HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > The Rink
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
The Rink For the not so ready for prime-time players, coaches, referees, and the people that have to live with them. Discuss experiences in local leagues, coaching tips, equipment, and training.

OT: Girl forced off of Boys Hockey Team

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
01-01-2011, 05:25 PM
  #151
Briere Up There*
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Žďár nad Sázavo
Posts: 2,868
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kritter471 View Post
Dump and Chase wants facts? Here are some factual things he apparently doesn't know!.

Did you guys know that women's hockey was a checking game until 1990, when the IIHF took it out because the US and Canada were too dominant physically (the more things change, eh?)? And did you know that they don't measure NHL bench press stats in max outs, but in repetitions at weight since raw strength isn't the main point of hockey (the combine makes them do reps at 150 pounds, and the 2009 max number was 18)? Did you know several current and former elite NHL players can't bench their own body weight?
I did know all of that. Yet no female on the planet can touch the hockey playing prowess of a girly man like Phil Kessel.

Quote:
Did you know that it's actually harder to knock a woman off the puck with a body check than it is a similar-sized man because a woman's center of gravity is lower, which makes her more stable? Did you know women generally have a higher pain tolerance than men for biological reasons (labor FTW!) and greater endurance?
Asinine. Are you arguing that Theo Fleury could make the NHL or women? As for pain tolerance, I'll take your word but I'd like to see proof of that claim. Endurance is more easily disproved. Men outperform women at marathons and distance running.

Quote:
To quote myself from another thread, discussing the average high-level or international female hockey player versus the average NHL hockey player is dumb for two reasons.

One, at the moment, they have to play different sports, so saying "women don't check" means nothing. Women certainly could check if the game, as drawn up by the IIHF, had that in the rules. Several of the bigger elite players have publicly stated they wished checking was allowed in women's hockey. The ones who want to keep it non-check are, generally, the smaller players who would face a natural disadvantage just like smaller NHL players are at a natural disadvantage. There is nothing that physiologically prevents a 5-11, 190 pound woman like Angela Ruggerio from being able to play with men in a checking league.
Her weaker bones say otherwise. She would be more prone to injury, far more prone than you would admit. There's really nothing here to debate other than the fact that women's bones are naturally less dense. Even a great player like Ruggerio, who is superior to most men skillwise, would see her opponents "hold back" even as she weaves through them in this theoretical high level contact league.

Quote:
I think that if/when/whatever a the right female skater comes along, some organization will take a chance on her, even just to give her a dry run at the AHL level. There's no reason not to, and there are no rules against it (as there are in the Olympics, where it's men's hockey and women's hockey, not hockey and women's hockey). Given the way the current system is set up, the most likely candidates are girls who grow up playing on boys' teams because they will have more experience with a checking game, which is a completely different beast than a non-check game.

But boys boys boys. Your male bodies aren't as impressive as you think.
I do not understand your need to downplay the significant physical differences between men and women. Acknowledging these differences will not send you back to the kitchen, you can still aspire to any profession you wish.

Briere Up There* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-01-2011, 06:00 PM
  #152
BMC
PerJohan Axelsson
 
BMC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Northeastern CT
Country: United States
Posts: 20,787
vCash: 50
This idiot [Atis] has/had a problem with Kayla Atkins' mother and he decided to get at her by going after her daughter. End of story.

This guy is a total ******* for doing this and he deserves all the criticism and abuse he is getting.

I wonder if he realizes he has turned his son into a lump of radioactive material by doing this- nobody is going to want him on their team in the future, nobody will want to deal with his ********* father. So that's 2 kids who have had their lives damaged as a result of this....way to go Atis. NOT.

BMC is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
01-01-2011, 06:26 PM
  #153
Briere Up There*
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Žďár nad Sázavo
Posts: 2,868
vCash: 500
Maybe the mother is a real you-know-what and he's had it with her?

Briere Up There* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-01-2011, 06:34 PM
  #154
BMC
PerJohan Axelsson
 
BMC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Northeastern CT
Country: United States
Posts: 20,787
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Briere Up There View Post
Maybe the mother is a real you-know-what and he's had it with her?
So what? You don't go after someone's kid. EVER.

