Originally Posted by Robert Callahan
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:
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?
That was my one issue with the article as well.
Basicaly Rip says, "Bigger muscles have better leverage and can move more weight."
And Charniga replies, "Bigger muscles aren't necessarily better from a power production standpoint. Excess mass can be a detriment."
As you pointed out Robert, these are two different arguments.
Other than that, he disagrees with Rip's view on Russian literature which he is certainly more than qualified to do.
He doesn't say anything negative about Rip's theory or programming. Doesn't mention it at all really.