Size vs strength, what's your opinion?

**boxingfan30** · 11-18-2011, 11:44 PM

When I was growing up I was ALWAYS ths shortest and smallest kid my age. There were a few here and there that were smaller, but not to many.

When I was about 4 or 5 I was deemed a "slow developer". I had a soft spot in my head until about 5 years old. My bones very very soft and flexible, I didn't lose my first tooth until I was 8 years old. I didn't reach my peak height until I was 21 and couldn't grow any hair on my face until I was about the same age. Probably to bad HGH wasn't used back in the early 80's much.

I was however always surprised to find that many guys my age were bigger than me, much better builds etc. yet I could still do more than they could.

Which brings me to my question... does size always = more strength? Genetics... say a person has 15" biceps, will he continuously get stronger with that same size? Or will he inevitabily have to eat more to recover and thus grow even if he doesn't want to?

Just thought it would be interesting to see some opinions on this.

**stpete** · 11-19-2011, 01:07 AM

Great question. I too have seen smaller guys out lift the bigger guys. And i firmly believe that it's a mental thing. Genetics play a role of course, but the mind body connection is under rated.

Size does not = more strength imo. I work out at a gym that many amateur and pro bb's work out at. not to mention the powerlifters that compete on a regular basis. I often see guys that are 250lbs + w/bf at around 8-9% struggling to get 8 reps from bent over db's @ 120lbs. I can do 10-12 of those no problem. For at least 3 sets...

to answer your question, NO...If someone is getting stronger, that means that they are getting bigger. And diet plays a major role in all this. And why after going thru all this, they wouldn't want to grow? If you're talking maintaining, that's a whole different ball game.

**jypoll** · 11-19-2011, 02:24 AM

size does not = more strength, If you take a body builder and powerlifter of the same size you will most likly notice a significant strength difference. Depending on how you train you could be huge but not that strong, relatively to your size, and there are lots of guy who arent that big but are really strong. Also as you age from 20-30 yrs old you will become stronger at the same weight and size

**boxingfan30** · 11-19-2011, 02:30 AM

Thanks for your feedback on this pete. I don't mind getting bigger. My whole beginning of the post was a point that I was not very clear on which is I don't really have the genetics to get very big unless I was using some help. I have been debating the idea for a while, but i've always preferred the smaller leaner look. I'm 5'9 and a solid 165 would be fine with me.

It's basically a question of how much limitation does someone smaller have with their strength? Will the body continously get stronger when put under heavier load each time? I know that there is a limit because the body grows if nothing else as a by product in order to handle the heavier loads that it's being put under.... but it's got to have the fuel to do it.

I'm cutting now just because i'm not happy with how I look and feel and can only work my arms and legs because of a shoulder injury, but somehow my arms and legs have grown... not by any huge margin at all... but I can notice. Especially my legs, but that is because I never worked them. All i'm doing is working them on an elliptical... it's making them bigger though lol. Total test has also gone from 647 to 796 after 2 months of using my legs more which is a plus though it will likely drop back to where it was before after my body gets used to it.

**Loki387** · 11-19-2011, 09:27 AM

Originally Posted by stpete

Great question. I too have seen smaller guys out lift the bigger guys. And i firmly believe that it's a mental thing. Genetics play a role of course, but the mind body connection is under rated.

Size does not = more strength imo. I work out at a gym that many amateur and pro bb's work out at. not to mention the powerlifters that compete on a regular basis. I often see guys that are 250lbs + w/bf at around 8-9% struggling to get 8 reps from bent over db's @ 120lbs. I can do 10-12 of those no problem. For at least 3 sets...

to answer your question, NO...If someone is getting stronger, that means that they are getting bigger. And diet plays a major role in all this. And why after going thru all this, they wouldn't want to grow? If you're talking maintaining, that's a whole different ball game.

+1...

**randymeans** · 11-19-2011, 10:07 AM

This is a fact that i picked up from this book ive read that makes perfect sense! Its easier for a person to get bigger muscles from doing slower rep exercises and if you train explosive you do not see these gains but you will become stronger! I see the body builder type guys in my gym that weight 50 more lbs than me but i can lift more than they can because ive trained explosive my whole life! plus being really flexible and explosive will make those numbers so up! You need to check out the book "4 hour body" it will tell you almost anything that is backed up by experiments! later!

**boxingfan30** · 11-19-2011, 12:50 PM

^^ a shame that I can't do the large muscle compound movements right now

**randymeans** · 11-19-2011, 05:29 PM

man imma tell you from my experience...there is no better feeling in this world then being a smaller guy showing up them big boys! so be proud..................but can i ask whats really stopping you from doing big movements?

**boxingfan30** · 11-19-2011, 11:18 PM

I have a misshapen shoulder socket and have to have an operation called a Glenoid Osteotomy.

**Armykid93** · 11-28-2011, 05:20 PM

I think strength is the most important thing. Seems like all the bodybuilders who are insanely strong like Ronnie have the densest muscles. Size comes with consistent training.

**JohnnyVegas** · 11-28-2011, 05:30 PM

I couldn't care less about moving big weight. At this point in my life I just want to look good again.

**Gefell** · 11-29-2011, 09:19 AM

Originally Posted by JohnnyVegas

I couldn't care less about moving big weight. At this point in my life I just want to look good again.

This !

**Venomup** · 11-29-2011, 09:32 AM

Yeah i agree with JonnyVegas i just wanna look good.

**Macon_Bacon** · 11-29-2011, 09:39 AM

At the point I'm at in life I like strength over size. And I would choose functional strength over vanity muscles. Then again I'm 23 and when I work for strength I end up looking good too.

