Calling our dumbarses who blame their bench on their height

[surf junkie]

Powerlifting style bench uses triceps, front delts, pecs, lats, abs, seratus, and even a little bit of legs...

The slow descent + "pulling the bar apart" on the way down even puts stress on your biceps.

I didn't say it was an isolation movement.

I said "Bench is primarily a Pectoral exercise"

[bouwnt]

explain why powerlifters arch the back to shorten the distance in bench ?

Because if you shorten the distance it's easier to perform the lift.

brb irony

[Ancients]

Because if you shorten the distance it's easier to perform the lift.



Already explained it, if you don't get it sorry brah.

i get it, you're still wrong.

a manlet who moves 135 lb 10 inches is exerting what? like 150 joules?
a manmore who moves the same weight 20 inches is doing what? 300? double the work

would have to go deeper and figure out how much of a difference the height/bones make in terms of extra mass or whatever

they don't arch their back to shorten distance. they do it do it brings the pectorial major more into play which is the larger part of the pectorial muscle

they do it for a number of reasons, you've already said its to bring the chest into it more, which is true, but its also to drastically reduce the distance.

watch the dave tate video on benching, he'll admit it there

its pectoral btw

[surf junkie]

Longer arm means longer clavicle (proportions), and also larger rib case which = larger chest. I should have covered that in the OP, my bad, I was trying to use the easiest measurable bodypart to show the idea of proportions.

That is simply not the case.

Many guys are tall and skinny with narrow shoulders and long limbs. More commonly known as "Ectos".

My old housemate, has a tiny little chest, but he's 6'4". Most of his height comes from longer limb length, relative to torso.

[alg0801]

i get it, you're still wrong.

a manlet who moves 135 lb 10 inches is exerting what? like 150 joules?
a manmore who moves the same weight 20 inches is doing what? 300? double the work

would have to go deeper and figure out how much of a difference the height/bones make in terms of extra mass or whatever

Don't forget... a larger chest and traps actually reduces the distance the bar has to travel.

[iliketodoit]

brb irony

wrong. I could have easily answered the following question that would come next after my short simple response (basically, I'm baiting you, and you took the bait, thanks), but it's easier if we take it step by step so that way more people understand. RESPECTIVELY, if someone shortens the length the bar has to travel they will have an easier lift. This doesn't mean that shorter people have an easier lift than taller people. Again, proportions.

That is simply not the case.

Many guys are tall and skinny with narrow shoulders and long limbs. More commonly known as "Ectos".

My old housemate, has a tiny little chest, but he's 6'4". Most of his height comes from longer limb length, relative to torso.

So he's not proportionate. Read the last paragraph in my OP. Already been addressed.

[BigDawg69]

my wingspan is 6'5 but im only 6'. So yes my wingspan is much larger then the average person, making it harder to bench. Where is your god now op?

[Ancients]

Don't forget... a larger chest and traps actually reduces the distance the bar has to travel.

yeap. its all about reducing the distance you move the bar, same reason why manlets find it easier to squat

[1hardgainer]

And to think all this time I thought I had a legit excuse for having weak lifts. Thanks for nothing, OP.

WellIguessthatsit.jpg

[iliketodoit]

my wingspan is 6'5 but im only 6'. So yes my wingspan is much larger then the average person, making it harder to bench. Where is your god now op?

6' height to 6'5" wingspan is a proportion. the OP states that proportions are what make benching difficult. thank you for unknowingly confirming my OP

[FunnyWeasel]

Manmores have a reason to complain because they have longer arms...benching is much easier for manlets

Can't disagree on that. I bench 290 and I'm 5'8

[dnyambi]

lol "dumbarses"

Brit***.jpg

[turboface]

so op, would you say the same theory applies to squatting?

should a 7 foot tall man have an equally easy time squatting atg as a 5'2" sub-human?

if it doesn't apply to squatting, why would it apply to bench? argument = invalid op

[lowstrife]

OP, I have to make that bar travel several inches further than you ever will, so you have no room to say a single ****ing thing.

Also you've never taken any anatomy classes, if you had you would know having a long femur for instance will hinder your squat because of the additional leverage distances that are covered. You need an almost exponentially increasing amount of muscle to compensate for the added leverage disadvantage. The same applies for the humerus of the arm, and in bench.

However, having long arms makes deadlifting a ****ton easier. Thats' why my PR's for bench and deadlift are 225lb and 475lb.

[iliketodoit]

so op, would you say the same theory applies to squatting?

should a 7 foot tall man have an equally easy time squatting atg as a 5'2" sub-human?

if it doesn't apply to squatting, why would it apply to bench? argument = invalid op

it applies to every lift. longer bones means longer muscles which negates the extra work required. that's putting it simply.

OP, I have to make that bar travel several inches further than you ever will, so you have no room to say a single ****ing thing.

Your longer bones support more muscle mass than my shorter bones making it proportionally difficult for us.

[turboface]

OP, I have to make that bar travel several inches further than you ever will, so you have no room to say a single ****ing thing.

this, I mean think of doing a set of 10 with 2 more inches of rom per rep. thats almost 2 feet worth of extra movements - much of it coming from below parallel

[BEASTMODE420]

ITT, manmores who've had an easy time getting laid, feel no reason to push themselves hard on Bench, and subsequently bench less than manlets.

not sure if i qualify as a manamor?

but guilty of this^ lol ik but i dont change it, i still go pretty hard. just not worth hurting myself. sex life is more important




OP, what about the idea that concentrated force(shorter grip) on an object is stronger than separated force(wider grip)? Could factor

[CoreMaster75]

What the **** are you talking about? It clearly isn't an issue about proportions.

