- Joined
- Jun 1, 2008
- Messages
- 10,466
- Reaction score
- 247
I'm curious to know how you interpret the definition of "many?"
Mahailya Reeves, a 15 year old girl, benched 335 lbs RAW {IMPRESSIVE]
- Thread starter woloo
- Start date
I'm curious to know how you interpret the definition of "many?"
I dunno what u mean. Please explain.
- Joined
- Jun 22, 2012
- Messages
- 3,990
- Reaction score
- 0
that's a girl?
According to some ignorant posters, she's a 100% natural girl, who is a genetic freak and can naturally bench press 360 pounds raw.
- Joined
- Jun 22, 2012
- Messages
- 3,990
- Reaction score
- 0
damn. she should do mma.
- Joined
- Jun 1, 2008
- Messages
- 10,466
- Reaction score
- 247
I still don't get how you can adamantly conclude that she's not naturally big and strong. Your basica argument is:
Female + Massive Body Weight (in a country with epidemic obesity rates) + benches more than me = Juice
You don't know about science. Fat is not strength. So any overweight walking woman is stronger than an average grown up male? Are you kidding me? There are lots of women that are bigger and taller than average men. Do you think they will outbench men?
- Joined
- Jun 1, 2008
- Messages
- 10,466
- Reaction score
- 247
No! just stronger than you.
- Joined
- Oct 16, 2015
- Messages
- 5,971
- Reaction score
- 901
So you figure an untrained but physically active 200 pound woman is going to be weaker than an untrained and physically inactive 100 pound man (they exist)? The woman will have 50% more muscle mass than the man.
Among the most highly trained athletes in the world (ie the Olympics) the difference between elite men and elite women seems to have settled in at about 10% in just about every measured (timed, weighed etc) sport. That difference is swamped by the difference between a large active woman and a very small inactive man. No untrained men could match the numbers of the women winning Olympic medals in running, swimming, and yes, weight lifting.
She's very strong, but as a number of people have posted, there are 15 year old boys (ie boys just entering into puberty) lifting as much as her. However, your average 15 year old boy isn't going to bench a third of what she benches. The difference between elite and non-elite is huge.
No one in Sherdog could beat the woman's 100 meter Olympic champion in a sprint -- or even get close to her time. That every year many high school boys do is irrelevant, those boys are exceptional. Its like looking at Lebron James and thinking "I'm a man, so I can do what he does."
I am talking about if men are provided with the same training. A normal trained man will always beat a trained woman, don't you think so? I never compared a untrained man to a trained woman. About Mahailya, she's been lifting for 5+ years with an elite coach. The amount of steroids she probably took, it is possible for most guys to bench more than her unless they reach puberty late. Steroids gain muscle mass. A 14 year old Russian chick, Maryana Naumova, got caught for doping. She benched 270+ pounds by the way. Don't you think it is possible for teens to take steroids?
- Joined
- Jun 1, 2008
- Messages
- 10,466
- Reaction score
- 247
I think its possible, even likely that a lot of teenagers are taking steroids. However, the difference here is that she's in a tested FED, so arguing her cleanity is stupid because everyone in that FED is under the same scrutiny. I'd even argue that she is likely under more than the average lifter in that FED. She is fucking strong. Stronger than most 15 year old boys. Probably stronger than every single 15 year old boy in my city.
- Joined
- Oct 16, 2015
- Messages
- 5,971
- Reaction score
- 901
I think an untrained, active 200 pound woman (and yes, they exist) is going to be stronger than an untrained, unactive 100 pound man (and yes, they also exist).
I know teens take steroids, both boys and girls. But the strongest girls are going to be stronger than the weakest boys. Take the 100 meter sprint for instance (a good measure of explosiveness). The fastest untrained women are simply much faster than the slowest untrained men, even though the fastest trained men are 10% faster than the fastest trained women. Strength, speed, explosiveness are all distributed on normal curves (Gaussian distribution if you prefer that term, or bell curve), and though the men's average is higher than the women's average the upper tail of the women's curve is higher than the lower tail of the men's curve.
