Would you rather be...

Duncans Donuts · 03-06-2007, 11:45 AM

there seems to be an implication here that you can't be big, strong, athletic, mobile, and flexible at the same time.

Pianomahnn · 03-06-2007, 11:47 AM

I don't like your usage of "strong" in this context.

mike456 · 03-06-2007, 12:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Duncans Donuts

there seems to be an implication here that you can't be big, strong, athletic, mobile, and flexible at the same time.

I know this is possible, but the question is if you can only be one

**Dale Mabry** · 03-06-2007, 12:05 PM

Both, but if I had to pick one, athletic.

It also depends on what is considered big and small. I wouldn't want to weigh 180lbs, but 210lbs is acceptable.

mike456 · 03-06-2007, 12:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pianomahnn

I don't like your usage of "strong" in this context.

athletic type: Squat= 200, Bench = 180, Deadlift = 250

big/strong type: Squat= 400, Bench = 325, Deadlift = 500

the reason I thought about this, is because I was watching a show, and there was this big, strong kid, but he had shitty balance, mobility, and agility...

fufu · 03-06-2007, 12:07 PM

I'll choose big and strong.

You say, "not very mobile", so I could mobile or decently mobile.

Also, to get big and strong you have to have atleast a basic flexibility to do the movements, so I could live with that.

btw my numbers are very close to the ones you listed, except for the bench press, and I don't consider myself big and strong.

**Dale Mabry** · 03-06-2007, 12:08 PM

He didn't have shitty balance, mobility and agility because he was big, it's because he trains like a fool and ignores those abilities.

ReproMan · 03-06-2007, 12:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mike456

big/strong type: Squat= 400, Bench = 325, Deadlift = 500

What do you tell someone like Reggie Bush who easily puts up all of those numbers?

largepkg · 03-06-2007, 12:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ReproMan

What do you tell someone like Reggie Bush who easily puts up all of those numbers?

Exactly! My numbers are right in line with the "big and strong" example and I consider myself athletic. I'm certainly not Reggie Bush though so I guess I am "big, strong and goofy".

goob · 03-06-2007, 12:51 PM

I would have to pick athletic. Most women prefer that look, and I think it looks more symetrical and natural. It's all to do with proportion anyway, a muscular 6'4" guy could look athletic, but a 5'5" muscular guy could look overly big. But I'm pretty sure big guys could be just as flexible as 'athletic' guys.

ReproMan · 03-06-2007, 01:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by largepkg

Exactly! My numbers are right in line with the "big and strong" example and I consider myself athletic. I'm certainly not Reggie Bush though so I guess I am "big, strong and goofy".

largepkg · 03-06-2007, 01:15 PM

You laugh with me, not at me, right?

ReproMan · 03-06-2007, 01:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by largepkg

You laugh with me, not at me, right?

\

Of course!!

BoneCrusher · 03-06-2007, 02:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by largepkg

Exactly! My numbers are right in line with the "big and strong" example and I consider myself athletic. I'm certainly not Reggie Bush though so I guess I am "big, strong and goofy".

Same here. I cannot do back flips, work the the floor on a gymnastics routine, or throw a hat-trick (three bullseyes in a row on a dartboard).

I CAN throw a frisbee from here to Nebraska, which is about form and speed more than power. My superman-punch is wicked ... also about form and speed but power helps.

Yet I'll trip and fall on my ass over nothing but my own feet ...

Witchblade · 03-06-2007, 03:17 PM

Big and strong. Becoming mobile is easier than becoming big.

Focus · 03-06-2007, 04:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Witchblade

Big and strong. Becoming mobile is easier than becoming big.

That's a tough subject. It would most likely be easier to maintain mobility while building strength, than maintaining size/strength while building mobility.

I think you're classifying "big" as "strong".

katt · 03-06-2007, 05:25 PM

A happy medium between the two.....

KentDog · 03-06-2007, 06:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mike456

athletic type: Squat= 200, Bench = 180, Deadlift = 250

These numbers aren't very impressive at all. Are you sure this guy is athletic?

mike456 · 03-06-2007, 06:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Witchblade

Becoming mobile is easier than becoming big.

depends on who you are dealing with

Pianomahnn · 03-07-2007, 08:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KentDog

These numbers aren't very impressive at all. Are you sure this guy is athletic?

I feel that athleticism has little to do with a person's ability to safely lift some weights attached to a bar and more with their overall physical abilities.

largepkg · 03-07-2007, 10:10 AM

OK, define athletic. It would seem to be a very subjective thing so give me statistic you associate with "athletic".

I would say to be athletic you would need to be able to run a sub 4.6 40. Have at least a 36''+ vert. Bench your body weight 10+ times. Be able to do 10+ pullups.

