PDA

View Full Version : Natural Strength or Synthetic?



ArchAngel777
02-09-2006, 06:56 PM
Today two really strong people at my gym are preparing for a meet. Both of them weigh in the 198 pound class and one is going for a 650 pound squat. His other partner will be going for somewhere in the range of 615... Now, is this just a case of two geneticly gifted people? Or are steroids really that prevelent? I honestly do not know... I am shocked that someone in that weight class can Squat nearly 700 and DL 700 or so... I never want to take away from a valid athlete but with so many steroid cases going on each year and with its wide spread prevelent use sometimes I just have to question it. It doesn't matter to me if they use them, but I am just curious if this kind of strength is natural or not.

Post your thoughts...

Sidior
02-09-2006, 07:07 PM
unless they are training in a tested federation or competition, than gear is more that likely....the main question is, if you said it doesn't matter to you, than who cares?
700/700 is ****ing large!!

ArchAngel777
02-09-2006, 07:07 PM
unless they are training in a tested federation or competition, than gear is more that likely....the main question is, if you said it doesn't matter to you, than who cares?
700/700 is ****ing large!!

I care because I want to know if that is a level I can get up to without gear. I don't want to have my goals set on something I can never attain. I said it doesn't matter if they used gear personally or not, but that doesn't mean I don't care to know. They are two different things.

drew
02-09-2006, 07:53 PM
I'm hoping to hit a 600 squat this year in the 198 class. I am drug free.

WBBIRL
02-09-2006, 08:18 PM
I know their are those who question me on this... but when I was in tenth grade I squated over 500lbs and deaded over 400lbs. I was over 300lbs but a ton of it was fat and fat helps nothing so the weight was not the case.

People also question that I've seen a kid from my school squat 675 at 240 (15% ish BF). But I dont care what people think. I know I put those #'s up and I know the kid squatted 675 at 240.

So in short it is very possible, but is it very probable??? Those are very very big numbers for being 200lbs

Sensei
02-10-2006, 05:13 AM
I know their are those who question me on this... but when I was in tenth grade I squated over 500lbs and deaded over 400lbs. I was over 300lbs but a ton of it was fat and fat helps nothing so the weight was not the case.
Being fat helps your squat and your bench ...A LOT - no question about it.

A natural 600-700lb squat @198 is very doable, especially if you have no qualms about using equipment. I think you'd have to be a tremendous freak to DL 700 @198 without gear...

Paul Stagg
02-10-2006, 07:10 AM
Worrying about what you can and cant do with or withoug drugs is self defeating when it comes to powerlifting.

Don't put limits on yourself.

ArchAngel777
02-10-2006, 08:52 AM
Worrying about what you can and cant do with or withoug drugs is self defeating when it comes to powerlifting.

Don't put limits on yourself.

Good point Paul and I agree with that for the most part. I think putting a limit on yourself can cause you to never hit anything higher. But on a realistic note, I also think placing to high of a goal can be self defeating too. I think basically the sky is the limit, but then have several small goals and where you end up is where you end up...

Thanks for the reminder.:thumbup:

JamesBOMB
02-10-2006, 09:58 AM
Being fat helps your squat and your bench ...A LOT - no question about it.

A natural 600-700lb squat @198 is very doable, especially if you have no qualms about using equipment. I think you'd have to be a tremendous freak to DL 700 @198 without gear...

being a fattie myself id like to know how i possibly have an advantage in deadlift over a skinny guy? i have to lift not only the weight on teh bar but also my own body fat on top...how is that an advantage?
or do you mean that because i am heavier i will be naturally stronger?

Sensei
02-10-2006, 11:01 AM
being a fattie myself id like to know how i possibly have an advantage in deadlift over a skinny guy?I said nothing about being heavy helping the deadlift.

JamesBOMB
02-10-2006, 11:13 AM
I said nothing about being heavy helping the deadlift.

but it would

MixmasterNash
02-10-2006, 11:18 AM
but it would

Nope.

Skinny people are famous for big deads and small squats and bench.

JamesBOMB
02-10-2006, 11:31 AM
Nope.

