What do you think of he theory that strength is directly proportional to size?
I am having 4-6 weeks off after my domestic season, then am planning to hit the gym hard to try and increase some size in my legs, relative to the above theory. Thoughts?
Strength is predominantly a neural adaptation. Size is a metabolic adaptation.
To the original question - only if all else is equal (no difference in nervous system efficiency, %fibre activation, activation of golgi-tendon-organs/muscle spindles, anatomy, physiology, coordination, technique etc.)
I think that the theory is absolutely true. If you look at the results of any major weightlifting competition there is a clear and consistent indeed almost invariably perfect relationship between size and weight lifted.
There may be other factors as JimboUk has pointed which explain differences between individuals but for an individual a larger muscle is going to be a stronger muscle.
This of course says nothing about the degree of optimal hypertrophy for a particular individual in a given sport.
Well I’d go with peter mercadante for ‘abosolute’ weight lifted. A small 63kg top line lifter is not going to lift more then a top line 77kg, 85kg etc when compared against the worlds Elite. But they can easily beat others that are not quite worlds top 10 or so lifters for that category. And sometimes they beat the lower rank lifters.
You are limited by size to a degree as you at whatever weight will never be able to lift more then a guy 1.5x your bodyweight if you both train the same. He simply put has more capacity to lift more. But your ratio will always better as you are smaller. No big guy is going to lift more ratio wise compared to a small guy.
Not so proportional more like a very stretched out S curve for the bigger you are.
Koing
Maximal strength is a function of neural action and muscle CSA.
Limit strength in a given movement is a function of those plus biomechanical issues.
You could of course add psychological issues of confidence and courage when lifting a heavy weight but I accept everything you guys have said.
The point however is that if you look at any weightlifting championship or probably any lesser competitive event- but HK will no doubt correct me here- the only variable which explains the differences in weight lifted is the size of the lifter. Of course there are exceptions but the relationship is pretty much as perfect as you are going to get.
This is of course our real world experience in other sports-bigger wrestlers, boxers and judo players are simply stronger than lighter ones.
A bigger muscle is a stronger muscle on the basis of PowermanDL’s proposition that strength is a function of neural activity and muscle cross sectional area. Whether that translates into improved sporting performance is of course another matter.
how big are you thighs now?
how much do you weigh?
the only problem when i hear guys say they’re trying to add size is the fat weight that comes with it! and it sounds like you’re saying you wont be doing any track work while you try and get bigger.
Around 24" @ 84kg
Planning on about 12 weeks of BB gym work, however, will be anticipating 3 running days (2 x tempo, 1 x speed. All at quite reduced volumes though).