Biggest Bench in The UFC

[MusterX]

You're putting six hundred lbs on a couple of sq

while i agree Eric may come off a tad academic, i think he pretty soundly supports his statements...

im not being sarcastic, but what wasthe point of your post?
did Eric somewhere write that Brock or JJ was a poor athlete?

i have read a lot of what he's written, and agree with everything ive read so far- but i agree with your post too and it seems you 2 disagree.. (or i could be mistaken, if so, sorry)

Well he's basically saying that the NFL combine' s use of bench press is next to useless and its just a chance for certain guys to show off and I'm simply illustrating that these guys are not just bench press monsters, they are legit in all avenues of athletic testing. I don't care who you are. If you can throw up 225 for 30+ reps that is nuts. These same guys are also running the 40 in 4.7 and posting vertical leaps of 35+ inches at 300 pounds.

 

[ChickenNugget]

Now it's just completely ridiculous, bro, up to a point where I'm afraid I'm gonna have to go ahead and ask you a.) either leave the thread and stop making these weirdo claims about this and that or b.) contribute to the topic, which by the way I don't think you know about much about. Not much of a lifter, now are you dude?

• Benchpressing is so complicated, I'll leave that to the people in business. (Did your sarcasm detector go off?)
• Still not your bro.
• You don't get to ask me to do anything.
• contortionist vs creationist. How can you not see the brilliance? It's easy, I know you can do it.
• If I were to look up 'ridiculous', I'm sure one of your threads were to show up. The ratio of hate-posts against you vs posts with content is easily 7 out of 10 in your threads. You don't lay down anything as you try to make people believe. Have you thought about it?

 

[aus101]

No idea why you would consider the bench the grand daddy of strength exercises. Weightlifting precedes powerlifting by more than half a century, and the squat and the deadlift train larger, stronger muscle groups than the bench press.

In terms of judging strength off one lift I like the clean and press or perhaps the deadlift here. (Though I understand that bench is the current bragging rights lift and train it accordingly).

 

[Wadtucket]

Deadlift involves the least amount of technique out of the big three lifts, and is as such a better indicator of strength

See Jon Jones

 

[Hammurabi]

oh, no.
Hammurabi you put me on ignore?
if you take me off ignore, i PROMISE not to tease you even one time, mention you directly or indirectly, or in anyway make myself known to you........

until April 1st, 2016. (you cant make me promise to NEVER tease ya again, but thats 4 months- a LONG TIME)

on my kids' lives i mean this as a sincere plea for reconsideration by you.

i hope you can read this, and hope you believe me and take it serious, because
if you dont undo this, i wont be able to see your threads anymore.

i really dont want to not be able to see your threads anymore. i SWEAR I can read them but not comment.

there is no risk to you- if im lying, you could simply put me back on block, but im not.

as a token of my genuine request, i wont write in these threads anymore, but will hope they reappear in my watch thread list.

Bro, I haven't put you ignore whatsoever, I'm just trying to avoid making this thread into another come to Jesus meeting with some of my haters, and I'd ask you to get back on topic but since you've already done that I don't have to go ahead and do that. Appreciate the effort, bro.

 

[aus101]

Lean fight weight? Lawler was never lean at MW. Not saying he was fat, but he wasn't lean at all.

Even worst at 195lbs against babalu

Reminds me of BJ in this pic, you can tell all the fat in his face.

Now way in hell the dude was 220lbs lean.....Hell when he fought at MW, I highly doubt his weight was above 200lbs, I doubt he cut that much, and if he did, Like I said....The dude wasn't lean.

Obviously 5'10 Lawler wasn't 225 lean when Randleman was that height 195 lean. 225 lean at 5'10 is freaking huge.

 

[leatherneck]

Well he's basically saying that the NFL combine' s use of bench press is next to useless and its just a chance for certain guys to show off and I'm simply illustrating that these guys are not just bench press monsters, they are legit in all avenues of athletic testing. I don't care who you are. If you can throw up 225 for 30+ reps that is nuts. These same guys are also running the 40 in 4.7 and posting vertical leaps of 35+ inches at 300 pounds.

oh, is that how you took it?

i guess i didnt.

the stats you quoted are beyond impressive, i dont know how someone could disagree- but i think its more coincidence, like Tank for example.

Im betting he benches the same or more than Brock in a single bench, but in no way is he the same ATHLETE, (run, jump, swim, etc) so you cant say his bench is a display of his athleticism.

as for overall strength, once you employ the common 3-lift total they always use- he mentions correct term a few times, i forget. the point is, i doubt Tank OVERALL IS AS STRONG AS JJ OR BROCK, and if my guess is right, then it would be accurate to say bench isnt a great metric for strength.

in another post i mentioned my "Top 5 Bench" guesses, including Shawn Jordan, and Tank.

i would say for sure that while a Tank or Jordan may have a more impressive b ench than Mark Kerr, I wouldnt say they were as strong as im- so in that sense, i agree with Eric, bench can be misleading.
Pudz probably is strongest fighter, esily.
He benched 632, not a whole lot more than Jordan- ONLY 20 lbs.
the thing is, i looked up his 3-lift total and its like 3,000 lbs, which is a shit ton more than Tank im guessing.

