Adarq.org

I'm amazed, like literally shocked, this is being discussed in such an extent. Like I said, it should be obvious for even the less brain mobilated people what's going on in there. WOW!

5'11 = 1.81m tall
rim = 3.05m

So he needs to jump 124 cm to be head at rim. 124 cm = 48.81 inches...

So Taylor Allen just admitted he and Maroko are scam aritsts. You gotta give'em props for that one.

Quote from: Raptor on March 16, 2011, 08:08:06 am

I wonder why does vag think 15% is "natural" for him at his age, build etc? Who said you need to be at 15%? You could probably improve on that.

Yes , by natural bodyfat i meant how i am built, like giving an estimation of where my body wants to be under 'normal circumstances'.
Some people are naturally lean&ripped , some others are not. I belong in the latter.
I don't need to be at 15% , i need to be as low as i can maintaining strength.
But imo it is important to have a realistic view on your body/abilities. A guy like me freaking out and orienting his training to get to 8% would make a big mistake.
Anyway , were getting way off topic...

Yeah but - are you doing everything exercise and nutritional-wise to keep it low, and you end up with 15% as being the lowest while maintaining/gaining strength? That's my point - if you could manipulate training/nutrition in such a way that you could get the BF a bit lower while at the same time gaining muscle (muscle that will need more calories and that, in return, will help prevent fat build-up).

That's exactly right - it is and should be an involuntary thing. The point is your body will try to use the strongest muscles to get the job done. 

Hence the need to improve posterior chain strength.

In that picture, is that what you would consider a half squat depth? Or is it deeper?

Did I send you a PM? I forgot to click save to outbox so dont know if it send.

Looks deeper than half squat to me. And that save to outbox should be check on by default... but it isn't.

Good post, but I don't get this PED hate. Everything you do can be considered "cheating". Training is cheating. Resting is cheating. Having money to buy better food is cheating. And by "cheating" I mean improving beyond your natural ability. Just because PEDs do the job fast and good doesn't mean that's cheating. Cheating does not exist.

Oh, yeah, it exists if you sign a paper where you say you won't use PEDs, I agree with that. But in terms of achieving maximal human potential quick and good, PEDs are good for that. Don't see anything wrong with that, if you decide to take them.

Well Andrew refers to 3-3.5 half squat or higher than parallel, jump specific squat, not a full squat.

But yeah, I agree that you need/can train neurally a lot. The question is - are you going to improve as much and as quick, in terms of relative strength, as a guy who also gains a little muscle?

You could also go and build a little muscle and increase your squat quickly and then cut down on the calories and start losing weight, maybe fat maybe muscle, but now you're going to have a weight that you can use in your squat (a newly established, higher squat 1RM and 5RM) that you can use while cutting down on weight.

So you can be:

180 lbs with a squat of 250

GO TO

190 lbs with a squat of 300

then cut down back to 180 while using the same work reps and trying to maintain that 300 squat and end up being

180 lbs again with a squat of 300

I think that can make your CNS adapt quicker to the load, muscles as well etc, but it's going to take a good planning in terms of training and nutrition to make that happen I suppose. Your body will probably be more inclined to accept that weight as "managable" and will happen quicker than if you were just to stay at 180 and try to improve to 300 on your squat just by neural adaptations alone.