Getbig.com: American Bodybuilding, Fitness and Figure

Getbig Main Boards => Gossip & Opinions => Topic started by: rccs on January 16, 2007, 09:59:18 AM

Title: Ronnie and Ruhl are the only bbers that really have strength?
Post by: rccs on January 16, 2007, 09:59:18 AM
More and more today's bbing is about drugs... For what I have been seeing, Ronnie and Ruhl are the only ones who actualy perform heavy workouts, the rest is 100% drug based.
Discuss...
Title: Re: Ronnie and Ruhl are the only bbers that really have strength?
Post by: dseiler on January 16, 2007, 10:07:02 AM
What the hell have you been watching? This just might be the most idiotic post I have ever read.

Moving massive amount of weights = Building Muscle

Building Muscle = Becoming Strong.

Anything else?

 
Title: Re: Ronnie and Ruhl are the only bbers that really have strength?
Post by: kiwiol on January 16, 2007, 10:13:26 AM
More and more today's bbing is about drugs... For what I have been seeing, Ronnie and Ruhl are the only ones who actualy perform heavy workouts, the rest is 100% drug based.
Discuss...

Johnnie jackson's got a rep of going heavy, as does Branch, although I have to see it to believe it. I know Dennis James trains hard and heavy. Can't think of anyone else at the moment.
Title: Re: Ronnie and Ruhl are the only bbers that really have strength?
Post by: Bluto on January 16, 2007, 10:18:44 AM
They're bodybuilders. Apparantely training heavy is not necessary for a bodybuilder.
Title: Re: Ronnie and Ruhl are the only bbers that really have strength?
Post by: kiwiol on January 16, 2007, 10:26:53 AM
They're bodybuilders. Apparantely training heavy is not necessary for a bodybuilder.

Thats what pussies like say
Title: Re: Ronnie and Ruhl are the only bbers that really have strength?
Post by: Bluto on January 16, 2007, 10:29:31 AM
Thats what pussies like say

That's what results say. I didn't find Jay Cutler on your list, yet he's Mr Olympia. I didn't find Dexter Jackson on your list, yet he's been third many times. The list goes on.


Title: Re: Ronnie and Ruhl are the only bbers that really have strength?
Post by: rccs on January 16, 2007, 02:14:37 PM
What the hell have you been watching? This just might be the most idiotic post I have ever read.

Moving massive amount of weights = Building Muscle

Building Muscle = Becoming Strong.

Anything else?

 
I guess you didn't read well the question...
"Moving massive amount of weights = Building Muscle" this is the problem, most bbers don't move massive amounts of weight... bu massive amounts of drugs
"Building Muscle = Becoming Strong." not entirely true, iguess that only Pudzianowski can prove something like that...
I hope you learn somethig with this
Title: Re: Ronnie and Ruhl are the only bbers that really have strength?
Post by: MisterMagoo on January 16, 2007, 02:38:23 PM
That's what results say. I didn't find Jay Cutler on your list, yet he's Mr Olympia. I didn't find Dexter Jackson on your list, yet he's been third many times. The list goes on.

all right, the list goes on. so continue with it. for your jay cutler i list a ronnie coleman. for your dexter jackson i say kevin levrone. and then for the next few you plan on naming i'll point out chris cormier, johnnie jackson, branch, and ruhl.
Title: Re: Ronnie and Ruhl are the only bbers that really have strength?
Post by: JOEBEAST on January 16, 2007, 03:52:31 PM
kevin leverone 500lbs. benching with perfect form.ruhl loves the smith machine which is not true strength.
Title: Re: Ronnie and Ruhl are the only bbers that really have strength?
Post by: The Squadfather on January 16, 2007, 03:55:42 PM
i don't know where this fallacy of Jay Cutler not being strong comes from, on one of his videos he inclines 405 for 4, hack squats 8 plates per side for reps, barbell rows 405 for 5, shoulder presses a pair of 140's, he's plenty strong.
Title: Re: Ronnie and Ruhl are the only bbers that really have strength?
Post by: rccs on January 16, 2007, 04:25:13 PM
kevin leverone 500lbs. benching with perfect form.ruhl loves the smith machine which is not true strength.
Levrone is not even a bber anymore. Looks like a tennis player... very weak!!
Title: Re: Ronnie and Ruhl are the only bbers that really have strength?
Post by: MisterMagoo on January 16, 2007, 05:10:52 PM
i don't know where this fallacy of Jay Cutler not being strong comes from, on one of his videos he inclines 405 for 4, hack squats 8 plates per side for reps, barbell rows 405 for 5, shoulder presses a pair of 140's, he's plenty strong.

