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 - Raptor

Pages: 1 ... 129 130 [131] 132 133 ... 497
1951
Basketball / Re: A WHOLE BUNCH OF DUNKS AND SHIT.
« on: March 19, 2014, 10:10:03 am »
gerald green: better dunker than VC in his prime?

It depends what you mean by "better dunker".

I think possibly higher jumper (although Vince never really did try to MAXIMALLY jump to the best of my knowledge... never seen him in that position where I thought "that was his maximum jump").

Maybe here:

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

But otherwise, Vince has better power, better body control and is just more creative/looks cooler. But the main thing is the difference in actual power in the dunks.

1952
You can just look at this as a learning experience, no need to stress too much about it.

1953
Progress Journals & Experimental Routines / Re: Age vs Vertical
« on: March 19, 2014, 06:15:35 am »
Wait... could you guys repeat the whole intensity-volume debate? I don't understand exactly what you mean.

1954
Article & Video Discussion / Re: The low bar squat is not an exercise
« on: March 19, 2014, 06:13:40 am »
I know what Lance said but I disagree. If that was the case, then two different squat styles would not even exist and the difference in poundages between the high and the low bar squat wouldn't exist either.

The thing with the low bar squat is it really depends MUCH more on the posterior chain, and the tibias travel far less forward (and thus requires much less ankle dorsiflexion to be available) and thus the quads get a much less loading effect.

Which is bad if that's the only thing you do for the quads.

If you were able to front squat and also do low bar squats, maybe it would make sense. But for someone in my position who can't do front squats, then a high bar squat makes more sense in my opinion.

1955
Progress Journals & Experimental Routines / Re: chasing athleticism
« on: March 19, 2014, 06:10:28 am »
I've had a friend who was 6'7 and could dunk, he could even dunk a 5 kg medicine ball at 10'2 (3.10m) off SVJ... but off a running jump, of any kind, he would suck so badly.

And no matter what I tried to do with him he was always like this.

1956
Article & Video Discussion / Re: The low bar squat is not an exercise
« on: March 18, 2014, 06:07:12 pm »
my default squat is low-bar but quad-heavy. not much hamstrings.

It's probably similar to mine's... but a high bar squat feels SO much more different to me than a low bar squat. So much more "leg" involvement if you will... I consider "leg" when I feel the quads fire well.

With the low bar squat I feel like I'm neglecting my quads just because the posterior chain has been overblown so much on the internet lately: low bar squat for the PC, RDLs for the PC, leg curls for the PC, glute ham raises for the PC, hip thrusts for the PC, reverse hypers for the PC, deadlifts for the PC... OK OK... but what about stuff for the QUADS? What about that?

I mean I would be fine with all the posterior chain work in the world if I knew I had a 2x+ high bar squat and that my quads were strong enough to amortizate any kind of plant or landing... but even when I play ball, I'm scared to penetrate because I know I would be able to pass my defender but I wouldn't be able to stop or control the plant or landing that would follow that penetration.

So I'm limited to just be a passer etc. That can't happen. You can't pretend to squat 160 kg low bar and then say you have too weak quads to do anything useful with them.

At least if I had a 2x high bar squat I could say it's not the quads - it's something else and address it. But in this case, I can't, because they really are too weak.

1957
Basketball / Re: A WHOLE BUNCH OF DUNKS AND SHIT.
« on: March 18, 2014, 06:02:40 pm »
I'm not impressed either... it wasn't powerful... he just took off off one leg and threw down a pretty soft two hander... nothing impressive to me.

1958
Pics, Videos, & Links / Re: beast
« on: March 18, 2014, 11:50:33 am »
<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Apb3jObAwfg" target="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Apb3jObAwfg</a>

1959
Progress Journals & Experimental Routines / Re: Age vs Vertical
« on: March 18, 2014, 11:11:32 am »
Hm... for me it's almost impossible to train on the track during Winter and during Summer... for the simple fact that during Winter it's too cold and snow on the track, and during Summer it's too hot (40+ degrees Celsius) and you die.

1960
Article & Video Discussion / Re: The low bar squat is not an exercise
« on: March 18, 2014, 10:29:49 am »
Well I personally have never felt any quad strength improvement whatsoever in the months and years of low bar squatting. And this is a big thing because I always collapse at the knee, in both the one-leg and two-leg jump.

I might squat 160 kg low bar but my high bar squat is still at the same level as it ever was in the last 5 years or so (and I believe it's a strength issue, not a movement efficiency one).

1961
Article & Video Discussion / Re: The low bar squat is not an exercise
« on: March 18, 2014, 10:10:51 am »
Now now... read the whole article...

I think there are more nuances that aren't being discussed in the comparison of the two, and one of the most important and understated of these is the foot dorsiflexion demands/dorsiflexion adaptations that the high bar requires/provides. And with that comes a ton of other "side-effects".

1963
Progress Journals & Experimental Routines / Re: Age vs Vertical
« on: March 18, 2014, 09:50:01 am »
I would re-arrange that in a way where the plyos/jumps/sprints are being prioritized. Check out my last post in my log and see what you think.

1965
Thanks man!

Yeah, at this point, I just install themes and stuff like that...

For example, on this particular theme, if I want to access it by phone... that "resume" of the site keeps on popping up and you can't close it. Sucks.

Pages: 1 ... 129 130 [131] 132 133 ... 497