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 - Dreyth

Pages: 1 ... 127 128 [129] 130 131
1921
Pics, Videos, & Links / Re: 345 x 3 (1080p HD)
« on: February 07, 2011, 11:47:14 am »
BOSS LIFT!!! How long have you been lifting? That was great depth and alot of weight. I am thinking about Smolov and i'm wondering if it works for athletic gains(speed, vert, agility..ect.) like i want it to. How has it worked for you? Would you recommend that I do it even though my max is ~225ish ?

http://www.joeskopec.com/smolov.html that's the right workout right? there are alot of smolovs out there it seems

Been lifting since after basketball season of Freshman year, HS. Now I'm a freshman in college. However, I wouldn't say I have 4 years of squatting. It's closer to 2.75 or 3 years because I never lifted over the summer or during basketball season in some of the years, and it stalled my progress a lot.

At your level I think you shouldn't do smolov yet. Maybe when you max at around 315 you should try it. As for athletic gains, it's working very well for me because I am pretty reactive already so the strength gains help a lot. Squat gains have always directly translated into my VJ and RVJ provided my bw remained the same.

To answer your confusion about the different "smolovs," there's only two. The link that you gave me is the "true" smolov cycle. It consists of four different cycles, including an intro, a base mesocycle, a switching phase, and then an intense phase. It lasts 13 weeks. It is ONLY used for squats.

Then there is smolov junior (which is what I'm doing). Smolov jr is nearly identical to the BASE MESOCYLE of the regular smolov program, except the rep scheme is changed a bit to make it a tiny bit easier (but still difficult as hell). It lasts 3 to 5 weeks, depending on how long you  want to do it (minimum 3). Since it's a bit easier, the same rep scheme can also be used to bring up your bench press or deadlift (but when ppl do it for the bench, the increases in weight from week to week are about 5lbs less since the bench improves slower than the squat). However, there are no other phases in it. For me, I've decided to continue on with the weeks since I haven't stalled yet (I'm on week 6 right now).

Smolov Base Mesocycle (for squats only)
Monday - 4x9 at 70% 1RM
Wednesday - 5x7 at 75% 1RM
Friday - 7x5 at 80% 1RM
Saturday - 10x3 at 85% 1RM

Smolov Junior Cycle (for squats, bench, or deadlift)
Monday - 6x6 at 70% 1RM
Wednesday - 7x5 at 75% 1RM
Friday - 8x4 at 80% 1RM
Saturday - 10x3 at 85% 1RM

Those are the weights for week 1. After week 1, add 20lbs to each day. For every week after that, add just 10lbs to each day.
(but if you're doing it for the bench press, the increments are half as big)

If you're still confused, here's a chart from my log:

1922
Pics, Videos, & Links / Re: 345 x 3 (1080p HD)
« on: February 07, 2011, 01:16:10 am »
If the bass doesn't distort I think you can edit the video and raise the bass. But if it distorts like the first vid i put up there, not much u can do.

1923
Pics, Videos, & Links / Re: 345 x 3 (1080p HD)
« on: February 07, 2011, 01:03:26 am »
I'm just more excited about the camera lol. It's a Nikon s8100... my main motivation for buying it wasn't the video or picture qualty, but rather, the AUDIO quality. I wanted a camera that wouldn't distort from the loud bass when I go to trance events. I tested this one out on my friends Yamaha speakers, blasted the volume and subwoofer, and the thing picked up the bass clean as crystal on playback without distorting lol.

Can't wait to test it out at this Paul van Dyk gig in NYC in about 2 weeks.

haha nice.. my playsport zx3 audio seems to be weak, from my latest dunk vid i uploaded.. it has a weak sound, seems the bass is weak.


By weak bass, do you mean that the bass is too low in volume or that it can't handle the bass?

I'd rather have this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AMpldUyIvIc (live the bass was INSANNEE)
than this:
http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=1512923157762&set=a.1481838940676.59633.1674900050&pid=1107092&id=1674900050#!/video/video.php?v=427080217546

1924
Pics, Videos, & Links / Re: 345 x 3 (1080p HD)
« on: February 07, 2011, 12:29:10 am »
I'm just more excited about the camera lol. It's a Nikon s8100... my main motivation for buying it wasn't the video or picture qualty, but rather, the AUDIO quality. I wanted a camera that wouldn't distort from the loud bass when I go to trance events. I tested this one out on my friends Yamaha speakers, blasted the volume and subwoofer, and the thing picked up the bass clean as crystal on playback without distorting lol.

Can't wait to test it out at this Paul van Dyk gig in NYC in about 2 weeks.

1925
Pics, Videos, & Links / 345 x 3 (1080p HD)
« on: February 06, 2011, 10:29:33 pm »
1st Set of 345x3
10th Set of 345x3

From today's workout. The angle makes it look like I'm not going as low as I used to, but I still am!
If you look at the white line on my shorts, it hits just below parallel. In this video, it looks like I'm going lower, but the line on the shorts goes to just below parallel as well http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jplDf8iYtWA. Same depth.

1926
Oh, btw, i think the low bar squat translates a bit less to the VJ. However, since you can use more weight in the low-bar, it pretty much evens out. IMO you'd probably be at the same spot VJ-wise with either approach...

example:

A - After 3 years, Squat high-bar 405lbs at 200lbs bw and jump 30"
B - After 3 yeras, Squat low-bar 440lbs at 200lbs bw and jump 30"

Choose on preference.