because he's one of the few pros who doesn't ego lift for the camera. i often wonder if one of the reasons ronnie is all torn up is because, from what i've heard, he doesn't lift the way he shows in the videos year round. but when it's time for a cost of redemption or the unbelievable, he goes balls out and starts lifting like a maniac.

jay, on the other hand, has no problem with being on video smith squatting 365, because he let the results speak for themselves. if he feels like inclining 405 then he'll do it, if he feels like db pressing a pair of 120s he'll do that.

milos claims jay has, in the heat of the offseason, shoulder pressed the 200s for a few. what do you think about that?
Title: Re: Ronnie and Ruhl are the only bbers that really have strength?
Post by: pobrecito on January 16, 2007, 05:17:12 PM
i don't know where this fallacy of Jay Cutler not being strong comes from, on one of his videos he inclines 405 for 4, hack squats 8 plates per side for reps, barbell rows 405 for 5, shoulder presses a pair of 140's, he's plenty strong.

Jay's strength pales in comparison to Yates or Coleman. Yates was benching over 500lbs for reps in the 92 offseason, Coleman rows 495 like a peanut...etc.
Title: Re: Ronnie and Ruhl are the only bbers that really have strength?
Post by: bigmikecox on January 16, 2007, 05:18:25 PM
More and more today's bbing is about drugs... For what I have been seeing, Ronnie and Ruhl are the only ones who actualy perform heavy workouts, the rest is 100% drug based.
Discuss...

That's important b/c there is "how much can you bench round" at the Olympia ::)
Title: Re: Ronnie and Ruhl are the only bbers that really have strength?
Post by: MisterMagoo on January 16, 2007, 05:21:17 PM
Jay's strength pales in comparison to Yates or Coleman. Yates was benching over 500lbs for reps in the 92 offseason, Coleman rows 495 like a peanut...etc.

pales? hardly. he's not as strong as those two, but saying it pales is pretty ignorant.

oh, and then there's the fact that both ronnie and dorian have seen their careers halted due to multiple torn muscles, while jay remains injury free and has a sandow. yes, i'm sure it bothers him SO much that people scoff at him for not training ultra-heavy all the time.
Title: Re: Ronnie and Ruhl are the only bbers that really have strength?
Post by: pobrecito on January 16, 2007, 05:35:18 PM
pales? hardly. he's not as strong as those two, but saying it pales is pretty ignorant.

oh, and then there's the fact that both ronnie and dorian have seen their careers halted due to multiple torn muscles, while jay remains injury free and has a sandow. yes, i'm sure it bothers him SO much that people scoff at him for not training ultra-heavy all the time.

uh, Jay may have a sandow, but he hasn't achieved near the physique that Coleman or Yates did.....
Title: Re: Ronnie and Ruhl are the only bbers that really have strength?
Post by: Bluto on January 16, 2007, 05:45:31 PM
pales? hardly. he's not as strong as those two, but saying it pales is pretty ignorant.

oh, and then there's the fact that both ronnie and dorian have seen their careers halted due to multiple torn muscles, while jay remains injury free and has a sandow. yes, i'm sure it bothers him SO much that people scoff at him for not training ultra-heavy all the time.

Well that's just it. Clearly the risk of injuries is greater and clearly lifting heavy is not necessary in order to place well (or even best).
Title: Re: Ronnie and Ruhl are the only bbers that really have strength?
Post by: Big Lee on January 16, 2007, 05:47:55 PM
Definately one of the stupidest threads of the year.  Obviously by someone who doesnt even workout themselves.  This is a bodybuilding website.
Title: Re: Ronnie and Ruhl are the only bbers that really have strength?
Post by: pobrecito on January 16, 2007, 05:52:59 PM
Well that's just it. Clearly the risk of injuries is greater and clearly lifting heavy is not necessary in order to place well (or even best).


That's becuase Coleman and Yates are possibly the only bodybuilders who went at it 100% without fear. Do you honestly think Jay this year would have beaten a prime ronnie or dorian :-X
Title: Re: Ronnie and Ruhl are the only bbers that really have strength?
Post by: SteelePegasus on January 16, 2007, 05:55:05 PM
More and more today's bbing is about drugs... For what I have been seeing, Ronnie and Ruhl are the only ones who actualy perform heavy workouts, the rest is 100% drug based.
Discuss...

what about candidate (candy for short)? he said that he lifts the same as ronnie at 1/3 of his weight
Title: Re: Ronnie and Ruhl are the only bbers that really have strength?
Post by: Bluto on January 16, 2007, 05:58:52 PM
That's becuase Coleman and Yates are possibly the only bodybuilders who went at it 100% without fear. Do you honestly think Jay this year would have beaten a prime ronnie or dorian :-X

Some say Ronnie and Dorian was able to do what they did because they trained so hard. I say had they trained lighter and smarter, they've accomplished even more.  :)
Title: Re: Ronnie and Ruhl are the only bbers that really have strength?
Post by: 20inch calves on January 16, 2007, 05:59:39 PM
yes you have to lift heavy but smart also. you see pros getting injuired more and more trying to lift to heavy..look at ronnie....he is human after all. \

bottom line bodybuilding is not powerlifting..nobody asks you on stage how much you lift.

