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 - T0ddday

Pages: 1 ... 32 33 [34] 35 36 ... 58
496
Progress Journals & Experimental Routines / Re: a fast and explosive donkey!
« on: April 07, 2014, 05:57:29 pm »
Quote from: LBSS on April 06, 2014, 11:50:32 pm
so like,

DAY 1
jumps
4-5 x 60m @95+%
300m @ 95+%

DAY 2
rest/weights (upper only)

DAY 3
jumps
4-5 x 60m @95+%

DAY 4
jumps submax/basketball
weights (lower and upper)

DAY 5
rest

DAY 6/7
4-5 x 250-150m @75-80%
300m @100%

that gives three days of jumping and three days of sprinting per week, with a couple of days of obviously de-emphasized weights, to focus on upper stuff just for funzies and lower stuff to focus on p-chain.

Looks pretty sensible.  Not sure if jumps are all indoor basketball jumps, but you might want to add some bounding outdoor as part of your track warmup.  If the indoor jumps are already substantial then you could just add some submax bounds to your warmup to include with your skips and drills. As far as the distances and effort... You don't really get to use percentages.  They don't have much meaning because you will get better so fast initially that it's better to just set reasonable goals for times or do 100%.  Your tempo day will be an SE day until you are fit enough to do tempo, but thats fine.  I'd make a few minor changes (mostly to avoid boredom but also to get you a bit race prepped - dunno if any of your training days will have blocks or a training partner but if you have a pair you would use them for day 3, if you don't them use a four point stance instead of blocks ):

DAY 1
jumps
4-5 x 60m @100+%
300m @ 100+%

DAY 2
rest/weights (upper only)

DAY 3
jumps
5x30 in blocks, walk back
3x50 in blocks - start on curve, jog out the last 50 meters to straight
2x110*
1x150*
1x200*
* timed if possible - full recovery between reps, about 7 min, 7 min, 10-15m

DAY 4
jumps submax/basketball
weights (lower and upper)

DAY 5
rest

DAY 6/7
1) 300m @ 100% ***If you are up to doing this twice a week do it first on this day or else it won't be a good test.

2) Some challenging lactate run
- could be 2x3x200 - 2 mins between the reps (200, 2min, 200, 2min, 200) & 10 mins between sets - start off trying to hit 30,30,30 & 30,30,28 and get better each week
- could be 3 x (300m, rest 45 seconds 100m)  - Timed based on your 300m trial - if you run 42 all out then aim for 45 seconds @ 300m and then run as fast a 100m as possible.

^If training alone the 2x3x200 is probably easiest for you to self time and push yourself at, but you could make some other fun lactate test up just keep it the same until you compete and you will get better each week.   



497
Progress Journals & Experimental Routines / Re: a fast and explosive donkey!
« on: April 06, 2014, 04:23:41 pm »
Quote from: LBSS on April 06, 2014, 04:34:59 am
i'm planning to run a 100 on may 19 and/or june 9 and/or june 30. might try a 200, too, just to beat myself up. i get back to the states and normal training on april 14, which means the may 19 race would be just about a month off, and then ~six and nine weeks to the following two dates.

so, questions, for t0ddday primarily but also anyone else who wants to chime in:

1. is it worth trying to run a 100 race after a month of training, or if i can only do one of the three am i better off giving myself a bit more time to train?

Totally worth it.  If your schedule allows do all three.   In your first meet (and often in your second and sometimes in your third) if you don't false start you will probably stand up out of the blocks, feel dizzy and a bit overwhelmed, forget all your training and cues and feel like the event was quite a blur. :) An awesome experience everyone should have.   You will feel like "If I would done A,B and C I would have run 1 second faster" which of course is not true but you will feel like that anyway.   Get that race out of the way. 


Quote from: LBSS on April 06, 2014, 04:34:59 am
2. what's my best approach, considering that jumping/dunking remains the overwhelming goal and i'm not going to give that up to run 4+ times a week? if i'm jumping indoors 2-3 times per week and the track is a mile away from the gym, should i bother trying to sprint after jumping? just stick to tempo and try to get in some semblance of shape? i'm happy to reduce time in the weight room but not time on the court.