BMC is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
01-02-2011, 01:09 AM
  #155
Kritter471
Registered User
 
Kritter471's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Dallas
Country: United States
Posts: 7,709
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Kritter471
Briere -

Women outperform men at ultramarathons, and the bone density thing is a myth. Men have greater bone mass on average because they, on average, have larger frames. But when you figure volumetric bone density, it's basically equal, and some studies have shown women have greater volumetric bone density in some areas. They do not have "weaker" bones than men until you start comparing women who have gone through menopause, and that's not applicable to this discussion since we're talking about ages of 5-40ish.

I did err a bit in the endurance thing (though women do regularly beat men at ultramaratons of 50 miles or more), but you are wrong as well. There are several studies out there that show when equalized for height, elite male and female athletes (runners and swimmers) have essentially the same "pace" if you will. The biggest difference is average stride length. A 5-4 man in these study groups, on average, ran at the same pace as a 5-4 woman. That held true to the 6-foot tall men and women. So a 5-10 female hockey player would not be under any physical disadvantage in skating stride when compared to a 5-10 male. How effectively they implement the physical tools is a separate question that comes down to technique and training, not physiology.

The center of gravity thing is well known. Now, how much practical difference does this serve? Probably very little because the issue of overall mass is also at play when it comes to collisions. Pain tolerance is harder to prove. There have been several studies done on hormonal pain receptors, though. And this would be very career-specific when comparing to males, because male professional athletes generally have higher pain tolerances than their couch-bound brethren.

There are physical differences in males and females. The amount of hemoglobin in the blood, for one, and the distribution of muscle mass (proportionally more in the upper bodies of males, proportionally more in the hips/thighs for women) and the difference in angle from hip to knee. But when comparing people of the same height and relative training, these aren't nearly as big of a deal as people make them out to be.

The thing about bench press was responding to the person who claimed NHLer's averaged a 300 pound bench press. That's absolutely untrue.

Kritter471 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-02-2011, 11:20 AM
  #156
Briere Up There*
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Žďár nad Sázavo
Posts: 2,868
vCash: 500
Someone said NHLers average a 300 bench press? I doubt there's more than 3 guys on each team who can bench that.

As for the differences between men and women, I think the results speak for themselves. The best women in the world can't beat midget boys on a regular basis. Additionally, men have more slow twitch muscles which means better endurance performance even accounting for relative size. Women begin to catch up in the so called super endurance races because of a higher body fat percentage, which obviously means more energy to draw off of. But most sports do not require the kind of endurance that this advantage provides.

You're absolutely right though, the bone density thing is simply a myth. That's my bad. I've been skimming a few research papers on Ebsco and most seem to agree with you, that size is the primary factor in the differences between men and women. But most acknowledge women seem to have a more difficult time putting on muscle than men.

Briere Up There* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-05-2011, 12:56 PM
  #157
WDR357
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Boston Area
Country: United States
Posts: 57
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kritter471 View Post
The thing about bench press was responding to the person who claimed NHLer's averaged a 300 pound bench press. That's absolutely untrue.
I was the one that made that comment. Jack Falla reported twenty years ago that the average bench, I think it was 1988, of NHLers was 275. What do you think it might be now with the advances in athletic and weight training we've had? It certainly hasn't dropped.

I'll give you a little example. I weigh 165 pounds or so, am over 40 years old and bench about 250. I'm really not very strong for a grown man as I'm smaller than your average adult male. One of the guys I work out with occasionally is in his late 20's, about 6'2" and 215 lbs. He puts up 315 without breaking much of a sweat. NHL teams are full of these types.

