Is there any power lifter who you think is pound for pound stronger than Jesse Norris?
>inb4 he's not natty
Of course he's not. That's not the question.
Sergey Fedosienko and Tony Conyers have better lb for lb totals. Maliek Derstine is within 1%
That is after 90 seconds of looking.
So yes there are a number of stronger pound for pound lifters, they just all weigh 30-100lbs less then he does.
Is there a stronger wilks lifter? Fuck no.
>>35222851
>Of course he's not. That's not the question.
what, because he's strong?
>>35223140
Seriously just don't start this ridiculous shit. He is not natural.
>>35222851
Pound for pound as in proportional to his body weight? The ant pretty much takes that title hands down doesn't he?
>>35223163
Ants not even near Norris's level when you incorporate the other two lifts family
>>35222851
>I'm jealous of somebody so I'm gonna claim he is roiding despite the fact he takes monthly dope tests.
How's your 12th birthday treating us, op?
>>35223213
>drug testing works
Pls get out
>>35223240
E D G Y
D
G
Y
Jesse Norris diddly ratio is 3.95*BW
Here is a video of my 407lb diddly at 116lbs which is 3.5*BW
https://www.instagram.com/p/8XrVftG3gu/?taken-by=brendon_chaithoo
His squat is a 3.5*BW ratio, mine is a 3.1*BW ratio
His bench is a 2.1*BW ratio, mine is a 1.8*BW ratio
Yeah
>>35223354
>shameless self-promotion
>while not even being close
>at ~60% of his bw
Other than that nice lifts bro, pls be natty
>>35223367
Comparing the digits mane, ratios and all.
100% natty, guaranteed. Probably makes a difference tho?
Richard Hawthorne shits on everyone else. pound for pound
>132lbs
>5'3
>Has Scoliosis
>pulled 650 FUCKING POUNDS for x4.93 BW
>>35223374
Just saying bw ratios scale up too with weight, his 3xbw is more impressive than yours (taller people privilege)
Obv being natty makes a difference :^
>>35223378
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8zmtMyM6Ssk
Oh, and he doesn't use straps
>>35223411
He's well on his way to beating Lamar Gant faggot, i'm talking about ALIVE people.
>>35223378
>5'3
the little hobbit's lifts might be impressive in the shire, but actual men don't give a fuck LMAO.
>>35223200
But the Ants total is 11.45 times his body weight, Norris total is 10.18 times, that means that technically the Ant is stronger proportional to his body weight.
As full natty brah as Caitlyn jenner
>>35223354
Its a bit silly for someone your weight to compare *bw ratio lifts with someone who weighs so much more
your wilks adds up to a ~430 points which is good but certainly not even close to jesse norris
>>35222851
>>35223162
Those are some serious accusations, and you seem quite convinced
I suggest you contact USAPL with all the proof that you are apparently sitting on.
>>35223213
>being this delusional
>>35222851
Why does pound for pound mean so much to you?
Do you realize that if Jesse Norris grew a foot taller and 100 pounds heavier he would no longer have the same relative strength due to two reasons:
1). Longer range of motion - sapping more energy to move the weight a further distance.
2). Heavier bodyweight to work against. When a 300 pound man does a squat or deadlift, compared to a 200 pound man, the heavier man is ALSO lifting 100 pounds more of his own weight+the load.
Strength does NOT scale up in a 1:1 ratio. So why are people still making a big deal out of pound for pound?
There is a mathematical formula and chart called the WILKS used to compare the equivalent lifts of different sized lifters that takes these factors into consideration.
>>35223387
>that holy mist coming off of him
Holy shit that guy's impressive.
>>35223387
How is his bench and squat?