1927
I like mid-bar. I think that's what I'm doing... it's still pretty high though. Usually I squat with the barbell on the very top of my traps. Now I put the barbell an inch lower because it's a lot more comfortable and I can lift easier. It kind of rests behind the very top of my traps. But it's still DEFINITELY not resting on my rear delts, not even touching the top of them. I use a narrow stance and go near-ATG. I break parallel all the time, but only maybe every 5th rep do I hit rock bottom. Actually, I'm uploading a video of it right now in HD :)

Will be in the pics/vids section.

1928
Peer Reviewed Studies Discussion / Re: Vertical Jump
« on: February 06, 2011, 12:54:31 pm »
Oh and I'm still confused about some stuff on RFD "vs" plyos. Like is there a need to do resisted RFD when you can just do plyos? I'm asking because plyos also increase explosive strength as well as elastic strength, and I feel like you'll get more bang for your buck doing an extra set of depth jumps versus a few sets of paused weighted jumps squats.

1929
Pics, Videos, & Links / Re: funny / horrible training videos
« on: February 02, 2011, 05:44:55 pm »
<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CaJDek6Pf8U" target="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CaJDek6Pf8U</a>

HAHAHHAHAA

1930
Article & Video Discussion / Re: Spot reduction may actually be possible?
« on: February 02, 2011, 04:48:26 pm »
The other areas of my body are still warm, so wouldn't the fat continue to come off in those areas?

uh.... yeah... he kinda said that. the point is that fat comes off slower in "colder" areas, so maybe warming them up will allow fat to come off a little quicker. lets not misquote anybody.

whether "warming up your stomache" is effective or not (probably just 1% effective honestly). im in no way advocating for this retarded method, i'm just looking to have a valid discussion about an argument the guy is making. that's what interests me, because it is SOMEWHAT of a tiny paradigm shift, which i've always loved.

Your very large sentence contradicts itself. If you can create a more even distribution of fat loss, why can't you create a differently uneven distribution of fat loss? The mechanism -- increased heat to areas of desired loss -- would be the same, just taking it to different levels.

The sentence contradicts itself because I didn't make clear what I meant by "more even distribution." It depends on the POV:

POV 1. If we have stubborn areas, then that means fat loss happens unevenly, since fat loss ocurrs SLOWER in those areas. Hence, they are stubborn areas. "Evening it out" would mean a bit more relative fat loss to happen in that spot, thus creating a more even distribution of fat loss over the entire body(although yes, you will still experience faster fat loss in non-stubborn areas anyway).

POV 2. If we have stubborn areas, then it must mean that we must create an uneven distribution of fat loss and focus it on the stubborn areas to have some sort of spot reduction.

The POV I was using was #1, and that's also why I was stating early that it's not necessarily a spot reduction. I think you are using #2.

I don't know how else to clarify myself lol

1931
Strength, Power, Reactivity, & Speed Discussion / Re: Great Agility
« on: February 02, 2011, 02:39:48 pm »
I need to "learn" this hip sink for basketball... but as for cutting while having the ball in my hands (aka crossing over), my ball handling is the first limiting factor. Any split second needed to reassure the ball in my hands won't fly out is another split second lost.

1932
Peer Reviewed Studies Discussion / Re: Vertical Jump
« on: February 02, 2011, 12:53:10 pm »
for example, say you squat 2xBW in 2s, well, if you become squat-obsessed and end up squatting 2.5xBW in 5-6 seconds, those gains in maximal strength past 2x probably won't transfer well to explosive movements

Agreed. However, consider this possibility:

Athlete A:

Squats 2.0xbw in 2s

Three months later

Squats 2.5xbw in 4s
Squats 2.0xbw in 1.75s

I think going from a 2xbw squat to a 2.5xbw squat is more effective in increasing the amount of time it takes to squat 2xbw (in terms of how long the rep takes) versus incorporating RFD work and not increasing to a 2.5xbw squat.
Not only that, but the RFD work may fade away over time once you switch to more strength oriented work, and you wouldn't be able to keep up with that 2xbw squatting speed.

I prefer strength work over RFD work pretty much all the time. Plyos, on the other hand, are a bit of a different story imo (yes I know they increase RFD as well).



1933
Article & Video Discussion / Re: Spot reduction may actually be possible?
« on: February 02, 2011, 12:44:26 pm »
Why not? I'm definitely a skeptic but I'm looking for faults in the article.  BUT PLEASE READ:

Spot reduction is definitely not possible in the way that we think it is (ONLY losing fat in ONE area), but what the author is saying is that we may have stubborn areas due to some certain causes, and if we help do away with some of those causes, those stubborn areas wont be stubborn... they'll just be like most other areas. regular. Which means at THAT point, the body will actually be closer to losing fat more evenly over different parts.

He's not saying that we can actually lose more fat in a "stubborn area" than any other area, he's saying that maybe we can get the level of fat loss in a "stubborn area" closer to the level that it occurs in the rest of the body, therefore allowing for a more even distribution of fat loss.

Don't get it wrong, "spot reduction" is just in the title (of this post and the article as well) just to grab attention. Please understand the philosophy.

1934
Article & Video Discussion / Spot reduction may actually be possible?
« on: February 02, 2011, 12:33:49 pm »
http://www.t-nation.com/free_online_article/most_recent/spot_reduction_is_real_heres_how_to_do_it

I trust this article a bit more than the others because there's no product placement in it. Read up, sounds interesting and plausible.

1935
Pics, Videos, & Links / Squat 335x3
« on: January 26, 2011, 12:42:23 pm »
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZEAQIRL-aVI (unrack at :22)

The first set of 10x3 from smolov jr. 335 was my max before i started. I also recorded the last set, but the memory on the camera ran out and cut off the second two reps so I'm not uploading that.

I'll be sure to try recording a 335x5 and a 375 1RM later this week and early next week.

Pages: 1 ... 127 128 [129] 130 131