Well, how can you be sure that dunking will still be the overwhelming goal at the time?  From your journal progress it seems conceivable that you could achieve your tip/lob dunk in May?  If you are solo-dunking volleyballs already it seems you are just a great day and some well timed lob catching practice away from your goal....

Even if you don't achieve the dunk in May you are certainly close enough that weight training is hardly necessary for you to get to where you need to be.   For sure you don't want to sacrifice jumping but maybe you can be creative and jump outdoors.   I have some athletes doing some "creative" outdoor jumping ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yCUDKR8IFa8 ).  That's hood vertical training and it certainly could be substituted for a day of jumps at the gym.

As far as jumping before or after sprinting it doesn't matter much but just avoid jumping after serious speed endurance.  If you recall that workout we did at Georgetown where you ran about 4-6 50m sprints with full recovery....  You should be fine to jump before or after a workout like that.   For sprinting just get to the track 3 days a week and get one SE day and the rest speed and you should be fine.  If you are not going to jump post-sprinting finishing with a timed 300m will help give you the confidence to not do horrible in the 200...

498
Progress Journals & Experimental Routines / Re: chasing athleticism
« on: April 06, 2014, 03:06:54 pm »
Quote from: LBSS on April 06, 2014, 02:10:11 pm
you get quality dialogue because you obviously care and put in really hard, dedicated work, and your whole process is out there for everyone to see and engage with.

^^^ This point exactly.  This is really the whole appealing thing about the community and what Adarq created.  I have been training/coaching/in the athletics community now for over 15 years but Adarqs training model was unique in that his big question and challenge as a coach was: "Can truly excellent coaching, training and science application take a low-level or mediocre athlete and turn him into a high performing athlete?".    His posts and his goal were more about the vertical jump and so his framework was always claim was always that truly great coaching could take himself from a 20inch to 40inch jump which would be more impressive than going from a 35 inch to 45 inch jump or something like that.   

The question I am more interested in involves track and field and it's one I am not certain I know the answer to.  I have made some gains in sprinting speed myself but the first time I stood up out of the blocks wearing distance spikes I ran 11.54 just on the athleticism I had developed from team sports... even at the peak of training my best races in perfect conditions were less than a 1 second improvement so I can't really say that I was ever a great sprinter...    The "great coaches" of the world get handed athletes who run 10.1 as high school kids and turn them into 9.9 runners which is equally unimpressive but also not shocking because their are of course limits to human performance.   I have trained some great athletes and some not-so-great athletes and like Adarq the question I want to answer is can you take a male athlete age 20-30 who has normal body movement and is say an "intramural level" athlete and put him on the track and watch him run say 13.5 seconds.   With proper training and coaching can I make that same athlete run 11.0 seconds?  11.5 seconds?   12.0 seconds?  I want to know the answer to that question...  Even moreso than the vertical jump their is this refrain that speed is not something that you build but something that you are born with.  Obviously, their is some truth to that.... but is speed more like height or body mass on the continuum of changeability.    I like to believe that 13.5 to 11.5 is possible for 80% of men.... Of course I don't really know and I probably believe it based more on faith than evidence.

Most times I engage in coaching or training with one of those poor athletes they tend to make silly excuses ("I'm just not fast-twitch like you are", "I'm more of a natural jogger", "I'm white", "I'm asian", etc.) or get just far too nerdy in their quest to get faster (RJ Nelson thought DB-hammer would make him run 9.9x, Selfialluh thinks he needs to worry about his frontside mechanics) or plain get distracted by something else (like real life - Mutumbo has to get a job!).   That last reason is why the question is hard to answer!  A 13.5 second 100m is not going to get anybody to support him to train... he will have to have a job and a life and those things may make the question of whether it's possible that IF he was trained like a high-performing athlete he would get significantly better!  But, it's still a question I want answered!

