- Joined
- Aug 19, 2007
- Messages
- 6,717
- Reaction score
- 0
Are you saying Ed Coan didn't have exceptional genetics for powerlifting?
And the fact that you didn't also mention Kroc or Efferding is an admission on your part.
Are you saying Ed Coan didn't have exceptional genetics for powerlifting?
And the fact that you didn't also mention Kroc or Efferding is an admission on your part.
I have no doubt that genetics play a role, but it is interesting to see that some top powerlifters may not come from very athletic parents or that they were pretty small throughout their early years. Too many people automatically assume that the guys at the top have great genetics.
My strength comes from my good genetics and 24 years of consistent intense training.
My point is, because someone told you you had shitty genetics, doesn't mean you had shitty genetics. It just means you shouldn't put much weight to what dumb people have to say.
Whether your parents play sports or if you were small while growing up has nothing to do with anything. There isn't a person at "the top" in sports that doesn't have great genetics unless the sport has an extremely small number of competitors. Lamar Gant claims to have normal genetics and just worked hard, but he broke national or state records for reps in his weight class during his first workout. Kirk Karwoski says he just works hard, but he says he was squatting 400lb+ as a light 13 year old not long after he started lifting. Benni Magnusson, who broke his back while skiing and started lifting for the purpose of rehab and then deadlifted 971lb a few years later, claims to have been a little big for his age growing up but was otherwise normal.
The only great lifter I know of that seems to realize or at least acknowledges their genetics is Dennis Cieri.
http://www.powerliftingwatch.com/node/2880
Having to try really hard is a given, I don't know why people fool themselves into thinking they can out-work genetics though.
Such as powerlifting?
I really don't think everyone "at the top" in PL have "great genetics" assuming at the top means highly ranked in their respective weight classes.
Not really sure what cratos's numbers are,
But you dont think most people can reach 520/320/600 @ 215 with hard work and dedication alone?
C.) Genetics are just one variable among many. Take an average person and have them put the same amount of time and effort into training as a world-record holder for a span of a decade: at worst, they'll be at an elite level by the time they're done.
lol ok
Lol - powerlifting is as fringe of a sport as they come.
So far you've argued that the athletic ability of someone's parents or the size of someone prior to excelling at lifting has nothing to do with the topic of genetics.
Then you acted as though powerlifting wouldn't fall under a sport with "an extremely small number of competitors". We'll see these absolutely genetically gifted monsters competing at the local high school gymnasium PL meet for their top 10 ranking rather than using their leet genetics in a sport that could actually earn them a nice paycheck. Hopefully their sword trophy will do.
This. You don't have to have excellent genetics to be a good or even a great squatter.
It doesn't, not everyone's parents played any sports at all and how big you are as a kid doesn't mean much.
The people that place at the top have the best genetics compared to everyone else. Are you denying this? And you can have top genetics and never make it in another sport, thousands of college and high school athletes have tried. Plus a lot of powerlifters were introduced to powerlifting through training for other sports.
Not really sure what cratos's numbers are,
But you dont think most people can reach 520/320/600 @ 215 with hard work and dedication alone?
Yep - the parents attributes displayed through athletics have nothing to do with genetic makeup.
Neither does the size of a child.
Are you even reading what you are typing? "The people that place at the top have the best genetics compared to everyone else". Right - so frequency of training, preparation, strategy, etc. have nothing to do with it? The person at the top is simply the guy with the best genes. Yet you can have "top genetics", yet still not make it? I'm curious for your dissertation on these specific PL genes.
Too many people automatically assume that the guys at the top have great genetics.
I think you can't make it to the top without great genetics, though there's really no way to "prove" it.
I'm saying when you are competing against the best then you are there ultimately because of your genetics.
I think you can't make it to the top without great genetics, though there's really no way to "prove" it.