**Times Roman** · 11-29-2011, 09:49 AM

of course, there is a correlation between size and strength. the bigger you are, the stronger you tend to become. But this is not always the case. I've only lost to arm wrestling maybe three times in my entire life, and used to do a lot of arm wrestling. People would be shocked when i beat them, obviously much bigger than me. in fact, when i was 15 and maybe 145 lbs, i beat my dad who is 6'3 and about 280. he was drinking with his buddies, and i embarrassed him. never wanted to arm wrestle me again.

I'm supposed to arm wrestle the big Bosnian here in a couple of weeks. He's 6'4" and weighs about 300lbs, and I'm 20 years older. I'm pretty sure I can beat him, too. He's into judo and training, but more into kettle balls and that sort of thing.

**Fred40** · 11-29-2011, 11:42 AM

Well I'll let you know when I'm done.

I've just begun a power lifting routine. I've always trained in the more traditional "bodybuilding" fashion.....3-4 sets of 8-12 reps. Well now I will be doing three sets of 5 with most exercises and cutting out a lot of isolation work in favor of large more "whole body" lifts like Squats, Deadlifts and power cleans.

It will be interesting to see how it goes. I'm expecting some big gains in "practical strength" and at the same time some loss of definition.

I'm only 5'9" and small boned (6.5" wrists) so the gains will probably come a little slower than average.

My long term plan is to reach some specific strength goals and then go back to the more traditional isolation work to cut and define some while attempting to maintain the strength I've gained.

**rockinred** · 11-29-2011, 08:22 PM

Good stuff...here is my two cents, which echos what the majority have stated. If you OP wanted to get stronger, typically you will get bigger as your training strength and diet increases. Now if your diet sucks and you stay the same size based on your training and eating habits... well, you might get a little stronger with strength training but it will cap out for sure. This will pretty much hold true for all.

What is meant that size does not always = strength. Everyone and human anatomy is different and unique. As many posted, you can't size someone up and say this guy is stronger than this guy because he is bigger. Too many variables. It is impossible to say that and you will get proven wrong more often than not.

As a general rule more size = more strength for a particular individual. It doesn't mean that a man 250 is always stronger than a man at 175 though. Human anatomy and variables come into play.

If you really want to know the truth and before anyone argues.... watch ESPNs worlds strongest man competition. There are no small guys that win those comps. All those dudes are monsters. You never see a guy wining that at 165lbs. What does that mean? It just means as a general rule, size = strength for the most part.

**OnTheSauce** · 11-29-2011, 08:43 PM

i have always trained for strength instead of size. Because of that, nobody ever believes i can move the amount of weight i do. And in daily clothes, it doesnt even look like i lift. So I think doing both would be good if you care about that

**tapout417** · 11-30-2011, 05:52 PM

My own personal experience I only cared about looking like I could bench 350 not caring if I could or not. I mean really how many hot chicks have ever walked up and said how much can you bench? None.. So I always trained with moderate weight and that was great for awhile my body took shape over years of lifting, but it wasn't untill I incorporated both strength training and hypertrophy training that I got the look I was really going for. IMO you just need both

**pebble** · 11-30-2011, 07:36 PM

Size is the limiting factor in strength. You can only be as strong as you are big. Each unit of muscle (sacromere) is able to generate a specific amount of force. The bigger the muscle the more sarcomeres the more the total force possible.

With that said there are many other variables that limits one strength before the amount of total sarcomeres become an issue. The rest of the issues all have to do with neurological innovation and control (agonist inhibition, rate coding, synergistic activation ...).

**Times Roman** · 11-30-2011, 09:53 PM

^ I don't know. I've seen some little guys move some freakishly large amounts of weight. but this does seem to be the exception, not the norm

**falco21** · 11-30-2011, 11:05 PM

There was a kid on my baseball team over at Texas State. The kid was about 5'6 and weighed around 170 pounds, wet. He was a pitcher. He was an absolute freak. The kid topped out at 94 mph. One day we were all eating in the Cafeteria and a bet came up on what pitcher could bench the most weight. This kid claimed he could put up 3 plates at least 5 times. He claimed that he worked out his entire life, but I shit you not, if you saw this kid, you would laugh in his face. I am talking skinnier than skinny. Beyond small.

Anyways, we get to the gym. He warms up. They stack the bar with 3 plates on each side. The kid lays down and puts up 7 reps!! LMAO In front of all of us. I witnessed it. Let's just say, some people were pretty pissed haha

**pebble** · 12-01-2011, 12:50 AM

Originally Posted by Times Roman

^ I don't know. I've seen some little guys move some freakishly large amounts of weight. but this does seem to be the exception, not the norm

Lucky for us, I do.

**largerthannormal** · 12-06-2011, 11:19 AM

all genetics to me.............. some people have different types of muscles fiber configurations... there is two different things to consider here because what you may consider "stronger". There is a difference between strength and power. But most of them are used to measure strength. Example:

Person A moved 500lbs from point A to point B in 15 seconds
Person B moved 300lbs from point A to point B in 5 seconds but cant lift 500lbs

Who is stronger? This is where the word stronger can be confusing. I would say person A is "stronger probably bigger" Person B is more powerful probably smaller more athletic type look

In a sense I would say strength is more relative to size if that is the word being used

In your case if you say you can not get any stronger because you are not growing, i would say that is not true what so ever. If you come to a hault in size you can always re activate other muscle fibers and become more "powerful" despite your size. in return will probably up your strength and in return also more than likely add small amounts of size or more quality muscle.

All in respects to you eating to support your efforts.

Also to play a role is age after a certain point you will either have to A add much to your diet and workout. or B use something to keep elevated test levels or C both...