Why are feats of strength held in lower regard than other athletic achievements?
Log-pressing 500lbs (Big Z), deadlifting over 1000lbs (something only three people have done on a standard set-up) and other records are seriously pushing the boundaries of human achievement, and easily as impressive as anything Usain Bolt or Chris Froome does, but it's nowhere near as much in the public eye with the exception of the odd feature on TV.
Is it because non-lifters can't really comprehend how significant the numbers are, whereas anyone can see how significant a sub-10 100m is?
Because people don't like fat people even if they're strong
>impressive as chris froome
Not sure if srs
>>37334795
Not all records are held by the bigger lads though, most of the really successful strongmen until the last decade or so have been lean. Pudzian, Jon Pall, Magnus Ver and Jouko Ahola in particular, and that's without mentioning people like Ed Coan
>>37334795
>>37334815
it is. I'd actually say Zydrunas is one of the most impressive athletes ever. The bloke has been world class for at least 15 years in a sport where careers rarely span more than a decade.
>>37334779
Because it's a single person event? A race you can compare the athletes in the instant it happens. For viewers, that's probably more exciting.
It doesn't look that impressive. Look at how it looked back in the days, they lifted like 10 people instead of a bar with weights on.
>>37334779
They aren't anywhere but America. Strength sports are bigger internationally.
People have no frame of reference for the feats in question and it isn't as entertaining to watch. It's the same way in most individual competitions. Team sports (some of them) are different because they're entertaining to watch and so many people have played them.
>>37334779
because no one can relate to it and when someone sees one of these guys they expect them to lift that much weight
