luck to those in their " immoral " pursuits? And perhaps they should

consider coming in

from the desert heat more often. After all, I could quote....

" mad dogs and Englishmen go out in the noonday sun " .....

The Phantom (with good humor, tongue firmly in cheek!)

aka Schaefer, CMT, CSCS,

champion powerlifter

Denver, Colorado, USA

-----Original Message-----

From: Sammuel Damon <james_sammuel_damon@...>

><These findings add to the growing amount of evidence of an association

between anabolic steroid abuse and premature death, and support the view that

>measures to decrease AAS misuse among both competitive and amateur athletes

>are justified.>

>

>

>Who were " strongly suspected " ? -does that really comprise the foundation

for a

>solid scientific argument-I think not. This is pseudoscience at its height.

>As for decreasing use of performence enhancing agents- you won't. They have

>been around since the dawn of time (gladiators eating bulls testicles) and

>will continue to be used. The intelligent route is education.

>

>Currently there are around 6457 casualities per week on the roads in the UK

>alone. Now imagine how high this figure would be if people were not first

>given a driving test... Imagine the mortality rate from paracetamol-and

>again, not people " strongly suspected of analgesic agents " but real world

findings..

>

>How many people die from AAS use? Few. How many people die from insulin use

>and possibly diuertic usage? Marginally more. However, whilst you can

quote

>crass studies trying to blame a heart attack on AAS, I can give you

MILLIONS

>of examples of people who suffered heart attacks who never smoked, drank

>alcohol, or used AAS. So now, express the % rate of heart attack victims

who

>have used AAS. Pathetic, isn't it?

>

>Doctors prescribe these compounds to people to build tissue, and often the

>patients suffer no deleterious side effects - yet I know more than my

doctor

>about this subject. Can you counter by saying that " These people have a

need

>for these medications? " No. Because that is an issue of morality.

>

>Please excuse my 'rant', but I am sick and tired of people talking about

>subjects that they apparently know little or nothing about. I do not know

anything about powerlifting, (I do have a 300kg hack squat at 70kg lean), which

is why I

>joined this board-to learn. You do yourself a great disservice to believe

>you have nothing to learn about a subject because of a handfull of half

>baked studies in the media.

>

> " Just because something is illegal, does not mean that it is immoral "

>

> Sammuel Damon

>Gobi ......

>

>-----------------------

>

>From: " Majorinc, Kazimir " <kmajor@...>

>

>Mel wrote:

>

>>If you are going to make statements about " frequent " injuries (of

>>powerlifters - KM), please cite some suitable references.

>

>>Kazimir:

>

>--------------------------------

>

>>Sportverletz Sportschaden 1989 Mar;3(1):32

>>

>>Injuries and damage caused by excess stress in body building and power

>>lifting. [Article in German]

>>

>>Goertzen M, Schoppe K, Lange G, Schulitz KP.

>>

>>Orthopadische Klinik und Poliklinik der Medizinischen Einrichtungen der

>>Universitat Dusseldorf...............

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

>>Pediatrics 1983 Nov;72(5):636-44

>>

>>Medical history associated with adolescent powerlifting.

>>Brown EW, Kimball RG. ................

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

>

>Mel:

>>

>>..... what exactly do you mean by <powerlifters training is " not

>>efficient " ?

>

>Kazimir:

>

>>Investing same time and effort, one can expect bigger amount of

>>non-specific adaptations (condition, working ability, useful hypertrophy)

>>with bodybuilding type training, because.

>>

>>1) injuries are more frequent in powerlifting.

>>

>>2) maximal lifts require specific adaptations more than sub-maximal lifts

>>

>>3) it is easier to overtrain CNS with (relatively) big weights. Avoiding

>>1RM one can train more frequently, with more volume and more variety, and

>>it is easier to construct productive training.

>>

>>4) there is more freedom in choice of exercises.

>>

>>Platz-Hatfield squat duel is good example of bigger efficiency of

>>bodybuilders training. Bodybuilder can expect even relatively better

>>results in exercises powerlifter does not train.................

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

>>Int J Sports Med 2000 Apr;21(3):225-7

>>

>>Increased premature mortality of competitive powerlifters suspected to

have used anabolic agents.

>>Parssinen M, Kujala U, Vartiainen E, Sarna S, Seppala T.