Title: Re: Ronnie and Ruhl are the only bbers that really have strength?
Post by: pobrecito on January 16, 2007, 06:00:28 PM
Here are some of Dorian's poundages in the 92 offseason from his log:

decline bench: 440 x 5
smith squat: 560 x 7
standing calf raise: 1400 x 7
reverse row - 425 x 6
db row: 215 x 12
flat bench: 435 x 5
Title: Re: Ronnie and Ruhl are the only bbers that really have strength?
Post by: the shadow on January 16, 2007, 11:55:11 PM
Here are some of Dorian's poundages in the 92 offseason from his log:

decline bench: 440 x 5
smith squat: 560 x 7
standing calf raise: 1400 x 7
reverse row - 425 x 6
db row: 215 x 12
flat bench: 435 x 5

:o
Title: Re: Ronnie and Ruhl are the only bbers that really have strength?
Post by: Mobil on January 17, 2007, 12:17:35 AM
dennis james is a strong s.o.b.
Title: Re: Ronnie and Ruhl are the only bbers that really have strength?
Post by: kiwiol on January 17, 2007, 01:16:42 AM
Some say Ronnie and Dorian was able to do what they did because they trained so hard. I say had they trained lighter and smarter, they've accomplished even more.  :)


Maybe you should go advice them on how to train smart ::)

I don't get it Blew-two - just about everyone with an IQ of 5 and above acknowledges that you're the biggest f*cktard here. Why do you insisting on proving a point that no one's disputing, over and over ???
Title: Re: Ronnie and Ruhl are the only bbers that really have strength?
Post by: Rich2 on January 17, 2007, 01:45:46 AM
Johnnie jackson's got a rep of going heavy, as does Branch, although I have to see it to believe it. I know Dennis James trains hard and heavy. Can't think of anyone else at the moment.

on BFTO 2005 Branch does 17 reps on incline bench with 315 one week out from a contest. judging from the way he handled that weight i would say that he can go pretty damn heavy.
Title: Re: Ronnie and Ruhl are the only bbers that really have strength?
Post by: GoneAway on January 17, 2007, 02:03:48 AM
Building Muscle = Becoming Strong.

Depends on which fibers you want to stress. If you're strong in one-rep max, you probably won't be very big, as that's one type of fiber compared to the many that the body has inside muscle.

All I have to say about this thread is "who cares?" People who want to be bodybuilders, yet give a shit about how strong they are, are fighting a tough battle with their goals.
Title: Re: Ronnie and Ruhl are the only bbers that really have strength?
Post by: rccs on January 17, 2007, 02:37:54 AM
Depends on which fibers you want to stress. If you're strong in one-rep max, you probably won't be very big, as that's one type of fiber compared to the many that the body has inside muscle.

All I have to say about this thread is "who cares?" People who want to be bodybuilders, yet give a shit about how strong they are, are fighting a tough battle with their goals.
That's why bbing will never be consider as a true sport. "Looks" is all that matter right? It is easier that way, only money is needed, don't really have to train hard...
Title: Re: Ronnie and Ruhl are the only bbers that really have strength?
Post by: thepeg on January 17, 2007, 04:52:32 AM
i got it! from now on they wont wear posing trunks anymore. they can wear squat suits and inzer shirts. and not pose anymore just do a max single in the bench, deadlift and squat to see who the winner is! the only people who worry about how much other people lift r the little wanny-bes.
Title: Re: Ronnie and Ruhl are the only bbers that really have strength?
Post by: Bluto on January 17, 2007, 05:14:49 AM
Maybe you should go advice them on how to train smart ::)

I don't get it Blew-two - just about everyone with an IQ of 5 and above acknowledges that you're the biggest f*cktard here. Why do you insisting on proving a point that no one's disputing, over and over ???

