Professional Arm Wrestlers

[Robert Bishop]

Josh what state are you from? Why dont you go to the state championship for that state and see how you match up. They usually allow you to pull multiple classes.

[Robert Bishop]

Yes I do pull tournaments, and I have a 1st place, and two 2nd place finishes. I'll let you know how AAA nationals went in a week (open class).

Not a 150lb guy who doesn't think he's strong, a 150lb guy that OTHERS don't think is strong. A guy can be strong and not get credit from his peers (138lb guy I mentioned). Don't use technique on guys at school man, that's not cool. Go in a hook, man against man. Half the time they'll say you're cheating if you use technique anyway.

A novice puller, is a novice.....all people when they start are novices. A 138lb guy who does one arm chins and starts armwrestling will be a novice, just like 154lb guys that can't do 20 chins. I bet the 138lber wins.

When I asked Tom Nelson to armwrestle after a tournament and he said he was tired and wanted to rest his elbow I guess that means I have a win over Tom Nelson now? No that is horrible logic. If John Brzenk refuses to armwrestle you, does that mean you are better? No. Some people just don't have confidence in themselves. I've been beaten by a guy that I had to beg to armwrestle me.

I would challenge you, but to many people armwrestling is just....retarded. Like if a guy at your school loved Pokemon, would you go challenge him? That's kind of what armwrestling is to some people....they think it's stupid.

If you are beating guys heavier and stronger than you at armwrestling you are gifted. Your arm has a natural strength for it. Hand size is a different matter though. I suspect you will find all the great champions were always good.

Good luck to you and i wish i was going because i want to pull Christian Binnie and Ryan Constantino again. Last year was a good year for me at the AAA nats Edited June 7, 2008 by Robert Bishop

[Robert Bishop]

Josh what state are you from? Why dont you go to the state championship for that state and see how you match up. They usually allow you to pull multiple classes.

I guess you must be from Minn then after looking back

[Robert Bishop]

Josh what state are you from? Why dont you go to the state championship for that state and see how you match up. They usually allow you to pull multiple classes.

I guess you must be from Minn then after looking back

It kinda sucks for you guys because i see on the northeast board that not many tournaments are held in Minn/ Wis area and the only ones listed was North and South Dak, Iowa

[darthsith19]

Yes I do pull tournaments, and I have a 1st place, and two 2nd place finishes. I'll let you know how AAA nationals went in a week (open class).

Exactly, which is why uou would probably beat me even if you don't look that strong. Non-armwrestlers who are strong but don't look strong would have a way lower chance.

Not a 150lb guy who doesn't think he's strong, a 150lb guy that OTHERS don't think is strong. A guy can be strong and not get credit from his peers (138lb guy I mentioned). Don't use technique on guys at school man, that's not cool. Go in a hook, man against man. Half the time they'll say you're cheating if you use technique anyway.

They do say I cheat. But I know that I don't, so I don't care. I usually hook anyways, but hooking is still technique, and so is backpressure - using those 2 things alone gives you an enormous advantage against someone who keeps their wrist straight and uses only sidepressure.

A novice puller, is a novice.....all people when they start are novices. A 138lb guy who does one arm chins and starts armwrestling will be a novice, just like 154lb guys that can't do 20 chins. I bet the 138lber wins.

To me, to be classified as a novice you have to go to tournaments or be interested in doing so. Armwrestling once or even twice a month doesn't make you a novice, otherwise almost everybody in the United States would be a novice.

When I asked Tom Nelson to armwrestle after a tournament and he said he was tired and wanted to rest his elbow I guess that means I have a win over Tom Nelson now? No that is horrible logic. If John Brzenk refuses to armwrestle you, does that mean you are better? No. Some people just don't have confidence in themselves. I've been beaten by a guy that I had to beg to armwrestle me.

That's different - Tom Nelson had a good reason for backing down and yes, in his fatigued state maybe you could beat him, idk. If Brzenk has a reason, then no it doesn't. But there's a difference between the reigning champ (in the world, in a state, in a school ect.) backing down to to injuries ect. and someone likely to be weaker backing down merely because they don't think they can win.

I would challenge you, but to many people armwrestling is just....retarded. Like if a guy at your school loved Pokemon, would you go challenge him? That's kind of what armwrestling is to some people....they think it's stupid.

If I thought I could take him, yes. If I had the game he had (I only have one Pokemon game) then yes. But that's different, not everybody has the games, cards, w/e he wants to challenge you with. I have some one pokemon cards stanched away. If he challenged me in that, I would back down and yes, in doing so I would be insuperior to him in that game.

If you are beating guys heavier and stronger than you at armwrestling you are gifted. Your arm has a natural strength for it. Hand size is a different matter though. I suspect you will find all the great champions were always good.

What? But it isn't natural strength - I wasn't born with it, so how is that being gifted? It's not natural strength, it is not being gifted if you had to work hard to get it. Not all the great champions are naturally gifted, most of them probably worked hard for it.

Josh what state are you from? Why dont you go to the state championship for that state and see how you match up. They usually allow you to pull multiple classes.

