Adarq.org

hah nice.

jelly of the "vascularity", kinda. I've literally never been vascular in my life. Even when I was recorded at 7% body fat during my boxing days, no vascularity. Maybe like a vein in my forearm or something, but definitely not upper arms/chest/abs/back/legs, no way - always a layer of fat covering.

interesting how that works. I imagine if I get into the 6's though ...

Even at the pro level, I don't see lots of "vascular" runners, it's interesting. I do see TONS of vascular cyclists. Also, I literally saw one yesterday drive past and veins popping out everywhere on arms and legs. wtf is up with that?

hehe.

Quote from: Kingfish on June 29, 2017, 11:35:33 pm

Quote from: Final Phenom on June 29, 2017, 10:57:30 pm

Any reason why you don't deadlift? Imo you could benefit from additional P-chain work, esp a big compound movement.

Squatting heavy is good but I believe from your video of 315 (the amount your knees go over your toes) and your front squat:back squat ratio you are quad dominant, maybe even very quad dominant. This sets you up for injury if you play sports and I don't believe you can get to a 40" SVJ without a good quad:p-chain balance.

deadlifting very heavy weights is almost always counter productive to explosiveness. quads+glutes are the prime movers of quick sporting movements.

i am not against p-chain work. i do volumes of GHR raises.

go to a track meet. the fastest and most explosive athleltes are all quadzillas.

Okay I found where KF said that.

I thought DL is huge a huge glute workout.

ya I remember that quote from KF. great quote. agree. also agree about quadzillas, the "p-chain" obsession is ridiculously overblown. Yeah those guys have amazing glutes & hamstrings, but quads as well.

the problem with heavy deadlifting is, when does it become more of a back exercise? for athletic performance, once the DL becomes a back exercise, it's not really as productive. Unfortunately that hurts lots of people's egos and they just go nuts and keep increasing the weight.

if you take DL and SQ, you might be able to eventually lift more weight with DL, but, not nearly as much weight as SQ if you say: i'll stop adding weight to DL once it becomes a back exercise. Then, SQ completely destroys it. The only way potentially that you could do that with DL, is using SUMO DL, but then the ROM is much less and it's just pointless, focus on SQ.

pc

So it seems like if I do SVJ starting from the bottom ATG pause then jump up, I jump just as high or even HIGHER than the normal SVJ of going down then up.

WTF does that mean?

could mean a few things:
1. You're engaging the primary muscle groups (especially your glutes) for jumping better when you use the static squat jump form.
2. You're not engaging your glutes with a normal SVJ
3. You're rate of force development is "slow", so a static squat jump allows you to produce more force over a longer time span, including the tension built up from getting into position.
4. Your SVJ and static squat jump form are very different.
6. Your ability to generate tension during the eccentric (negative) phase of the SVJ is lacking.
7. You're not driving yourself down explosively during the negative phase of the SVJ.
8. You're simply more strength dominant right now (and in general), relying primarily on force created by muscle, with not much contribution from elastic/reactive components.
9. does it seem like that, or do you actually jump higher from a static hold than with a countermovement? perception is not always reality. have you measured?


so, nothing wrong with a higher static squat jump than SVJ, if SVJ is your goal. For basketball however, you'd want your SVJ to improve closer to your squat jump, especially at less depth - since you rarely hit depth during a game of basketball. Having a high squat jump usually also indicates your RVJ will use a similar form.. again, good if goal is jumping/dunking, worse (but not as worse as slow SVJ) if you also have goals of using that vert in games etc.

peace!

dude probably a plant.

hope not, that'd be lame af. I kind of think it isn't a plant, seemed real to me .. spazzing on professor and professor spazzing on him raking him on the block/strip etc.

there's people like that though, that's for sure. They show up to pro sporting events too, talk so much shit. Actually, remember pros vs joes? Some legit delusional fucks on that show.

some people really think they are very athletic whilst being lazy slobs & talk shit/talk down on professional athletes all of the time, it's incredible.

Since I have been trying out things such as the progressive depth squats, which has gone well to a certain depth then when it get's lower the progress slows down but probably progress is being made.

So I was thinking of another idea combined with this method, using the cable pulley machine, where most have 2 close by, so using a bar attachment at a low depth and then just building hip strength so basically doing concentric squats with pulley machine and progress the depth and then transfer that strength on to the actual squats.

What do you think, feasible or does it have more disadvantages to it?

dno, not sure I like it. It sounds like you would lose alot of specificity doing that, so I don't see much carry over.

To improve depth more, i'd focus on:
1. lighter but more volume at depth, using partials at the bottom, could be off pins or free, sets of 10-20 reps.
2. getting stronger above depth - which will carry over to deeper ROM
3. getting stronger at depth - heavy but relaxed singles to become more comfortable in that ROM

So, #1 targets time under tension for the glutes especially, at those joint angles. You'd start off really light and make sure everything feels fine doing that exercise, for several (3-4 sessions) before bumping it up more. The idea is to just hit depth nice and controlled, then go up a bit but not fully completing the rep, just mid-way, then go right back down. Keeping the tension on the glutes. It could even be less than midway, idea is to just keep the glutes shoulders the load for the entire set. This can be a finisher, after your (#2/main movement).

#2 is basically what you're doing already .. if you go from say, 2xBW half squat, with 1.5xBW full squat .. to 3xBW half squat, then full squat will surely increase as well. Just using some hypothetical numbers.

#3 is just actually performing the exact GOAL movement, whether that's pin squatting or free squatting at depth. The idea here is just to become more comfortable, confident, and stronger 1 rep at a time.. Hit a single, walk back out relax, reset, refocus, hit another. Something like this can be a finisher as well.

my 2 cents on it.

peace!!

Going strong, made it long enough for the bathrooms to be unlocked so I didnt have to leave.

6.5 miles in or so and ive ran about 2 to 2.5 of them.

Little less than half way.

Scratch that, 8.2 mIles in

hah nice. ya man i'm afraid to leave earlier, bathrooms would be locked. I left the house @ ~6:45 AM today, bathrooms usually are opened at 7 AM .. one lap in, bathroom stop.

did you comment on my strava activity while you are doing yours?

get that 13.1 bro!

cute porcupines



<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oQ8AwnuEOOE" target="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oQ8AwnuEOOE</a>

<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U5I5H7EeC8k" target="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U5I5H7EeC8k</a>

I don't understand your journal, all that quotations and brackets.

it's programming lingo.

[x,y,z] is a list consisting of x, y, and z

[(x,a),(y,b),(z,c)] is a list consisting of (x,a), (y,b), (z,c)

I included FORMAT: after each list, so you can see the format of the tuples (blah,blah,blahs) .. ie:
- FORMAT: (day, weight in lbs)

Would look like: (30, 147) for today, since today is the 30th of october and 147 was my weight in lbs this morning.

Also if you get any lighter, I will be about 5 inches shorter than you and 100 lb heavier than you heheh

nice. hopefully by the end of november i'm 110 lb lighter than you

think about it though.. when you're ~165 & flying, you'll only be ~30 lb heavier than me. So I think that's a good way of looking at it.

peace