All that said that's why this msg board is great.  Track boards have far better athletes.  But this board has a unique number of athletes KF, Entropy, LBSS, etc who didn't start out elite.  But are able to balance out their life to train like semi-elite athletes and see just what they can achieve.  Of course we don't have a lot of guys with singular track goals which would make things more fun, but it's still enjoyable to be part of the quest for jumping or whatever.   The big problem I see currently with Entropy is "WHAT IS YOUR GOAL!!!".   You are only 6'3'' and were a fat horrible athlete and now you are catching oops in games!   That's ridiculous improvement.  Amazing.  BUT.... what's your goal now?  Is it to jump 38'' inches?   Run 12.0 in the 100m?   I wish you would get some type of explosive athletic goal and quest for it because this nebulous goal of being good at basketball is not that fun!  We know you can be good at basketball.... I went to a Lakers game the other day and Steve Nash is shorter than you, less athletic than you, 100 years old, suffering from 15 injuries to ever muscle, AND still put on a passing clinic and probably had a +/- of over 10 in about 18 minutes of game time...  Obviously, this is somewhat tongue in cheek, basketball is fun and if you want to excel at it keep it up... But the great dialogue you get is a reward for you amazing dedication to athletic requirements your willingness to be the oft-frustrated science experiment for scientists and trainers like myself... after all you named your journal chasing athleticism NOT chasing 20 pts and 10 rebounds a game.



 

499
Progress Journals & Experimental Routines / Re: acole14's journal - DUNK OR DIE
« on: April 05, 2014, 02:56:51 am »
Quote from: acole14 on April 04, 2014, 10:05:26 pm

11.31 I think. I does kind of look funny from that angle I guess!

Wow.  If that's the case then you should be able to drop under 12 seconds in less than a month by just getting in a tiny bit of shape!  Is the angle of the video funny.... because it looks like you are losing by at most 5 meters....  Losing by more than a second and only being 5 meters behind means you are extremely gassed!  That's how the end of a 400m might be... not a 100m!   Your running over 12.3 but coming in at closer to a ~20s pace which means you are no where near your potential.  Guys who run 10.0 always come through in an 8.x pace... Your fitness might not be that good but you should certainly finish at a pace faster than your total time.  Get your coaches to make you throw up a few times and you will be at 11.6. 

500
Progress Journals & Experimental Routines / Re: chasing athleticism
« on: April 05, 2014, 02:48:25 am »
Quote from: Raptor on April 04, 2014, 06:55:07 pm
Hm... so as an useful training means for both athleticism and fat loss, 400m runs would be "the best"?

No.  First of all you have to decide what you mean by athleticism.  Second, training "like a 400m runner" would be optimal for fat loss, but that does not necessarily mean doing a bunch of 400m runs (although I have fallen into that trap myself).   Doing lots of 400m runs would be more like training for the mile.  Training to reduce your 400m time would include a lot of work in the 100m-300m range at a pace better than your 400m PR.   For the untrained and soft the 400m is a good test because if you make it a goal to reduce your time it is almost incumbent on you that you will have to lose BF to achieve your goal.  Also, 400m is long enough that you can quite easily reliably hand-time yourself and gauge your progress...

For the type of athleticism that you desire ( I'm thinking unilateral jumping / weight loss ) you should emulate someone like Christian Taylor.  One of the hardest working athletes I have been around and an absolute beast who runs the 400 in 45 seconds and is the Olympic champion in the triple jump.  Get conscious of your 400m time, get some interval work and some end of practice reps in at 400m, but don't neglect your jumps.  The biggest bang for your buck for the athleticism you desire will come from constant training (bounding/jumping then running) WHILE you are losing the babyfat.  Keep your strength up but don't worry about things like squats -  if you are doing proper bounding/jumping they are almost counterproductive.  CT hardly squats and I would bet he cannot squat as much as he can hang clean.... Of course he can hang clean almost double bw:

<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=og_koqNOdJ4" target="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=og_koqNOdJ4</a>

(should probably be in the beast thread... that's a 165 lb triple jumper!)