I just dont see Tank deadlifting 900lbs, or squatting 800, do you? im betting Pudz's #s are at least 20% more than Jordans, and if he doubled Tank it wouldnt shock me, so in THAT SENSE, bench is a poor judge of overall strength.

THATS what i believe anyway, and what i took ERic to mean. and i dont think he disagrees with you really, i know i dont,

 

[MusterX]

while i agree Eric may come off a tad academic, i think he pretty soundly supports his statements...

im not being sarcastic, but what wasthe point of your post?
did Eric somewhere write that Brock or JJ was a poor athlete?

i have read a lot of what he's written, and agree with everything ive read so far- but i agree with your post too and it seems you 2 disagree.. (or i could be mistaken, if so, sorry)

And I'm not really down on Eric. Its just that there is always someone that wants to see a bench press or a deadlift then talk smack about technique. What does it really matter? You can lift that shit or you can't.

Check this guy out.

That's Paul Anderson, probably one of if not the strongest human being to ever live. The guy was poor and made his own weights out of giant wheels and concrete. When he was first discovered and nobody had ever showed him any technique, at the age of 19, he was breaking world records. This guy would probably be picked apart on today's internet and yet is one of the strongest men to ever live.

This video is about 5 parts but is a great doc on his life. This kid, with no trainers, or facilities, or nutritionists, or people pointing out technique to him was stronger than anyone on the planet.

 

[Eric Brown]

You are kinda a geek. You probably are ripped but on the inside you are as geeky as a dweeb crunching numbers at a D&D convention. As far as athletes showing off bench press at the combine, those guys are generally A class athletes.

Take a look at Brock Lesnar's numbers, since he fought in the UFC, compared to a monster like JJ Watt.

Lesnar
40-yard dash time: 4.7 seconds
Vertical jump: 35 in
Standing long jump: 10 ft 0 in
Bench press: 225 lb with 30 reps

JJ Watt
40-yard dash time: 4.84 seconds
Vertical jump: 37 in
Standing long jump: 10 ft 0 in
Bench press: 225 lb with 34 reps

Virtually indistinguishable, but it illustrates what monsters these guys are. How many 6'5" 300 pound monsters you know that can run a 4.7 40? Anyway, have you seen the Dana White video of him putting up 315 and all the muscleheads across the internet gushing that he has perfect technique doing it? Yea you heard that right. Dana F'ing White has the lifting technique of a professional.

I am a strength and conditioning coach. I am aware of Lesnar's numbers, just not the point of your post. And I know or knew of quite a few guys that put up great qualifying numbers, goes with the job.

No, I have not seen the video. But, since he is not a fighter, I fail to see how what he does is relevant. You could perhaps post a link.

 

[leatherneck]

Well he's basically saying that

ok, i was curious enough i went back, and found 2 posts, including THIS:

No idea why you would consider the bench the grand daddy of strength exercises. Weightlifting precedes powerlifting by more than half a century, and the squat and the deadlift train larger, stronger muscle groups than the bench press.

i imagine this is what a few of you are reacting to.

(he IS technically correct on his points here)

this post and 1 or 2 sentences in another post DO come off a a tad gym-rat snaobby, i get that.

im sure nooone is going to argue with him on the volume mass of a pectoral/tricep/anteriordelt vs glute/bifem/quad, etc, and i think he knows that.

i also am pretty sure he's aware that while not scientific, the ole "how much does he bench?" is easily the most COMMONLY wondered query when the average person encounters a man-hulk.

its not the most accurate, but its the most common, and im sure he knows it. im sure he knows most guys think gals appreciate big arms/chest to big back, etc, and that therefore most guys care more about them too.

im also betting eric himself is probably built like a brick shit house, with brachial veins that look like jump ropes, and or a back that looks like a broken windshield.

he knows this stuff is common, and he probably isnt common, so naturally goes off on a tangent a bit.

he DID put out a lot of good info though, and i doubt he would sneer at Brock or JJJs combine stats. (dont know the guy)

as for the old man you posted, that guy was not only crazy huge, he was so strong so long ago its more impressive to me (poor equipment, poor PEDs, etc)

he looks like he was raised chained to the Wheel of Pain. thx for sharing his bio.

 

[MusterX]

I am a strength and conditioning coach. I am aware of Lesnar's numbers, just not the point of your post. And I know or knew of quite a few guys that put up great qualifying numbers, goes with the job.

No, I have not seen the video. But, since he is not a fighter, I fail to see how what he does is relevant. You could perhaps post a link.