Skinny people are famous for big deads and small squats and bench.

ok so if i been fat all my life used to lifting my own weight then i start to deadlift, i should be lifting the same as a skinny bloke, but i corse i am lifting my weight on top
which would make me stronger surely?

SW
02-10-2006, 11:48 AM
I'm hoping to hit a 600 squat this year in the 198 class. I am drug free.

You're also a squirrel. This must not be left out of the equation.

Guido
02-10-2006, 01:03 PM
There's a Russian guy on my PL team who's right around 200lbs and squats over 600, plus just deadlifted 615 RAW. No drugs, and he drinks a lot of Vodka. Genetic freaks like him DO exist.

drew
02-10-2006, 01:40 PM
You're also a squirrel. This must not be left out of the equation.
A live action squirrel. With big balls.

Optimum08
02-10-2006, 01:58 PM
There's a Russian guy on my PL team who's right around 200lbs and squats over 600, plus just deadlifted 615 RAW. No drugs, and he drinks a lot of Vodka. Genetic freaks like him DO exist.

Must be the vodka...grey goose anyone?

WBBIRL
02-10-2006, 05:22 PM
How does being fat help me bench or squat. I have a fuller range of motion then 90% of the people I've seen bench. And parallel is relative to the lifter, so I always hit parallel when I squat.

Sensei
02-10-2006, 08:24 PM
How does being fat help me bench or squat. I have a fuller range of motion then 90% of the people I've seen bench. And parallel is relative to the lifter, so I always hit parallel when I squat.
Ask any powerlifter and they will tell you the fastest way out of bench or squat plateau is too eat more...

If you are fat, then you WILL have a shorter ROM on bench press. If you are fat, you will have better leverages in the squat and you can use your gut to rebound off of your legs.

If you are fat, you just absorb energy better - it's not the most scientific explanation, but it's the truth. Perhaps someone w. a better understanding of kinesiology and physics can explain it to you better...

WBBIRL
02-10-2006, 09:16 PM
I dont know... I just really dont understand myself. The gut rebound thing makes a tiny tiny tiny bit of sense... but I dont buy that because pause reps would elimnate that. Same with bench, I mean maybe im like 1" or 2" off the average persons ROM

And I just plain dont understand about having better leverage from being fat.

Sidior
02-10-2006, 09:39 PM
1-2" shorter ROM would make a large difference for benching

Sensei
02-11-2006, 06:13 AM
I dont know... I just really dont understand myself. The gut rebound thing makes a tiny tiny tiny bit of sense... but I dont buy that because pause reps would elimnate that. No, it wouldn't.


Same with bench, I mean maybe im like 1" or 2" off the average persons ROMYou weigh 300, right? I'm pretty sure that someone who has the same reach as you, but weighs 180, has a much longer range of motion...


And I just plain dont understand about having better leverage from being fat.Lordy... I'll try to find you something more scientific...

edit: In the meantime, look at the physiques of some of the strongest squatters, benchers, and lifters - some of them are relatively lean, but none of them are small. Gene Rychlak, Scot Mendelson, Jeff Lewis, Brent Mikesell, Paul Anderson, Alexeev, Hossein Rezzazadeh, etc...

KevinStarke
02-11-2006, 08:19 AM
Having a big ol get definitelly decreases the ROM. Phil is always screaming "BIG BELLY" when anyone benches and he himself fills his big gut up with air and brings the bar to it which is like 4-5 inches higher than his freakin chest with a good arch.

Stumprrp
02-11-2006, 08:34 AM
yeah when your heavy you usual have some strong legs, and your bench motion is shorter.

even if these people arent on steriods there so much stuff thats close to it i consider it the same. protien shakes are enough for me, then again im no pro and would get killed in the 16-17 198 class.

Bob
02-11-2006, 08:47 AM
Why not just got to the APA records site:
http://www.apa-wpa.com/Amrecords.html (for American records)
and
http://www.apa-wpa.com/worldrecords.html (for World Records)

This will pretty much give you a good idea of what genetic potential is.. APA tests for drugs, etc... look up your age and weight...

If your friends in the gym or those boys from Texas are lifting above this.. then they are either drugged or unwilling to show their tricks to the world...