501
Progress Journals & Experimental Routines / Re: chasing athleticism
« on: April 04, 2014, 05:45:39 pm »
Quote from: Raptor on April 04, 2014, 02:57:21 pm
Hey Toddday, what type of sprinter has the lowest body fat % usually in your experience? Meaning, as a general average? The 100m sprinter, the 200m sprinter, or the 400m sprinter?

Short answer:  At lower levels 400m training will reduce bodyfat the most but 100m sprinters will have the least bodyfat. 

Long Answer: For high level athletes I'd say it's pretty much a wash between those distances because they really have a lot more overlap than most people realize (consider that Tyson Gay has run 9.x, 19.x, 44.x --- a lot of "100m" or "400m" guys can do both).  Maybe you could differentiate if you compare only guys who excel at the 60m/100m vs guys who are really 800m/400m guys.  For example Martin Rooney vs. Dwain Chambers.  In that kind of comparison the short sprinter will almost always have lower bodyfat levels than the middle distance sprinter simply because the 400m/800m guy carries far less muscle mass.   Additionally, as the distances increase you get shorter runners which also have more % bf.   This is actually an excellent comparison to consider because it hammers home a point that I think we need to all remember and that for all discussions of leanness we need to STOP CONSIDERING BODYFAT AS A PERCENTAGE!!!!

This concept that you NEED to have 3%, 4%, or 8%  bodyfat as "essential bodyfat" is completely invalid when it comes to athletes.  These %'s assume a constant amount of lean mass and as such are silly.  A 6' distance runner might weigh 150lbs and have about 10 lbs of fat ( 6.6 % bodyfat ).  If you add 30 lbs of muscle to the athlete you shouldn't expect his bodyfat to remain the same.   In fact the amount of "essential fat" needed is more likely a function of organ size/chest cavity size and probably doesn't go up much with height.   There are people alive with zero bodyfat so the idea of "essential fat" is somewhat incorrect anyway... 

But the point is if you want to really consider you question accurately you should really focus on amount of fat mass rather than % of bodyfat to eliminate confounding information like height and muscle mass.   The answer there is more straightforward....  All track athletes who compete at an event where bodyweight is the primary resistance are not going to get away carrying a large amount of fat for two reasons:  1) It slows you down.  2) Hard training reduces the amount you carry.   I'd estimate that the numbers really don't vary that much for the 10k and down... Men probably have between 5-10lbs of bodyfat and the differences in %'s are just a function of muscle mass and height.   The formula doesn't really change until the endurance requirement increases so much that fatty acid oxidation is a useful energy source...  The catch is of course the longer the race the more mileage incurred in training means fat storage is harder to achieve.  This is why women get so hard to beat as distances increase past the marathon (more adept at fat storage in spite of training).   





502
Progress Journals & Experimental Routines / Re: acole14's journal - DUNK OR DIE
« on: April 04, 2014, 11:55:26 am »
What was the time of the winner of the heat?  The Internet has done some crazy things to sprinting!  I swear that race looks to me like a bunch of guys running in slow motion.... but with AWESOME front side mechanics!

503
Progress Journals & Experimental Routines / Re: chasing athleticism
« on: April 04, 2014, 11:46:10 am »
Quote from: entropy on April 04, 2014, 03:40:51 am
Quote from: T0ddday on April 03, 2014, 02:15:48 pm
Yeah... I'm wholly confused.  If you claim you would be at 2.4% at 180-183.... And now you are at 187... woudn't that make you a lot leaner than 7% currently?   

Right, I don't think he is 2.4% and i don't think i would be either if i weighed 180-183. Isn't that near enough essential bodyfat levels? Like stage ready bodybuilder levels? I dont think your friend is there, i'd say he's maybe somewhere between 6% and 12% as a guess just from visual inspection but that's not worth much. What was the estimation method btw? 2.4% with how much error? Cause if the error is say ± 3.5% then i wouldn't put much stock in 2.4% (which is claiming what, that you know bodyfat to 2 figures? i dont think so).

