Perhaps the reason Schemansky never received the acclaim he deserved was because his sport was, and is, a relatively minor one in the United States. No crowds met Norb at the airport after his many international victories like they swarmed around Vlasov upon his return to Russia after he had beaten Norb for the 1962 World championship with an illegal double-jerk.
The man's lifting career has ended.
It is over.
He has moved out of the gym.
Norb's well-used weights are now stored in his garage. He prefers not to look back and speculate on paths not chosen. "What's done is done."
He can take pride in his achievements, his own accomplishments, because they are his, no one else's. His concerns at the moment are immediate, such as giving more encouragement to his daughter, who is a swimmer, than his father gave to him.
Maybe there are some who are happy that he is working, though he has always worked. He made house payment, raised four children, though he struggled sometimes, while giving more of himself to the world and athletics than others, much more. "I don't owe any money, my kids haven't been in trouble," he says to his critics. "Let them match that."
And he lifted weights.
Oh, how he lifted!
Training for the 1964 Olympics.
Five American soldiers man an anti-aircraft gun in the liberated portion of Normandy, France, July 25, 1944.
On your left: Pvt. Norbert Schemansky.
Seen in this video at :57, 1:21 and 1:35.
No jokes about Reg Park Park.
Don't even think it.
He works now in a position which befits him -- as a leader of men. It is his job to check their work, make certain it is correct, and oversee the completion of a project. He does this with the same dedication he applied to weightlifting and the same scrutiny he gave to the weighing of a world record.
Norb is a civil engineer. During the spring, summer, and fall, he directs crews which put in sewers and pave streets, usually in Detroit suburbs. It is also his job to read blueprints and maps, checking for water or gas lines, because breaking a water line can delay the progress of the crew for some time. He also has to make decisions such as whether or not trees must be removed. If at all possible, he keeps them.
Not surprisingly, his boss, Jim Armstrong ("Should be my name, huh?" Norb said and grinned), says that he never has to worry about Norb being there on the job or that anything will go wrong, because he has a man in charge that he can depend on, just as the lifting world depended on Norb for about 30 years. Schemansky has to wear a hardhat on the job. Somehow the hat becomes him. Some men can wear hats.
Though living his life as it is now, and though he says he pays little attention to lifting and thinks little of the past -- "until someone like you comes around," -- when pressed or asked, Norb has comments and opinions. They are often witty, always precise, full of candor, often satiric; yet honest beneath it all. Everything he says can't be taken literally, which may be why he has been so often misunderstood and maligned. Perhaps a sampling of what he has to say on a variety of subjects is the best way to present him.
Even though the 1972 AAU Olympic trials were held in his native Detroit, Schemansky was conspicuous by his absence. He did arrive for the heavyweight and super-heavyweight finals. He hadn't missed competing at all until he saw heavyweights winning with totals barely over the 1100 he was lifting in March of '72.
On Lifters and Lifting Today
"Some super-heavyweights pressed the same weight, 425 pounds, I pressed 10 years ago weighing 220. That was when the press was strict and without the back bend.
"Lifting has been going downhill since 1952. We are almost a weight class behind the lifters in Europe and Russia now.
"Lifters today don't need a coach, they need a pharmacist. Just look at their eyes and listen to what they say, like that one guy at the '72 Nationals. There are more injuries because of drugs -- and because they try for too much."
On Coaches
"Instead of one coach, there should be regional coaches, such as Detroit, Los Angeles, York, etc. The only place you can get help is York. Everybody can't just pick up and go there. I'd be willing to be that kind of a coach. There are certainly enough other ex-lifters who could coach and do the same. Divide the money. The desire is an individual one and you need help where you are."
On Officials
Without Bob Hoffman, lifting would be in a sad state of affairs.
"The bad part is that people (officials) who know little about lifting become important figures in the sport and ride to the top on the muscles of the athletes. They're the deltoid warmers."
On Inconsistent Judges
"Lifting is easy. It's beating the officiating that is difficult."
