OldGuy Posted March 4, 2003 Share Posted March 4, 2003 Inch claimed at one time to have 19'' arms 50'' chest 15'' forearms and 27'' thighs. I do not believe any of those. He was only 160 lbs as a young adult and bulked up later to 200 210. As a physical specimen he was not impressive. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roark Posted March 4, 2003 Author Share Posted March 4, 2003 In H&S June 1, 1910, Inch claimed to have arms that measured 19-7/8", and noted that it was a great tempation to simply round off that number to 20". Like you, OldGuy, I do not believe it- I have seen arms that large up close and they appear to be immensely larger, and more muscular, than Inch's arms. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldGuy Posted March 4, 2003 Share Posted March 4, 2003 He also claimed to have excelled at all sports and to have popularized plate loaded barbells. The barbell part may be true. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
amaury Posted March 4, 2003 Share Posted March 4, 2003 I am too stingy to have paid for the access to Iron History Steve, I would pay 10$ per year just for ironhistory.com . Is it because i'm not "stingy" ? Not even that ! Its just worth it (and more). Perhaps you should give it a try ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Horne Posted March 4, 2003 Share Posted March 4, 2003 Oh it's definitely worth $10! Christ what's $10!! Joe, Keep up the good work! David Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldGuy Posted March 4, 2003 Share Posted March 4, 2003 I now know there are people around who are even cheaper than I am. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mobsterone Posted March 4, 2003 Share Posted March 4, 2003 I now know there are people around who are even cheaper than I am. Full of praise u guys - will no suggest passing the hat? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChrisJames Posted March 4, 2003 Share Posted March 4, 2003 So are you now implying that Apollon was a fraud ? "Once a fraud always a fraud " How many famous bodybuilders have quoted exaggerated arm measurements, are they all " frauds" ? I have subscribed to Ironhistory . com Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom of Iowa2 Posted March 4, 2003 Share Posted March 4, 2003 Excuse my ignorance but I just read the letter/article by Mr.Holle. I understand what they did(with the strap and the 6mm steel bar but I'm not sure the purpose of it.Yes it apparently makes the INCH replica easier to lift but why would you want to do that? Is this a training technique?Or is it just a possible explanation about the hole in the handle and what Mr.Inch may have used it for?A theory? The nearly full page photo shows Mr.Holle lifting it up past his waist with the steel bar/wrist apparatus.....I'm just wondering what that photo was for?With a strap I'm sure there would be a half dozen guys here in the gym(my self included) that could do that and more...one or two guys? probably do it without the strap. Anyway...sorry to be such a dumb ass but what was the point. Quite seriously I may have missed it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Piche Posted March 5, 2003 Share Posted March 5, 2003 So are you now implying that Apollon was a fraud ?"Once a fraud always a fraud " How many famous bodybuilders have quoted exaggerated arm measurements, are they all " frauds" ? I have subscribed to Ironhistory . com Where did you read that Chris? Not in my post. I was referring to Mr. Inch. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Piche Posted March 5, 2003 Share Posted March 5, 2003 All it takes to lift the inch is a SMALL force to stop rotation. It's not difficult to get it airborne even with a small side force to stop the SPIN of the bell. That's why larger hands are such an advantage with it. It's purely the stopping of roation or increasing the leverage to stop rotation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roark Posted March 5, 2003 Author Share Posted March 5, 2003 Tom, Wanna is right. Simply touch the top of the globe (with the hand on top it cannot be lifting) and push anti-rotation. Whole new ballgame. Why would a hole be drilled into the 172 lb Inch? For what purpose? I suspect not to make it that much lighter but as an insertion point to stop rotation with an easily hidden stud or nail or other device lodged between the fingers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom of Iowa2 Posted March 5, 2003 Share Posted March 5, 2003 Yes..I understand how stopping rotation of the dumbell makes it easier to lift...We have a 2 3/8"180,solid dumbell (pictured in Gallery)which I can barely break off the ground with a 'normal 'grip...but is nothing to lift when I keep it from rolling.With straps-or a method of controlling rotation- I could do a set of 1 arm rows with it..I am just not sure what the purpose of the article/letter was? Was he trying to explain a theory regarding the hole? Was it a subtle expose? And then was the photo dramatizing the ease of which the Dumbell could now be lifted?Or how easy it would have been for Inch to lift IF using the hole? Or was the photo there to show a new training method? I don't understand Why they devoted such a large Photo of someone lifting the INCH with the wrist wrap/apparatus in place? The article/letter was just a little ambiguous...the letters intent not clear to me... If Strossen needs some good photos ot fill up an issue I'll send him some photos...... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
terminator Posted March 5, 2003 Share Posted March 5, 2003 So are you now implying that Apollon was a fraud ?"Once a fraud always a fraud " How many famous bodybuilders have quoted exaggerated arm measurements, are they all " frauds" ? I have subscribed to Ironhistory . com I never singled out Apollon, I don't claim to know enough about him to comment either way. My statement was a general one, pointed at nobody in particular with the possible exception of Inch. It is my experience that those who engage in deceptive practices rarely do so on just a single occasion. Usually there is a pattern of bullshit which makes any claim they make subject to scrutiny. Since you ask my opinion, I think most (drug abusing) bodybuilders fit into the "fraud" or worse category. For example, selling supplements based on the pretext of being natural and healthy when the truth is totally the opposite is a fraud of the highest order. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sybersnott Posted March 5, 2003 Share Posted March 5, 2003 Most if not all bodybuilders do the supplement gig to earn money. Selling supplements is BIG BIG business. What the bodybuilders don't tell you is the amount of steroids they use to get that mass; it isn't done solely with the supplements they hawk. So, in essence, they are telling you half the truth. And you know what telling half the truth means, don't you? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.