>>

>>Misuse of supraphysiological doses of anabolic steroids is claimed to have

>>serious side effects. The aim of the study was to determine the mortality,

>>and the cause of premature deaths among a group of subjects who are

>>strongly suspected to have used anabolic steroids for a non-medical purpose

>>over several years. ...............

>>

>>The causes of premature death among the powerlifters were suicide (3),

>>acute myocardial infarction (3), hepatic coma (1) and non-Hodgkin's lymphoma

(1). These

>>findings add to the growing amount of evidence of an association between

>>anabolic steroid abuse and premature death, and support the view that

>>measures to decrease AAS misuse among both competitive and amateur athletes

are justified.

>

>>[This study has nothing to do with powerlifting as a cause of injury - it

>>concerns drug abuse, so it has no relevance whatsoever to the discussion. Mel

Siff]

[Guest guest]

Mel Siff:

<Did this study make any attempt to examine the total amount of work (load

volume) and the training intensity done by each group? Any significant

disparities in

training intensity and volume between the two groups would render the

study misleading and invalid. >

Kazimir:

You cannot expect the study that compare powerlifters and bodybuilders who

train with same intensity. Bodybuilders train with lower intensity (in the

meaning %1RM) and that's why they can expect less injuries. The cited study

confirms it.

[Exactly - you simply confirm my reservations about the study which you cited!

Mel Siff]

Mel Siff:

<I'm not exactly sure of what you mean here - are you suggesting that

Platz exceeded Fred Hatfield's 1014lb squat (I think that is what it was)?>

Kazimir:

I thought of 'Great American Squat Off' as described in Hatfield's 'Hardcore

bodybuilding ...' Results were something like Doc Squat - 800x1, 500x11,

Tom Platz - 600x1, 500x23. Both had bar placed high, and both had same bodymass.

Each was better in favorite rep range, but Platz's kind of strength contained

less skill and it is applicable in less then perfect conditions necessary

for display of 1RM. Platz was not a specialist in squats, so he could

perform *relatively* better in other exercises. No one is a much better 1RM

squatter than Hatfield, but some who train high reps are even better than

Platz. For example, Tolbert did 600 x 30 full squats.

Kazimir Majorinc, Zagreb, Croatia

http://public.srce.hr/~kmajor

[Guest guest]

It was written:

<3) it is easier to overtrain CNS with (relatively) big weights. Avoiding

1RM one can train more frequently, with more volume and more variety,

and it is easier to construct productive training.>

***By all your comments, I'm assuming your a bodybuilder. I believe it

was Zatsiorksy that stated that it is far easier for athletes to

overtrain using excessive volume/reps than excessive intensity/load.

This is due to the fact that the body cannot gauge as well when it is

fatigued with excessive volume, where as with high intensity training it

is more easily detectable. Are there any studies out there regarding

overtraining when comparing programs with various intensities, volume, etc.?

Mike on, CSCS

Graduate Assistant

Human Performance Lab

Ball State University

Muncie, IN

[Guest guest]

" Whit " <whittt@e...> wrote:

> While I agree with about the importance for most men of

> lookin' good (and more so for most women), I don't think the

> BBer show receipts is a very good indication. Pro BBing is a

> niche audience. Most men who go to the gym want to look good, not

> compete in the PLifts, but they are not that interested in BBing as

> a sport, or who the latest steroid monster is.

M wrote:

I used an example on the outside fringes. OK. Compare the sales of

Muscle Media, or *any* major bodybuilding mag, to that of PLUSA, the

premier powerlifting mag. The same results occur. And then consider

the fact that most magazine buyers purchase the mags as instructional

information for their desired goals. Perhaps powerlifting mags sell

better in Canada ... or Finland. But I doubt it.

Wayne Hill follows up:

Does anyone know about the relative participation in PL vs BB

competitions?

- Wayne Hill

Westborough, MA

[Guest guest]

> I used an example on the outside fringes. OK. Compare the sales

> of Muscle Media, or *any* major bodybuilding mag, to that of PLUSA,

> the premier powerlifting mag. The same results occur. And then

> consider the fact that most magazine buyers purchase the mags as

> instructional information for their desired goals. Perhaps

> powerlifting mags sell better in Canada ... or Finland. But I

> doubt it.

> --

> M.

> Wooster, Ohio, USA

>

That is not a valid analogy either. You are discounting the influence of

marketing here. That makea an enormous difference. Most bodybuilding

magazines have supplement companies or the Weider Organization behind them.

