Adarq.org

None of the best athletes play basketball. Except nate robinson I guess?

Based on what?  NBA players jump just a bit lower than NFL players for standing vertical jumps (reach isn't deflated as much because reach/wingspan is much more important than jump in basketball), and for running jumps nba players probably jump higher. Speed wise you can't really tell because football kids are practicing 40 yard dashes since they are 13, basketball really just suicides and moron coaches have players run miles.

Just because Kelly Baggett said football players are much more athletic doesn't mean it's true.


And you're right LBSS, we send our best athletes into figure skating. Lyle Mcdonald is case and point.










































































Are you seriously disagreeing that the best athletes in america are pushed into and play football and basketball?

RJ was acting like steven-miller was an idiot. Nobody thinks Squatdr is an idiot; he's just a liar.

It's always the people who don't get results that want to change the basics, thinking they are different. How about you increase your relative strength in the squat and stay active by jumping a lot and then see if you jump higher


Of course you're done RJ. You're mad because nobody is kissing your ass here like they used to on dbhammer. It's different on this site. We're sick of people talking as if they were gurus yet haven't done anything themselves or trained anyone. Your strength levels may be impressive compared to people on here, but let's not forget you have pretty good genetics for strength. I believe you said you bench pressed 300+ when you were 17 after only a few months of training. That's a feat that takes most people years, and probably a feat you're bs-ing just like your power snatches.

It's different here than on dbhammer. People actually get results here (for the most part). They get these results by sticking to the basics. There's no room here for "gurus" such as yourself who change their mind about what is optimal every week, and claim it's backed by science yet haven't actually seen it work themselves. People like you (and the rest of the guys from dbhammer) try to over complicate everything and that's why you get nowhere.


And of course you ignore all my posts again.

I believe I'm adding plenty to the discussion.

Were "shrimps" talked about in your Engineering the Athlete book that was backed by science and can be compared to the works of Verkhoshansky ? If the answer is no, I think everyone can see why nobody should listen to a word you say.

Quote from: RJ Nelsen on August 29, 2011, 06:59:06 pm

Quote from: steven-miller on August 29, 2011, 06:31:55 pm

So provided lack of balance was not there, which will always be a limiting factor with a heavy weight no matter how coordinated you are, it would be a useful unilateral exercises. But this is purely hypothetical because balance is an issue, for example for you. The evidence is you using 110 lbs for a lower body strength exercise.

I'm sorry, but your post shows a lack of understanding. The load utilized is, in itself, irrelevant. Would you say someone is weak because they can only do an iron cross with a 10kg weight vest? I mean, the vest is only 10 kilos, that's light, right?

When calculating loads for a shrimp or a pistol, the trainee's body weight needs to be taken into consideration. When doing an unladen shrimp, the load is roughly 85% of the person's body weight, so 170 lbs for a 200 lb man, which is being lifted on one foot. This is equivalent to the load on the legs found in a ~170 lb back squat.

For someone like me, an unladen shrimp results in about 190 lbs of weight per leg. Add 110 lbs of load and that's 300 lbs per leg. An equivalent back squat (in terms of tension on the legs) is around 410 lbs. The math breaks down as follows. 300 per leg x 2 = 600 lbs. 600 lbs - 190 for BW = 410. In other words, when I'm doing 110 lb single leg work, it's equivalent to repping 410 lb squats, at least as far as tension on the muscles of my legs and hips are concerned. The lower back is another matter.  

First, you seem to think that I am dumb because you are explaining to me that load is depended on the exercise. I find that hilarious.

Second your math is wrong because you pretend that people don't have to lift their bodyweight as well in the squat.

Third you fail to see my point. It is irrelevant that you THINK that your 110 lbs shrimp corresponds to a 410 lbs squat. My argument is that you would be able to train your body more efficiently with an exercise that does not limit your performance due to imposed demand of balancing around on one foot.

These

I disagree with Andrew and Steven, the shrimp is the backbone of my lower body training right now. Provided one is coordinated enough, they should actually be seeing higher levels of muscular tension in the shrimp than in the back squat due to the bilateral deficit. Lack of balance is an individual issue.

That having been said, unweighted shrimps are damn near useless. I'm using 110 lbs on my shoulders for reps at a BW of 225, so the exercise is a bit different the way I do it.