Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - vag

Pages: 1 ... 330 331 [332] 333 334 ... 338
4966
Progress Journals & Experimental Routines / Re: vag's journal : Age vs Vertical
« on: December 31, 2009, 11:32:19 pm »

31 December 2009 / 1 January 2010

5*red wine glasses
1*huge dinner
7*whiskey glasses
duration : 8pm to 6:30am

Happy new year everyone ;)

4967
Strength, Power, Reactivity, & Speed Discussion / Re: About the hangtime based vertical jump calculators
« on: December 28, 2009, 05:19:22 am »
Quote from: adarqui on December 27, 2009, 10:07:06 pm
Quote from: vag on December 26, 2009, 03:57:41 pm

As i expected , i busted that hangtime calculation shit:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f0UOGS7BrKE


interesting.. what was 'almost flat foot' as the starting point.. ? should be pretty close..

cool vid.

peace

Flatfoot to touchdown hangtime was also wrong, its too early. The correct timeframe start seemed to be somewhere the 1st and 2nd visible heel elevation. Cant make any rule out of that.
What seems to be true is that the hangtime calculator measures the highest touch - reach on your toes.
So the error is equal to the flatfoot/toes reach difference, as i was speculating on my first qm. That is indeed 5'' for me , makes sense.

4968
Strength, Power, Reactivity, & Speed Discussion / Re: About the hangtime based vertical jump calculators
« on: December 26, 2009, 03:57:41 pm »
As i expected , i busted that hangtime calculation shit:

<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f0UOGS7BrKE" target="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f0UOGS7BrKE</a>


EDIT ( 6 years later  :P ):

The video does not exist anymore so i should describe what it showed.
I captured a jump that i knew exactly how high i got ( highest touch - standing one hand flatfooted reach ) , it was 24''.
The hangtime calculator was wrong , measuring either from toes off or from heels off.
What seemed to work was use the hangtime calculator measuring the toes-off-to-touchdown hangtime, and then add the 'reach on toes - reach flatfooted' correction, see continued discussion below.

4969
Progress Journals & Experimental Routines / Re: vag's journal : Age vs Vertical
« on: December 24, 2009, 04:52:49 am »

23 December 2009

Dynamic warmup 5'

Bilateral line hops , 2x10sec side-side , 2x10sec back-forth , scoring 35-40

2x5 18'' depth jumps
2x5 standing vertical jumps

Jumps where in my house , ceiling is too low to use reach so i dont know the exact height i was getting.

Based on maximum head height : ~27,5''
Based on hangtime calculation with 30fps camera : ~25,5''
Based on maximum heels height : ~27,5''
Based on maximum toes height : ~25,5''

Pick what you like! :D




4970
Strength, Power, Reactivity, & Speed Discussion / Re: About the hangtime based vertical jump calculators
« on: December 24, 2009, 04:46:18 am »
Quote from: adarqui on December 23, 2009, 05:28:49 am
whoa.. awesome!!!!!!!!

120fps = fun fun fun.

cool man tell me how it goes.. with video timing, you can always take a few measurements... it would be interesting if you:

- calculated rvj using touch - reach .. touch on rim of course..
- compared that to: video timing of heels barely off ground AND toes FULLY extended right at takeoff... both timed until first contact with ground.

vag - psyence detective (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FKl43SPgqCo)


My thoughts exactly , word by word!
Gonna have an ultra-epic "hangtime calculation vs reality" video up soon! ;)

lolzzzzzz @ psyience detective

4971
Strength, Power, Reactivity, & Speed Discussion / Re: About the hangtime based vertical jump calculators
« on: December 23, 2009, 04:48:09 am »
Well i just got a new mobile that features 120fps video, that minimizes the error to 1/120 of a second each side , so max error is 1/60 wich is 0,016666.
I would still prefer the highest touch - standing reach measurement , but now highest touch is an aproximation , trying to see from the vid how much i got above a measured rim!  :-\
Im leaning towards the 120fps hangtime thing , jsut wanted your opinion.
Probably gonna use both in next jump session to compare the results, that should be interesting...

4972
Strength, Power, Reactivity, & Speed Discussion / About the hangtime based vertical jump calculators
« on: December 22, 2009, 02:05:48 pm »
Being an engineer i know well that the hangtime-vert calculation formula is 100% accurate, i even have my own excel version with the local gravity acceleration in the formula.
I was thinking:
The correct way to measure hangtime is to measure the time that the feet are in the air , from the first 'airborn' frame to the first 'touchdown frame'.
But doesnt that mean that we have a different measurement here compared to the normal one ( highest touch minus flat-footed reach )?
Instead of flat footed standing reach we are using 'toes-up' reach!
That would make the vertical measurements different by an amount equal to the flat-footed vs toes-up reach difference, wich would be ~4-5''.

What is your opinion?

4973
Progress Journals & Experimental Routines / Re: vag's journal : Age vs Vertical
« on: December 21, 2009, 11:53:11 am »
Quote from: adarqui on December 20, 2009, 06:15:51 pm
snow is cool.. i saw it ONE time ;)

Quote from: LBSS on December 21, 2009, 11:10:07 am
We just got 18 inches here in DC...

snow is awsome , so is skiing!!!
The city i live though is at sea level , so it rarely snows here , like 1-2 days per year!
I have to drive 3,5 hours north and change country to get a decent ski resort...