WBBIRL
02-11-2006, 09:29 AM
I guess... but im one for always benching with my back flat and everything else. I always felt that purposly makeing your ROM shorter was practically cheating. In squats you have to go to parallel, theres nothing you can do to make that distance shorter for you. So it kind of puzzles me why someone wouldn't get disqualified for arching their back way up and inflateing the gut.

debussy
02-11-2006, 09:34 AM
Hey sensei is it really true about powerlifters using their gut to rebound off there legs hahaha. That is hilarious because my gut brushes my legs sometimes... I need to use my fatness to my advantage.

ArchAngel777
02-11-2006, 10:48 AM
Hey sensei is it really true about powerlifters using their gut to rebound off there legs hahaha. That is hilarious because my gut brushes my legs sometimes... I need to use my fatness to my advantage.

It is true... You can suck in a lot of air and let your gut sort of be like a trampoline... IT isn't going to give you another 100 pounds on your squat, but it does help.

As far as ROM? Wow, I have to dissagree not about it being less, but about it giving someone an advantage... Let me explain.

For BP the first two inches are cake and then I hit my stick point (about 1 - 2 inches). Now if someone placed a board two inches thick on me I would be hopelessly doomed. I used the first 1 - 2" as a means to get past that stick point and if I had to stop at that stick point the weight would not going anywhere... Make sense? But, that is just my personal opinion on how ROM isn't always better to have less.

biggimp
02-11-2006, 11:33 AM
615@198 is not that amazing, unless those guys are still in high school.

it's very very good, but i wouldnt say it's amazing or that they are using gear.

KevinStarke
02-11-2006, 12:23 PM
I guess... but im one for always benching with my back flat and everything else. I always felt that purposly makeing your ROM shorter was practically cheating. In squats you have to go to parallel, theres nothing you can do to make that distance shorter for you. So it kind of puzzles me why someone wouldn't get disqualified for arching their back way up and inflateing the gut.

To each his own man, by your standards im a super mega cheater :strong:

Rex
02-11-2006, 01:19 PM
For BP the first two inches are cake and then I hit my stick point (about 1 - 2 inches). Now if someone placed a board two inches thick on me I would be hopelessly doomed. I used the first 1 - 2" as a means to get past that stick point and if I had to stop at that stick point the weight would not going anywhere... Make sense? But, that is just my personal opinion on how ROM isn't always better to have less.

What you're saying makes sense. In fact, you're describing techniques that advanced people use to improve their lifts.

But what your describing is not analogous to what is actually happening when comparing the smaller ROM of a fat person to a skinny person. The fat person has the smaller ROM and can still use the first 1 - 2" to get past the sticking point.

JHolmes145
02-11-2006, 05:12 PM
Ask any powerlifter and they will tell you the fastest way out of bench or squat plateau is too eat more...

If you are fat, then you WILL have a shorter ROM on bench press. If you are fat, you will have better leverages in the squat and you can use your gut to rebound off of your legs.

If you are fat, you just absorb energy better - it's not the most scientific explanation, but it's the truth. Perhaps someone w. a better understanding of kinesiology and physics can explain it to you better...


its a physics thing, the greater the mass the more power you have, almost everything in physics revolves around mass and acceleration. thats why powerlifters want more mass and work on explosive power

Sensei
02-11-2006, 08:03 PM
As far as ROM? Wow, I have to dissagree not about it being less, but about it giving someone an advantage... Let me explain.

For BP the first two inches are cake and then I hit my stick point (about 1 - 2 inches). Now if someone placed a board two inches thick on me I would be hopelessly doomed. I used the first 1 - 2" as a means to get past that stick point and if I had to stop at that stick point the weight would not going anywhere... Make sense? But, that is just my personal opinion on how ROM isn't always better to have less.
If you did 1 or 2 board presses consistently, you'd very soon be doing sets and reps with your 1RM or more.

If you think that having a greater ROM is a good thing (and it defies logic that you do), try bench pressing w. a cambered bar and see how much you can put up.

ArchAngel777
02-11-2006, 10:49 PM
If you did 1 or 2 board presses consistently, you'd very soon be doing sets and reps with your 1RM or more.

If you think that having a greater ROM is a good thing (and it defies logic that you do), try bench pressing w. a cambered bar and see how much you can put up.

