Are we stronger/weaker then past humans?

>people in Roman ages were tall
(citation needed)

There's nothing wrong with that lunge you're being an autist about some fucking knees over toes rule that you hear every bro wannabe trainer consider to be gospel

In fact everything you said is some retarded bro science shit

Im not the op but
Romans, especially roman athletes like gladiators, ate pretty well. I think height was mostly nutrition.

The average ancient man was stronger than the average modern man but the average trained man today is stronger than the average trained man back then. The only ways they have an advantage are

1) More of them having actually survived violence and having the nerve to inflict it without hesitation instead of threatening to kill people on the internet
2) Resilience from having to deal with actual struggle.

A weak, skilled fighter will beat a strong, unskilled fighter; A strong, skilled fighter will obliterate a weak, equally skilled fighter.

we are basically degenerate manlets compared to early modern humans, and some sort of disgusting ape compared to medieval humans. Here is an example:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English_longbow#Draw_weights

----------------
Estimates for the draw of these bows varies considerably. Before the recovery of the Mary Rose, Count M. Mildmay Stayner, Recorder of the British Long Bow Society, estimated the bows of the Medieval period drew 90–110 pounds-force (400–490 newtons), maximum, and Mr. W.F. Paterson, Chairman of the Society of Archer-Antiquaries, believed the weapon had a supreme draw weight of only 80–90 lbf (360–400 N).[2] Other sources suggest significantly higher draw weights. The original draw forces of examples from the Mary Rose are estimated by Robert Hardy at 150–160 lbf (670–710 N) at a 30-inch (76.2 cm) draw length; the full range of draw weights was between 100–185 lbf (440–820 N).[9] The 30-inch (76.2 cm) draw length was used because that is the length allowed by the arrows commonly found on the Mary Rose.

A modern longbow's draw is typically 60 lbf (270 N) or less, and by modern convention measured at 28 inches (71.1 cm). Historically, hunting bows usually had draw weights of 50–60 lbf (220–270 N), which is enough for all but the very largest game and which most reasonably fit adults can manage with practice. Today, there are few modern longbowmen capable of using 180–185 lbf (800–820 N) bows accurately

-------------

We thought the english longbow had a draw weight of 90 pounds. We found an extant bows from a buried boat. The draw weights were generally around 150 pounds, and as high as 180 pounds.

Modern cucks struggle with 60.

there's a reason modern fencing has the knee at a 90 degree angle while lunging

now fuck off, retard

Its not appropriate positioning for fencing and leaves you open to a counter attack from multiple positions

Have you ever fenced in competition before? It may have worked in the past but doing it when your opponent has any sort of agility would cost you the match.

And don't try insulting someone and not letting them respond. That's what faggots do user and I'm sure you're not a faggot right...

MIDGETS

As a whole we are probably significantly physically weaker.

Access to barbells, dumbbells, and whatever faggy machine that you swear helps probably make us stronger because the weight is more available to use than it was during antiquity. We also have more access to protein, prework out, and 8 hours to sleep (if you don't you're a degenerate).

They probably had better cardio because we sit down while they were out flogging Mollys or some shit that robots do now. Swining muh sword doesn't compare to having a bar a metal that doesn't bend under the weight of 5pl8.

tl:dr jacked beer and mutton eating english yeoman could row 400 lbs all fuggin saturday and have a lark while doing it.

nigga premodern man sleep all the time.

What else you gonna do when the sun is down and you don't have electricity lol? Give the wifey maybe 10 minutes of action then till to pass out

>let me just retroactively adjust what was meant and then I'm not wrong

At what point in the original post was the subject of your lunge criticism based on sport fencing? oh that's right it wasn't and you said the lunge was bad because humans aren't built to move at such an extreme angle with knees over toes which is bullshit and the example isn't even an extreme angle.

does that mean we should be doing hella longbow pulls to make gains?

That's another user, you dumb fuck

British longbows are the absolute extreme, and even then
You have to divide lbf by whatever the imperial acceleration of gravity on earth is. Anyway, the heaviest draw weight there is equivalent to 85ish kg coming off the floor, but also remember that you push with one hamd and pull with the other. It's not.anything that crazy, although firing a bow of that weight is not easy.