Quote
My main point is that perhaps the mirror isn't the best gauge for your bodyfat levels. The person I am comparing you to is the same height as you and has much less lowerbody muscle than you (as judged by quad size) and doesn't really lift...  However, he is 2.4% at 180 while you claim to be much higher % at 165lbs.   That doesn't make sense.  Sure, if we just look at you both you "look" much fatter.   But how fat you look and how fat you are are not always in agreement. 

But the mirror is the only reliable thing we can rely on. If i look lean enough compared to other ppl who are athletic, i'd say i'm around that 10% mark, even though in reality, i have no idea what exact number my bodyfat might be in that case. And in truth it doesn't even matter. Its just a threshold of going from average in shape guy to athletic bodyfat levels. If i took a DEXA today and it came out with 6.9% (say) i wouldn't say great i'm lean now, i dont need to worry about my bodyfat. Because i'd know that i'm not quite there compared to my desire level of leanness. And after DEXA what else is there, dunk test? It's got issues too with error. We can't really do much better than mirror and photos in practice..

Ok, first of all the method we use to test at the lab at USC is hydrostatic weighing.  It's the same method used at the NBA combine and we have data from both the lakers and other athletes where we compare MRI/DEXA to hydrostatic weighings and the error is less than 1% with multiple weighings in all cases.  The athlete I am showing you is maximum 3% bodyfat.  He is a 45.x second 400m sprinter and you really don't see athletes running those times that are above 5%.   I really don't understand how you can just contradict data and say "I'd say he is between 6 and 12%".  Just for reference if you see an athlete who D1 (alabama) level (football and track) and is 6'3'' 180lbs in the USA that guy is not EVER 12% bodyfat.   The SEC is the best conference in American College football... you will never find an athlete capable of performing at that level standing 6'3'' 180 who is not single digit bodyfat.  Every non-kicker or quarterback who is double digit bodyfat weighs over 200lbs.   

The point of all this is that your argument that the mirror is reliable is simply not true.  I don't know much about Australia but there must be a decent sports lab around where you can get better data.  It would help you on your training. 


Quote from: entropy on April 04, 2014, 03:40:51 am
Quote from: T0ddday on April 03, 2014, 02:15:48 pm
Quote
I don't want to get into some long argument about race and bodyfat but just a few things to consider.  You have not been training for most of your life so you probably added a lot of subcutaneous fat cells to your body.   You are south-asian ethnicity and some evidence suggests that as such have a slightly higher set point as far as the fat you store subQ.   As such it seems reasonable to me that you might get down to 175 lbs or so (with a decent 400lb squat) and take a look at yourself in the mirror and think "I'm still too fat" while in reality your actual bodyfat % is not THAT high (say around 7%). Trust me that seeing person after person get their bodyfat tested suggests that the mirror really isn't reliable for everyone.  Cutting till you are as "ripped" as that other guy might just not work...  That's all.

It's interesting but its also a recipe for complacency. People have no shortage of excuses for not cutting. I'm going to recomp. I'm carrying a lot of LBM underneath so my bodyfat isnt that high. I'm just a few weeks away from seeing my abs IF I WANT. etc. In the end its only when you do the hard work and get rid of the bodyfat that you have something solid to show. But the only problem is when I get there, i am so weak that it's counterproductive to becoming athletic. There is probably a sweet spot to being strong enough and fat enough to be athletic though. I need to work harder at optimising my training and diet to find it..

Totally agree.  It's a BS excuse 99% of the time.   But not in your case.   While you may not be a gifted athlete one thing that is special about you is your dedication.  While Raptor refuses to give up eating candies and chocolate, following your journal is great because you are really inspiring with your level of dedication to your diet.   You don't drop from 210 to 190 in as short as you do without great dedication to your diet.  The reason I'm commenting here is that your consistent insistence that you are fat can slow you down in your goals to become a better athlete.  If this was bodybuilding... this would be a different story.   You are fat for a bodybuilder because the mirror says so and the only solution is to keep cutting into you look lean for bodybuilding and maybe you just don't have the genetics to be a bodybuilder.   But this isn't about bodybuilding this is about athletic performance.   And the fact that you are able to remain super dedicated to your diet, lose weight, but not appear super lean leads me to believe that maybe the level of leanness that will maximize athletic performance for you just won't have you looking super cut.  And chasing a certain look may derail your training.   Fact is the mirror might just be a shitty way for you to judge your bodyfat. 

