Who is stronger? - Gymnast or Weightlifter

OP

What about olympic weightlifters.... guys in the 52kg division....... PL obviously can;t be compared.

basketofsnakes

lb for lb gymnasts are stronger since "weightlifters" (and by "weightlifters" I assume you are talking about powerlifters) only carea bout lifting as much weight as possible so put on as much muscle/fat as possible

but as far as "strongest", weightlifters own gymnasts

p4p strongest: gymnasts
total strongest: "weightlifters"

Reply 21

cowsforsale

15

weight lifter obviously,,,,gymast all about bw ****,,, mind you CHINESE weightlifters and gymnasts FOR THE ******* WIN XD

REPRESENT

Reply 22

barnisaurusrex

2

redbuthotter

What about olympic weightlifters.... guys in the 52kg division....... PL obviously can;t be compared.

Well done this man. Olympic weightlifters who compete in weight classes will be lb for lb stronger than any gymnast. I'd love to see a gymnast snatch 180kg like people in the 85kg category Olympic weightlifting class can.

Reply 23

basketofsnakes

redbuthotter

What about olympic weightlifters.... guys in the 52kg division....... PL obviously can;t be compared.

I don't really follow that so can't comment on it, but I wouldn't be surprised if there are some olympic lifters at the very low weights who are as strong as some gymnasts p4p wise

Reply 24

OP

thats right... you gotta ******* represent.... all we need to do now is breed some sprinters to destroy the gwei lo.

cowsforsale

weight lifter obviously,,,,gymast all about bw ****,,, mind you CHINESE weightlifters and gymnasts FOR THE ******* WIN XD

REPRESENT

Reply 25

bbk

Gymnast, easy.

You guys are looking at this all wrong, weight lifting or body building style strength training is geared towards a more aesthetic purpose whereas gymnastic strength training is to prepare for the demands the sport places upon you.

It doesn't matter how much any of you can bench or squat, these exercises will result in some great muscle gains but compared to exercises like Planche or Chinese Flagpole, exercises that require complete control over so many muscles across your body, they are simpy left behind in the dust.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wb2k5_ftaE0
A clip of Dominic LaCasse, check out his style of wide grip chins.

All of you who hit the gym on a regular basis and think you can lift a fair bit, scroll down this article and follow the steps shown to do a basic Planche. See how far you get.
http://www.dragondoor.com/articler/mode3/229/

Reply 26

ch0c0h01ic

18

redbuthotter

Came accross a couple of articles a while ago including this one:

http://www.gymnasticbodies.com/articles2.html

A lot of people say gymnasts are lbs for lbs the strongest people in the world.

Sommer is a gymnastics coach who has released gymnastics based products aimed at your average gym goer - he's a tad biased :wink:

How can this be true if there is no good way to measure absolute strength - is it speed, limit or endurance, and how would you measure it for the entire body?

They're two different types of athletes studying two different disciplines, training in two different ways - you can't make any direct comparisons.

One is not better than the other.

bbk

Gymnast, easy.

You guys are looking at this all wrong, weight lifting or body building style strength training is geared towards a more aesthetic purpose whereas gymnastic strength training is to prepare for the demands the sport places upon you.

Believe it or not but not all weight trainers train solely for aesthetic purposes.

It doesn't matter how much any of you can bench or squat, these exercises will result in some great muscle gains but compared to exercises like Planche or Chinese Flagpole, exercises that require complete control over so many muscles across your body, they are simpy left behind in the dust.

If gymnastic exercises are so effective at building strength and size, and leave everything else 'behind in the dust', why is it that they're so under utilised? What you're saying is far from the truth.

The vast majority of these exercises have a very steep learning curve, are very hard on the body, aren't particularly effective at building strength and/or size and take years to master. The bodies you see of muscular athletes are forged by years if not decades of hard training and even then they're not that big. There are limits to how big and strong you can get using solely your bodyweight.

All of you who hit the gym on a regular basis and think you can lift a fair bit, scroll down this article and follow the steps shown to do a basic Planche. See how far you get.
http://www.dragondoor.com/articler/mode3/229/

Difficult does not equal strong and/or big.

The planche is primarily about balance and core stability which is clearly evident by both the strength and size of the practitioner shown in the article.

When you have a decent amount of experience and knowledge under your belt your view will change and you will view the usual DragonDoor rubbish for what it really is.

Reply 27

Hugh-Jackman

redbuthotter

thats right... you gotta ******* represent.... all we need to do now is breed some sprinters to destroy the gwei lo.

never going to happen.....plus the heavyweight categories is all that matters......razza doesnt care that a 60kg chinese man has a better p4p clean and jerk than him when hes got the heaviest clean and jerk ever....likewise i dont think andy bolton gives a **** that herr stamper can deadlift 310kg at 80kg.....when he can deadlift 450+ at a worse p4p ratio. im also sure bolt doesnt care that a midget can run a faster 100m for height to time ratio.....to answer original question its weightlifters.....gymnast arent all that

Reply 28

Arturo Bandini

Saying a weightlifter couldn't swing himself round a bar or do a Planche has little to do with strength. It has to do with them being difficult techniques (that do involve strength but also lots of other things).