What's more surprising is how accurate some archers, like the Mongols, were. Not far off sharp shooters of recent history, but ofc firing a bow that accurately is far harder than a gun and required a hell of a lot.of experience.

lmao you're trying to save face pretty hard my man, was pretty aware it was two different posters but guess what you both said the same thing

It means when these knaves slap your wenchs ass at the tavern, you best step off lad.

>let me just retroactively adjust what was meant and then I'm not wrong

Are you honestly trying to be smarmy implying a person wouldn't notice that two posts right after another obviously made by different posters were in fact made by different posters?

Get your internet arguing skills up kid lmao

...

raw strength I would give to the modern age, but overall fitness I would give to the past due to constant movement and physical labor.

You forget bowmen were highly trained since kids and not everyone at that time could just pick a longbow and start shooting. Sure they would have it easier than a degenerated modern human anyways

Yea height is totally about nutrition.

Just feed your kids a bunch and theyll get really tall you fucking dumbass

Not that guy but underfeeding someone can easily stunt their growth... dumbass : )

Holy shit this is the most brosciencey thing i ve ever read.

>I think height was mostly nutrition

Youre a dumbass, hes a dumbass, carry on

English guys back then had to practice for longbows by law though. They cant just up and do that shit.

There is basically no evidence for any significant group of people in the past being tall at all by today's standards. The Vikings were considered to be giants by french standards, and they were estimated to average 5ft7. Meaning maybe a couple of them were even nearing 6ft

You basically have to go back to Paleolithic societies to find people taller than late 20th Century modern humans.

Homo sapiens idaltu averaged almost 2 meters.

Diet, and especially access to meat during childhood development, is a very important factor.

Palefaces, will they ever learn?

>Do you think gladiator or knight could hold their own in terms of strength to us.
Depends, are we talking barechested hand to hand combat or medieval combat with weapons and armor? Cause we would lose the second one.
>Heck, how could they hold there own in terms of overall fitness?
They literally fought and killed people for a living, while carrying an armor that is very heavy and wielding a very heavy weapon, you expect them to be weak?
>Put in a pit against ancient warriors would you have a chance?
As said above, depends on the combat we are talking about, they did not had nearly as much skill in hand to hand combat as a martial artist, boxer or UFC fighter, but they would hack, slash ,crush, stab, slice and dice you to pieces with any blade, axe, spear or blundgeon.

Ancient warriors had natural test levels that makes modern day powerlifters look like children.
An ancient greek powerlifter was able to lift an atlas stone that is roughly about 2 thousand pounds. I have to find that story somewhere, does anyone have it?

Yes. Yes we are. And bigger, with less diseases and longer lifespans.

ps. those halberds weight only a couple pounds

Manlets etc

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Angus_MacAskill

>unsubstantiated claims about ancient test levels
>powerlifters lifting atlas stones
>believing stories haven't been exaggerated
user, I'm afraid you're clinically retarded.

It's a fact, men back in those times had significantly higher testosterone levels. On top of that they were all exercising literally every single day. Most of them at least.

>wielding a very heavy weapon
>5lbs is heavy

[citation needed]

Stay on reddit, triplenigger.

Excellent source you have there faggot.

Yeah back then by law all men were required to train with a longbow from early childhood. They would go through dozens of bows in their life, increasing in size and draw weight as they got older. We can tell by skeleton analysis that this really fucked up a lot of peoples joints. We can see asymetrical enlargement of the bones in the shoulder and arm and growth around the joints that would have definitely restricted movement.
Imagine the sort of weight you'd pe able to pull if you'd have trained every day since the age of 6 or 7

>5'7 are weak manlets

Yes, keep telling yourself that. You sound insecure as fuck.

These are Hungarian Medieval Swords

Really makes you think who lifted this shit, right?

Those longbow users also had deformed bones by the end of their lives.

Try swinging that around striking things as heavy as you can with a single hand, see how light you feel it is after 20 minutes fighting.

That's a myth. Most of the food they consumed was bread. Almost no protons for them as people back then didn't know about the link between protons and muscles.