There is an extremely large amount of money spent on making their products

known, getting people to purchase them. They have marketing departments that

have determined demographic information on the target audiences and have acted

accordingly. The Weider Organization has multiple magazines all targeted at

specific audiences. I could go on about what magazine is targeted and to

whom, but it is an " unsupportable " opinion since I do not have access to each

companies proprietary information. Fact, there is money to be made in

bodybuilding and the magazines are designed to steer the general public

towards it.

Sad to say but, people are at times overtly concerned with appereance and the

magazines cater to it. Even sadder is that most people are not even aware of

this " manipulation " . There is no guarntee that the routines in the

bodybuilding magazines contain sound training information either.

Now, the lower sales of PLUSA... They are primarilly reporting on a sport

(meet results and meet listings) with more " hardcore " strength training

information. It is all geared towards a very specific audience, not the masses

that marketing has determined will bring in the money. Sales of PLUSA is more

influenced by the quality of their information vs the " ooohhh & aah " factor. I

am biased to a degree. I think that if PLUSA started printing the " rubbish "

routines of the mainstream magazines, it would quickly fold as it's sales

would disappear. Most mainstream bodybuilding magazines target a specific age

group and they know that in a few years a new (and uneducated) group of buyers

is just around the corner.

Sound training advice and information does not correlate with magazine sales

(or infomercial sales).

Mike Ambrose

Millis, MA US

[Guest guest]

Whit, point well taken. we happen to live in a very superficial world. all

sizzle and no steak. thus the b./bldr physique may be in vogue. I go for

substance over style. it's what attracted me to lifting in the first place. as

for the muscle mass of the mentioned o'lifters, I disagree. The chest is

underdeveloped but, the shoulder girdle and posterior chain and upper back in

very impressive.

Ever watch Dimas front squat? He's done a 290 kg in training as reported in

Milo. I'll take that over any accomplishment from any pro BBldr. This is, of

course, just my opinion. As for BBldrs being graceful, I stand by my opinion.

I went to the Mr. O in I believe 98 when it was at the Theater at Madison

Square Garden. there was not one graceful performance that night, as a matter

of fact, if any of them had moved at anything other than a snails pace they

would have split apart at the seams. Nothing graceful about a dried out sponge.

I do not disagree they might have been athletes and perhaps talented graceful

ones at that. but the very nature of pro BBldg takes all that out of the mix

and they change, for the worse. And I must restate, it is not the noble

endeavors of anyone out there I question, my reason to lift is no better or

worse than anyone else's.

Robbie Stark

St. N.Y.

----- Original Message -----

> From: Whit <whittt@...>

> > From: Robbie Stark <igrus@...>

> >

> > <I agree with you, Whit. Unfortunately, bodybuilding as a sport dies a

> > quick death sans the Chemical enhancement. As for Arnold, most if not

> all, know him as the

> > movie star, not Mr. " O " . I'd much rather look like Pyrros Dimas, Ivan

> Chakarov

> > or Marc Huster than any walking (barely) chemistry set disguised as a

> > bodybuilder!>

> >

> > I agree with you. But, it's not just Arnold. Many of our " action

stars "

> > sport great, resistance trained physiques e.g. Sylvester Stallone, Jean

> > Claude Van Damme, Clint Eastwood, etc. I think a constant problem is

this

> > debate is when you mention " bodybuilder " , the only sort mentioned by the

> > people who discuss this point is the IFBB extreme. Everybody who goes

to

> a

> > gym and lifts PRIMARILY to approve appearance, as opposed to performance

> of

> > a group of lifts (OLing, PLing) or sports perfomance (football, etc.) is

a

> > bodybuilder. For every 'roided out super-freak who is a pro-BBer or

looks

> > like one, there are scores of guys and gals who build decent physiques

> > through bodybuilding, who are not interested in the competitive lifts.

> For

> > every hyoooge BBer, there are scores of guys who don't even know

steroids

> > look like, and who just want chiseled arms and some nice abs.

> >

> > For every guy who reaches the upper echelons of competition, there are

> tons

> > of guys who plod along doing mediocre totals, etc. However, EVERY BBer

> can

> > improve their physique to levels that will make them the envy of other

> men,

> > and the desire of women (or reverse this for female bbers).