Like you said W=F*D

W=xxxN*58" < W=xxxN*71"

[GardHainer]

You just went full retard mate.

The human body is not proportional at different heights lol

Not only do you not understand the argument, the basis for your wrong argument is wrong. Lmao

[vanert]

Would rep if I wasnt out.

[StupidWheels]

Just read the 'how much do you bench' thread and there's short people claiming they have it hard because of their height, then there's manmores who think having a large wingspan makes it difficult.

I have a question for you all. How do you even know which weights to put on the bar? Like for instance, what stops you from putting on a 35 instead of a 45 when you're trying to load up 135? I ask because if you're too stupid to realize that the body is anatomically proportionate regardless of your height then surely you must have some trouble calculating the math for your lifts?


Taller people have longer bones. Muscles connect to these bones through tendons. Therefore, longer bones support longer muscle bellies which collectively leads to more muscle mass which is part of why they weigh more (herp derp). This extra mass makes up for the extra "work" that they have to do (Work = force * distance). The proportions are the same. It levels out.

Shorter people do not have an easier time benching because they have shorter muscles to match their shorter arms. The only thing taller people have on shorter people is that they do more 'work', which isn't the same thing as lifting more.

Surely there's an ideal clavicle length, an ideal arm length, and an ideal rib cage size for benching, but guess what *******s, you aren't so bad off genetically that your height is the issue. It would be your proportions that are the problem. Unless you look like a fukin monkey with arms down to the floor, or you look like a fukin t-rex, your proportions aren't the issue either. So quit your bishing, realize that's what women do, stop making excuses for yourself, and go to the jim and make some fukin gains you stupid *******s.


Cliffs: whole misc done gone full retard for the past ever on bench press.
W = F*D, Work = Force * Distance, tall people do more work not have to lift harder.

how do you explain a 148lb guy maxing at like a 620lb deadlift then and 6'3" deadlifting up to .5 ton?

[iliketodoit]

You just went fuk retard mate.

The human body is not proportional at different heights lol

The basis for your whole argument is wrong.

There is a definitive correlation between height and arm length, clavicle size, and rib cage size.

The basis of my argument is that proportions are what's responsible for manmore's challenging lifts. How is that wrong exactly?

how do you explain a 148lb guy maxing at like a 620lb deadlift then and 6'3" deadlifting up to .5 ton?

way too many variables there. Maybe one guy trained longer? Maybe he has better genetics? Maybe the 148 pound guy is actually 6"5? These are all more likely to be the issue than height, which is the point of my OP. But really, how am I supposed to know the difference in their strength? Surely you don't attribute almost 400 pounds to height?

[Efranks]

You just ignored everything in my post and regurgitated the same garbage posted in every bench thread. Do you even proportions? The bones are longer, then so are the muscles attached. Taller people weigh more. There's your answer.

With your 'logic', every lift a manmore does would be harder. There's more rom for every lift if you're taller. I already covered the definition of work in the OP.



If his arms magically grew longer then the muscles in them would magically grow longer to accommodate his arms. Given your scenario, yes he's going to have a harder time benching (because you specifically said he would have the same strength; which he wouldn't....), but generally if your arms grow longer the muscle connected between the joints will also grow with it. More muscle mass = easier bench (yes I know tricep isn't primarily responsible for bench). Next.

U wot?... There's a reason 90% of tall people look lanky. Their bodies aren't in the exact same proportions as manlets and no the muscle doesn't always cover the bone the same way. My wingspan is 6'8" and my arms don't even look noticeably long. IMO u need to be strict as fuk on form if u have long arms, so u don't take ur chest out of it. Which I think a lot of people do when they're taller

[BigPharm]

Doing more work =/= more difficult lift.

I think that this is actually the physics definition of work. If someone has to do more work, then the motion is harder to do. However, this is assuming that the taller and shorter person are applying the same force. If it's true that it only has to due with proportions, then they will both apply the same force, yet the D term will be larger for the taller person, making them do more work. Maybe someone else can catch this, but I think the physics points to the taller person having to due more work, making it a harder lift.

[gatovolador]

Longer arm means longer clavicle (proportions), and also larger rib case which = larger chest. I should have covered that in the OP, my bad, I was trying to use the easiest measurable bodypart to show the idea of proportions.

Actually, I remember reading an article on bicycle handlebars where they were saying almost everybody is 38cm from center of one shoulder ball joint to the other, across a range of male heights + weights (pretty sure it was from Japan). People are always suggesting different handlebar widths- people used to ride narrow, then there was broscience about opening up your rib cage so your lungs could move, and now people are going narrower for aerodynamics.

[lironzz]

google work in physics

[McKlown]

i'm skeptical... sure, if you have longer bones, you have more muscle, but it sounds like broscience to assume that the extra muscle perfectly supplements the increased rom to have no difference between the height of the lifter.

based on how terribly worded that thought was, i'm sure i'm wrong, but just speaking my mind.

[turboface]

i find it hard to believe that it falls together as well as the op thinks it does

i mean think about total length of the limb itself. if my arm is 2.5 feet long balancing a 120 lb dumbbell on the end, I guarantee you its going to be much more difficult than someone with manlet arms - more/longer muscle or not, its comparable to balancing a book on a pencil versus a chapstick

i don't buy it for below parallel movements either

[sourcecode123]

Ummm no op...

Someone with shorter arms is more built for bench press.
Such as someone with short legs and longer arms is more built to deadlift for example.

You are thinking under the premise that first of all, everyone is proportional as you stated. And second of all, the whole more muscles because of longer bones is some of the biggest broscience I have ever heard, do you even science op?

[quarters]

/thread