I guess you must be from Minn then after looking back

It kinda sucks for you guys because i see on the northeast board that not many tournaments are held in Minn/ Wis area and the only ones listed was North and South Dak, Iowa

Yeah I don't know of any MN state championships. And I would probably get stomped, being the best in a high school and being the best in the state is a huge difference. I go to wristwrestling tournaments in Wisconsin and Iowa that aren't listed on the northeast board.

[Pancake Sprawl]

Not true. If your THE best you're THE best. Sure everyone loses sometimes, even Brzenk. But Brzenk is THE best, so yes, he is better than 100% of the world, if he loses then he's either;

A. Not the best

B. The best, and just had a bad day, was fatigued, or injured

C. The guy who beat him had a good day

Just because you lose a couple matches a year doesn't mean you're not better than 100% of the world. There's a difference between being better than 100% of the world and winning 100% of your matches.

you don't understand what i'm saying. i'm not saying he's NOT the best arm wrestler in the world, of course he is, but he's not better than 100% of the world, THAT is a fact. just like there are guys out there who can easily break grip records. guy's like Dalip Singh who probably has a 11 in. hand. he could easily break thickbar, rolling thunder, and blob records, he like 400lbs of muscle at 7'4. but since he's not interested in grip strength he hasn't done it, but he's fully capable of doing these feats. just like Andrus Murmets has closed the #3, but he hasn't certified, does that mean the #3 certed guys better than he is? no. he is only a few mm away from closing the #4. just like i'm sure Mark Felix could close a #3 but he hasn't.

just because some people aren't interested in the things you are interested in doesn't mean you're better than they are in it. so you are the best arm wrestler in your school, you're not better than 100% of the people until you arm wrestle against them.

If he was the champion, then he was better than 100% of the world. If he wasn't, he wouldn't be the champion. Just because a couple guys might be able to beat him a few times, doesn't mean he isn't better than 100% of the world. Being #1 is being better than 100% of the world; again, being better than 100% of the world isn't the same as winning 100% of your matches. Brzenk is the best, he doesn't win all his matches though, but as long as he is the best he is better than 100% of the world, if he wasn't, he wouldn't be THE best. That doesn't mean he doesn't ever lose, though. He does lose, but he is still the best (for now at least). And if somebody could have beaten Marciano, they would have.

it goes the same way, he didn't fight everyone he fought multiple times, he fought only a few guys multiple times. some of his wins was after he was losing like 10 rds and caught the guy with a punch. he practically won on a fluke himself. being #1 is just a ranking, it doesn't mean he's better than 100%. so if you're going to count the wins he won by barely getting by then you should count the losses he would incur if he fought some regular joe off the road and he caught him. not to mention styles make for different outcomes. fighter A beats fighter B, fighter C beats fighter A. that doesn't automatically mean C is a better fighter than B, there have been cases of B beating C.

Correct, but until your mantle gets overthrown you are the best. Right now Brzenk is the best. Nobody in the world is better than him, hence he is better than 100% of the world.

he's the best armwrestler in the world, he's not better than 100%. cuz if some guy like Cyplenkov comes and beats him, than it's not 100%, and he never was better than 100% of the people in the world unless this guy just came from a different planet. he always was on earth, just nobody knew about him.

believe it or not out of 2 billion people in the world there are freaks of nature that nobody will ever know about that could be the best if they had the proper drive and advertisement.

So yes, I was as good as I say I was, and being the best is being better than 100% of the world. If someone can beat you, but chooses not to, then they aren't the best. To be the best you have to go for it and prove yourself, otherwise your skills are for nothing and hence you're NOT the best. If someone beats you once but you can beat them every other time, you're still better than them. Being better than 100% of the world isn't the same as winning 100% of your matches.

being better than 100% of the world isn't the same as being the best arm wrestler in the world. if someone can beat you but chooses not to then they aren't the best, but you aren't better than 100% of the world until you PROVE it.

[darthsith19]

you don't understand what i'm saying. i'm not saying he's NOT the best arm wrestler in the world, of course he is, but he's not better than 100% of the world, THAT is a fact.

What's the difference? Being THE best in the world means being #1, nobody is better, which is the same as being better than 100% of the world.

just like there are guys out there who can easily break grip records. guy's like Dalip Singh who probably has a 11 in. hand. he could easily break thickbar, rolling thunder, and blob records, he like 400lbs of muscle at 7'4. but since he's not interested in grip strength he hasn't done it, but he's fully capable of doing these feats. just like Andrus Murmets has closed the #3, but he hasn't certified, does that mean the #3 certed guys better than he is? no. he is only a few mm away from closing the #4. just like i'm sure Mark Felix could close a #3 but he hasn't.

Could do it if he trained for it doesn't mean anything. Potential is potential, nothing more until it is unlocked. And no, maybe he doesn't care about getting certified, if he trains his grip and goes to competitions and beats those people, he is better. If not, he isn't.

just because some people aren't interested in the things you are interested in doesn't mean you're better than they are in it. so you are the best arm wrestler in your school, you're not better than 100% of the people until you arm wrestle against them.