> >

> > Personally, IMO Dimas and Huster have too little muscle mass on their

> upper

> > body for me to want to look like them. I would rather look like

Tavakoli,

> > etc. However, most guys would rather have a great physique and some

> > strength. They are not seeking sports performance. As an OLer, I would

> > take Dimas' total any day *but* as an OLer I lift primarily for

> performance,

> > more specifically competition, not for looks. I have seen enough OLers

> with

> > pretty terrible physiques, who lift huge amounts, to know that OLing is

> not

> > the path to optimum physiques.

> >

> > <With the possible exception of gymnasts, Olympic lifters are the most

> > graceful, talented athletes in the Olympic games. >

> >

> > Arguable. For example, I think a pole vaulter is at least as graceful

as

> a

> > OLer. Whether they are as talented is hard to say, but considering the

> number of

> > track and field athletes in the world, I would say they probably are.

> There

> > are lots of other track and field sports I think that are as graceful as

> OLing.

> >

> > <Bodybuilders (pros) usually are as ungraceful, un-athletic creatures as

> there are in all the weight training

> > world! >

> >

> > I disagree. Many BBers are phenomenally graceful. Posing can be

> beautiful

> > and challenging for example. It is true some BBers are not particularly

> > graceful. Many others (I am always suprised at how many) were quite

good

> > athletes in some sport before they became BBers.

> >

> > [We must never lose sight of the fact that individuality is a vital

> component of all sport, so that

> > there are graceful and grotesque individuals in every pursuit known to

> humankind. Possibly

> > a major part of the problem is that some insecure amateur and pro

> bodybuilders walk around in public

> > with " lat spreads " , protracted shoulders, outward thrust chests and

other

> stage directed poses

> > which do not really transpose all that well to the " normal " world. The

> truly great bodybuilder

> > has no need to parade around in that exaggerated fashion, which tends to

> create a mockery

> > of physique training (this is a preferable term to use for this type of

> training - I would reserve

> > " Bodybuilding " for the competitive aspects of this pursuit. One thing

is

> for sure - it would be

> > considerably more attractive if some of the 65% of Americans who are

obese

> would try to look a little more

> > like the average physique trainer. I suspect many members of the public

> who find obvious

> > musculature unattractive are just a little bit envious! Mel Siff]

> >

> > <The sub-culture called pro bodybuilding more closely resembles Rome

> > under Caligula, than it does any athletic event. >

> >

> >

> > And as I said again, *pro* BBing does not define the sport of BBing. Go

> to

> > a gym and look at the guys building their physiques. They are all

BBers.

> >

> > <I happen to be a powerlifter, 220 lbs, 16 years on the competitive

> > platform. If i could do it again, I'd go the Olympic lifting route.>

> >

> > I agree. I just started lifting 4 years ago. I have tried both PLing

and

> > OLing. I have been doing OLing for a year. I like PLing because it

gives

> > you a better physique, generally speaking, because I think many OLers in

> the

> > age of the biathlon have pretty mediocre upper bodies, but as a

> challenging

> > sport, I far prefer OLing.

> >

> > <If one wants to see some impressive physiques and athletic grace and

> beyond human

> > strength, just watch any of Randy Strossens training hall tapes and

enjoy!

> >

> >

> > I own many of these tapes. I also work out with lots of OLers. I see

> plenty of

> > terrible, or at best - mediocre physiques among OLers. It is not about

> how

> > you look, and many OLers have holes in their strength, for example in

> Bench

> > Press, or whatever. A BBer can also have holes in his strength, but

they

> > are free to develop their physiques to the ultimate by achieving

symmetry,

> > lean muscularity. IMO, BBing is a noble endeavor. To paraphrase Arthur

> > Dreschler, it is the ultimate achievement in the development and

> > presentation of the human body as finely detailed art.

> >

> > And there are guys in gyms across the country working for this ideal.

It

> is

> > no less noble than working towards a total in PLing or OLing.

> >

> > [And we must never lose sight of the fact that beauty is in the eye of

the

> beholder, so that

> > some might consider bodybuilders to be obscenely ugly, while others will

> > perceive them to be the models of perfection. Would anyone care to

> identify any universal

> > components in Western society which determine physical attractiveness to

> the majority of

> > people? For example, many American women (and men?) seem to find large

> breasts as being

> > particularly attractive, while many others find them hideously

> disproportionate and ugly. The

> > cosmetic surgery profession relies on this perception to a huge extent,

so

> this is an image that will

> > hardly be medically discouraged. Mel Siff]

> >

> > Whitney Richtmyer

> > Seattle, WA