On Advice for Lifters
"They're lifting over their capacity. They leave their best lifts in the gym. I could always lift 10% more in competition. Hoffman once said, 'In training he (Norb) looks like he is dying; in a contest, he's a dynamo!' Don't attempt maximums in the gym. Concentrate on doubles, and do, saving a lot of energy. Some members of the team couldn't believe how much more I could do in a contest. I was never burned out. Doubles also develop technique.
"In a contest don't start at maximums. The Russians failed in the Olympics because they started too high."
On Jon Cole
"Did he look like the strongest man in the world? I pressed 425 ten years ago."
On Norb's Having Been Called the Strongest Man in the World
"Try a better deodorant."
On Longevity
"Davis lasted about 17 or 18 years; Tommy Kono about 14 or 15. I'm talking about higher caliber lifters, not some lifter who hangs around for 20 years and the only thing that goes up is his bodyweight."
On Davis, Bradford and Schemansky
"John Davis appreciated my lifting. Once somebody suggested in 1954 that I reduce to 198 again and Davis remarked, 'Vorobiev doesn't want any part of Ski.'
"In 1960 at Rome, one lifter said that I was about through as a lifter. Jim Bradford told him, 'Ski isn't in the mothballs yet.' I started breaking some world records shortly after. Jim was right.
"Jim would have lifted better and longer, but he had the same problem as most good lifters. He once told me that he was getting a little tired of owing at the gas station, the grocery store, etc."
On Being in the Shadow of Davis and Anderson
"I don't think I was in the shadows of those two. I broke their records, didn't I? Lack of money stopped me from beating Davis in 1950. I had a bad back when Anderson was lifting and couldn't have beaten Truman Capote if I had to."
On Powerlifting
"Power-lifts are half-lifts. What did I do? Oh, 630 in the squat for a couple of reps, 630 in the deadlift for a couple of reps, 440 on the bench, and 505 with a kick. I didn't train; I just tried them."
On Bodybuilders vs. Weightlifters
"One tries to look good, the other tries to do good."
On Isometrics
"Take a heavy press and really press it. And if it doesn't go, that's isometrics."
On Eating at the '64 Olympics
"I didn't go there to plug the toilets."
On an Argument with an Iron Curtain Lifter
"He was braggin' how good he had it. I told him, 'I don't even have a job and I got more than you have.'"
Norb Schemansky has more than most men, Iron Curtain or not.
He has traveled, survived, and succeeded beyond the realm and capacity of good men who are and become lesser to him. Though some bad memories may remain with him no one can discount his longevity, and his excellence.
From 1942 to 1968, 26 years, he was
national champion 9 times
2nd 4 times
3rd only once, and
4th twice.
For those 10 unaccounted-for years add
3 years of Service
3 years for a back problem
a year for no money, and
3 years of miscellaneous injuries.
That totals the man's career; a man, who, without injury, and with good luck, could have participated in 7 different Olympics.
Cue the music . . .
On one of the last days of September, Norbert Schemansky moved out of the gym for good. He took with him the smaller weights which had not found their way into the bags of thieving keyholders, as well as the heavier weights which had been thrust above his head an uncountable number of times.
No one was there to witness the event. No one waved goodbye. There wasn't anybody there to say something good.
He moved out as he had begun, alone, quietly, in relative obscurity.
No one can say that about his career, however. It is unfortunate there wasn't anybody there when he left for the last time to look at his muscular body and arms and say: "You must be somebody."
Because he is.
Enjoy Your Lifting!
"....On Bodybuilders vs. Weightlifters
ReplyDelete" 'One tries to look good, the other tries to do good.' "
After over 53 years in iron-mongering, I still have never discovered what about any aspect of iron, whether Oly lifting, powerlifting, or bodybuilding, is anything about trying "to do good". To me, "doing good" involves something practical and useful for daily living and which contributes to family and community.
As amazing as I have always considered Oly lifters (and Schemansky particularly) to be, I've never found Olympic sports of any kind to be that kind of "good" for anything, no more than powerlifting or bodybuilding (or golf or football or soccer or chess or building plastic car models). Unless they serve to earn a living, they amount to personal enjoyments, passions, and pasttimes, not "doing of good".