Hmmm, noted. I will keep that in mind.

WBBIRL
02-12-2006, 11:27 AM
Its not that I feel having a bigger ROM is better, lord knows you can move more weigh in a shorter distance. But its like for squats you have to get to parallel for the lift to count. I dont know of any fair way to do it, but there should be some standard for benching also.

Guy 1 has much longer arms then Guy 2 and isnt overweight. Guy 2 weighs 300lbs and has arms about 3-4" shorter then Guy 1 and when he benches he arches his back.

That IMHO isn't a fair competition. Guy 1 may be benching over 20" while Guy 2 could be moving the weight a good 8" less.

But I guess locking the weight out on a benchpress is good enough for somepeople, and who am I to question lifting standards.

Sensei
02-13-2006, 11:07 AM
Guy 1 has much longer arms then Guy 2 and isnt overweight. Guy 2 weighs 300lbs and has arms about 3-4" shorter then Guy 1 and when he benches he arches his back.

That IMHO isn't a fair competition. Guy 1 may be benching over 20" while Guy 2 could be moving the weight a good 8" less.

But I guess locking the weight out on a benchpress is good enough for somepeople, and who am I to question lifting standards.
You are really wasting your time complaining that the bench press is unfair because it favors the short or fat... That's like complaining about basketball favoring the tall...

ElPietro
02-13-2006, 11:14 AM
I was a marshall at a powerlifting competition a couple years ago.

I was helping some kinda small guy from quebeck get his belt on for deadlift. Took 3 of us to do it. Anyway, I think he was around 180lbs, and he pulled if I recall correctly, around 680 lbs on the deadlift.

Being marshall means that after that he couldn't leave my sight for any reason whatsoever until after he had been drug tested. This was all under IPF rules and his test was negative.

So of course there are freaks out there. I often dismiss heavy lifts at light weights on things like bench or especially squats, since 90% of the population doesn't know how to squat properly. I get more depth than some when I'm doing shrugs.

But not much you can do to fake a deadlift, other than hitching, or not lock it out.

Rex
02-13-2006, 04:45 PM
Yeah, that's the beauty of the lift. It's simplicity. Just stand up with the bar.

biggimp
02-14-2006, 12:47 AM
Its not that I feel having a bigger ROM is better, lord knows you can move more weigh in a shorter distance. But its like for squats you have to get to parallel for the lift to count. I dont know of any fair way to do it, but there should be some standard for benching also.

Guy 1 has much longer arms then Guy 2 and isnt overweight. Guy 2 weighs 300lbs and has arms about 3-4" shorter then Guy 1 and when he benches he arches his back.

That IMHO isn't a fair competition. Guy 1 may be benching over 20" while Guy 2 could be moving the weight a good 8" less.

But I guess locking the weight out on a benchpress is good enough for somepeople, and who am I to question lifting standards.

guy 1 and guy 2 arent going to be in the same weight class. so there you go. stop whining.

phreak
02-14-2006, 02:24 AM
In squats you have to go to parallel, theres nothing you can do to make that distance shorter for you.
Yes there is. Why do you think people started squatting (and of course DLing) with a sumo stance? That is solely done to decrease the ROM.

MixmasterNash
02-14-2006, 07:50 AM
You could also be this guy:
http://www.europowerlifting.org/espm02ass.jpg

Fair enough?

tigo
02-14-2006, 04:13 PM
Worrying about what you can and cant do with or withoug drugs is self defeating when it comes to powerlifting.

Don't put limits on yourself.

this is so true.. back in the day i always was thinking about how much 200 was, how hard it would be and al lthat crap.. kept me from going over for a few years... now i think more on skys the limit terms.. blew past 200 and got to 225 in a matter of weeks

WBBIRL
02-14-2006, 08:30 PM
Wasn't whining about anything.. just voicing my opinion. Which last time I checked wasn't illegal.

khari
02-14-2006, 09:06 PM
You could also be this guy:
http://www.europowerlifting.org/espm02ass.jpg

Fair enough?

That's damn near 300kg, right? Awesome.

MixmasterNash
02-14-2006, 10:38 PM
That's damn near 300kg, right? Awesome.
290!

