Adarq.org

Then why not try to get to that 75 kg athletic body with a low bodyfat and then start building up from there. Start to add muscle with minimal bodyfat gain (that will be difficult). But if you start from a good position of low bodyfat and light bodyweight (and get there from where you are now trying to maintain your strength as much as possible) - and work your way up to say a 80-82 kg bodyweight with a 2x squat, then you'd be a MUCH better athlete than you are right now.

The problem, obviously, is that in order to do what I'm writing in here you have to "deconstruct" yourself and build yourself up again from "zero", but where "zero" is a better place than when you first started training because now you have the strength training experience and the knowledge to do it.

This is the plan for myself, and we'll see if I'm able to do it (I have big reserves in my success but I'll try anyway).

Ankle weights? Why not a weight vest?

You will probably get more reactive. I was having a conversation yesterday with Joel Smith about Mutaz Barshim and his jumping, and he was like "at 65 kg, you bet he's going to jump like that".

So I was like "well, what if he was 85 kg and had a 400 calf raise and a 300 squat?". And he said something very interesting, that I haven't thought about yet, which is the fact that the problem in the case of the 85 kg guy would not be strength, but the passive structural elements that would get in the way. The amount of tension occuring in the plant for these elements would be the problem that would shut down that guy.

That's why bodyweight, in an absolute manner, is important to reactivity: regardless of strength, these tendons and ligaments will get, in a high speed plant, 8 kg of additional load for every 1 kg of bodyweight you gain in a 8G plant. And once they reach their "material resistance" absolute number limits, the CNS will receive that feedback from the receptors and shut down power production.

Something to think about.

<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yhgc9IsBu1A" target="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yhgc9IsBu1A</a>

Awesomeness, I love your weight loss. It's an interesting coincidence that I decide to focus almost entirely on weight loss and then I read this post the very next thing.

Jordan Kilganon off one leg:

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?v=10154304630710002&comment_id=10154304728530002&offset=0&total_comments=4&ref=notif&notif_t=video_reply

By the same token, you can say the opposite is what is actually happening. If you keep the head down, you will have the tendency to bend the chest down and push the hips back and be more hip dominant. That's what happens in a low bar squat - you don't have the vertical back that is in the high bar squat.

In fact, Rippetoe recommends AGAINST a "look-forward" approach, because, according to him, if you look forward or (even worse) up, you will have the tendency to push the knees forward and lose hip drive.

Also, a hip dominant jump is a chest forward, hips back, tibias more vertical jump (head down), whereas a quad dominant jump has a more vertical back and a more positive shin angle, with the head looking up.

So... who knows what the real deal is? Interesting, nonetheless.