Winning the Mr. Olympia in 2024, deadlifting 1,102 lbs in 2016, and hoisting " ...the Apollon bar with his first attempt" in 1954 are all impressive contest wins and lifts to us within the Iron Game, but mean zero in the "doing good" of life and history. Taxes didn't get reduced, orphans didn't get adopted, diseases didn't get cured, flood victims didn't get new housing, the elderly neighbor's lawn didn't get mowed; heck, the dishes didn't even get washed.
Maybe his "to do good" quip was facetious? A teasing jest?
But, Part One of this article series states, "...Schemansky worked long and hard to become a champion of world class and stature, and though he achieved and was successful, he holds some bitterness and has some bitter memories of the past. Few are connected with his performances. He cannot understand the duplicity with which people admire strength on one hand, and then knock his sport. He finds it incongruous that some sportswriters laud other athletes for their strength, yet look down their noses at athletes who perform in Norb's kind of arena. "
And, Part Two states, "...That year 1954 was a great year, filled with good memories; but for Norb it was tarnished by the typical American attitude toward his sport. He was voted the #1 man in sports in a worldwide poll; that is, if you don't include his native country. He finished 10th in the United States, behind, among others, Willy Mays. As a result of the American vote, he ended up 5th worldwide and was the highest ranking U.S. athlete.
Three times he had been nominated for the Sullivan award. Each time the top amateur of the year had been someone from a more popular sport...."
So, I have to wonder if the remark reflected his belief that Oly lifting competition is some sort of beneficial "good" for society, and if the bitterness attributed to Schemansky in this series roots in his wanting his Oly lifting to amount to more than a medal or trophy won at contests and more than praise and recognition limited to Iron Game devotees?
I wonder if the private satisfaction which many of us get from iron and continues to motivate us, that pushing ourselves to our maximums in strength, technique, or aesthetics, whether we win contetss or don't, and whether anyone else knows and cares or doesn't, just wasn't satisfying enough for how Schemansky was wired?
Perhaps that's why he dismissed hoisting iron when his competitive years ended, instead of continuing to train, to whatever capacity remained in him, simply for the love of it, despite the inevitable decline which aging causes?
To me, it's sad that someone with that much elite genetic ability would simply discard iron mongering when his competitive years ended.
But, each to their own. And who th' f**k cares what my wax-philosophical opinion is anyway, lol?
I'll start out with your last line. That should cover me right nicely too! Ah, you know . . . the scheduling, discipline, goal-setting . . . all that hooey that makes us humans so special . . . and back in the York heyday bodybuilding was, let's be honest, seen as a joke by many lifters, just like now. The differences between a bodybuilder and a lifter are huge in my view. Seriously, I'm allergic to tanning paint and cutting diets. No worries, Norb was likely just expressing his distaste for bodybuilding seen as a much less valid form in his eyes.
DeletePrior to one of his Olympic competitions, Norb asked his then employer for time off to represent his country. He was denied. Effectively, he had to choose between keeping his job or competing in the Olympics. He went to the Olympics whilst being supported by his wife.
ReplyDeleteAlso, during his career the Cold War with Russia meant the Olympics were also a defacto political contest. (This is a very long conversation that has been written about extensively elsewhere and not really the purpose of this blog, where we learn training concepts that we hopefully sensibly adapt to our own needs).
In the early days of physique competion they were held in conjunction with weightlifting competition. AAU physique competitions also had athletic points, that were eventually discarded. Norb is probably referring to this development rather than denigrating physique competitors per sec. In fact, in his early years he entered a few local physique competitions. His Olympic teammate Tommy Kono won multiple Mr Universe titles.
Post Lee Haney era, physique contests seem to have increasingly devolved into pharmacological contests. Again just a comment from a disinterested observer of the arena since the 1990s; not saying they don't train very hard. But because of the boost from these "aids", I am not much interested in their methods.
Fortunately, this blog has curated top quality information from successful competitors who built strength & health that can be examined, tested and adapted in our own training.
Wonderful to see intelligent commenting here! I sure do enjoy and appreciate it.