Yes, I am. That's like saying some non-puller in a small country is really the best armwrestler in the world, which is wrong. If you want it, you gotta take it. Part of being good is dedication and actually doing what you're good at. Say person B can beat person A at armwrestling but never does, never proves himself, never does competitions, and doesn't care at all. Person A goes to competitions, wins local competitions and has a world ranking. Person A is better than person B then because you aren't good at something if you never do it, part of being good is actually doing the thing you're good at and proving yourself. It's about what you DO, not what you are capable of doing, that really matters in life. If you're only capable of doing something, but you never do it, it doesn't mean shit.

it goes the same way, he didn't fight everyone he fought multiple times, he fought only a few guys multiple times. some of his wins was after he was losing like 10 rds and caught the guy with a punch. he practically won on a fluke himself. being #1 is just a ranking, it doesn't mean he's better than 100%. so if you're going to count the wins he won by barely getting by then you should count the losses he would incur if he fought some regular joe off the road and he caught him. not to mention styles make for different outcomes. fighter A beats fighter B, fighter C beats fighter A. that doesn't automatically mean C is a better fighter than B, there have been cases of B beating C.

That is boxing, and that is how boxing works. Barely getting = still getting and barely losing = still losing. That's like saying that Andrey Pushkar barely lost to Brzenk so it doesn't count. Wrong, and stupid logic. And the abc thing is true, however, I'm not seeing how it has any relevance in this debate.

he's the best armwrestler in the world, he's not better than 100%. cuz if some guy like Cyplenkov comes and beats him, than it's not 100%, and he never was better than 100% of the people in the world unless this guy just came from a different planet. he always was on earth, just nobody knew about him.

How can you actually believe that? Do you understand armwrestling at all? Yes, Cyplenkov has been around and probably quite muscular for several years. But, as you should know if you are competing at a national level, armwrestling is more technique than it is strength. Cyplenkov was always on the Earth (at least in Brzenk's time as champ), however, Cyplenkov did NOT always know the technique. And even if Cyplenkov beats Brzenk, if Brzenk is sitll ranked number one he is still better than 100% of the world - remember, being better than 100% of the world and being able to beat 100% of the world is not the same. If Brzenk is ranked #1, and Cyplenkov is ranked, say, #4, but Cyplenkov can beat Brzenk, Brzenk is still better than Cyplenkov is overall cause he can beat people than Cyplenkov cannot beat. Being #1 = being the best = being better than 100% of the world, which again does not mean being able to beat every single person.

being better than 100% of the world isn't the same as being the best arm wrestler in the world. if someone can beat you but chooses not to then they aren't the best, but you aren't better than 100% of the world until you PROVE it.

Winning a world cup = proving it. Like you said youself, and I have said before, "if someone can beat you but chooses not to then they aren't the best". To be the best you have to actually pull tournaments, part of being the best is actually doing the thing you're the best at. I am saying Brzenk is better than 100% of the world, NOT that he can beat 100% of the world.

Edited June 8, 2008 by Josh H

[Pancake Sprawl]

you don't understand what i'm saying. i'm not saying he's NOT the best arm wrestler in the world, of course he is, but he's not better than 100% of the world, THAT is a fact.

What's the difference? Being THE best in the world means being #1, nobody is better, which is the same as being better than 100% of the world.

just like there are guys out there who can easily break grip records. guy's like Dalip Singh who probably has a 11 in. hand. he could easily break thickbar, rolling thunder, and blob records, he like 400lbs of muscle at 7'4. but since he's not interested in grip strength he hasn't done it, but he's fully capable of doing these feats. just like Andrus Murmets has closed the #3, but he hasn't certified, does that mean the #3 certed guys better than he is? no. he is only a few mm away from closing the #4. just like i'm sure Mark Felix could close a #3 but he hasn't.

Could do it if he trained for it doesn't mean anything. Potential is potential, nothing more until it is unlocked. And no, maybe he doesn't care about getting certified, if he trains his grip and goes to competitions and beats those people, he is better. If not, he isn't.

just because some people aren't interested in the things you are interested in doesn't mean you're better than they are in it. so you are the best arm wrestler in your school, you're not better than 100% of the people until you arm wrestle against them.

Yes, I am. That's like saying some non-puller in a small country is really the best armwrestler in the world, which is wrong. If you want it, you gotta take it. Part of being good is dedication and actually doing what you're good at. Say person B can beat person A at armwrestling but never does, never proves himself, never does competitions, and doesn't care at all. Person A goes to competitions, wins local competitions and has a world ranking. Person A is better than person B then because you aren't good at something if you never do it, part of being good is actually doing the thing you're good at and proving yourself. It's about what you DO, not what you are capable of doing, that really matters in life. If you're only capable of doing something, but you never do it, it doesn't mean shit.

it goes the same way, he didn't fight everyone he fought multiple times, he fought only a few guys multiple times. some of his wins was after he was losing like 10 rds and caught the guy with a punch. he practically won on a fluke himself. being #1 is just a ranking, it doesn't mean he's better than 100%. so if you're going to count the wins he won by barely getting by then you should count the losses he would incur if he fought some regular joe off the road and he caught him. not to mention styles make for different outcomes. fighter A beats fighter B, fighter C beats fighter A. that doesn't automatically mean C is a better fighter than B, there have been cases of B beating C.

That is boxing, and that is how boxing works. Barely getting = still getting and barely losing = still losing. That's like saying that Andrey Pushkar barely lost to Brzenk so it doesn't count. Wrong, and stupid logic. And the abc thing is true, however, I'm not seeing how it has any relevance in this debate.

he's the best armwrestler in the world, he's not better than 100%. cuz if some guy like Cyplenkov comes and beats him, than it's not 100%, and he never was better than 100% of the people in the world unless this guy just came from a different planet. he always was on earth, just nobody knew about him.

How can you actually believe that? Do you understand armwrestling at all? Yes, Cyplenkov has been around and probably quite muscular for several years. But, as you should know if you are competing at a national level, armwrestling is more technique than it is strength. Cyplenkov was always on the Earth (at least in Brzenk's time as champ), however, Cyplenkov did NOT always know the technique. And even if Cyplenkov beats Brzenk, if Brzenk is sitll ranked number one he is still better than 100% of the world - remember, being better than 100% of the world and being able to beat 100% of the world is not the same. If Brzenk is ranked #1, and Cyplenkov is ranked, say, #4, but Cyplenkov can beat Brzenk, Brzenk is still better than Cyplenkov is overall cause he can beat people than Cyplenkov cannot beat. Being #1 = being the best = being better than 100% of the world, which again does not mean being able to beat every single person.

being better than 100% of the world isn't the same as being the best arm wrestler in the world. if someone can beat you but chooses not to then they aren't the best, but you aren't better than 100% of the world until you PROVE it.

Winning a world cup = proving it. Like you said youself, and I have said before, "if someone can beat you but chooses not to then they aren't the best". To be the best you have to actually pull tournaments, part of being the best is actually doing the thing you're the best at. I am saying Brzenk is better than 100% of the world, NOT that he can beat 100% of the world.

ok, i understand what you mean. yeah, i can agree with that.

[Ivarboneless]

I guess hooking is technique, but most people automatically hook. And it's not difficult, nor does it gain you an advantage. If I toproll a guy A) he wasn't expecting it at all (kind of cheap) and B) he is now horribly disadvantaged (from the cheap shot)

Backpressure and all is fair game in my opinion. But at across the table style I like to keep it in a hook, so that lack of toproll knowledge does not create an unfair advantage. I armwrestle guys at school for a different reason, maybe, than you do: I armwrestle them to see who is stronger not who is better at armwrestling. Therefore hook, no technique. Unless the guy is a jerk, then whip him down in any way possible .

I would NEVER beat Tom Nelson (at that time), no matter how tired or sick or injured he was. I have pulled him before and it was so awe inspiring. I hit as hard as I could and it was like he was armwrestling a child. I toprolled as hard as I could and his hand didn't budge (my toproll has never been stopped in a tournament). No way he is losing to me no matter what the circumstances. He just didn't feel like armwrestling, as many of my fellow students don't feel like doing something they think is stupid EVEN IF they could crush me.

As for the gifted:

I would bet that aside from grippers (which are VERY specific) that David is stronger than you at wrist curls, bicep curls, overhead press, bench press, crucifix and Lat pulldown. He's stronger at everything. But, you can beat him. And yes you can beat him, you were in a horrible position in those two matches. If nothing else you gave him a good match even though his wrists and arms are in every way stronger. Therefore you (having not trained for multiple years) have a natural strength for armwrestling.

I think you'll find that many guys you beat have stronger biceps and forearms, but you out sidepressure them.

Don't believe me that the greats have always been good? PM Bob Brown ask him how many of the top guys used to get beat all the time by their friends at school. I bet you'll find that most guys were already good when they started.

[darthsith19]

I guess hooking is technique, but most people automatically hook. And it's not difficult, nor does it gain you an advantage. If I toproll a guy A) he wasn't expecting it at all (kind of cheap) and B) he is now horribly disadvantaged (from the cheap shot)

No, it's not difficult, but most people don't do it. Very few people a my school do. And yes, if you hook and your opponent doesn't use his wrist, it is a huge advantage. Toprolling is fair game, the pros do it, it's not against armwrestling rules, so it's fair. Why should we have different rules for at school?

Backpressure and all is fair game in my opinion. But at across the table style I like to keep it in a hook, so that lack of toproll knowledge does not create an unfair advantage. I armwrestle guys at school for a different reason, maybe, than you do: I armwrestle them to see who is stronger not who is better at armwrestling. Therefore hook, no technique. Unless the guy is a jerk, then whip him down in any way possible .

Backpressure is fair game, yes, but so is toprolling, and a lot of people don't use backpressure. If you are simply trying to find out who is stronger, go to the gym.

I would NEVER beat Tom Nelson (at that time), no matter how tired or sick or injured he was. I have pulled him before and it was so awe inspiring. I hit as hard as I could and it was like he was armwrestling a child. I toprolled as hard as I could and his hand didn't budge (my toproll has never been stopped in a tournament). No way he is losing to me no matter what the circumstances. He just didn't feel like armwrestling, as many of my fellow students don't feel like doing something they think is stupid EVEN IF they could crush me.

If he has beaten you many times before, that is different. But never having armwrestled before, if he had just said no for the reason of "I think I will lose." then yes, you are his superior until he proves himself to be better.

I would bet that aside from grippers (which are VERY specific) that David is stronger than you at wrist curls, bicep curls, overhead press, bench press, crucifix and Lat pulldown. He's stronger at everything. But, you can beat him. And yes you can beat him, you were in a horrible position in those two matches. If nothing else you gave him a good match even though his wrists and arms are in every way stronger. Therefore you (having not trained for multiple years) have a natural strength for armwrestling.

Are you talking about David from my videos? Yes he is probably stronger than me at all of those, probably, except I doubt at wrist curls, I am better at pull-ups and forearm curls probably, too.

I think you'll find that many guys you beat have stronger biceps and forearms, but you out sidepressure them.

Yes, but I out-technique them (techniques include backpressure and hook for at school since not everyone does those things).

Don't believe me that the greats have always been good? PM Bob Brown ask him how many of the top guys used to get beat all the time by their friends at school. I bet you'll find that most guys were already good when they started.

What do you call "when they started"? Do you mean when they starting pulling tournament? If so, yes, I would agree, but if they weren't already good they probably wouldn't have competed - a guy who sucks isn't going to want to compete. But that's because all the greats were pulling friends and getting good before they started pulling tournament, but they weren't born good without ever armwrestling. Take Brzenk for example, he didn't pop out of the womb and just grow up like a normal kid and be naturally good, he used to pull his dad (who was an armwrestler) and his dads friends and that's how he got good even before he started doing comps.

[Ivarboneless]

You are correct about toprolling being legal, but I see it as kind of a cheap move against guys that have no knowledge of it or the sport. Toprolling in street style armwrestling is an attempt to use technique to make up for weakness. Do what you wish, but when tournament time comes you'll wish you spent more time in a hook. Do you lean hard to one side, climb out on the opponents hand and use straps at school? I didn't think so: it's a different game at school.

My gym has rings, their gym weights not exactly easy to just take a random guy to the gym. Armwrestling does the job right on the spot.

Like I said, some guys don't care to armwrestle. I had to give a guy $3 to armwrestle me one time....and he won much to his suprise. Apparently I shouldn't have given him $3 because then I would have won? Some people just do not want to armwrestle, even if they can beat you, it's not fair to count that as a loss and if you do you are just deluding yourself.

How much do you wrist curl? Better be over 190lbs judging from what I saw.

Say for a hypothetical example when John was is 5th grade he started armwrestling friends at school and won most of the time. I am trying to say that a lot of the guys have ALWAYS beaten their friends, all through grade school 3rd grade 7th grade senior year ect. They have always been better than their peers.

[darthsith19]

You are correct about toprolling being legal, but I see it as kind of a cheap move against guys that have no knowledge of it or the sport. Toprolling in street style armwrestling is an attempt to use technique to make up for weakness. Do what you wish, but when tournament time comes you'll wish you spent more time in a hook. Do you lean hard to one side, climb out on the opponents hand and use straps at school? I didn't think so: it's a different game at school.

I hate to break it to you, but that's what the toproll is, a move to take down stronger opponents. Armwrestling is NOT about strength, it's about technique; if a novice had to go against a pro in an open class, should the pro hold back on technique just because it's cheap? No, it's armwrestling, and technique is part of it, if the other person loses due to lack of technique then they are not as good of an armwrestler. Simple as that, that's the way it works at tourneys, that's the way it should work everywhere. And no, I won't wish I spent more time in a hook, why would I wish that, is toprolling illegal at tourneys? Not the ones I've been to so far. And no, I have never used straps at school, because I have never slipped (at school or at tourneys).

My gym has rings, their gym weights not exactly easy to just take a random guy to the gym. Armwrestling does the job right on the spot.

WHat do you mean they have rings? Go to another gym then. But armwrestling without technique still doesn't show who is stronger, one guy could still be much stronger than the other guy but lose due to weaker forearms.

Like I said, some guys don't care to armwrestle. I had to give a guy $3 to armwrestle me one time....and he won much to his suprise. Apparently I shouldn't have given him $3 because then I would have won? Some people just do not want to armwrestle, even if they can beat you, it's not fair to count that as a loss and if you do you are just deluding yourself.

Yes. By not competing it is impossible to win. If they don't want to armwrestle, fine, but then their not better. You can't not armwrestle and be better, that's impossible. You might be able to win, but if you never try it you're not better because your abilities are for absolutely nothing and therefore don't equate to anything until you unleash them. Potential is potential, nothing more until it is unlocked.

How much do you wrist curl? Better be over 190lbs judging from what I saw.

Yeah I'm sure David can wrist curl over 190 lbs.

Say for a hypothetical example when John was is 5th grade he started armwrestling friends at school and won most of the time. I am trying to say that a lot of the guys have ALWAYS beaten their friends, all through grade school 3rd grade 7th grade senior year ect. They have always been better than their peers.

Maybe John did, maybe he didn't - I see no proof that he did beat his friends in 5th grade, and even so his dad is a friggin armwrestler, I'm sure John picked up lots f stuff from him even as a child. I know if my dad had been an armwrestler when I was in 1st grade I would have pulled against him many times. So, proof please that John, in 5th grade, was beating most of his friends and had no more AW experience than any of those kids.

[lifesnotfair]

I hate to break it to you, but that's what the toproll is, a move to take down stronger opponents. Armwrestling is NOT about strength, it's about technique;

I am sure many people would have something to say about that....