The simple test is to take a look at sprinters like Walter Dix and Craig Pickering.  Your "mirror test" would estimate them around 15% bodyfat.   I used to be puzzled by how "fat" guys run so fast.  The truth is Walter Dix just looks fat... whatever you want to call it (thick skin, subQ water, low muscle tonus, extra skin, etc) he just isn't holding a huge amount of fat.   If he was really 15% bodyfat that would suggest he could lose around 20 lbs....  A guy who runs 19.5 in the 200m losing 20lbs of fat would mean he runs 18.9 at the slowest.  So, either believe that the mirror test is accurate and that there are "fat" athletes who are just a diet away from breaking every world record known to man OR realize that all high level athletes are not carrying tons of excess non-functional tissue but some just look better doing it.   Which one is it?

Judging from your level of dedication I would say you consistently grossly estimate your bodyfat and need to settle in at a reasonable bw and maximize performance.   The fact that you complain so much about strength losses when cutting is evidence that you are leaning than you think.   Notice how KF didn't drastically lose strength until he was pretty light.  I've cut to 5% and it isn't until I'm well into single digits that the strength losses become noticeable...  16% guys don't get weaker when they go to 12% (unless they are WAY stronger than any of us).   Consider that.   

504
Progress Journals & Experimental Routines / Re: A Journey to Running Fast and Jumping High
« on: April 03, 2014, 09:01:13 pm »
Quote from: seifullaah73 on April 03, 2014, 07:51:40 pm
So I will be doing the 5-10 x 100m everyday and add gym after when I can. Followed by current workout, with 100m timed at start of workout cycle tuesday.

I will definitely try to make sure it is 100m, I have a stop watch, which I can use to time my runs.

thanks

It's the ONLY workout you need.  High school girls run 12.x without weights, plyos, tempo runs, any of that stuff.   

And it doesn't really matter if it's 100m.  Just make sure it takes about 15 seconds.  Put your left foot on the line, rock back and start your stop watch as you pick up your right foot.  Hit stop on your watch on your first footstrike past some line.  Do it 5-10 times.  Your first time you will run all the reps in about 15 seconds.  After do this for long enough you will be able to get every rep in closer to 12 seconds.  Taking 2-3 seconds off your self timed "85-120m" run should mean you are fast enough to think about training like a sprinter (sort of).   It really is that simple. 

505
Progress Journals & Experimental Routines / Re: chasing athleticism
« on: April 03, 2014, 02:15:48 pm »
Quote from: entropy on April 02, 2014, 02:58:44 am


7% isn't in the ballpark. You've seen me at my lightest/leanest @ ~165lb and you thought i was above 10% then. I'm no where as lean now as I was then. It's not that I think i have no muscle, it's just i have too much bodyfat for how much muscle I have. I'd probably be as lean as your friend if i weighed 180-183 (estimating here, have no idea whether i'd need to weigh as low as 170 say in reality). But yeah we've talked about htis and you convinced me I might have lightweight birdlike bones. I just find it hard to put on muscle/strenght without putting on too much bodyfat. Like in January when i ended my bulk, i was 98kg, squatting 170kg and front squatting 145kg, could still dunk. But was just soo fat. Dieting down 15kg to get lean and i've lost muscle and strength, gone from 27.5" thighs to just under 25" etc. Lifts have come down too. If I could do my bulks more efficiently, maybe i'd be a better athlete but i kinda got it wrong this time around haha.


Yeah... I'm wholly confused.  If you claim you would be at 2.4% at 180-183.... And now you are at 187... woudn't that make you a lot leaner than 7% currently? 

My main point is that perhaps the mirror isn't the best gauge for your bodyfat levels. The person I am comparing you to is the same height as you and has much less lowerbody muscle than you (as judged by quad size) and doesn't really lift...  However, he is 2.4% at 180 while you claim to be much higher % at 165lbs.   That doesn't make sense.  Sure, if we just look at you both you "look" much fatter.   But how fat you look and how fat you are are not always in agreement. 