Actually this is an issue that's being debated a lot. Pay attention.  :)
Title: Re: Ronnie and Ruhl are the only bbers that really have strength?
Post by: kiwiol on January 17, 2007, 05:36:30 AM
Actually this is an issue that's being debated a lot. Pay attention.  :)

Not to what you say - you don't know jack about training
Title: Re: Ronnie and Ruhl are the only bbers that really have strength?
Post by: Bluto on January 17, 2007, 05:44:28 AM
Not to what you say - you don't know jack about training

I know that if I were to use the same machine as you, I would have to lower the seat all the way to the bottom after your midget ass been using it  ;D
Title: Re: Ronnie and Ruhl are the only bbers that really have strength?
Post by: dseiler on January 17, 2007, 05:55:34 AM
I guess you didn't read well the question...
"Moving massive amount of weights = Building Muscle" this is the problem, most bbers don't move massive amounts of weight... bu massive amounts of drugs
"Building Muscle = Becoming Strong." not entirely true, iguess that only Pudzianowski can prove something like that...
I hope you learn somethig with this

Please explain to me how a guy who packs on muscle isn't strong. And please explain how a guy gets huge (drugs or not) without moving tons of weight. Really, I am very curious.
Title: Re: Ronnie and Ruhl are the only bbers that really have strength?
Post by: kiwiol on January 17, 2007, 05:58:55 AM
I know that if I were to use the same machine as you, I would have to lower the seat all the way to the bottom after your midget ass been using it  ;D


To sniff it like you do any seat in which a guy's been sitting?

I'm just joking as I know you are Blew-two - we all know you don't work out. How can you, when you're busy moderating the Y......whoops ;D ;D
Title: Re: Ronnie and Ruhl are the only bbers that really have strength?
Post by: Playboy on January 17, 2007, 06:46:08 AM
More and more today's bbing is about drugs... For what I have been seeing, Ronnie and Ruhl are the only ones who actualy perform heavy workouts, the rest is 100% drug based.
Discuss...
Ronnie yes. Ruhl by far is NOT strong. He uses all smiths and machines. Watch his made in Germany tape. Still a huge freak though, thats for sure.

PB
Title: Re: Ronnie and Ruhl are the only bbers that really have strength?
Post by: rccs on January 17, 2007, 09:49:49 AM
Please explain to me how a guy who packs on muscle isn't strong. And please explain how a guy gets huge (drugs or not) without moving tons of weight. Really, I am very curious.
We are not talking about guys that packs on muscle, I am talking about professional bbers, that pack lots of muscle moving girly weigths. Drug based training. Let me give you some examples.
Johnnie Jackson huge guy great bber people say is one of the strongest, bench pressing... Ridiculous
http://www.mesomorphosis.com/store/videos/johnnie-jackson-next-level.html

A girl doing the same weight


Some guy from some gym doing the same using only 3% of the drugs JJ uses.
&mode=related&search=

Title: Re: Ronnie and Ruhl are the only bbers that really have strength?
Post by: dseiler on January 17, 2007, 10:21:39 AM
We are not talking about guys that packs on muscle, I am talking about professional bbers, that pack lots of muscle moving girly weigths. Drug based training. Let me give you some examples.
Johnnie Jackson huge guy great bber people say is one of the strongest, bench pressing... Ridiculous
http://www.mesomorphosis.com/store/videos/johnnie-jackson-next-level.html

A girl doing the same weight


Some guy from some gym doing the same using only 3% of the drugs JJ uses.
&mode=related&search=



One lift doesn't mean anything. Let's be realistic. Jackson is a former powerlifter, look at his traps.

From findarticles.com:

At the time of his second sanctioned powerlifting meet, in 2001, he had already been dieting down for two months in preparation for the NPC USA Championships four weeks later. His bodyfat was only 3.8% and his weight was down to 216, so he entered a lighter class, the 220-pounders. Didn't matter. This time, he soared to a new personal record by totaling an amazing 2,072 pounds, which included the 815 deadlift, and took home yet another set of trophies for his weight class and best overall lifter.

Taking only the light-heavyweight title at the USA, Johnnie O. later extended his two-trophies-per-show haul by capturing the light-heavyweight and overall titles at the NPC National Bodybuilding Championships.

What stood out on that bodybuilding stage was the thickness of Jackson's back. Lots of bodybuilders have wide lats, but their backs are as flat as ironing boards. Heaving, squirming gibbosity, however, is the special trophy of a powerlifter, and Jackson's makes him look like he's carrying a knapsack full of bobcats.
Title: Re: Ronnie and Ruhl are the only bbers that really have strength?
Post by: Charlys69 on January 17, 2007, 11:54:52 AM
Ronnie yes. Ruhl by far is NOT strong. He uses all smiths and machines. Watch his made in Germany tape. Still a huge freak though, thats for sure.

PB

If markus progress better with the smith machine he will be a idiot to use a heavy barbell and injure himself.
"Not strong" means for Rühl training with 550 lbs. on the smith machine for shoulder front-presses/Offseason".
He act. is stronger on front press than on incline presses where he used 500 lbs. for heavy sets.
In my opinion that`s enough weight to say, "i`m strong"!!