DeleteJOHN,
DeleteYes, to all your points regarding Oly lifting history generally (including the geo-political ideological importance it, along with all other Olympic sports, was given during the Cold War) and Schemansky particularly; as well as to your points regarding the AAU evaluation of athletic abilities (a new rule added in late 1956 to their physique contests which only remained effective until about 1964), and, the ever-exponential use of PEDS underlying physique competition (although, I push the date back to circa1960, by which time the anabolic extreme of high-enough doses of exogenous testosterone injectables was becoming known and when Dianabol was becoming the ubiquitous go-to.)
Also agreed, that when drugs are added to a weight-training process, it's thereafter a question of "is that method or program applicable, practicable, and productive for an average-gened, non-drug-using trainee?" Regrettably, the drug shadow confusing the effectiveness of training methods also extends over Olympic weightlifting methods, too, with the Ziegler-initiated series of Oly competitors, Reicke, Bednarski, Starr, and Patera being confessed examples of, and even my favorite Oly lifter, Kono, being claimed for, the common AAS use during the Bob Hoffman/York era and long afterwards.
For me, who at 69-ish is still passionate about iron (despite never considering it to be other than for my personal satisfaction and benefits, never as some sort of "doing good for family, community, and society") and still trains regularly despite my gradual decline caused by aging, it's difficult to comprehend why a man with Schemansky's genetic gifts and elite-level success would quit lifting at age 48, when he still seemed fit and able. My wondering and musing is simply my trying to understand why he quit.
Only Schemansky knew why, of course. Anything I might think is merely my fallible speculatings.
Just, it astonishes me (because of my own weird wiring?) that someone could be so dedicated and passionate about hoisting iron - - a pursuit which can be done alone even at home, can be adapted to declining capacities, has the side-benefits of fitness and health, can almost always be modified to set new personal challenges - - then discard it the way he did.
But, yeah, I come back to, "who th' fuck am I, anyway, why does that matter to me? Each to his own."
And, AGREED - - this blog is a treasurehouse of information, reminders, and inspiration. Basic principles and ideas which most any guy (or gal) can glean from are contained here. Like GIVEITANAME succinctly states, lifting "ain't that complex". 'Tis why I've been a regular reader here for several years.
Why Norb stopped competing is in the article:
Delete"Jim would have lifted better and longer, but he had the same problem as most good lifters. He once told me that he was getting a little tired of owing at the gas station, the grocery store, etc."
Today we would say cost of living pressures.
JOHN,
DeleteI understood that finances is why he quit COMPETING, but, unless I misunderstand, he also quit ANY and ALL working-out with weights. After he no longer competed, he didn't seem to be interested or motivated to work out with weights for personal benefit and satisfaction.
I'm married 45 years, raised six kids, earned a living as a self-employed builder/roofer contractor, so I understand the cost of living pressures in life. But I'd come home after a day's labor and keep a workout schedule, done then as I still do it, in my primarily outdoor home gym with the 3,000+ lbs of Oly and Standard plates I own. I did it then, privately and non-competitvely, all the decades I was earning a living with a hammer and tape measure, because I enjoy pushing iron.
In contrast, the articles claim Schemansky mothballed his weights.
Part One says:
" Whose are the weights?"
"Mine. Someone's been stealing them. The small ones they can carry away in their bags. I'll store the weights in my garage or give them away, maybe, if it's to someone who's serious. Not just to anyone. Maybe I'll sell them....
"Not much else to see," Norb said, and with the purpose which has characterized his lifting and his life, he led his visitor out, shut off the lights, closed the door, and turned his broad back on what had been.
On the last day of September, Norbert moved out of the gym....The weights now rest in Schemansky's garage, perhaps there for a long time."
Part Three, above, says:
" The man's lifting career has ended.
It is over.
"He has moved out of the gym.
Norb's well-used weights are now stored in his garage. He prefers not to look back and speculate on paths not chosen. "What's done is done."
Nothing about him planning to keep using weights non-competitvely, working out for personal enjoyment or benefits, like many of us do right into our '70s.
THAT, what seems to have been his complete quitting of lifting, period, is what baffles me. The article portrays a man who was passionate about competing but not about lifting; when his competition years ended, his motivation for any lifting at all seems to have vanished.