4974
Progress Journals & Experimental Routines / Re: vag's journal : Age vs Vertical
« on: December 20, 2009, 02:02:19 pm »

19 December 2009

6hrs ski

Legs = toasted.

4975
Progress Journals & Experimental Routines / Re: vag's journal : Age vs Vertical
« on: December 18, 2009, 12:59:44 pm »
Quote from: LBSS on December 18, 2009, 12:12:27 pm
Somehow missed this before. I think I just got screwed on the elasticity gene. It's funny, I haven't been jumping hardly at all, which is probably dumb. I'm focusing instead on just building my strength up as much as I can at my current bw (don't want to bulk, even though I know I'd get stronger, because I honestly don't want to be any bigger than I am right now after eventually cutting). I figure I'll keep going on starting strength until I get to 3x5x315 in the squat, 5x370 in the dead lift, and then back way off on weight volume and start focusing on jumps, plyos and sprinting.

Still, I should probably be jumping a little bit now outside the depth jumps on non-DL days.

Well , i think that if your main goal is to improve jumping you should quite often practice jumping.
As for bulking etc , i was thinking 100% like you, but after 2,5 years of training i think i was wrong
Take a look at this , it's exactly about that theme: http://www.higher-faster-sports.com/relativestrengthmyth.html
I tried that on me , gained ~25lbs from August , bodyfat went from ~13% to ~19%.
Still , my running vert is the same ( and feels easier to get it ) and i PR'ed 1'' on standing vert, feeling easier again.
Currently trying to lean back to the middle ( -12 from now , +12 from August ) , i expect huge gains!
Just saying though , each one of us is different , you know better...


4976
Progress Journals & Experimental Routines / Re: vag's journal : Age vs Vertical
« on: December 18, 2009, 12:33:18 am »
Quote from: adarqui on December 17, 2009, 06:06:13 pm
ive never done line hops bare footed, i'd think they would really burn up?

not realy , actualy sometimes they burn more with shoes on ,if its not tied tight the foot slides inside the shoe.
btw i meant bilateral side-to-side ones, but ive done all combinations ( unilateral , bilateral , side-to-side, back-forth ) and they feel more or less the same.
also , barefoot =  no shoes , but i do wear socks.

4977
Progress Journals & Experimental Routines / Re: vag's journal : Age vs Vertical
« on: December 17, 2009, 05:02:24 am »
16 December 2009

Dynamic warmup, 5'

Plyos:
4x10sec barefoot line hops , getting 35 to 38.
2x5 18'' depth jumps : average 27'' , max 27,5''
2x5 standing vertical jumps : average 27'' , max 27,5''

Weights , unloading :
SQUATS: 3x5@187
ROMANIAN DEADLIFTS : 3x8@143lbs
CALF RAISES : 3x12@220lbs
SHOULDERS OHP behind head : 4x8@110lbs


4978
Progress Journals & Experimental Routines / Re: vag's journal : Age vs Vertical
« on: December 14, 2009, 04:42:15 pm »

14 December 2009

BENCH PRESS :
2x5@143lbs
1x4@154lbs
1x3@165lbs ( PR , previous was 5reps@154lbs )

WIDE GRIP LAT PULLDOWN:
1x6@165lbs
1x6@176lbs
1x5@187lbs
1x3@198lbs ( PR , previous was 6reps@187lbs )


BICEP CURLS : 3x8 , 35lbs dumbell in each hand

TRICEP PULLDOWNS ( ROPE ) : 3x12@77lbs


4979
Progress Journals & Experimental Routines / Re: vag's journal : Age vs Vertical
« on: December 13, 2009, 01:51:12 pm »

13 December 2009

Failed vertical jump testing & dunk session.

Reason 1 : 8 Degrees Celsium + wind + light rain.
Reason 2 : Weight with clothes = 199lbs.
Reason 3 : RVJ still fucked up , i feel totaly out of coordination, probably from excess bodyfat.

2x5 SVJ : getting steady 27'' , 0,5'' below PR.
2x5 RVJ : feeling like crap and getting 29''. Yup , just 2'' above SVJ , negative SVJ-RVJ gap PR!
No dunks attempted , '29 inches' and 'dunk' cant exist together...


4980
Progress Journals & Experimental Routines / Re: vag's journal : Age vs Vertical
« on: December 12, 2009, 06:25:16 am »

12 December 2009

Body measurements
After ~6weeks of bulking.

Weight ( in the morning ) : ~195lbs , ( +7lbs )
Waist ( navel level , loose) : 36,5'' , ( +0,7'' )
Thighs ( about 3/4 from knee to hip flexor , flexed) : 26,2'' , ( +0,8'' )
Hips ( middle of butt , loose ) : 41,3'' ( +0,3'' ) , dont know if this is good or bad as hips have a lot of muscle and fat...
Biceps ( flexed ) : 15,8 , ( +0,3'' )
Calves : 15,35'' ( +0,35'' )

Bodyfat estimation : ~19%

Those +/- are compared to start of bulking , wich was after unloading and undereating for 10 days!
Comparison with end of previous bulking cycle :

Weight : +3lbs
Waist : +0''
Thighs : +0,2''
Hips : -0,7''
Biceps : +0,05''
Calves : +0,15''


Green = positive changes
Red = negative changes

Good shit!  Time to lean down now , its gonna be very easy at this bodyfat level, should see awesome results if i can keep this strength and lean to my normal bodyfat levels ( ~15% ).


Pages: 1 ... 330 331 [332] 333 334 ... 338