This

theglyptodon.wordpress.com/2012/06/26/the-archers-bones/

>This lifelong training left its mark on the archer. We can actually identify a longbowman’s skeleton by the damage they have done to their bones; otherwise rare defects show up along the shoulder blades, wrists, and elbows. The act of drawing back hundreds of pounds of force every day, hundreds of times per day, strained ligaments and bones to such an extent that some skeletons even started growing extra bone to compensate. Their devotion to their skill permanently changed their bodies enough that we can still identify them hundreds of years later. Few other professions can so easily claim the same.

This is the dumbest post of the day

>That's a myth. Most of the food they consumed was bread. Almost no protons for them as people back then didn't know about the link between protons and muscles.
Don't be stupid, they ate a lot of fish, cheese, eggs and wildgame they hunted like boars and deers.

>not studying the blade
I bet you drink on the weekends with harlots.

No they weren't. Fuck Napolean was average height in his time at 5'7"

>the link between protons and muscles
>protons and muscles
>protons
Veeky Forums

Yes. 5'7" was the average.
The average height for Americans is 5'10"
Those Romans were not "tall", champ.

Welcome to Veeky Forums newfriend.
Protons is nothing new here.

Bread was certainly a staple and would have been eaten with almost every meal, but it was not the majority of the food they ate. We know from surviving recipe books that classical period humans are a wide variety of foods and indeed ate many foods that we wouldn't today. The romans for example ate almost every bird that lived in the region and mammals that we wouldn't eat today like otter were certainly on the table. Meat would have been more expensive definitely but fish was extremely plentiful and cheap.

kek

>he doesn't his protons
never gonna make it

>We also have more access to protein, prework out, and 8 hours to sleep (if you don't you're a degenerate).

Average hours of sleep has gone down drastically in the past 60 years, from 8.5 hours to 6.5.

There's no reason to think that prior to the Industrial Revolution, people slept less than 7-8 hours a night. They had no alarm clocks, and no reason to sleep less than they needed to.

Lurk more

We are incredibly weaker.
>inb4 more muscle and health
Constant use creates more strength than more efficient use. We do the latter, we diet, we train, we do all these things, but at the end of the day a man who lifts hay barrels all day since he was a child will always be stronger than all, but the greatest of us who physically train.
These people also hardly look as strong as they actually are.

Back than, day after day you did hard labor.
If you knew an actual combat skill, you trained with it daily for hours and hours, that was your job.
There is no way we can compete.

>tldr
>midget from the 1500s with a huge fucking sword trains with it daily
>is going to rekt your shit

People have technically gained much more potential for strength. Of course, that's not to say that the average person today is stronger than the average person of ancient times. I think that they'd be much better warriors though.

Keep in mind these bows weren't aimed like a modern bow. They were fired at a 45 degree angle to arch up and land into massed troops. The high draw weight was to extend range.
Still impressive, but it wasn't like they were drawn and held for minutes at a time like modern hunting.

You only hold the arrow back on compound bows. Which is easy as fuck. If you're using a recurve or long you typically shoot instinctively. Meaning you pull to your anchor point and release.

I study history and I'm particularly interested in ancient Rome. You can't imagine how bad food situation was before the agricultural revolution

That's why he was laughed at for his height during his days?

He was average height. Him being short was a myth. He did have a weird thing for tall men and loved to have his tallest soldiers around him.

>That's why he was laughed at for his height during his days?

British propaganda, no lie. He also surrounded himself with his Imperial Guard, who all had to be 6' or taller, which made him look shorter.

the west is generally weaker than their ancestors

Hit em with the face user that'll show him

>I study history and I'm particularly interested in ancient Rome. You can't imagine how bad food situation was before the agricultural revolution
Now, are we talking about the nobility or the plebs? Cause their diets are hardly comparable.

Of course the army and gladiators were well-fed, otherwise they would not be combat efficient.

The regular pitchfork wielding slave and poorer servant classes ate pretty badly.

