The weight is the same. Does moving the bar and extra 8 inches or whatever mean the tall guy will have more real world strength?
Is a 6'4 guy who squats 315 stronger than a 5'4 guy who squats 315?
The weight is the same. Does moving the bar and extra 8 inches or whatever mean the tall guy will have more real world strength?
For reasons other than strength, the midget is cooked
The taller man probably has more bodyweight so he's pushing more.
Assuming they are the same weight, their strength is the same. What is different would be power. If they were to both throw a kick, the longer leg would generate more power at the tip all things being equal. It's kind of like how you flick your wrist but it makes the tip of a whip go 700mph, but not quite as extreme.
If you were training for kicking power you'd be training kickboxing or muay thai not squats though so this is still a stupid judgment imo. Plus the manlet would still have balance and center of mass on his side.
it's all hypothetical you moron. he was making a point and you missed it.
Hypothetically suck my wiener you fat homosexual.
excellent retort sir, well done
> What is different would be power.
You don't know what power is.
> If you go by w = F*d then yes, the taller guy is stronger. He's doing more work every rep.
Why are you conflating strength and work? Strength is the F of that equation; if we consider work on the bar, and assume both lifters lift the bar at constant velocity, then they both exert the same force on the bar, the taller one just does more work because the d is larger; F (i.e., strength) is the same in both scenarios.
>Why are you conflating strength and work?
Strength is a loaded word I guess. The weight on the bar matters obviously, but I'm sure 99% of people would call the guy who can do more reps at the same weight "stronger" (can do more work overall).
No the Lanklet has more bone mass than the manlet.
Bones > Muscle > Fat
Also the 315lbs on the manlet is has less surface area to spread, so the manlet is under more tension than the lanklet.
muhfugging thicc bones. Stfu, moron
Fat is less dense than muscle and muscles are less dense than bones.
Keep coping.
Absolute cope.
Yes. The tall guy will have better leverage in real world applications. Like ask both those guys to do a strongman stone off with the same weight. 5'4" guy couldn't do shit, lmao. Real world objects in real scenarios won't magically scale in size, shape, and balance to fit perfectly in the hands of the tiny guy.
Tall man will be stronger as his range of motion is longer for every rep. Manlet will appear to have relatively bigger muscles as they are not as stretched out throughout his short bones. Also manlets have been bread through history to be both more aggressive and have slightly better muscle building genes to be able to compete. Same principals as with dog breads
Taller guy has more bodyweight, and more ROM
He generates much more force than the smaller guy
How did someone get a manul for their home?
If you go by w = F*d then yes, the taller guy is stronger. He's doing more work every rep.
The manlet would have better leverage so it balances out in terms of real strength (as they're literally lifting the same), in a technical sense yes the muscles on the tall guy would be stronger, but it literally doesn't matter in real terms.
taller guy is stronger
If 2 people squat the same weight, the lighter one is stronger (ie the manlet.) Especially if the squats are comparable like both normal highbar squats. Odds are the manlet will be more "powerful" as well (ie he will move a given weight faster than the weak lanklet.)
taller guy is stronger for the simple reason that his rom is greater. if we equalize the rom he would move more weight
This argument makes sense
But you need to exert more F to do more work
Right? More force is needed to push a boulder up a hill than to push it two feet uphill
> But you need to exert more F to do more work
No, moron. W = F * d. If you keep F constant and increase d, work still increases.
In fact you can do arbitrarily large amounts of work with arbitrarily small forces by doing it over arbitrarily large distances (displacements for conservative fields).
>No, moron. W = F * d. If you keep F constant and increase d, work still increases.
I meant "more" as in more quantity of the same level of F.
Anyways that's getting convoluted. Doing more work means more strength. Like doing five reps instead of one.
>simply consider the bodyweight to weight lifted ratio
Yes, what does this matter? as
points out.
no. simply consider the bodyweight to weight lifted ratio and cope
>lifts weights in a gym
>"tall guy will have more real world strength?"
LMAO are you lifting in the metaverse?? this is the real world, brainlett
>consider the bodyweight to weight lifted ratio
This you?
I can not answer your question, but rather than asking who's stronger you should be asking who's less weak.