Quote:
Originally Posted by seeker5  There was a gym where I belonged that had a non-muscular-looking trainer. The other trainer told me that he was a vegetarian, so he didn't gain a lot of muscles. However, when it came to actually lifting, the trainer told me how amazed he was at how much strength he had for his size.
Perhaps, then the mass of muscle does not have a 1-to-1 correlation to the strength of the muscles? Perhaps it's possible for some smaller muscles to be stronger then some bigger muscles? |
I think it mainly depends on how you train... Someone who has never touched a weight before and sets out to be a bodybuilder can very well build an impressive physique without really impressive strength to match on the usual "strength judgement" exercises (Squat, Bench Press, Deadlift). Most chubby powerlifters could generally annihilate a "Greek God looking" bodybuilder in a strength competition and don't have the same visible muscular physique- they're usually big guys, but also usually look like fat big guys. The really impressive ones are bodybuilders who started off powerlifting, then moved into bodybuilding after years of training for strength and building a huge, muscular base.
I'd imagine the vegetarian trainer has the more chubby look than the "skinny wimp" look, and probably trains more like a powerlifter, specifically for strength over muscularity/aesthetics. Gaining muscular strength also requires disciplined eating for the proper nutrients for muscle growth- of course there's the occasional genetic freak who's the size of a grown man and benching 300lbs at the age of 14, but most of us mortals have to work our butts off at that sort of thing