Please feel free to add to the above list.

Pianomahnn · 03-07-2007, 11:04 AM

Just look in a dictionary.

Witchblade · 03-07-2007, 11:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Focus

That's a tough subject. It would most likely be easier to maintain mobility while building strength, than maintaining size/strength while building mobility.

I think you're classifying "big" as "strong".

Mobility is basically stretching. It's quite easy to get to at least normal flexibility levels if you're not flexible. Building power isn't hard either if you're already very strong. Conditioning is always easier than building mass and strength.

Raising your bench 200 pounds on the other hand will take months if not years.

View Poll Results: Would you rather be
big and strong (not flexible, and not very mobile)	8	33.33%
flexible, very mobile, athletic (but skinnier, and not to strong)	16	66.67%
Voters: 24. You may not vote on this poll

03-06-2007, 11:32 AM	#1
mike456 Registered User Join Date: Feb 2006 Posts: 3,285	Would you rather be... .
mike456 Registered User Join Date: Feb 2006 Posts: 3,285	Journal

03-06-2007, 11:45 AM	#2
Duncans Donuts Stay puffed, baby. Join Date: Jul 2004 Location: CA Posts: 2,774 Photos: 2	there seems to be an implication here that you can't be big, strong, athletic, mobile, and flexible at the same time.
	"in the howling bleeding nights, the dogs plunge into the Volga and swim desperately to gain the other bank. The nights of Stalingrad are a terror for them. Animals flee this hell; the hardest stones cannot bear it for long; only men endure."

03-06-2007, 12:05 PM	#5
Dale Mabry Moderator Moderator Join Date: May 2003 Location: Elsewhere Posts: 13,838 Photos: 10	Both, but if I had to pick one, athletic. It also depends on what is considered big and small. I wouldn't want to weigh 180lbs, but 210lbs is acceptable.
	If sense were common, everyone would have it. 4/2007-Current 75th Ranked most popular image 1 spot behind Prince's bulge...

03-06-2007, 12:07 PM	#7
fufu fiendish thingy Elite Member Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: Massachusetts Posts: 16,205 Photos: 4	I'll choose big and strong. You say, "not very mobile", so I could mobile or decently mobile. Also, to get big and strong you have to have atleast a basic flexibility to do the movements, so I could live with that. btw my numbers are very close to the ones you listed, except for the bench press, and I don't consider myself big and strong.
	fufu's 1337 Journal Your diet will set you free.

03-06-2007, 11:47 AM	#3
Pianomahnn I bike to work. Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: Chicago, IL Posts: 1,224 Photos: 6	I don't like your usage of "strong" in this context.

03-06-2007, 12:08 PM	#8
Dale Mabry Moderator Moderator Join Date: May 2003 Location: Elsewhere Posts: 13,838 Photos: 10	He didn't have shitty balance, mobility and agility because he was big, it's because he trains like a fool and ignores those abilities.
	If sense were common, everyone would have it. 4/2007-Current 75th Ranked most popular image 1 spot behind Prince's bulge...

03-06-2007, 12:51 PM	#11
goob Smartass anthropologist Elite Member Join Date: Apr 2006 Location: Anywhere, everywhere, nowhere.... Posts: 5,995	I would have to pick athletic. Most women prefer that look, and I think it looks more symetrical and natural. It's all to do with proportion anyway, a muscular 6'4" guy could look athletic, but a 5'5" muscular guy could look overly big. But I'm pretty sure big guys could be just as flexible as 'athletic' guys.

03-06-2007, 01:15 PM	#13
largepkg Senior Fucknut Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: S FLA Posts: 3,039 Photos: 2	You laugh with me, not at me, right?

03-06-2007, 03:17 PM	#16
Witchblade Succinct Elite Member Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: Holland Posts: 4,359 Photos: 2	Big and strong. Becoming mobile is easier than becoming big.
	My Linkdump [LSFW] IM Official FAQ [WORK IN PROGRESS]

03-06-2007, 05:25 PM	#18
katt Registered User Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Pacific Northwest Posts: 4,115 Photos: 37	A happy medium between the two.....

03-07-2007, 10:10 AM	#22
largepkg Senior Fucknut Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: S FLA Posts: 3,039 Photos: 2	OK, define athletic. It would seem to be a very subjective thing so give me statistic you associate with "athletic". I would say to be athletic you would need to be able to run a sub 4.6 40. Have at least a 36''+ vert. Bench your body weight 10+ times. Be able to do 10+ pullups. Please feel free to add to the above list.

03-07-2007, 11:04 AM	#23
Pianomahnn I bike to work. Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: Chicago, IL Posts: 1,224 Photos: 6	Just look in a dictionary.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode