Bolding dilemma

[Roark]

All right, with the bells adjacent, can you tell me

how much the green bell weighs, and how much

the black bell weighs. 152 is which color?

http://www.cyberpump.com/gallery/IronHistory?&page=1

After some feedback, I'll give the answer.

Not as easy as I thought. Now imagine you were seated

in the audience and the bells were brought out separately!

(chome painted bell is the Millennium, approx 232 lbs)

[Guest Jeff Roark]

Joe,

I am probably wrong but I am going to say the green one is the 172. Looking at the other photos also... Ditillo was a monster! Joe did you know Mr. Bulk and Power himself?

[Roark]

Thanks for the vote, Jeff.

No, never knew Anthony.

[OldGuy]

I cannot tell the difference between the black and the green, both appear to be butter. My guess is now for the green, as people have always before seen black Inch replicas. Of course there is such a thing as double bluffing and so on!

[Roark]

OldGuy,

Your guess is for the green. For the 152 or the 172?

[OldGuy]

Green for the 172 pounder.

[Roark]

Okay, score 2 to 0 in favor of the green as the 172.

Anyone disagree?

[The Mac]

I go green, for the same reasons as above.

This really does prove how difficult it would be to tell Inch's 'bells apart.

Many thanks Joe!!

[Roark]

Thanks, Chris! 3 votes for the green, which pleases

Roark (Irish and all you know).

Yes, very hard to distinguish until they are attempted, and when I grab the xxxxx one with two hands it is MUCH easier

to deadlift than the xxxxx one. MUCH easier than the difference of only 20 pounds would indicate.

I'll give the correct answer this evening. Still time to provide

your vote!

[Nathan Say]

I think the chrome one is the 152. Oh wait, that isn't one of the choices. :p I say the green one is the 172.

[amaury]

It's hard to tell because of the perspective but the width of the black dumbbell seems smaller than the one of the green dumbbell ( :crazy  :crazy ) and corresponds better to my idea of the original inch dumbbell. So i'll say the black one is the 172 !

[Rick Browne]

I will say the green is the 152....

[Rick Browne]

Hey Joe,

            How `bouts a round of Bushmills'

            for the house? :hehe

[Guest ando]

black - 172

green - 152

[Guest mg6680]

Black - 172  Green - 152

[Roark]

Thanks for playing the guessing game.

Green is the 152, black is the 172. When both bells

were black the difference was more obvious, and, of

course, the angle matters.

But if all four of Inch's bells were black, and he had only

one on stage at a time, it would be nearly impossible to

know which was which because only his assistants knew

the markings from a close-up view.

How I wish I knew if the other three bells also had a

hole drilled centerpoint of the handle!

[Rick Browne]

Joe,

         I picked the green one as the 152 because from

         the pictures, my perspective of its' handle length

         appears a little bit longer than the handle of the

         black one.

         If this is true then the green globes would be smaller

         to expose more handle. Maybe, maybe not?

         Could you tell me the length of each handle?

         Thanks

[Roark]

The handle length is the same: four inches. The

Millennium bell handle is 5 inches.

The color causes the perception problem. People dress

in black if they wish to appear smaller, so I could re-paint

the black green, and the green black, and the problem

would remain.

By the way, Curt thought I had mislabed the first

photo, because in another photo he is deadlifting the

MB (using two hands), and I told him the caption was

my attempt at humor. Plus, had we used that other photo,

ribald comments would have come flooding in.

[Guest Jeff Roark]

Joe,

A few Inch questions, regarding his feats are there any proof of him putting an Inch Db overhead? Regardless of the weight. I think even the 152lb bell would be enough to stop most people that were untrained in his day. Maybe he only used the 152 in his performances but when people like Saxon came around the big boy was pulled out. Joe do you think Apollon could have cleaned and pressed the 172 Inch DB?

[ChrisJames]

Herman Goerner had a dumbbell the same diameter handle and weighed 3 lbs less and he used to one hand swing it overhead every show.Imagine what he could have done if pushed.Apollon might have been even stronger again in thick bar work.Boggles the mind !!

[Roark]

Jeff,

I have more than 6,000 magazines; of those about

800+ are Health & Strength. I have autopsied all these

mags for Inch mentions, and though there may be

facts and claims I am missing, here are my conclusions

to this time:  

In brief:

1. I do not believe Inch ever lifted the 152 or the 172

   overhead FOLLOWNG a ONE Hand clean. I also doubt

   the 140. The 75 pounder, yes.

2. I do not believe Saxon ever wrapped his hand around

   the 172- keep in mind that Saxon's failure was not

   mentioned until after Saxon had died. And as David

   Willoughby stated, it is unthinkable to consider

   Inch's hand strength superior in thick bar to Arthur's.

3. Apollon would have, and I use this word meaningfully,

   TOYED with the 172. Whether he could one hand

   strict press it, I don't know, but suspect he could.

   Mark Henry cleaned the Apollon wheels replica by

   skilled dipping - olympic lifting style- in the clean,

   whereas Apollon power cleaned them.

4.  Early reports of Inch and the 172, which conflect

   with later reports, do not mention over-heading the 172.

   It appears after some other men were in fact able to

   one hand deadlift the 172, that Inch wrote in to claim

   the actual challenge was one hand ALL THE WAY- a

   stipulation absent when he was lifting it his 'hundreds

   of times'.

[The Mac]

Joe,

This may not be the place as it's a big issue, but I wonder what it is about Apollon that makes you seem so sure that he is that much stronger than any other olde-time strongman? I have neither your depth nor breadth of knowledge or research materials, and I imagine the evidence you could provide would fill a thick folder, but why do Apollon's claims (or at least the claims made for him) seem to hold so much weight? (Hah!! ) Especially the snatch movement/throw with the extremely heavy thick dumbell (the precise identity/weight of which escapes me now).

Many thanks for any response you give.

[Roark]

Chris,

In January at ironhistory will be presented the case I

have in favor of Apollon being the greatest of the oldtimers.

I am hoping to present a list of his every lift.

What if Kaz, and Mark Henry, and some of the current

World Strongest Man competitors all tipped their hats

to one other current strongman as being THE strongest?

That's what happened when Apollon's strength was

demonstrated- his fellow strongmen yielded the spotlight.

And, those who wrote about the strongest, NEVER placed

Apollon in a second tier.

Most of his lifting was done without going

to his limit- he was known for being lazy. Much like a

current competitor who has already won the match will

decline his third attempt, so did Apollon keep himself below

maximum effort.

I could be wrong about Apollon, and I readily admit to

having a strong bias based on the research I have done.

But based on that same research, my bias could have

landed on some other strongman.

Finally, and this is significant- there have not been others

claiming that Apollon was faking, that he in fact did NOT

perform as generally thought. This cannot be said of

Goerner, for example.

Anyway, that's my opinion pulled from quite substantial

study, not from pre-conceived ideas, so in that sense it

remains my bias, not a prejudice.

It is the absolute easiest task to write about Apollon

being the greatest. It is much less easy a task to elevate

other strongmen to his level. At least that's how I see it.

[The Mac]

Joe,

Thanks for the lengthy and detailed reply. I look forward to your Ironhistory piece on Apollon (as I do for all of your pieces).

It was just my natural scepticism that prompted my question, especially after reading the detail and consideration behind your work on Inch and Anderson's claimed lifts. In my own reseach I do not think I have yet given Apollon the time he deserves - this will be remedied. The research I have done has thrown up a few questions - but I will not bring them up for discussion until I have had time to look at them fully.

Forgive me if it seemed that I was accusing you of prejudice in this matter. It would be a cold thing indeed if we were not allowed to develop personal biases towards the cases of certain strongmen!!

Again, thanks for your reply.

[Roark]

Our sport has been attacked on all fronts- drugs, equipment that has been designed to 'aid' lifters, questionable judging,

and competitors of less than sterling honesty who want

publicity above performance.

It never bothers me to be questioned, but it bothers me when

others object to being questioned, and when the errors of their beliefs are pointed out with thunder pencil, they continue

to desperately cling to the sad past that never was, except

in their wishful thinking.

The problems in the first paragraph above do not need to be

supplemented by writers who cannot face the truth. After the

Anderson materials were published, a professor of logic wrote to the U of Texas and commented regarding my 'motives'. He

said basically that my motives do not matter- that truth will

stand whether motives are honorable or dishonorable, so

examine the arguments as though you do not know their

author. Lady Justice is blind.

If it turns out down the road that any of my research can be

proven to be incorrect, I will lead the parade of those who

make that discovery, and I will rejoice albeit embarrassingly,

at trotting on down the road of knowledge. I will NOT attack

the person's 'motives'.

I'd like to think we are all in this search together. It should

be fun! I'll let the blacksmiths grind the axes.