Chamberlain vs Schwarzenegger: strength is not one thing

Chamberlain shared a film set with Schwarzenegger and the question resurfaces: who was stronger? It depends on which kind of strength you measure.

English · Original discussion in Spanish · Published

Chamberlain's strength and Schwarzenegger's are not measured the same way

The question is clear: can a basketball player be stronger than a bodybuilder like Arnold Schwarzenegger? The short answer is yes, but only if strength is measured in its athletic form. Wilt Chamberlain, the NBA center, was agile, explosive and athletic for his height: in that arena he beats Arnold hands down, for obvious reasons. It is not an opinion, it is the consensus of anyone who ever saw Wilt play.

The nuance comes when defining strength. Bodybuilding strength is a different thing: static, gym-based, built for lifting weight in a room, not for jumping to the basket or running the court. They are two different types of strength, and mixing them leads to absurd conclusions.

The spark that revived the debate is cinematic. Chamberlain shared the screen with Schwarzenegger in the Conan sequel. And he was such a bad actor that he made Arnold look like Marlon Brando. That role was his first and last in film. It is not hard to figure out why. For fans of slapstick movies, the ultimate height showdown remains Kareem Abdul-Jabbar versus Bruce Lee, far more worth remembering.

In short, the next time you compare a basketball player with a bodybuilder, ask which kind of strength is being measured. The answer will change the result. And reality is split: Chamberlain wins on explosiveness, Schwarzenegger on static strength. Nobody wins outright.

Also available in: Deutsch

Summary of a discussion on Burbuja.info - Foro de economía, actualidad y política., translated from Spanish and reviewed before publication. Read the full discussion (45 replies).

More summaries

All summaries in English →

-
Back