Perhaps the article is hyperbole, I'm inferring too much from how the writer chose to color the story, and Schemansky did stay interested in working out non-competitvely with barbells after retiring from competition?
I hope that's true, my take is wrong, and he did keep at it..
Joe, sorry to butt in here. They do so love to pump up this whole part of Norbert Schemansky's career. I can almost see him and Hepburn sobbing away in their beer, side by each and lamenting the injustice of it all over rotten hot dogs in some dank old men's drinking establishment. I highly doubt the actual men were like that in their lives after competitive lifting, but then, drama sells stuff right nicely, in sports as in any other endeavor. These Norbert articles were kind of "off" in my eyes in that respect. Hell, no difference between an elite guy and a schlepp like you or I . . . we ALL age, we all get some form of "injustice" dumped on our goals, dreams and even achievements. The whole flavor of this one left a bad taste in my mouth, and I don't really think Mr. Schemansky or Mr. Hepburn spent their post-competitive years wallowing about in whining. But then, you know muscle-mag authors and what they get paid to do. Grain(s) of salt may be required when reading such.
DeleteGIVEIT,
DeleteLOL...echoes of Hepburn articles I've read with rolling eyes and intermittent guffaws were in fact ringing in my otherwise empty skull as I read these three, lol
I'll take heart from your welcomed butt-in. You're right, I oughtta know better by now. Like my brother-in-law's dad used to say when we were teens, "Never let the facts get in the way of a good story!"
I'll picture Schemansk later doing like you and I and the rest of us iron-addicts inevitably would do until until we're either found dead at the base of the power rack or too senile to remember where we put them - - digging those weights out of storage, setting up in that garage (fuck the car or truck!), and hoisting some poundage. Just, cuz', it's what we do.
We are addicts! Plain and simple . . . at least I am . . . brain-wise! Still don't have any chairs at home outside of in the bedrooms or if you sit on a bench in the "living longer" room. It's quite crazy at this stage, really. Ah, ya gotta love it no matter.
DeleteWell I don't know if my views on weightlifting are the same as you guys but it has 100% carried over to practical daily use in my life. So many benefits that I've gained from it and continue to do so. I'll list some of them: strength for working with my dad on the house, strength and better conditioning for martial arts, faster recovery from illness and injuries in general, and last but not least being able to cope better with tragedy, stress and depression while striving to maintain a tranquil state of mind.
ReplyDeleteIt gave me great satisfaction being able to lift a water heater and hoist it up into the compartment in the back of the house and hold it while my dad tightened up the pipes. I felt like Jon Pall and Kaz lifting an awkward object! What a thrill it was!
Hey Jeff, yep, for sure without doubt or question. I feel much better when I lift, no matter how much less it is now, than if I don't. And there's the fun factor to consider there too. Life's simply more enjoyable when I lift, and that's reason enough for me. I remember you mentioning elsewhere that (remember the endless questions about conjugate training? over there . . . good grief, it ain't that complex), when we as lifters mature somewhat (to put it fucking mildly), it's impossible to eat enough of the right stuff to keep up to what promises our minds make; the body just can't keep that promise anymore. So now I know what you were saying in spades! Ah, it suck,, but without lifting, to repeat . . . my life is a whole lot less enjoyable.
DeleteYeah, I agree wholeheartedly! I tried stuffing myself with food in the past and just felt bloated. It didn't do anything in the way of increasing my strength. I used to be obsessed with how many grams of protein I consumed each day and I never reaped any benefits from it. Now I simply eat whenever I'm hungry, stop when I'm full and just try to lift as best I can.
DeleteYes, i went into great detail about this in my talk with Bob Simpson. He believed it helped him and who could argue with his results? Everyone has to find their own path and use what works best for them because we're all different. In Pat Casey's book he's got a great saying where he states that the great thing about training is you can cut and paste from other people's routines and make it work for you. It's what I have done since reading this blog and as the years pass I continue to learn and refine my training.