I don't want to get into some long argument about race and bodyfat but just a few things to consider.  You have not been training for most of your life so you probably added a lot of subcutaneous fat cells to your body.   You are south-asian ethnicity and some evidence suggests that as such have a slightly higher set point as far as the fat you store subQ.   As such it seems reasonable to me that you might get down to 175 lbs or so (with a decent 400lb squat) and take a look at yourself in the mirror and think "I'm still too fat" while in reality your actual bodyfat % is not THAT high (say around 7%). Trust me that seeing person after person get their bodyfat tested suggests that the mirror really isn't reliable for everyone.  Cutting till you are as "ripped" as that other guy might just not work...  That's all.

506
Progress Journals & Experimental Routines / Re: a fast and explosive donkey!
« on: April 01, 2014, 10:20:03 pm »
Quote from: LBSS on April 01, 2014, 02:06:10 pm
i've said it before and i'll say it again: tip dunking IS dunking for me. if i can put a basketball in off a lob or rebound or whatever, then in my mind it's mission accomplished and i can go about trying to run a sub-12s 100m or squatting 425 or whatever. while still trying to improve my dunking, of course. but once i can put a basketball in BAMN then i can move on from this blasted* obsession.


That's my point!  If you are dunking  volleyballs consistently.... Then get out the camcorder and tip dunk the basketball!

507
Progress Journals & Experimental Routines / Re: acole14's journal - DUNK OR DIE
« on: April 01, 2014, 01:20:43 pm »
Quote from: acole14 on March 19, 2014, 08:43:01 am
Well I had a shit run again goddammit. Ran a 12.34 with +0.2m tail. I got a video of it and my form is just really terrible. I've been working on driving my right arm more in training but in a race situation it just all goes out the window. No power coming from the arms and I just look sluggish. Also, because the attendance was low, I got jumped up to the second heat, which definitely psyched me out a little. I still feel very 'inexperienced' in big meets like this and even though I'm running faster in training, mentally I'm only able to achieve maybe 85-90% of my best performance rather than 95-100% in a proper race. Oh well. Looking forward to the season being over so I can focus more on jumps and getting fit.

<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zkl6Nn8n_Ow" target="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zkl6Nn8n_Ow</a>

Which one are you? 

508
Progress Journals & Experimental Routines / Re: a fast and explosive donkey!
« on: April 01, 2014, 01:17:08 pm »
Looks like actually emphasizing jumping has worked... Glad to see it.  Not that I want you to stop on your journey but if you can dunk a volleyball.... Then you can probably tip dunk a basketball...

509
Progress Journals & Experimental Routines / Re: A Journey to Running Fast and Jumping High
« on: April 01, 2014, 01:15:09 pm »
Quote from: seifullaah73 on March 30, 2014, 08:39:49 am
Warm up:
   jog

Workout More Warmup
   2 x 2 x 170m @70%

Cool down: Commute Home
  normal cool down walk home


Listen to acole.  You have the cautiousness of an extremely fast masters athlete at the end of the season with the speed of a 14 year old girl.   If you can't run 100m in under 14 seconds then a good workout for you is to try to run 100m under 14 seconds.  5-10 times.  Every day.  Deciding not to compete until you are "fast enough" is deciding to give up.

510
Progress Journals & Experimental Routines / Re: ADARQ's journal
« on: April 01, 2014, 01:09:23 pm »
Quote from: Raptor on January 22, 2014, 06:12:36 pm
Hey Andrew I just started learning Python... I was wondering... what's your opinion about it?

I've heard it's a good idea to start with Python as a means to learn programming. What do you think?

It's how I got started as a graduate student and made the switch from math to data analysis.  If you like math/problem solving but hate syntax and programming it's absolutely the best way to go.  Make a account on https://projecteuler.net/ and solve the first 100 problems using python.  Anybody who can do that is capable of quite a lot. 

Pages: 1 ... 32 33 [34] 35 36 ... 58