She's stronger because she's been training for 5 years and her voice is deep, too. She got side burns too. Steroids show those signs. Most guys who are provided with the same stuff should be stronger. There is no doubt about that. Check high school weightlifting records. Guys bench pressed over 450 pounds for the same weight class and category.
I don't know what you mean by untrained and active at the same time. Anyways, the point is grown men are always stronger than grown women regardless of genetics. I haven't seen any woman being stronger than an average man. Prove it scientifically.
- Joined
- Jan 23, 2019
- Messages
- 9,982
- Reaction score
- 697
Mahailya's lifts are FAR beyond what the "average man" can do.
She squatted 523, which would place her in the "advanced" category for a hw male. The average fit (nonobese and active) male is about 180 pounds. She would outsquat pretty much all of them except for competitive athletes. Her bench would not be elite by male HW standards, but place her as elite for 181.
I've already challenged you to take all the roids you need and try to match her lifts. I guarantee you will fail. Her genetics are superior to yours. Just accept it and move on.
Mahailya's lifts are FAR beyond what the "average man" can do.
She squatted 523, which would place her in the "advanced" category for a hw male. The average fit (nonobese and active) male is about 180 pounds. She would outsquat pretty much all of them except for competitive athletes. Her bench would not be elite by male HW standards, but place her as elite for 181.
I've already challenged you to take all the roids you need and try to match her lifts. I guarantee you will fail. Her genetics are superior to yours. Just accept it and move on.
Her genetics are superior to me, but I, like any guy, have much more testosterone naturally. So doesn't it balance out or make me stronger?
- Joined
- Jan 23, 2019
- Messages
- 9,982
- Reaction score
- 697
Well I'm 40 and my T is low enough now that I could probably qualify for TRT (but I'm delaying it). My lifts are down from my prime, but a lot of that is due to injuries. I can however still squat and deadlift in the 500's. And this is still more than what a lot of "enhanced lifters" (they openly sell in my gym's bathroom) can do. So these guys are younger than me and have at least 4x my blood T levels. And I can still outlift them.
There are countless other factors to someone's strength than just T levels. Otherwise, every gym rat on roids would be smashing records from tested federations.
https://bretcontreras.com/abc-can-a-testosterone-challenged-man-still-be-muscular/
But high levels are not mandatory for muscular growth, which is why some women are able to grow larger muscles than some men despite the fact that they produce one-tenth to one-twentieth the testosterone levels of men. Here’s why:
According to research, satellite cell efficiency appears to be the most important factor in muscular growth. Some folks have efficient satellite cell systems while others don’t. Satellite cells are located between the basil lamina and sarcolemma toward the periphery of the myofibers and function like stem cells. Once a nucleus and its surrounding sarcoplasm reaches approximately 2,000 square micrometers per nucleus (or 17-25% of the fiber’s initial size), a threshold is reached and additional nuclei are required for further growth (this has been coined the “myonuclear domain”). Efficient satellite cell systems are generous with their donation of nuclei to myofibers, and they’re also very expedient at replenishing themselves so the available pool stays bountiful. Poor satellite cell systems are stingy with their nuclei and inefficient at renewing themselves.
While testosterone is indirectly related to satellite cell efficiency through increased IGF-1 production (which has been shown to activate satellite cells) and increased androgen receptor density (which has been shown to be abundant in satellite cell nuclei), it appears that mechanical tension and muscular damage (and the associated macrophage/cytokine release) are closely related to satellite cell behavior as well. Mechanical tension also stimulates growth through increased mechanogrowth factor release and activation of the Akt/mTOR pathway, which appears to be a dominant pathway leading to muscular hypertrophy.
I agree with some of your points. If we compare male to male, genetics make a difference. You have no idea what PEDs can do. Check some female crossfit and physique competitor athletes' crazy transformation. You will get an idea. They were skinny as hell prior to lifting and juicing. Stacy Burr, top 148 pound female powerlifter, claimed she wasn't genetically strong. She was skinny. Please show me a superior genetic female powerlifter that could lift close to her numbers in a similar weightclass.
Top athletes take PEDs whether it's 100m dash, strength sports or bodybuilding. Steroids gain muscle mass and strength. No wonder steroids are banned because it gives one an unfair advantage.
Last edited:
