CarlitosWay said:
lol@ toned ....I just can't help but think of little school girls and 130 lb only hitting bench and curling ab work outs amebercrombie & fitch soy boys using that word. :crackup: :crazy: :cheer:
It's either you put on some noticable muscle or you don't, training for functional strength or training with machines it doesn't matter. I love how people who suck at eating enough to put on some muscle or don't reach physique goals use the old "It's cause I'm training for functional strength" excuse...what a crock of ****. If you don't look like you lift seriously after 5-6 years of training....I say you're just going through the damn motions like every other yuppie.
Carlito,
On this very Forum I once saw a video of a guy who at 158 pounds can deadlift about 400 pounds, does 33 consecutive chin ups, and can leap about 6 feet in the air. And he's about 5'8" which makes him about the same height as a lot of guys in this Forum. How many people do you know who can do any of those things? The guy was lean muscular but not bulky. There
ARE people who can and do look healthy without bulking up.
Functional strength is functional strength. The ones you're referring to do
NOT have functional strength. My definition of functional strength would be the ability to carry at
LEAST 160 pounds up a flight of stairs, be able to pull your own body weight up at
LEAST twice, bench your own weight, lift a
MINIMUM of 200 pounds from the floor and lift at
LEAST 100 pounds overhead. These would come in handy if you have to carry someone out of a house, car, etc. in an emergency situation. It comes from exercise and diet. If their nutrition is poor then they probably won't be able to even get out of bed, much less do any lifting.
But there are a lot of weight lifters who can't even do a simple pull up or chin up. How's that for functional strength?