Let's look at the Bruins per Briere's comments regarding there wouldn't be three players on any team that could bench 300. Off the top of my hand I can think of Milan Lucic at 6'4" and 220 lbs, Chara at 6'9" and 255-260, Boychuk at 6'2" and 225 and Nathan Horton at 6'2" and 230. Oh, and maybe Thornton at 6'2" and 217, Mark Stuart is around 215 I believe. I'd guess each of these fellas benches MORE than 300. If you think they're struggling to put up 250 you're delusional or simply not aware of how strong professional athletes are, not to mention 200 pound men in general(approximately the average weight of NHL players).

Yes, there are many strong women. But no women are going to play in the NHL or other minor leagues for that matter except maybe a goalie. You can dismiss ten of thousands of years of genetics all you want but it won't put a woman in a professional hockey unifrom for more than a marketing ploy.

WDR357 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-05-2011, 03:15 PM
  #158
sjmay*
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 4,732
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by WDR357 View Post
I was the one that made that comment. Jack Falla reported twenty years ago that the average bench, I think it was 1988, of NHLers was 275. What do you think it might be now with the advances in athletic and weight training we've had? It certainly hasn't dropped.

I'll give you a little example. I weigh 165 pounds or so, am over 40 years old and bench about 250. I'm really not very strong for a grown man as I'm smaller than your average adult male. One of the guys I work out with occasionally is in his late 20's, about 6'2" and 215 lbs. He puts up 315 without breaking much of a sweat. NHL teams are full of these types.

Let's look at the Bruins per Briere's comments regarding there wouldn't be three players on any team that could bench 300. Off the top of my hand I can think of Milan Lucic at 6'4" and 220 lbs, Chara at 6'9" and 255-260, Boychuk at 6'2" and 225 and Nathan Horton at 6'2" and 230. Oh, and maybe Thornton at 6'2" and 217, Mark Stuart is around 215 I believe. I'd guess each of these fellas benches MORE than 300. If you think they're struggling to put up 250 you're delusional or simply not aware of how strong professional athletes are, not to mention 200 pound men in general(approximately the average weight of NHL players).

Yes, there are many strong women. But no women are going to play in the NHL or other minor leagues for that matter except maybe a goalie. You can dismiss ten of thousands of years of genetics all you want but it won't put a woman in a professional hockey unifrom for more than a marketing ploy.
Again,

You are absolutely DEAD WRONG.

When NHL players bench, they don't bench for max, and they don't bench to get the pretty pectoral muscles that most guys think they have to have.

They bench for endurance, there is a reason why the NHL combine have the rookies bench set at 150 and they count the number of reps they do, not the max weight.

sjmay* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-05-2011, 10:16 PM
  #159
WDR357
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Boston Area
Country: United States
Posts: 57
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by sjmay View Post
Again,

You are absolutely DEAD WRONG.

When NHL players bench, they don't bench for max, and they don't bench to get the pretty pectoral muscles that most guys think they have to have.

They bench for endurance, there is a reason why the NHL combine have the rookies bench set at 150 and they count the number of reps they do, not the max weight.
Again,

You're absolutely kidding yourself.

The max bench of men playing in the NHL has really nothing to do with the combine results of 18 year olds doing 150 for reps.

As an example, in high school football camps, they use 185 pounds for max reps. Just because they do, doesn't mean that NFL players don't bench more than 400 on a regular basis! BTW, the NHL also has the kids do a max push test and many of them exceed 300 pounds on that test. That's at 18 years old.

Your example of what is done at the combine or what players may do for keeping in shape does not preclude that they can't max out. And I'm saying that 215 pound grown men, professional athletes, usually bench in excess of 300 pounds. I can't imagine Shawn Thornton saying "I don't know how to max out, I only know how to do reps at 150/185/225 pounds"! Too funny.

Something tells me you don't exercise in a gym very often if you don't understand this.

How about this? Ask a couple of men you know, men you know who work out and exercise, how much they weigh and how much they can bench and you'll probably be astounded at how strong grown men are. Particularly compared to your average woman. This does not mean that women are not good athletes, or wonderful people or shouldn't be running companies.

300 pounds on a bench or 400 pounds in a squat is nothing to many of these professional athletes.

WDR357 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-06-2011, 12:02 AM
  #160
sjmay*
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 4,732
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by WDR357 View Post
Again,

You're absolutely kidding yourself.