[Robert Bishop]

I hate to break it to you, but that's what the toproll is, a move to take down stronger opponents. Armwrestling is NOT about strength, it's about technique;

I am sure many people would have something to say about that....

comon sense should tell you that you need both

[Ivarboneless]

It seems like you are just trying to argue with me for the sake for arguing.

I give you a complement and you completely throw it in my face. I have never seen someone so unreceptive to praise in my entire life. I tell you that you look like a natural armwrestler and you start arguing with me. I won't be making that mistake again.

I mean that I don't lift weights, I do gymnastics...on rings.

"Armwrestling is not about strength" I wonder why all the guys have massive arms when they don't even need the strength. Weird.

Believe me you will wish you spent more time in a hook. You are going to try and toproll someone and it will go to a hook then you will wish you were stronger inside. I bet you'll notice that John is strong inside and outside. I'm just trying to give you some advice from one puller to another. Train the hook.

I told you to PM Bob Brown, which you apparently didn't do. There lies the proof about the always better than their friends great armwrestlers.

You need not tell me what a toproll is or how tournys work, I assure you that I am well aquainted with the sport. You keep pulling the way you want to. I hope to see you at a tournament sometime (USAF Nationals in Salt Lake City would be nice). I'll be the guy with long hair and the baggy shirt warming up with handstand pushups.

[kyle102887]

Say for a hypothetical example when John was is 5th grade he started armwrestling friends at school and won most of the time. I am trying to say that a lot of the guys have ALWAYS beaten their friends, all through grade school 3rd grade 7th grade senior year ect. They have always been better than their peers.

Maybe John did, maybe he didn't - I see no proof that he did beat his friends in 5th grade, and even so his dad is a friggin armwrestler, I'm sure John picked up lots f stuff from him even as a child. I know if my dad had been an armwrestler when I was in 1st grade I would have pulled against him many times. So, proof please that John, in 5th grade, was beating most of his friends and had no more AW experience than any of those kids.

I know I Beat all my friends (and there friends) that played football and lifted weights in HighSchool and beat some of the strongest guys in my school (juniors and seniors) as a freshman before I even seriously touched a weight in my life and really knew nothing about armwrestling.

So Josh there are people that are just good at some things naturally.

[Robert Bishop]

It seems like you are just trying to argue with me for the sake for arguing.

I give you a complement and you completely throw it in my face. I have never seen someone so unreceptive to praise in my entire life. I tell you that you look like a natural armwrestler and you start arguing with me. I won't be making that mistake again.

I mean that I don't lift weights, I do gymnastics...on rings.

"Armwrestling is not about strength" I wonder why all the guys have massive arms when they don't even need the strength. Weird.

Believe me you will wish you spent more time in a hook. You are going to try and toproll someone and it will go to a hook then you will wish you were stronger inside. I bet you'll notice that John is strong inside and outside. I'm just trying to give you some advice from one puller to another. Train the hook.

I told you to PM Bob Brown, which you apparently didn't do. There lies the proof about the always better than their friends great armwrestlers.

You need not tell me what a toproll is or how tournys work, I assure you that I am well aquainted with the sport. You keep pulling the way you want to. I hope to see you at a tournament sometime (USAF Nationals in Salt Lake City would be nice). I'll be the guy with long hair and the baggy shirt warming up with handstand pushups.

I agree AW isnt all about power but it is very important. When your pulling against national level pullers they just about all know how to AW and different syles so the stronger man usually wins and a guy like John Brzenk who is strong in every style has the ability to adjust according to how the other guy is pulling because not many are strong in every situation like he is. To say power isnt important in AW is way off because if two people are close in knowledge and ability the stronger man will win almost every time. I saw Bob Brown get beat by Ron Klemba a while back because Ron was stronger but he isnt a better AW than Bob

[Pancake Sprawl]

i don't think Josh understands you Ivar. you mean people who don't compete can't win, but they also can't lose, so counting them in the win column for you is incorrect.

[Aftershock]

Josh H,

I have been following this thread and have had a particular interest in the argument(s) between you and Ivarboneless. To be frank and completely honest, I don't see how you could possibly make a legitimate case against what Ivar has been telling you. He has way more experience with armwrestling the average (and strong) joes and armwrestling at the table. Also, I'm very sure that you wouldn't stand a chance at beating him. He knows what he's talking about. If I were you, I would listen to what he has to say instead of coming up with various, futile arguments against him.

And as for what you have been saying over that past days, I have some things to say as well...

Armwrestling is a sport which requires a balance of both technique and strength. To think that having awesome technique will win over those who are much stronger and have decent technique is wrong.

A toproll is a great technique, no doubt. But that doesn't mean that you should only train a toproll. If you show up to a tourny with only a toproll under your belt, you will be very surprised when your opponent puts it into a a hook. Train all aspects, not just one.

"...one guy could still be much stronger than the other guy but lose due to weaker forearms." That makes no sense. If the "much stronger" guy has weaker forearms, then he is not "much stronger".

"I sometimes tell people that I am a professional, though I've actually only pulled one tournament..." Why? If you're not a professional, then don't tell others that you are. Seriously, that's a slap in all the pros faces out there.