I'm not trying to insult you, I'm just pointing out that sometimes people get a bit crazy with the technique arguments. If you are a strength and conditioning coach I wouldn't mind knowing what you think of the guy I posted in the video above your post. Paul Anderson did a back lift of 6270 pounds. That kid was breaking world records before he ever know anything about technique. He didn't have any of the modern advantages that lifters have now like awesome facilities and computers and nutritionists etc. Hell he didn't even have weights he had to make his own. His nutrition was probably cheeseburgers and mashed potatoes.

 

[I WILL CUT YOU]

No idea why you would consider the bench the grand daddy of strength exercises. Weightlifting precedes powerlifting by more than half a century, and the squat and the deadlift train larger, stronger muscle groups than the bench press.

It's because Cannurabi is a shitposting neophyte.

 

[accolyte1022]

It's because Cannurabi is a shitposting neophyte.

Incoming:

Ad hominem
bro
my man

 

[TheLuckiest]

The bench is most popular in gyms because it's what the girls like. Naturally, these gym bros want big arms and chests for the ladies, and are not professional athletes, so it is form over function. It is the least useful exercise for functional strength out of the big 3. Period. I'd even argue that it is less useful than bicep curls because that pull strength is great for grappling. There is no discussion to be had. It is an objectively verifiable truth, but somehow the discussion continues. Sherdog is a special place.

 

[I WILL CUT YOU]

Incoming:

Ad hominem
bro
my man

"I am an educated, bro, my man, and commas, bro, are my only friend, man."

 

[MusterX]

ok, i was curious enough i went back, and found 2 posts, including THIS:


as for the old man you posted, that guy was not only crazy huge, he was so strong so long ago its more impressive to me (poor equipment, poor PEDs, etc)

he looks like he was raised chained to the Wheel of Pain. thx for sharing his bio.

You should seriously watch that doc on Paul Anderson. What he was able to do that long ago and likely natural is nuts. Its about 5 parts and the man who discovered him said he freaked out because someone brought Paul over to his house and told him this kid was strong. The guy had a weight room in his basement and they went downstairs and he said he immediately realized that with no training this 19 year old kid was stronger than the strongest men in the world who spent their lives dedicated to lifting.

 

[The Best JG]

Only a matter of time before TS is posting weigh in crotch shots and wondering which fighter is packing the biggest rocket

 

[accolyte1022]

"I am an educated, bro, my man, and commas, bro, are my only friend, man."

Please stay on topic, my man.

 

[Eric Brown]

I'm not trying to insult you, I'm just pointing out that sometimes people get a bit crazy with the technique arguments. If you are a strength and conditioning coach I wouldn't mind knowing what you think of the guy I posted in the video above your post. Paul Anderson did a back lift of 6270 pounds. That kid was breaking world records before he ever know anything about technique. He didn't have any of the modern advantages that lifters have now like awesome facilities and computers and nutritionists etc. Hell he didn't even have weights he had to make his own. His nutrition was probably cheeseburgers and mashed potatoes.

Technique plays a huge role in strength. Not just because it allows you to lift more, but because it reduces your risk of injury. Anderson lifted below his potential in the Olympics because he was, as pretty much always, injured, (and sick, IIRC). Cannot see the vid, at work and need to change some things to view vids. Not happening right now.

A better example of brute strength vs technique would be the clash of Titans that occurred in Munich in 1972. Patera was the strongest on the assistance exercises, such as the squat, behind the neck press, deadlift, etc. with Redding checking in 2nd, and Alexeev third out of the three. But he had the best technique. Patera bombed, and Alexeev set the three lift record that stands for all time.

And yes, there have always been genetic freaks and outliers. Most people can not, nor will they every be able to do what someone like Anderson did. That being said, with good technique and good nutrition, even more is possible. Think of it like this: You can beast fuck a weight into place. With good technique, you can lift more weight. This is not just a matter of ego, your results are proportional to your appropriately applied workload (this being goal-dependent). So whatever Anderson did, with better training and nutrition he could have done more.

Everybody makes mistakes, it is part of the learning process. Future generations learn from their mistakes. There was a time when runners never lifted, for example. And in some places the idiotic concepts of "getting muscle-bound" or "lifting slows you down" still abound.

 

[eNoq]

You should seriously watch that doc on Paul Anderson. What he was able to do that long ago and likely natural is nuts. Its about 5 parts and the man who discovered him said he freaked out because someone brought Paul over to his house and told him this kid was strong. The guy had a weight room in his basement and they went downstairs and he said he immediately realized that with no training this 19 year old kid was stronger than the strongest men in the world who spent their lives dedicated to lifting.

there's a lot of bullshit going on with these said "records" paul anderson was supposedly breaking.
there's no evidence of anything just the word of some, lets face it the numbers surrounding him are bogus.