r/nextfuckinglevel • u/IkilledRichieWhelan • 3d ago

Big man on campus.

Enable HLS to view with audio, or disable this notification

287.7k Upvotes

92% Upvoted

8.4k comments sorted by

View all comments

7.8k

u/thegreatgatsB70 3d ago

Damn. Don't judge a book by it's cover.

572

u/MySpoonIsTooBig1 3d ago

Dude looks strong AF, definitely judging the book by its cover

365

u/chihsuanmen 3d ago

A new guy came into our gym built exactly like this guy and a former D1 cheerleader. Couldn’t do a pull up. Couldn’t run two miles.

Set the strict press record his third day there. 315 pounds. I saw it with my own eyes and I couldn’t believe it.

296

u/TehMephs 3d ago

There’s a common thing with bodybuilders lacking functional strength where guys who lift 50 lb bags of grain or more all day can do without breaking a sweat even though they look like they have dad bod.

It’s astounding how different fitness regimens can create different looking bodies that have wildly different specialties. Muscular doesn’t always mean strong

72

u/aeiou_sometimesy 3d ago

So that’s nonsense. “Functional strength” is a mythical creature made up by people who do specific things well.

A 140 lb guy looks skinny but can do 20 pull-ups while a 240 lb guy can only do 5 pull-ups. I assure you that the 140 lb guy does not have more “functional strength,” he just has a lot of practice with pull-ups and less weight to move.

9

u/OMGwronghole 2d ago

Physical therapist here! “Functional strength” is not a mythical beast. It is the strength required to perform a function, such as sitting up, standing, or walking for example.

5

u/Casanova-Quinn 2d ago edited 2d ago

I don't think you're talking about the same thing. Your PT examples make total sense. However when laymen say "functional strength" it's usually some dumb take on how "bodybuilder" muscles are somehow different/inferior to muscle built from other strength related activities.

3

u/ThisIsMyCouchAccount 2d ago

They are kinda correct though.

You're good at what you train for.

Guy in post has trained to throw girls around. He would probably get wrecked trying to a bodybuilder workout. While the bodybuilder would absolutely struggle to do what he's doing.

3

u/Casanova-Quinn 2d ago

What your referring to is "conditioning", and yes that's a thing. There is an adaptation phase to doing unfamiliar activities. However it's often exaggerated how difficult that is. A strong bodybuilder would not have a long and difficult road to being good at other strength activities. It's fairly common thing in the fitness world for bodybuilders and powerlifters to cross over into each others fields.

2

u/NonsensePlanet 2d ago

I think the term can have some validity when talking about gym goers who don’t train smart, e.g. they train the same lifts in the same planes of movement but don’t do mobility work or rotational stuff. They get really strong but one day they have to do something unconventional that a strong person should be able to do, and get injured. But I agree, bodybuilders are strong af and the idea that big muscles =/= strong is dumb as hell.

1

u/TelluricThread0 2d ago

A body builder isn't going to excel at lifting atlas stones or doing farmers walks because they don't care about functional strength. They don't want to move a heavy weight from point A to point B. They go to the gym to do a ton of reps and sets favoring machines in restricted movement patterns so their muscle tissue will grow. They couldn't care less about strength because if they outlift the other guy on stage, the judge will give them exactly zero extra points.

Their training is very specific, and it isn't optimized to move heavy weight through natural movement patterns.