639lbs @ 113 BW. Insane!

Canadian Crippler
02-14-2006, 11:06 PM
4" Rom...

phreak
02-15-2006, 04:29 AM
4" Rom...
So? Ever seen him deadlift?

Guido
02-16-2006, 10:44 AM
So? Ever seen him deadlift?Ha! That would be more like 1" ROM!

Back on topic, yes ROM has a lot to do with how much weight you can lift. Yes, it's fair in competitions because of the weight classes. Yes, you will be able to lift more doing board presses, shortening that ROM. I can do 40 lbs more from a 2 board than I can with a full ROM. Finally, people can put up a lot of crazy weights without drugs. Trust me, I know some of them, and I've seen them. There are a lot of guys out there who've proved that you don't need drugs to be super strong.

khari
02-16-2006, 11:37 AM
4" Rom...

That he can even stand with over 5.5x bodyweight is pretty incredible.

Sensei
02-16-2006, 02:45 PM
Looks like Stanzenek(sp?). He's a great lifter. A lot of trouble w. the deadlift though - small hands.

phreak
02-17-2006, 02:09 AM
Ha! That would be more like 1" ROM!
No. In fact he's totally screwed when it comes to DLing: his arms and legs are so short compared to his back that his back is almost horizontal when he grabs the bar, and because of his short arms the bar will be touching his sternum(!!!) when he's standing up with it. You try doing what amounts to a zercher DL in comp and see how you fare.

cachee0
03-09-2006, 07:25 AM
I care because I want to know if that is a level I can get up to without gear. I don't want to have my goals set on something I can never attain. I said it doesn't matter if they used gear personally or not, but that doesn't mean I don't care to know. They are two different things.


That depends on you and your genetics. You’re training/diet your ability to recover and the ability to constantly train with out injury. I have all the faith in the world that someone can do this natural at that weight class.

Blood&Iron
04-06-2006, 09:01 PM
Yes there is. Why do you think people started squatting (and of course DLing) with a sumo stance? That is solely done to decrease the ROM.
Definitely not the sole reason. I do sumo deadlifts because it allows me to keep my back from rounding, which I find unavoidable when doing a conventional dead.

phreak
04-07-2006, 01:30 AM
Definitely not the sole reason. I do sumo deadlifts because it allows me to keep my back from rounding, which I find unavoidable when doing a conventional dead.
You could also have stretched.

dw06wu
04-07-2006, 02:56 AM
Back in my prime I weighed in around 265 and I could squat ~500, raw. I think with years of proper training that a 600lb squat at that weight is totally attainable. Steroids definitely speed things up by a factor of at least 4, though.

Blood&Iron
04-07-2006, 05:11 AM
You could also have stretched.
Uh...okay.

Whatever you say.

Bigwhitemale
04-07-2006, 05:22 AM
The bottom line is, if their are going to a tested meet, chances are they are drug free...for now, there are the possibilities they must had done roids in the past...Also let's not forget, they might be natural too, even if the meet is not drug tested...Hard work and dedication can go a long way in powerlifting. Is it possible for a 198lb guy to squat 650lbs without steroids? Yes...Does that mean he is gifted? Not necesarely genetically gifted, but that individual must have a lot of drive , determination and discipline to have achieved all that...;) :hello:

dblocc707
04-26-2006, 10:00 AM
there is a 16 year old who lifted in usapl meets santiond meets. his names reese burt and you can find him on www.montermuscleforums.com under the name animal lifter. before the age of 16 im pretty shure he broke 600 DL.. his now trying to be the first person in the 16-17 usapl range to break 700 DL pounds. these lifts are geared...lifts now in the 242's this kid is a beast!.. squats in the 600 to i think? and i know this kid is 40lbs more than your guys but he also just turned 16 so vur him some slack... also passed his first and second drug test!
this is a post posted on monstermuscleforums.com from his trainer

Animal Lifter (Rees Burt) went to his first USAPL HS Nats in the 220 freshamn and sophmore class. He opened with a 515 squat and killed it. He then went for the 555 national record and I took him 2 inches deep just to amke sure (the judging was crazy strict) and he nailed it. He then went for 572 and missed it (leaving his belt loose did not help him any). On the bp he opened 275 easily raw. he then went for the national record with 352 and it was too light to stay in the groove and touched too low but he still pressed it. He went up in weight to 367 and pressed it but still got 3 reds I presume for still touching a tad low. On to dl. He opned with a national record of 557 and killed it. He then went to 600 and pulled it smooth. He went on 617 and just missed it at the top. That was 5 records broken or rebroken. He won first by a lot and got best lifter of the day. An awesome day. But th ebest part was as soon as it was over he looked at me and said "we have work to do when we get home". That is what makes him so good.

