ShawnG said:Patrick (Forum Supporter) said:In reply to Duke :
Except if you call him a fairy he'll squash your head with roid rage
Those are just "gym muscles"
Let's see him throw hay bales all day long. Then I'll be impressed.
So true.
One of my grooms would walk the length of the shedrow with a 90 pound, three wire bale of alfalfa in each hand, walk into the feed room, and stack one at shoulder height, and the second bale on top.
I wonder where she is today?
Floating Doc (Forum Supporter) said:ShawnG said:Patrick (Forum Supporter) said:In reply to Duke :
Except if you call him a fairy he'll squash your head with roid rage
Those are just "gym muscles"
Let's see him throw hay bales all day long. Then I'll be impressed.
So true.
One of my grooms would walk the length of the shedrow with a 90 pound, three wire bale of alfalfa in each hand, walk into the feed room, and stack one at shoulder height, and the second bale on top.
I wonder where she is today?
My dreams?
barefootskater said:In reply to 914Driver :
Monday was 109 here. The low Tuesday night was 44. Over 60* swing in less than 36 hours. Some reports of 112mph winds in SLC in that period.
Sept. 2020: wtf weather.
We can at least appreciate climate change for keeping things interesting. How's that line go again- "The ice we skate, is gettin' pretty thin" ?
ShawnG said:Patrick (Forum Supporter) said:In reply to Duke :
Except if you call him a fairy he'll squash your head with roid rage
Those are just "gym muscles"
Let's see him throw hay bales all day long. Then I'll be impressed.
l'm not sure I follow. Do hay bales weigh more than stacks of iron plates?
In reply to ProDarwin :
Endurance.
Ever watch the strongman competitions? Those guys don't look like 'roid monkeys, they look like someone's dad.
In reply to ProDarwin :
Muscle size is less important than muscle density. Lifting heavy weight for low reps = big muscles. That's great, if you want to look like Ahnold. Lifting low to medium weights for high reps = dense muscles. Pound for pound, smaller muscles that are more dense lift more weight than big muscles. In general, they are also more efficient, allowing for greater stamina.
Ever see a farmer that looked like he was made of rawhide and whipcord? Watch him work sometime. It would astonish you what somebody like that can move by hand... all day long.
Recon1342 said:In reply to ProDarwin :
Muscle size is less important than muscle density. Lifting heavy weight for low reps = big muscles. That's great, if you want to look like Ahnold. Lifting low to medium weights for high reps = dense muscles. Pound for pound, smaller muscles that are more dense lift more weight than big muscles. In general, they are also more efficient, allowing for greater stamina.
Ever see a farmer that looked like he was made of rawhide and whipcord? Watch him work sometime. It would astonish you what somebody like that can move by hand... all day long.
Kinda sorta; we also have to touch on the difference between fast-twitch and slow twitch. Size is just a visual display of water and nutrient content, as "the pump" will show on anyone.
The powerlifter archetype has to make a TON of power all at once, and physically in a fight between his need for larger cells/more resource storage (ATP, Glycogen, water) versus better nerve response (smaller, faster movement/recruitment). The farmer isn't ropey because endurance- he's also ropey because he has to recruit his muscle far faster to move things than the powerlifter typically does (no such thing as a small bale to warm up for the large ones). So the farmer's body is fighting between wanting more powerful slow-twitch muscle and resource storage (size) versus more ganglion and innervation to quickly use them.
aka this convo is false equivalency
You'll need to log in to post.