I'll correct myself. It wasn't really a myth. It was a misunderstanding. The French measured inches differently than the English.
The French claimed Napolean to be 5'2" but when converted to modern inches he comes out to about 5'6.5", which was average during his time.

laughing my ass off at these nostalgic faggots who think everything was better back then

think about it you imbeciles
did the ancient man eat 10 eggs a day, 2kg of red meat and healthy fats?
did the ancient man train following a hypertrophy/strength method in order to make better gains?

no you fucking morons, their diet was shit, their training was also shit, they had only practice on their side and no study. Today, normal gym faggots can become goliath in 3 years, 6months in case they go /fraud

so stop saying this kind of bullshit, in 1v1 fight where each one would only use their bare hands and feet, the modern day man would crush the socratic greek one

they are just larping faggots
modern men and much more in shape than ancient manlets with shit nutrition and no training knowledge

...

I agree with you however if we were comparing our best to their best I would root for us. Especially in hand to hand. A good example is Mohammad Ali. Just watch him fight on youtube. He was the best in his time. He'd easily be able to kick most peoples asses. But not our current boxers. Hell watch mike tyson. He is noticeably faster and stronger then ali. Muhammad Ali wouldn't stand a chance. So if you were to take the most decorated fighter of the middle ages to the most decorated fighter of the 20 or 21 century we would win

Your right
Fish was far more plentiful in the Mediterranean back then

>stronger?
Yes

>Could they kick my ass still?
Yes.

When you think about how we exercise today it's fairly amazing. We have managed to condense what humans used to do for 8-10 hours a day into an hour and thirty minutes 4-5 times a week and get the same if not better results.

This needs to be broken down into categories.

In a match of sheer strength? We're bigger on average now (5'10 vs like 5'7),and a hell of a lot heavier. Also we have supplements, good nutrition and have surpassed broscience and work out scientifically. But there are a lot of numales with no muscle development. Therefore: Modern athlete, ancient fighter, average modern man.

In a test of unarmed combat, I'd actually give it to modern fighters. Boxing/MMA/Muay Thai have come a hell of a long way, with natural evolution of techniques, scientific training methods and much bigger fighters. So: Modern fist fighter, ancient fist fighter, untrained ancient man, untrained modern man.

In an armed fight though? Hahahahaha no, these people actually did this shit for a living/their own fucking survival, and we've barely reconstructed how to use these weapons. The few skilled and physically fit (you need both and boy do they rarely overlap) HEMA practicioners we have might get in an afterblow before they died from being run the fuck through. The average modern athlete would be slaughtered. The average modern man would piss himself before being literally bifurcated.

>guys were all quasimodo-fied from training with and using longbows so much
Some of their postures were screwed and some bones and joints were messed up from professionals focusing so much on that activity, leading to offset muscle group development.

Think chicken leg syndrome for the entire weak hand side of your body.

>can William Marshal kick my ass?
yes

laughing my ass at this guy who goes to a mcdojo twice a week thinking he can roll with Joachim Freeman, some burly yeoman who kills pigs and tosses sheep for living, and has probably already killed a man or two by age 25. While you spend 8 hours a day doing excel bitchwork or listening to your jewish prof talk about genders, Joachim is exercising. While you spend 4 hours a day jerking it to pron, video games, and Veeky Forums, Joachim is exercising. Your barbells and kungfu don't mean shit.

Kek'd

((Daniel Mendoza)) was a manlet back in his time, people ridiculed him for being smaller. He found actual techniques and trained. He is regarded as the father of scientific boxing. THis was bare-knuckled and grappling(dirty boxing) was allowed.
>pic related

Not that user, but it's true, test levels have been dropping.
endocrine.org/news-room/press-release-archives/2006/testosterone_lvls_in_men_decline
Me thinks, we just become so cucked in life as men, being masculine in society is seen as sexist.

yeah yeah, i'm sure some jew invented boxing all by himself, haven't heard this story before

Was /pol/ right all along? What you are saying makes sense, srs.
This was my introduction to him.
bloodyelbow.com/2015/1/30/7885703/pugilistica-the-diaz-brothers-the-sweet-science-of-bruising

the celts that the romans fought were like 6 foot 4

Were these not used to kill mounted soldiers?
Pretty sure they'd hoist those around and kill horses.

Depends what you mean by ''past''.

We're definitely more stronger and physically bulked than our forebears a century or two ago, since the majority of people back then were malnourished peasants.

Meat-eating hunter-gatherers from pre-Neolithic era might be in par with modern fitfags when it comes to muscle composition, but men back then were also slightly shorter and smaller in average, so...