Bigwhitemale
05-08-2006, 06:41 AM
I've been told that using anabolic steroids is considered to be a form of ''cheating''...anyways, I don't really care since I'm all natural and I'm planning to compete in a drug tested competition this October. But the beuty of powerlifting, is that you can get incredibly strong naturally, but you can't look like Ronnie Coleman without steroids. In other words, you can't really develop the type of muscle development you see in the Mr.Olympia line up without drugs..at least for now, maybe in the future, there'll be better supplements that'll make steroids unnecessary to become a muscle freak. But in the world of powerlifting, a natural athlete can become incredibly strong without steroids, maybe not as strong as the pwerlifters using steroids, but close. That's one of the reasons why I love powerlifting!(even though I look more like a bodybuilder...lol!)

Canadian Crippler
05-08-2006, 07:12 AM
It's only a form of "cheating" if it puts you on an unlevel playing field. In an untested meet, this usually is not the case when dealing with the big boys.

Bigwhitemale
05-08-2006, 07:16 AM
[QUOTE=Canadian Crippler]It's only a form of "cheating" if it puts you on an unlevel playing field. In an untested meet, this usually is not the case when dealing with the big boys.[/Q
I do understand what you mean, and I do respect all kind of athletes, even if they do drugs or not. The way I see it, if they are willing to sacrifice their health and well being for the sake of being the best athlete they can be...more power to them!..lol! It's their life, who am I to judge, that's why I stated ''I've been told..'':clap:

toki
05-08-2006, 12:56 PM
because drugs never leave your system, right?

Bigwhitemale
07-30-2006, 01:28 AM
because drugs never leave your system, right?
LOL! LMFAO!! That was funny!...:strong: :hump: :micro:

Westsidemonster
08-15-2006, 03:16 AM
[QUOTE=Canadian Crippler]It's only a form of "cheating" if it puts you on an unlevel playing field. In an untested meet, this usually is not the case when dealing with the big boys.[/Q
I do understand what you mean, and I do respect all kind of athletes, even if they do drugs or not. The way I see it, if they are willing to sacrifice their health and well being for the sake of being the best athlete they can be...more power to them!..lol! It's their life, who am I to judge, that's why I stated ''I've been told..'':clap:
I agree with you on that one, you make a good point, but still, I have a much greater admiration for drug-free natural athletes, but that's just me.

SaVvY
08-15-2006, 06:25 AM
Today two really strong people at my gym are preparing for a meet. Both of them weigh in the 198 pound class and one is going for a 650 pound squat. His other partner will be going for somewhere in the range of 615... Now, is this just a case of two geneticly gifted people? Or are steroids really that prevelent? I honestly do not know... I am shocked that someone in that weight class can Squat nearly 700 and DL 700 or so... I never want to take away from a valid athlete but with so many steroid cases going on each year and with its wide spread prevelent use sometimes I just have to question it. It doesn't matter to me if they use them, but I am just curious if this kind of strength is natural or not.

Post your thoughts...
why do you state the only two options as genes or roids? i see no talk of hard work and dedication

Dinosaur
08-15-2006, 08:20 AM
A natural 600-700lb squat @198 is very doable, especially if you have no qualms about using equipment. I think you'd have to be a tremendous freak to DL 700 @198 without gear...

There's a 148 pound man who has deadlifted 702 before.

Sensei
08-15-2006, 10:56 AM
There's a 148 pound man who has deadlifted 702 before.
Sure, but there are probably a lot more 148ers who can squat that because of equipment - which is my point. I'm saying that there probably aren't a lot of people who deadlift 700 who aren't very gifted and/or using "gear". (I'm NOT accusing anyone at all)