Most of his complaints were about soviet bloc stuff and didn't really concern me much. The only comment made that I found interesting was this one:
“Bigger muscles also mean more efficient leverage around important joints. Knees, elbows, hips and shoulders work better when the muscles that operate them are larger… big quads work better than small quads….”
Equating muscle mass and mechanical efficiency is simply not true.
I understand he then talks about how many sports strength is only useful in its application to power so getting big and bulky doesn't necessarily help. But in regards to just pure strength I don't understand how the increased mechanical efficiency argument is not true? Is he just making a BS argument about how size is not always better when that is not what Rip is saying? or is there more to it that I am not seeing?