>> |
Anonymous
>>279526 I agree and disagree.
I personally know an olympic level gymnist. He trained with the Canadian olympic team, and was in cirque de soliel for quiet some time. I know exactly how strong he is, and he was the person I went too first when I decided to get in shape.
He lifted weights. He did not exclusively lift weights, but they were part of his routine, along with a lot of calisthenics. And buddy, even after 6 months of slacking off and eating fast food, he still had a six pack and could lift himself up with one hand. We used to workout together.
The problem is that you're stressing the strength aspect too much. This is /fit/, not /strengthtraining/. Weight rooms are so common because hypertrophy is the goal of most men, not endurance or power. Curls for the girls, bench press for a chance under their dress. It's because they're the fastest road to big muscle, though not strong muscles. (Though I am not saying they can't get you strong, we all know they can. I'm,just stating we're in the age of hypertrophy).
Calisthenics work much better then weights for me, but that's because I'm training to be a workhorse rather then for bulk and strength. If you take them into the advanced stages, you'll start using the exercises that gymnists use. And you can't deny the raw strength necessary for a handstand push up.
The point I'm trying to make is both work well for people, and as a lot of athletes state. . . It's stupid to discount one for the other. When I reach my goals (Which are the moment, to reach the 100 point level in each exercise on the army fitness test), I plan to hit the weights. But I think a lot of lifters could really benefit from bodyweight exercise.
.
|