The max bench of men playing in the NHL has really nothing to do with the combine results of 18 year olds doing 150 for reps.

As an example, in high school football camps, they use 185 pounds for max reps. Just because they do, doesn't mean that NFL players don't bench more than 400 on a regular basis! BTW, the NHL also has the kids do a max push test and many of them exceed 300 pounds on that test. That's at 18 years old.

Your example of what is done at the combine or what players may do for keeping in shape does not preclude that they can't max out. And I'm saying that 215 pound grown men, professional athletes, usually bench in excess of 300 pounds. I can't imagine Shawn Thornton saying "I don't know how to max out, I only know how to do reps at 150/185/225 pounds"! Too funny.

Something tells me you don't exercise in a gym very often if you don't understand this.

How about this? Ask a couple of men you know, men you know who work out and exercise, how much they weigh and how much they can bench and you'll probably be astounded at how strong grown men are. Particularly compared to your average woman. This does not mean that women are not good athletes, or wonderful people or shouldn't be running companies.

300 pounds on a bench or 400 pounds in a squat is nothing to many of these professional athletes.
You aren't around many professional hockey players are you? Or guys that train them, or for that matter junior players etc?

Again, they train for muscle repetition and muscle endurance, very rarely do they max out as it does nothing for them, and if you think that professional athletes train something that does nothing for them, you are out of your skull.

Anyways, this has pretty much been beaten death, but I hate to inform you that your view of professional hockey players sitting in a gym like a bunch of teenagers seeing who can bench the most, is well, a fantasy.

sjmay* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-06-2011, 12:19 AM
  #161
Briere Up There*
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Žďár nad Sázavo
Posts: 2,868
vCash: 500
I could bench 335lbs when I was 17 years old. There wasn't a kid on any of the 3 teams I played on (High School, split Midget, local junior) who came within 50lbs of it. And guess what? It was absolutely useless. Being able to bench 135 35 times or 225 20 times was way more important than the max. Truth be told I can probably count on my hand the amount of times I was able to fling someone due to my chesticles. It just isn't an important thing in hockey.

I worked out at Boyle's the summer of my freshmen and sophmore years. Very few kids (many of them elite prep and even college) could bench 225. Sure, a freak like Mark Stuart probably benches 350, but he's pretty atypically built, wouldn't you say? Look at the guy's neck. A guy like Chara doesn't even waste his time trying to max out.

Briere Up There* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-06-2011, 01:44 AM
  #162
sjmay*
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 4,732
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Briere Up There View Post
I could bench 335lbs when I was 17 years old. There wasn't a kid on any of the 3 teams I played on (High School, split Midget, local junior) who came within 50lbs of it. And guess what? It was absolutely useless. Being able to bench 135 35 times or 225 20 times was way more important than the max. Truth be told I can probably count on my hand the amount of times I was able to fling someone due to my chesticles. It just isn't an important thing in hockey.

I worked out at Boyle's the summer of my freshmen and sophmore years. Very few kids (many of them elite prep and even college) could bench 225. Sure, a freak like Mark Stuart probably benches 350, but he's pretty atypically built, wouldn't you say? Look at the guy's neck. A guy like Chara doesn't even waste his time trying to max out.
Thank you, that's exactly my point.

Just like 400 lbs squat, it doesn't freaking do anything for these guys, so they don't do it.

sjmay* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-06-2011, 10:31 AM
  #163
Maupin Fan
Hot Air
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 473
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by sjmay View Post
Thank you, that's exactly my point.

Just like 400 lbs squat, it doesn't freaking do anything for these guys, so they don't do it.
I think you guys are both right.

NHL players aren't maxing out on the bench or squat when they're working out, no doubt about that. Watching any one of the several videos on youtube of some of the training centers in Ontario where these guys work out show that. You're right about that.

I don't think WDR was arguing it correctly but I think his point is that IF they tried to, there are a handful of players on each and every NHL team that could bench 300 lbs. for a one rep max, which I also agree with.

