14596
News, Announcements, & Suggestions / adarq.org currently fukd
« on: September 25, 2012, 02:22:24 am »
server is getting gaped.
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.
14597
Nutrition & Supplementation / Re: lets talk hydration
« on: September 24, 2012, 10:43:02 pm »Um, be careful with the sea salt. That stuff is one hell of a fast acting laxative if you use the right amount. When I say fast, I'm talking < 15 minutes so make sure you don't go overboard and be sure to try it at home first.
never experienced that hah.. i get that from coffee though, can't even smell it or it's showtime.
14598
Article & Video Discussion / Re: The bilateral deficit
« on: September 24, 2012, 10:32:55 pm »http://www.strengthandconditioningresearch.com/2012/09/11/bilateral-deficit/
I found this very interesting:Quote
Basically saying that you need to really be rested (have close to 100% "battery" or CNS) if you really want to perform off one leg, whereas bilateral stuff requires less peak intensity but more overall CNS burn.
Even more, since we're trying to improve the neural drive and "explosiveness" during our plyo workouts, it should make more sense to use unilateral plyometric exercises since the most neural drive occurs during these movements.
Anyway,QuoteWhat did the researchers conclude?
The researchers concluded that the ground reactions force produced by each leg during the two-legged jump were less than that produced during the one-leg jump. This was caused by lower joint moments.
The researchers concluded that while it is possible that the lower joint moments in the two-leg jump were smaller than those in the one-leg jump because of reduced neural drive, peak EMG levels in the two-leg jump were only slightly lower than those in the one-legged jump. They therefore suggest that a reduction in neural drive is unlikely to be the cause of the reduced moments.
Rather, the researchers suggest that because some of the muscles must have shortened at higher velocities in the two-legged jump, this caused them to produce lower forces because of the force-velocity relationship. They note that this was the result produced by their computer simulation, as enforcing the same muscle-shortening velocities in both jump variations eliminated 75% of the difference in jump height.Quote
Regarding plyos:
I would imagine, from experience and observation, that single leg plyos (max effort consecutive leg bounds) yields greater permanent improvements in strength + hypertrophy than double leg bounds/depth jumps.
Regarding double leg bounds / MR tucks, I think I should have focused more on forcing myself to land lower, closer to half squat.. I spent too much time at the shorter range of movement, even though I really felt forcing depth on those was pretty beneficial.
14599
Article & Video Discussion / Re: Squat depth
« on: September 24, 2012, 10:26:29 pm »
for the record, since im back to posting alot, im not anti deep squat whatsoever.. Again, pick your tool (half or deep) and improve it as much as humanly possible.
pC
Adarq.org will be once again in hyper mode! Great!
anger fuel 2.0
14600
Progress Journals & Experimental Routines / Re: ADARQ's journal
« on: September 24, 2012, 09:50:08 pm »
im confused, i deleted tons of videos off of my main youtube a few years ago.. wtf?
reuploading a few more..
<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JIe5XaxINQQ" target="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JIe5XaxINQQ</a>
that shit is dope, why would i ever delete that.
im nuts.
reuploading a few more..
that shit is dope, why would i ever delete that.
im nuts.
14601
Article & Video Discussion / Re: Squat depth
« on: September 24, 2012, 09:24:24 pm »
forgive me but I seem to have forgotten how to use google scholar, aka i cant find anything.
IMO, there's too much conflicting data out there for us to really care. I've read numerous studies showing drastic increases in glute activity as depth increases with only minimal increases in quad activity, from ~90 degrees and below.. which would only make sense to me.. though, all of this depends on so many intricate differences in squat technique, ie bar position, torso position, shin angle with the floor etc... if your knee drifts very far forward as you hit "ATGbro", it's going to be an insane amount of quad contribution... if your shin is completely vertical, quad contribution is going to be very minimal while you're trying to get out of the hole -> it cannot anatomically contribute more than glutes given the line of pull and weakness at that ROM.
none of this even matters to me though.. pick your tool, based on what feels most comfortable in terms of aches & pains, then go with it 100%.. if squatting ATG hurts your hip, well, fix your hip or squat slightly above parallel.. if ATG feels fine, go with it 100%.
increasing your half squat X % is going to increase your deep squat Y %, and vice versa.. If your half squatting isn't improving your deep squatting, then you're doing it wrong (probably squatting way too high). Your deep squat should obviously improve your half, but, to the extent of focusing on half squatting primarily? usually not.
I tried to find the video of me going 315 x 1 for decent speed singles below parallel at like 148-150.. it was a night video.. maybe i didn't upload it, but i remember i uploaded pics.. anyway, the point being: I hadn't squatted deep for pretty much a year, then after achieving 405 x 1 half, a few days later I felt like playing with below parallel squats and they felt really strong, 2xBW singles easy without ever focusing on them exclusively.
The issue of EMG is still a 'debate', so to is the effect of squatting in general at improving vertical jump. Conflicting material is everywhere. Some studies say squatting doesn't improve CMJ, some do. Some say going half is optimal, some don't.
The real meat of the issue is getting relatively stronger and being able to display that strength in a specific amount of time... so basically, Relative Power.
Studies like the one you just posted always bug me, especially when you consider the deep squatting 'cult' and their "agenda".
The comment about quad size is equally annoying.
Do people with 'strong quad genetics' gravitate towards olympic lifting, or is it vice versa? Obviously people with strong quad genetics are going to do better at olympic lifting naturally. Why are we to credit their quad size to deep squatting when they spend countless time jumping with weight, catching weight, and pressing weight overhead in a variety of manners such as split jerk & squat jerk.
Professional body builders have bigger quads, let's credit leg extensions.
for the record, since im back to posting alot, im not anti deep squat whatsoever.. Again, pick your tool (half or deep) and improve it as much as humanly possible.
pC
x'd out before linking source:
IMO, there's too much conflicting data out there for us to really care. I've read numerous studies showing drastic increases in glute activity as depth increases with only minimal increases in quad activity, from ~90 degrees and below.. which would only make sense to me.. though, all of this depends on so many intricate differences in squat technique, ie bar position, torso position, shin angle with the floor etc... if your knee drifts very far forward as you hit "ATGbro", it's going to be an insane amount of quad contribution... if your shin is completely vertical, quad contribution is going to be very minimal while you're trying to get out of the hole -> it cannot anatomically contribute more than glutes given the line of pull and weakness at that ROM.
none of this even matters to me though.. pick your tool, based on what feels most comfortable in terms of aches & pains, then go with it 100%.. if squatting ATG hurts your hip, well, fix your hip or squat slightly above parallel.. if ATG feels fine, go with it 100%.
increasing your half squat X % is going to increase your deep squat Y %, and vice versa.. If your half squatting isn't improving your deep squatting, then you're doing it wrong (probably squatting way too high). Your deep squat should obviously improve your half, but, to the extent of focusing on half squatting primarily? usually not.
I tried to find the video of me going 315 x 1 for decent speed singles below parallel at like 148-150.. it was a night video.. maybe i didn't upload it, but i remember i uploaded pics.. anyway, the point being: I hadn't squatted deep for pretty much a year, then after achieving 405 x 1 half, a few days later I felt like playing with below parallel squats and they felt really strong, 2xBW singles easy without ever focusing on them exclusively.
The issue of EMG is still a 'debate', so to is the effect of squatting in general at improving vertical jump. Conflicting material is everywhere. Some studies say squatting doesn't improve CMJ, some do. Some say going half is optimal, some don't.
The real meat of the issue is getting relatively stronger and being able to display that strength in a specific amount of time... so basically, Relative Power.
Studies like the one you just posted always bug me, especially when you consider the deep squatting 'cult' and their "agenda".
The comment about quad size is equally annoying.
Do people with 'strong quad genetics' gravitate towards olympic lifting, or is it vice versa? Obviously people with strong quad genetics are going to do better at olympic lifting naturally. Why are we to credit their quad size to deep squatting when they spend countless time jumping with weight, catching weight, and pressing weight overhead in a variety of manners such as split jerk & squat jerk.
Professional body builders have bigger quads, let's credit leg extensions.
for the record, since im back to posting alot, im not anti deep squat whatsoever.. Again, pick your tool (half or deep) and improve it as much as humanly possible.
pC
x'd out before linking source:
Quote
14602
News, Announcements, & Suggestions / Re: some analytics
« on: September 24, 2012, 06:06:53 pm »Gotta bump in as i love statistics.
You can see the monthly stats at the bottom of this page:
http://www.adarq.org/forum/stats/
So that last chart most probably wasn't counting till June 2010, as the activity e.g. in June 2010 was similar to nowadays, about 1500 posts per month.
YES! I AM THIRD-MOST RESPECTED!
BOW BEFORE ME!!!!!!!!!!!
lmao your caption fits perfect to that gif.
btw, my post count is over 9,000.
14603
News, Announcements, & Suggestions / Re: some analytics
« on: September 24, 2012, 03:22:53 pm »sweet. question about the third chart: looks like it's at 0 until july 2010. i just realized yesterday (looking at my profile, which i rarely do) that i've been a member since september 2009. is that because you only started tracking in july 2010, or because before that it really was literally just you, me, vag, mike, rip, joe, and maybe raptor and nightfly? i can't remember.
i didn't have analytics on here initially, that's definitely why.
but ya i remember it was just a very small group of us originally.. vag's link shows those stats.
pC
And then people come in and say I only care about the number of my posts!!!
I did it for you... oh Adarqui!
im surprised i still dominate you in post count
lolol
14604
Nutrition & Supplementation / Re: lets talk hydration
« on: September 24, 2012, 01:21:30 pm »I'm having trouble getting hydration right. I don't eat a lot of salt and minerals compared to the average person and if I was just to pour down a gallon of water daily i'd probably do more harm than good since the water will just erode away all the nutrients and minerals and stuff which would suck from a health and performance point of view. So in lieu of better hydration, what are your recommendations and advice?
I take stimulants around training sometimes, like some of you, which act as a diuretic. So I often have bad workouts because of poor hydration and i'll find my lips dry at the end of the longer workout even though the stimulants are supposed to help performance. I know some guys like Kingfisher take a lot of caffeine so i'm interested in how he'd keep himself hydrated thru the day in particular
tldr: is there a nice easy, hopefully low/zero calorie way to hydrate short of drinking a shitload of water (which i don't want to do). a recipe or something would be good..
i realized this once, around may 2011.. Combine a lack of sodium with an over abundance of potassium (from my banana diet), I hit a severe wall and was completely wrecked => beyond weak. I remember the day my body just completely shut down, I felt as if I lost 10 lbs of water during a dunk session which turned into a layup session, it was crazy.
I started adding sea-salt to my 0-calorie waters, that did the trick.. The turn-around was pretty immediate.
So i'd add sea-salt to every crystal light or propel drink I made.. I kept up with that and started feeling better than ever.. didn't realize how sodium depleted I was. Right now I don't have that issue because i'm not sweating nearly as much as I used too, with all of the jump rope/long walk/running stuff i'd do.
If you want to drink pure water, adding sea-salt would probably be pretty horrible.. You could add some sea salt to your food or get sodium tabs.
once you get that sorted out, you won't see that water just passing right through you anymore.
pC
14605
News, Announcements, & Suggestions / some analytics
« on: September 24, 2012, 12:51:59 pm »
havn't checked this in a long time.. some cool stats regarding the forum.
thanks to everyone who makes this site what it is.. this shit is crazy.
if i had $1 per view, i would build the adarq.org compound and allow everyone here to train there for only $30/month recurring fee + free bonuses & a custom gym towel.
thanks to everyone who makes this site what it is.. this shit is crazy.
if i had $1 per view, i would build the adarq.org compound and allow everyone here to train there for only $30/month recurring fee + free bonuses & a custom gym towel.
14606
Strength, Power, Reactivity, & Speed Discussion / Re: resistance bands and chains
« on: September 24, 2012, 12:38:23 pm »
ya btw just to clarify i was speaking entirely of bands added to barbell lifts. banded {bench, deadlift, squat} etc.
pC
pC
14607
Strength, Power, Reactivity, & Speed Discussion / Re: resistance bands and chains
« on: September 24, 2012, 12:05:43 pm »There's a guy at the gym that is urging me to get resistance bands and chains. Says it will help me get a lot more stronger and explosive. I told him that i'm just going to use free weights until i get real strong 2x bw and then do plyos and explosive work outs. He just keeps saying "get the bands man" "get them bands man"
thoughts?
normal strenf first, advanced methods later.
bands/chains can be very effective when used by advanced athletes.. but when you're at this point, you're already well past the 'constantly getting stronger' stage.
bands are VERY intense (more so than chains), when attached to the bar for squatting/deadlifts/bench etc.. DEFINITELY not advised until you've 'max out your novice gains', which is basically 1 year of consistent, intense, & dedicated training.. many coaches would probably say 1 year would even be too soon, but im just giving you an idea.... chains would be advised before bands imo.. bands accelerate faster than gravity, that's why it can create massive DOMS & that's why they are an advanced tool.
so ya i guess chains would be more of an intermediate tool, bands definitely would be advanced.
master the basics first.. any time your brain thinks about 'fun cool training', realize it's trying to trick you into 'taking the easy way out'.
get that squat up first & get in insane shape.
pc man
14608
Progress Journals & Experimental Routines / Re: ADARQ's journal
« on: September 24, 2012, 09:57:57 am »wat? quad nation for life.
Quote
GLUTE NATION BABY!
I really wonder how well you'd jump/move/run if you'd really focus on getting your glutes to fire properly after being so heavily quad dominant all these years...
I've always wondered when you were squatting very heavy and very quad dominant where you'd been back then if you'd have matching glutes and possibly hamstrings (since the hamstrings are the quads antagonists so if they're weak they tend to inhibit quad max power anyway).
i trained my glutes pretty hard man..
my hamstrings were strong enough to prevent hyper-extension of the knee.. that will happen with pretty much anyone who 'jumps alot'.
to counter your statement, it has been shown that stronger quads in relation to hamstrings has resulted in improvements in vertical jump.. purposefully toying with the ratio can be dangerous for sure, but as long as the hamstrings can protect the knee dynamically, everything is fine imo.
this taken from wikipedia lol:
Quote
Sometimes, for example, a football running back can experience a "misfiring" of motor units and end up simultaneously contracting the quads and hamstrings during a hard sprint. If these muscles, which act opposite to each other are fired at the same time, at a high intensity, a tear can result. The stronger muscle, usually the quadriceps in this case, overpowers the hamstrings. This sometimes results in a common injury known as a pulled hamstring.
you just have to think of this logically.. glutes are the primary hip extensor in a vertical jump right? and quads the primary knee extensors? the majority of the 'sum of forces' comes from hip extension (glutes), knee extension (quads), and plantar flexors (calves).. hamstrings of course contribute a little to hip extension, but their primary role in a VJ is dynamic stabilization of the knee.. if your hamstrings are "overactive", one could say that they would reduce the force produced by the quads instead of facilitate it.
so there's two schools of thought here....
don't forget that when i was at my peak of jumping, my quads were 'massive' (relative to my body) and i was performing TONS of glute work in the form of glute bridges/prone glute/etc, as well as dunking/jumping pretty much every day.... so i definitely paid alot of attention to my glutes
my hamstrings were "weak as dogshit".
sure we could say 'what if' all day long.. who knows how i would perform with insane hamstrings.. i just know from experience, personal & coaching, that many of the best jumpers i've dealt with have pretty weak hamstrings naturally, by our standards.
14609
Article & Video Discussion / Re: KETTLEBELL SWING TRAINING IMPROVES MAXIMAL AND EXPLOSIVE STRENGTH
« on: September 24, 2012, 09:43:10 am »EXTRA! EXTRA! READ ALL ABOUT IT! RELATIVELY UNTRAINED MEN WHO EXERCISE IN A NON-STUPID MANNER IMPROVE ATHLETIC PERFORMANCE!
lol!
14610
Progress Journals & Experimental Routines / Re: ADARQ's journal
« on: September 24, 2012, 08:35:10 am »
btw my legs feel REALLY good today.. yesterday they felt so horrid.
the only thing that is bugging me after all of that activation work is my old medial hamstring tendon injury slightly.. all of those tke's stretched it out a bit.
raptor, you know im big into 'approaching lifting as a skill', for example with all of the high frequency work etc... well im going to really hit this low intensity activation work probably just as hard.. substitute that, to keep intensity down.. but, the point being, i'll still get thousands of reps thus thousands of impulses/activations.
so instead of activating my glutes say, 40 times in a day using squat.. ill activate them like 500 times in a day using activation work.
i feel i really need to 'turn on' my glutes, hams, quads, calves, and shoulder muscles hundreds of thousands of times in the future..
if my high frequency + high intensity work is to be avoided (because im trying to relax more and not become an obsessed dunkpsycho), i'll need hundreds of thousands of smaller activations of those muscle groups through 'isolation' etc..
dno i think it'll help alot..
pc
the only thing that is bugging me after all of that activation work is my old medial hamstring tendon injury slightly.. all of those tke's stretched it out a bit.
raptor, you know im big into 'approaching lifting as a skill', for example with all of the high frequency work etc... well im going to really hit this low intensity activation work probably just as hard.. substitute that, to keep intensity down.. but, the point being, i'll still get thousands of reps thus thousands of impulses/activations.
so instead of activating my glutes say, 40 times in a day using squat.. ill activate them like 500 times in a day using activation work.
i feel i really need to 'turn on' my glutes, hams, quads, calves, and shoulder muscles hundreds of thousands of times in the future..
if my high frequency + high intensity work is to be avoided (because im trying to relax more and not become an obsessed dunkpsycho), i'll need hundreds of thousands of smaller activations of those muscle groups through 'isolation' etc..
dno i think it'll help alot..
pc