So, now that I'm done with my ranting, I'll leave you with some words of advice. Train hard, be legit, and listen to what those who are better than you have to say.

Thank you.

[darthsith19]

I hate to break it to you, but that's what the toproll is, a move to take down stronger opponents. Armwrestling is NOT about strength, it's about technique;

I am sure many people would have something to say about that....

Not anyone who knew anything about AW...

(btw though what I said before might have came out wrong, what I meant was that it's more technique than it is strength, not that it's all technique).

It seems like you are just trying to argue with me for the sake for arguing.

I give you a complement and you completely throw it in my face. I have never seen someone so unreceptive to praise in my entire life. I tell you that you look like a natural armwrestler and you start arguing with me. I won't be making that mistake again.

I mean that I don't lift weights, I do gymnastics...on rings.

"Armwrestling is not about strength" I wonder why all the guys have massive arms when they don't even need the strength. Weird.

Believe me you will wish you spent more time in a hook. You are going to try and toproll someone and it will go to a hook then you will wish you were stronger inside. I bet you'll notice that John is strong inside and outside. I'm just trying to give you some advice from one puller to another. Train the hook.

I told you to PM Bob Brown, which you apparently didn't do. There lies the proof about the always better than their friends great armwrestlers.

You need not tell me what a toproll is or how tournys work, I assure you that I am well aquainted with the sport. You keep pulling the way you want to. I hope to see you at a tournament sometime (USAF Nationals in Salt Lake City would be nice). I'll be the guy with long hair and the baggy shirt warming up with handstand pushups.

1. No, I only stated that a novice armwrestler is more than 90% better than a non-puller in the same class, you started debating with me. It was never even meant to turn into a debate.

2. I didn't "throw it back in your face". I politely disagreed with the compliment, and yes, I do disagree with it. You don't know anything about me, I might look like I;m naturally gifted but I'm not, I train, and before I started training I was only mediocre at armwrestling. That's not naturally gifted. If you complement me and I completely disagree with what it is then yes I will politely disagree with you.

3. Ok. The to find who's stronger all-aroud (not just who has stronger forearms) you need to go to a gym with weights.

4. I'm sorry about saying AW is not about strength but about technique. What I meant to say is, AW is more about technique than it is about strength; obviously, though, both are important. If technique didn't matter, Worlds Strongest Men competitors would be able to beat John Brzenk, Devon Larratt, and Ron Bath.

5. Thanks. btw I do actually hook more than toproll at school. But I do toproll sometimes and don't consider it to be cheating.

6. Bob might know a lot about armwrestling, but unless he knows all the top guys and has spoken to all of them about their armwrestling abilities as kids, he can't possibly know that every top guy was naturally gifted. I didn't PM him because I assumed that he didn't know all the top guys personally.

7. I live in MN so no, I don't plan to drive that far for a tourney until I get better. I have oly done 2 tournaments so far so I have a long ways to go still before I will be able to compete at a national level.

I know I Beat all my friends (and there friends) that played football and lifted weights in HighSchool and beat some of the strongest guys in my school (juniors and seniors) as a freshman before I even seriously touched a weight in my life and really knew nothing about armwrestling.

So Josh there are people that are just good at some things naturally.

Point taken. But, just because some armwrestlers are naturally gifted doesn't mean all of the top guys were.

Armwrestling is a sport which requires a balance of both technique and strength. To think that having awesome technique will win over those who are much stronger and have decent technique is wrong.

A toproll is a great technique, no doubt. But that doesn't mean that you should only train a toproll. If you show up to a tourny with only a toproll under your belt, you will be very surprised when your opponent puts it into a a hook. Train all aspects, not just one.

"...one guy could still be much stronger than the other guy but lose due to weaker forearms." That makes no sense. If the "much stronger" guy has weaker forearms, then he is not "much stronger".

"I sometimes tell people that I am a professional, though I've actually only pulled one tournament..." Why? If you're not a professional, then don't tell others that you are. Seriously, that's a slap in all the pros faces out there.

1. I know. I messed up when I said it wasn't about strength; what I meant to say was technique is more important than strength. Not that strength isn't very important, because it is.

2. I do, and never stated that I only used a toproll. I said that I didn't consider toprolling at school to be cheating. I pull with a hook more often than with a toproll. I have been to 2 tourneys so far (wristwrestling not armwrestling but they're very similar). Every match I had I used a hook. In one close match me and my opponent were like dead even and we were in a hook and I tried to turn his hand over in a toproll and couldn't. So I went back to hook, which is what I normally use.

3. Why not? I am not talking on purely armwrestling strength, I am talking all around strength. Say one guy can bicep curl 200 lbs., squat 650, bench 450, has huge traps, lats, and calves, but has weak forearms (compared to the rest of his body). The other guy has much stronger forearms but can only squat 220, bench 200, bicep curl 180, and doesn't train his lats, traps, and has small calves. The guy with much stronger forearms is obviously much weaker all around but could still win an armwreslting match (assuming both guys are equally skilled). Maybe I am wrong about this, though, sorry if I am.