Maupin Fan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-06-2011, 10:40 AM
  #164
Dump and Chase
Hand of God
 
Dump and Chase's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 632
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Briere Up There View Post
A guy like Chara doesn't even waste his time trying to max out.

I realize that you are responding to someone else's post. So this not aimed at you.


For anyone that understands physics in even it's simplest form Chara is a terrible example of someone who can bench a ton of weight. At 6'9 the guy has a huge wingspan that makes the weight all that much tougher to move.


I would bet my left nut that a guy like Sean Avery could out max Chara in a bench press.

Dump and Chase is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-06-2011, 07:54 PM
  #165
WDR357
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Boston Area
Country: United States
Posts: 57
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by sjmay View Post
You aren't around many professional hockey players are you? Or guys that train them, or for that matter junior players etc?

Again, they train for muscle repetition and muscle endurance, very rarely do they max out as it does nothing for them, and if you think that professional athletes train something that does nothing for them, you are out of your skull.

Anyways, this has pretty much been beaten death, but I hate to inform you that your view of professional hockey players sitting in a gym like a bunch of teenagers seeing who can bench the most, is well, a fantasy.
You just don't get it but at least Crusaders did. The idea that professional hockey players aren't that strong simply because they use reps (like almost everyone else that stays in shape does) is laughable.

I'll give you another example since you just don't seem to get it or want to admit I'm correct. Brad Thiessen of the WBS Penguins played his college hockey at Northeastern. Before his senior year in the 225 pound squat he did approximately 58 reps. I was told he could have done more but the trainers said he had done plenty. Are you going to argue that he couldn't squat 300 because he only does "reps"??

Going back to the original issue of women being able to compete with men at the professional level, it is again laughable. They just aren't strong enough. I don't need to know whether professional players ever max out to know what they can do on a bench or squat just based on what I've experienced myself. Like I said before, I weigh 165 and bench approximately 250 and squat roughly 275-300. And I'm nowhere near how strong those players are.

BTW, I do play occasionally with kids who play juniors or college.

WDR357 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-06-2011, 11:15 PM
  #166
KaraLupin
카라
 
KaraLupin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 1,693
vCash: 500
You guys are both right.

NHL players can bench 300

BUT

NHL players don't choose to.

Whats the argument?

KaraLupin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-07-2011, 12:03 AM
  #167
sjmay*
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 4,732
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by WDR357 View Post
You just don't get it but at least Crusaders did. The idea that professional hockey players aren't that strong simply because they use reps (like almost everyone else that stays in shape does) is laughable.

I'll give you another example since you just don't seem to get it or want to admit I'm correct. Brad Thiessen of the WBS Penguins played his college hockey at Northeastern. Before his senior year in the 225 pound squat he did approximately 58 reps. I was told he could have done more but the trainers said he had done plenty. Are you going to argue that he couldn't squat 300 because he only does "reps"??

Going back to the original issue of women being able to compete with men at the professional level, it is again laughable. They just aren't strong enough. I don't need to know whether professional players ever max out to know what they can do on a bench or squat just based on what I've experienced myself. Like I said before, I weigh 165 and bench approximately 250 and squat roughly 275-300. And I'm nowhere near how strong those players are.

BTW, I do play occasionally with kids who play juniors or college.
So because you can bench 250, and weight 165, you think everyone in the NHL can bench more because they weigh more?

Seriously?

Just..stop bud, seriously, it's clear you have absolutely no idea how professional hockey players train, we get that.

As far as women playing professional hockey, it can easily happen, and while I know that's a shock to your system, but Ruggerio, played in a Central league game, and was easily one of the top 4 D in the game, could she do it over a season, yea, she could, she chose not to.

sjmay* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-07-2011, 01:13 PM
  #168
Dump and Chase
Hand of God
 
Dump and Chase's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 632
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by sjmay View Post
As far as women playing professional hockey, it can easily happen, and while I know that's a shock to your system, but Ruggerio, played in a Central league game, and was easily one of the top 4 D in the game, could she do it over a season, yea, she could, she chose not to.