I could just as easily point out that oh a gymnast couldn't pull 3x their bodyweight off the floor.

Reply 29

basketofsnakes

bbk

Gymnast, easy.

You guys are looking at this all wrong, weight lifting or body building style strength training is geared towards a more aesthetic purpose whereas gymnastic strength training is to prepare for the demands the sport places upon you.

It doesn't matter how much any of you can bench or squat, these exercises will result in some great muscle gains but compared to exercises like Planche or Chinese Flagpole, exercises that require complete control over so many muscles across your body, they are simpy left behind in the dust.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wb2k5_ftaE0
A clip of Dominic LaCasse, check out his style of wide grip chins.

All of you who hit the gym on a regular basis and think you can lift a fair bit, scroll down this article and follow the steps shown to do a basic Planche. See how far you get.
http://www.dragondoor.com/articler/mode3/229/

that guy has good strength to weight ratio, but compared to powerlifters and strongman competetitors and bodybuilders he is a weakling

not all weightlifters do it purely for aesthetic purposes

you clearly have never heard of something called "strongman"

this guy is 3x stronger than any gymnast in the world, there's a reason it's called "the world's strongest man" competition

Reply 30

Arturo Bandini

Even strength to weight ratio, lower class weightlifters have gymnasts beat at lifts. But they're completely different disciplines. Like Planto said, redhotbutter asked who we think is stronger, then pointed out in his OP that it's not something you can compare. Should've been /thread there and then.

Reply 31

Subconscious Illusion

Gymnasts

Reply 32

burningnun

Gymnasts are very specialised within the sport. The rings guys have really strong upper bodies but not much in the way of legs. Floor and vault are probably not as strong, maybe slightly more balanced and I guess bars are somewhere in between.

I've heard of gymnasts doing a 400 lb. deadlift the first time they tried, which is good but not really a whole lot for people claiming to be strong. They can bench a lot though.

Basically gymnasts are better at gymnastics and weightlifters are better at weightlifting.

Reply 33

burningnun

As for gymnasts being more "functional", don't most of their careers end in like their mid-20s due to back injury? I'd rather be my kind of functional thanks.

Reply 34

SMed

11

George, have you ever tried gymnastics? I don't think you're entitled to an opinion unless you've tried it.

My mistake. :o:

OP

to an extent but there's more politics/decision making involved.....

Firstly rezza is a genetic freak... even russians have trouble touching him. And in olympics chinese entered the weight classes they thought they were garentee'd to win. 7 golds and 1 silver out of 8 athletes (stupid entry limitations). Yes its true china have not developed the super heavies as well.... But I'd never say never with the right funding/infrastructure pretty much any race can dominate any sport.... look at soviets before they crumbled.

I doubt its "never" going to happen, we've swept up all the mens divisions medals from 09 WLC from 52 to 85... (and its only likely to get better) but like I said the super heavies need more development like track and field.

214kg @ 85kg vs 263.5kg @ 162.5kg are both amazing in their own right don't you think?

Hugh-Jackman

never going to happen.....plus the heavyweight categories is all that matters......razza doesnt care that a 60kg chinese man has a better p4p clean and jerk than him when hes got the heaviest clean and jerk ever....likewise i dont think andy bolton gives a **** that herr stamper can deadlift 310kg at 80kg.....when he can deadlift 450+ at a worse p4p ratio. im also sure bolt doesnt care that a midget can run a faster 100m for height to time ratio.....to answer original question its weightlifters.....gymnast arent all that

Reply 37

OP

I know, but I was curious to see the logic behind people who thought either were "Stronger".... especially gymnasts since ofc I'm a weightlifter

Arturo Bandini

Even strength to weight ratio, lower class weightlifters have gymnasts beat at lifts. But they're completely different disciplines. Like Planto said, redhotbutter asked who we think is stronger, then pointed out in his OP that it's not something you can compare. Should've been /thread there and then.

Reply 38

Hugh-Jackman

redbuthotter

to an extent but there's more politics/decision making involved.....

Firstly rezza is a genetic freak... even russians have trouble touching him. And in olympics chinese entered the weight classes they thought they were garentee'd to win. 7 golds and 1 silv er out of 8 athletes (stupid entry limitations). Yes its true china have not developed th. e super heavies as well.... But I'd never say never with the right funding/infrastru ture pretty much any race can dominate any sport.... look at soviets before they crumbled.

I doubt its "never" going to happ en, we've swept up all the mens divisions medals f rom 09 WLC from 52 to 85... (and its only likely to get better) but like I said the super heavies need more develo pment like track and field.

214kg @ 85kg vs 263.5kg @ 162.5kg are both amazing in their own right don't you think?

tbh i find the 263kg way more impressive....i dont think funding will produce the super heavies....its genetics. lower weight categories just mean you havent got the genetics to hang with the big boys....if they did they would compete with the big boys like KK and Ed Coan....they're hardly l ight though.

Reply 39

OP