Scribd
Upload
137 views3 pages

Nautilus Bulletin #2

This document discusses commercial bias in the field of bodybuilding and physical training. It argues that, contrary to claims by commercial interests, the average results produced by trainees have declined over the past 20 years due to biased selection and presentation of statistics. While there are outstanding individuals today, they are exceptions, as freaks always were, and do not represent improvements in training methods. True progress must come from increases in the average trainee's results, which have decreased. Commercial interests have almost destroyed the field by propagating myths rather than elevating the standards of training. Specific examples of commercial bias will be addressed in following chapters.

Uploaded by

Георги Добрев
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
137 views3 pages

Nautilus Bulletin #2

This document discusses commercial bias in the field of bodybuilding and physical training. It argues that, contrary to claims by commercial interests, the average results produced by trainees have declined over the past 20 years due to biased selection and presentation of statistics. While there are outstanding individuals today, they are exceptions, as freaks always were, and do not represent improvements in training methods. True progress must come from increases in the average trainee's results, which have decreased. Commercial interests have almost destroyed the field by propagating myths rather than elevating the standards of training. Specific examples of commercial bias will be addressed in following chapters.

Uploaded by

Георги Добрев
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 3

Nautilus

Bulletin #2

ArthurJonesExercise.com
The Arthur Jones Collection

2
Commercial Bias
Prejudice such as that encountered among involved people is a strange factor indeed; many years ago I noted
that, ". . . animals seem to survive in inverse ration to the amount of professional conservation attention that they
are afforded." And it has long been obvious that professional pilots are actually biased in favor of dangerous
aircraft. It is not the purpose of this bulletin to delve into the psychological factors responsible for such inverted
thinking; but I do think that this factor – as it is encountered in the field of physical training – must be carefully
considered.

Far from advancing, the field of body building has been steadily marching backwards for the last twenty years or
more; which statement will be considered outright heresay by most currently active bodybuilders. A biased
selection and a distorted presentation of statistics has been used to "prove" points that are actually the opposite
of truth – and there has been little if anything accidental about the final results produced by the flood of
propaganda so apparent in most publications in this field. In effect, the very people who have been claiming that
they are trying to elevate the field have almost destroyed it.

An old saying puts it very well, " . . . figures don't lie, but liars figure." Commercial interests in the field of body
building constantly point out a few outstanding examples of muscular development as proof of their claims that
great advancements have been made within the last few years –and it is certainly true that there are
outstanding individuals on the scene at the moment, men like Sergio Oliva, Arnold Schwarzenneger and Casey
Viator; but it is equally true that such men are almost literally freaks –the average man could never hope to
duplicate their physical development, regardless of how he trained. Thus such individuals represent nothing
apart from expectable deviations from the average.

Out of a group of a hundred individuals selected at random, the average body weight might be 160 pounds – and
one or two subjects might weigh as much as 190 pounds. But if the sample was increased to a thousand
individuals, then you could reasonably expect to find at least one subject with a body weight of 200 pounds –
while the average for the group remained as before. And out of a group of a million subjects, you could
reasonably expect at least one individual with a body weight of 250 pounds or more –but again, the average
would remain 160 pounds.

Thus proof of improvements in method must come from an increase in the average – and in the field of body
building, the average production of results has steadily declined during the last twenty years; the average results
being produced today are NOT better than they were twenty years ago – instead, they are worse. And exactly the
same thing is true in the fields of Olympic lifting and power lifting – in spite of vast propaganda to the contrary;
certainly the records have increased – but that is only to be expected when dealing with a far larger number of
subjects. But even that is misleading – because the performances really haven't increased as much as most
people think; in the case of the Olympic press, a great deal of the so-called "progress" has been produced by
relaxation of the rules, to the point that the press has now degenerated into an outright jerk with little or nothing
in common with the press as it was practiced twenty years ago –and at least one man, Douglas Hepburn, was
capable of bench pressing near-record poundages over fifteen years ago, and at a body weight far below that of
the present record holders. Thirty years ago, Bob Peoples deadlifted well over 700 pounds at a body weight
below 180 pounds – today, men weighing twice as much have finally been able to add approximately 100
pounds to his record. Some of Paul Anderson's lifts – performed over fifteen years ago – will probably never be
duplicated.

Nautilus Bulletin #2
The Arthur Jones Collection

The really outstanding men of today are exceptions – as such men always were, and as they always will be; there
are larger numbers of such outstanding individuals in view at the moment simply and only because a much larger
number of men are now training with weights. But what about the average trainees?

The simple truth of the matter is that the average trainee of today could not hope to compete on equal terms with
the average trainee of twenty years ago; and it is equally true that most of this decline in the average production
of results is directly due to commercial bias in the field of weight-training.

I cannot begin to attack such commercial bias in a bulletin of reasonable length – but at the same time, I cannot
just ignore it; so I will refer to specific examples of such bias in the following chapters – but I will not even
attempt to go into the length of explanations required to disprove all such myths.

Nautilus Bulletin #2

You might also like

pFad - Phonifier reborn

Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.

Note: This service is not intended for secure transactions such as banking, social media, email, or purchasing. Use at your own risk. We assume no liability whatsoever for broken pages.


Alternative Proxies:

Alternative Proxy

pFad Proxy

pFad v3 Proxy

pFad v4 Proxy