six pack abs vs. big size dude

[blut wump]

I know what you mean: as one slims down then moving around becomes easier. I remember thinking about this a while back, though, and I wasn't convinced that it was a good way to look at fitness.

I've seen 'fat' guys at the gym who would struggle with a 100-yard sprint. Nevertheless, they can pick up a bar and do a max set of squats and then do it again a couple of minutes later. Shortly afterwards, they're maxing out for reps on bench and then again on deads. This I see as fitness.

Usually, when we're talking about the fitness to get someone through a hard workout session like that we refer to it as conditioning or GPP. I can't see any good reason to think of it as an inferior type of fitness to the ability to do a hundred pushups, just as I wouldn't think of a marathon runner as unfit due to being unable to squat heavy weight.

If you take the typical guy who tends to be thought of as fit and compare him with someone who is like the above 'fat' gymrat and then have them do an equal workload in the gym how do readers think they'd compare. Obviously, the workload would need to be pitched such that they could each do it but you'd have them doing the same lifts at the same weights with same rest times.

I was really just saying that the idea of 'fit' has more facets than being able to move around an ever-decreasing bodyweight with ever-increasing ease. Equally, it's hard to balance ther concept of 'strong' with simple muscular fitness and an ability to recover from an effort.

 

[Scotsman]

Great post blut!

I think part of it may have been being a lineman in foutball and doing short burst training. I'm pretty sure I'd lose my lunch right now from a 100yd sprint. I do have a very quick recovery rate though and can do lots of sets of burst activity. I got tested for VO2 max one time and because the girl doing it hadn't factored in strength I got an elite athlete rating. Basically even though my true VO2 wasn't anywhere near that high I was able to "overpower" the test by having excess muscle to break down insteat of a better oxygen exchange. She consulted her boss and they factored it back a lot.LOL

I do carry quite a bit of "extra" weight now but it helps tremendously with strongman events. I'd like to slim down a bit just to increase mobility for events but don't see this as becoming more "fit". I see it in terms of physics that you described: Less mass takes less energy to move.

Cheers,
Scotsman

 

[Powerbuilder333]

I'm now 310 with a barely visible 4 pack. I prefer this look to last NOV when I was 270 with a clearly visible 4 pack, with the bottom row almost visible.
Unfortunately at my present size my asthma is worse, and I get short winded from a brisk walk. Excessive sweating, and a excelerated heart rate are some other negatives.
I look forward to the end of this bulk cycle so I can lean out for a few months.

 

[Tweakle]

the weightroom just blows when you're than lean

amen to that.

While bulking I feel empathy with the fatties on TLC documentaries who whine about how fit they are while cramming down twinkies, but seriously... you can't compare the average 50% bf american sack o' shite with a heavyweight lifter. The extra water helps prevent injuries and gives better leverage so it's worth sacrificing your bottom abs for imo (not that you could see mine since I stopped shaving myself)

 

[blut wump]

The VO2-max test is an interesting aspect. I'm not sure whether it indicates a way to correlate strength with cardio fitness or is just a gaping hole in yet another medical measuring method.

I think I might slim down this year.

 

[rnch]

it's easy to tell who here is doner DNA skinny here and who isn't....lololol

 

[steig]

I vote 6-pack, but that is probably b/c I've had to work my way up to 155 and have no aspirations of ever reaching 200 and above.

 

[H_T_]

meh. i believe in functional strength. abs are an affectation. period. like tits on a woman.

 

[rnch]

meh. i believe in functional strength. abs are an affectation. period. like tits on a woman.

yeh u rite!

 

[Jimbo15]

I agree with rnch. shoulders, pecs, and arms are more important than a six-pac. Functional core training can be very important for athletes. Fitness levels can be different according to what you are trying to accomplish. The idea of being able to muscle out max weight sets on multiple different exercises, or run a marathon, are both fine. But neither of those guys could compete on a rugby field. The guy weighing 300lbs probably wouldn't be able to catch me, and the skinny ass runner would get knocked on his ass when he tried to tackle. The big boy would do great in a scrum though, we have had a couple of those who can dominate at close range. This issue just comes down to what "you" want out of your workouts. I have to be big enough to tackle any size guy on a pitch, fast enough to run around or through people, have enough stamina to play for 80 minutes, and look good enough to get laid.