4. Actually, I don't know if I have told people that, sorry if I have. If I have, it is very rare. But to uneducated people, they wouldn't know the difference, if I can easily dominate them anyways. I would never tell that to anybody who is a match for me because yes, that would be a slap in the faces of the pros. I usually just tell people than I am an armwrestler and want to go pro one day.

Edited June 10, 2008 by Josh H

[raikkonen]

1. I know. I messed up when I said it wasn't about strength; what I meant to say was technique is more important than strength. Not that strength isn't very important, because it is.

i honeslty dont beleive for s second technique is more improtant than strength. you need strength to apply the technique imo. i have lose a couple of arm wrestles. and in them i got hammered. no matter what i tried it was obvious, i was going down like a puff. and i ask for another go and another and had about 20 one time eith this guy, and every single time no matter wehat i did at start or anywhere, he beat me without trying, cause he was stronger at arm wrestling than me. if we had been the same strength ( im talkin about strength for AW not chest or shoudlers etcx) then who knows cause that guy was just natually good at it. anyways i practiced alotand saw him a year or so later, had him one, and beat him, just like he beat me, and i beat him cause i got stronger. i really think somew people are delusioned. it seems novices think its about strength, people taht wanan get into it thin kits about technique. me ive realise ive ogt to be stronger or as strong in that position to win.

so imo, strength is more improtant. Because arm wrestling is task specifc. if a bencher wants to hit 1000 lbs, he/she gotta practice for it, and an arm wrestler has ot be strong in taht specifc area where he'she needsto be strong.

if arm wrestling is more abnout technique, thne id be #1 when i was 15 :D but i know its not. when you practice on the table, your not just improving your technique, but strength too, which is what coutns for it mostly imo. but , thats what i believe

Edited June 10, 2008 by raikkonen

[darthsith19]

1. I know. I messed up when I said it wasn't about strength; what I meant to say was technique is more important than strength. Not that strength isn't very important, because it is.

i honeslty dont beleive for s second technique is more improtant than strength. you need strength to apply the technique imo. i have lose a couple of arm wrestles. and in them i got hammered. no matter what i tried it was obvious, i was going down like a puff. and i ask for another go and another and had about 20 one time eith this guy, and every single time no matter wehat i did at start or anywhere, he beat me without trying, cause he was stronger at arm wrestling than me. if we had been the same strength ( im talkin about strength for AW not chest or shoudlers etcx) then who knows cause that guy was just natually good at it. anyways i practiced alotand saw him a year or so later, had him one, and beat him, just like he beat me, and i beat him cause i got stronger. i really think somew people are delusioned. it seems novices think its about strength, people taht wanan get into it thin kits about technique. me ive realise ive ogt to be stronger or as strong in that position to win.

so imo, strength is more improtant. Because arm wrestling is task specifc. if a bencher wants to hit 1000 lbs, he/she gotta practice for it, and an arm wrestler has ot be strong in taht specifc area where he'she needsto be strong.

if arm wrestling is more abnout technique, thne id be #1 when i was 15 :D but i know its not. when you practice on the table, your not just improving your technique, but strength too, which is what coutns for it mostly imo. but , thats what i believe

True, but I remember John Brzenk saying that armwrestlers aren't good in the gym because armwrestling isn't about strength. I'll try to find a quote if you want me to.

Edit: I was looking for it on the ask John Brzenk webpages, and how about this one for people who say it's all about being naturally gifted:

"I am a guy who is blessed with good genetics and a dad who loved the sport. I was brought up armwrestling at a very young age and have never stopped trying to improve. "

So yeah "good genetics" so he might be somewhat naturally gifted but, like I said, he trained with his dad even as a kid.

Edited June 11, 2008 by Josh H

[raikkonen]

yeha read alot on that ask john page too its good reading. but listen. in the gym what is there that gets you good at arm wrestling? things like curls bench shoulder press all make you stronger. but they all only have a slight carry over to the table imo. you will get most of your srength from arm wrestling. but i think some people think unless your not lifting a weight your not gonna get any strength. when you can. remember you got your enemies arm resisting yours which will make you streonger in that way, just like a resistant in the gym will make you stronger in the direction your moving/puhsing/pressing it in. i beleive if you wanna beat someone with technique then you have to have more or less same amount as strength as them. and that doesnt mean bicep curl as much as them. apparently john wont touch a weight bigger than 30kg in the gym? hes got all his strength just from arm wrestling it seems.

[bobbrown]

Well, this thread took a turn.

The old strength vs Technigue discussion

It really depends on who is AW. If a weaker AW'r is going against a stronger NON-AW'r and the AW'r wins....well thats Tech. Now if the NON-AW'r wins than the Tech was not enough and the Strength was more important.

If both know and try the same Tech than it totally come down to Strength.

Now which is more important....Thats easy.......Strength. I have seen many guys win based SOLELY on Strength but I have never seen a guy win based SOLELY on Tech. Your sister could be a Master Tech but she still will not beat her big brother. You can know all the Tech in the world but you still need strength to back it up.

And as far as what John may or may not of said in the past. I guarantee he thoughts have changed over the years. If you ask him now, He would say Hand and Wrist Strength is the Key.

[Robert Bishop]

i havent been around as long as Bob but from what i've seen nobody has better had control then John and also Cobra R in the lighter classes