Not sure if you've seen this but I wanted to share this awesome video with Doug Hepburn when he was at peak strength: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LyugRSjOXXI
Hey Jeff . . . I was just watching that Doug video this weekend! Great footage of the Grandview Gym in it, and a wonderful look at what older gyms around here were like. Doug presents himself very well in this one. We get older, our capacity for physical change lessens . . . but the joy of doing remains. Can't bitch too much about that, I figure . . . it didn't help me in the least to gripe.
DeleteInteresting that both Norb Schemansky and Tommy Kono never touted isometrics, even though they were heavily promoted by Bob Hoffman.
ReplyDeleteIn addition to what he said above, at times, it seemed Norb used partials in the rack...not entirely sure if the weights were lifted into the pin or from the pin...I am guessing they were from the pin until completion from images previously on this blog...not isometrics.
Tommy Kono felt isometrics were of no value to him. In a 2009 interview he said:
https://pierini-fitness.blogspot.com/2009/01/when-tommy-kono-speaks-wise-men-listen.html
Pierini: Have you ever trained using isometric contractions? What do you think of this training? Did you ever perform the exercises that were part of the Hoffman Functional Isometric Contraction System?
TK: I experimented with isometric contractions as outlined in the Bob Hoffman course but found that this way of exercising was not for me. You have to be able to give all that you have for a maximum effort and I wasn't able to do this by myself; it was just too difficult for me. I believe you can fool yourself into thinking that you are giving your maximum effort when, it fact, you are not really. Therefore, in my opinion, this training works better with a training partner who can encourage you to try harder. I personally did not and do not think much of this as a primary training method so there is no sense in me training this way if I do not believe in it.
Pierini: American weightlifters Bill March and Louis Riecke made phenomenal gains in their weightlifting totals in the early 1960s that Bob Hoffman attributed to his Functional Isometric Contraction System? Did this get other lifters into doing isometrics? How prevalent is this training for today's national and world-calibre Olympic lifters?
TK: Other lifters tried isometric contractions after observing the gains made by March and Riecke. I do not know how far they went with this training. I do not know how prevalent this training is today for national and world-calibre Olympic lifters.
What we in the West need are weightlifting training camps filled with five year old potential medalists
ReplyDeleteand Josef Mengele-style coaches.
I volunteer
DeleteGIVEIT,
DeleteLOL...prob'ly better than today's five-year-olds camping on media and devices seven days a week?
Dunno why, but reminded me of one of eight grandkids, before his 6th birthday, who'd been taking karate lessons. He's standing next to me near my kitchen table at which I'm seated, and murmurs to himself, very self-congratulatorily, aloud, "I think I can roundkick Grandpa right from here..."
OF COURSE, I replied, "Oh really?? Let me see you do that!"
My wife shakes her head, saying I shouldn't be left with them because I'm a bad influence encouraging their mischief, lol
Howard . . . it couldn't be any worse than the first years of school were. I'm in! Now, how do we get back to five years old again?
DeleteJOHN,
ReplyDeleteWhat Hoffman seemed to either deliberately ignore or unwittingly underestimate was the effect of the other variable March and Riecke added during that same isometrics experimentation: Dianabol, from Ziegler.
As you likely know, Ziegler introduced York lifters to that around 1959.
Isometrics probably had the least to do with the remarkable gains of Riecke and March,
I speculate that the use of isometrics was dismissed once lifters realized the actual cause of their gains.
Ol' Bob had a vested interest in promoting isometrics, since he was marketing home gym racks designed for isometric training.
In the earliest 1960s, how long it can take before a cycle of, say, Dianabol, causes significant gains, and, how dramatically some respond to anabolics once the effects present, weren't adequately nor commonly known among lifters yet.
It's unclear to this day, it seems, whether Bob's naivety about the effects of Dianabol versus the effects of isometrics was sincere or wilfull.
An early-1960s magazine advertisement for Hoffman's isometric racks:
ReplyDeletehttps://media.licdn.com/dms/image/v2/C4E22AQGSLNAZC_P0nw/feedshare-shrink_800/feedshare-shrink_800/0/1654873770798?e=2147483647&v=beta&t=AK3KBIeOjDnQdIjUIw3B-vIbqLuEKbRUYF-CzqoaJhI