I have seen the clips in the youtube video posted earlier in this thread. When I first watched it the day it was originally posted my thought was that she looked really out of place in that game. When you stated that she "was easily one of the top 4 D in the game" I went back and re-watched it.


Now I know the youtube was a puff piece so maybe the editor doesn't have a clue but all I saw in those clips was Ruggerio out of position in front of the net, getting easily boxed out just outside the crease, getting pushed off the puck (with one hand BTW) and she threw a really weak backhand at the net from the point (lol) that resulted in an assist. In fairness she also made a nifty little pass to her D partner in the one shot and got good position on a forward down low and shoved him out of danger behind the net.



Since you want to make the statement that she was one of the top 4 D in that game, how do you back that up? She was offered a one game contract how do you know she had the opportunity to play an entire season?


As I said earlier, I think that her playing in this game was more about marketing than skill and from the clips i watched she looked way out of her league.


Ruggerio's experience of playing in this game in no way represents a realistic argument that women are capable of playing in the NHL. None. Zilch. Nada. Capiche?

Dump and Chase is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-07-2011, 03:46 PM
  #169
sjmay*
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 4,732
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dump and Chase View Post
I have seen the clips in the youtube video posted earlier in this thread. When I first watched it the day it was originally posted my thought was that she looked really out of place in that game. When you stated that she "was easily one of the top 4 D in the game" I went back and re-watched it.


Now I know the youtube was a puff piece so maybe the editor doesn't have a clue but all I saw in those clips was Ruggerio out of position in front of the net, getting easily boxed out just outside the crease, getting pushed off the puck (with one hand BTW) and she threw a really weak backhand at the net from the point (lol) that resulted in an assist. In fairness she also made a nifty little pass to her D partner in the one shot and got good position on a forward down low and shoved him out of danger behind the net.



Since you want to make the statement that she was one of the top 4 D in that game, how do you back that up? She was offered a one game contract how do you know she had the opportunity to play an entire season?


As I said earlier, I think that her playing in this game was more about marketing than skill and from the clips i watched she looked way out of her league.


Ruggerio's experience of playing in this game in no way represents a realistic argument that women are capable of playing in the NHL. None. Zilch. Nada. Capiche?
I know the family, that's how I know.

Never said it was a representation of women playing in the NHL, I did however say professional hockey, slight difference.

sjmay* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-07-2011, 03:58 PM
  #170
Briere Up There*
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Žďár nad Sázavo
Posts: 2,868
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by WDR357 View Post
You just don't get it but at least Crusaders did. The idea that professional hockey players aren't that strong simply because they use reps (like almost everyone else that stays in shape does) is laughable.

I'll give you another example since you just don't seem to get it or want to admit I'm correct. Brad Thiessen of the WBS Penguins played his college hockey at Northeastern. Before his senior year in the 225 pound squat he did approximately 58 reps. I was told he could have done more but the trainers said he had done plenty. Are you going to argue that he couldn't squat 300 because he only does "reps"??

Going back to the original issue of women being able to compete with men at the professional level, it is again laughable. They just aren't strong enough. I don't need to know whether professional players ever max out to know what they can do on a bench or squat just based on what I've experienced myself. Like I said before, I weigh 165 and bench approximately 250 and squat roughly 275-300. And I'm nowhere near how strong those players are.

BTW, I do play occasionally with kids who play juniors or college.
If you bench 250 you're already stronger benching than most NHLers. While many will probably be able to equal or exceed that total, I assure you that number dwindles the closer you get to 300. Phil Kessel cannot bench 250, neither can his buddy Grabo. Luke Schenn and Phaneuf? Now you're looking at guys approaching 300. Believe me, 300 isn't some rare unheard of feat, but it's not an expectation.

Squatting is entirely different, that's an NHLers bread and butter in terms of weight lifting. Ovechkin's upper body looks like my grandfather's, but he can probably squat more than I can bench and squat put together.

Briere Up There* is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:08 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2014 All Rights Reserved.