5341
Progress Journals & Experimental Routines / Re: cowed77's time to get up!
« on: July 22, 2011, 06:25:10 am »
You eastern people have a lot of money on your hands don't you?
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.
5342
Progress Journals & Experimental Routines / Re: ADARQ's journal
« on: July 22, 2011, 06:08:04 am »
Please explain this pic!
dno it was after i landed this nasty warmup two hander, which was actually my best dunk make of the night... i didnt have cam on.. then i brought cam out and threw a bad lob and just coasted in the air for head height.. haha
ya i dno wtf is going on there.. oddness
looks dope tho
im going to dunk again tomorrow.. should be interesting... going to use the normal ball, not lob ball.. felt better with normal ball but i let some people use it.
pc man
WTF?
5343
Strength, Power, Reactivity, & Speed Discussion / Re: Glute activation during squats
« on: July 22, 2011, 03:51:04 am »
I watched a video of a guy who progressed into standing and even decline ab wheel rollouts and he recommended against the "wall" thing. Instead, he said you need to do your standing ab wheel rollouts in the beginning on an incline surface or on certain incline benches in the gym.
5344
Strength, Power, Reactivity, & Speed Discussion / Re: Few Questions
« on: July 22, 2011, 03:45:39 am »
ASS TO TOES!!!
The best thing I've heard all year long
The best thing I've heard all year long
5345
Strength, Power, Reactivity, & Speed Discussion / Re: Who would jump higher and why?
« on: July 22, 2011, 03:44:23 am »Guys on a serious note, everybody needs to watch this vid. I have only put it here because this thread is getting traffic.
Rick Simpson - Cure for Cancer.
DON'T EVER FORGET THIS VID. WATCH IT!!!.<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uomQey0HVGw" target="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uomQey0HVGw</a>
Orgignal Link: http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=Rick+Simpson+&aq=f
Official website: http://phoenixtears.ca/
WTF?
5346
Progress Journals & Experimental Routines / Re: cowed77's time to get up!
« on: July 22, 2011, 03:32:18 am »Oh yea, I subscribed to Adam link's vertfreak product.
Went thru 4 emails, alot of selling heehee, but I'm inclined to see it thru.
Heck, I might even buy it if it's reasonably priced!
You western people have a lot of money on your hands don't you?
5347
Strength, Power, Reactivity, & Speed Discussion / Re: Glute activation during squats
« on: July 21, 2011, 06:22:25 pm »
Hip Flexor. I wanted to emphasize that thing with the hip flexors because really, most people don't even know it's possible to train them well with the ab wheel.
In what variant do you think the hip flexors get better stimulation: the standing ab wheel rollout or the kneeling one?
In what variant do you think the hip flexors get better stimulation: the standing ab wheel rollout or the kneeling one?
5348
Strength, Power, Reactivity, & Speed Discussion / Re: Glute activation during squats
« on: July 21, 2011, 05:43:42 pm »How do you strengthen the low abs? Are they being stimulated with ab wheel rollouts?
YES< IF you pull in with the knees if youre doing them kneeling, or pull with the feet if youre doing them standing. most people dont do this and they miss out on some awesome low ab /hf work.
That's exactly what I'm doing. Not only they help with the abs but also the hip flexors strength which I need for a powerful knee drive in my one leg jumps.
5349
Strength, Power, Reactivity, & Speed Discussion / Re: Glute activation during squats
« on: July 21, 2011, 05:10:49 pm »
How do you strengthen the low abs? Are they being stimulated with ab wheel rollouts?
5351
Strength, Power, Reactivity, & Speed Discussion / Re: Who would jump higher and why?
« on: July 21, 2011, 03:57:47 pm »How it's a contradiction? I think mass is detrimental but additional leg muscle at a sub ~2.5 squat helps more than it kills. Meaning - you get a higher force output as a + but you need more effort from the CNS/core/other untrained small muscles to move as a - . I see the CNS power in absolute terms (like everyone of us having a battery in their bodies) that is drained more by the additional mass it has to move around, regardless of it's nature.
Adding muscle cannot be detrimental and useful at the same time because there is only one net effect in the end. This net effect might be the result of independent mechanisms, but what matters is the outcome of a higher, equal or lower VJ.
If you put a bigger and heavier engine in a car, it will have a bigger power production (positive effect) but it will burn more fuel and maybe, due to the higher forces, wear some other components out (negative effect).
the problem with statement is the human body is not a car, not even close. our "parts" adapt just like anything else to increased strength/stress and get bigger, stronger, faster.
also, dont say mass hurts ATHLETICISM, thats insane, tell that to some of the football guys who went from 150 - 190 and got much faster, more explosive, and became 10x the players the were. If you said it hurts, "vertical jump", you would still be wrong in several different ways, but youd have some ground to stand on at least.
Yeah that's true, sprinters or football players would punch me if they heard that but high jumpers would kiss you if they heard what you said. Haha.
5352
Strength, Power, Reactivity, & Speed Discussion / Re: Who would jump higher and why?
« on: July 21, 2011, 03:56:37 pm »If you put a bigger and heavier engine in a car, it will have a bigger power production (positive effect) but it will burn more fuel and maybe, due to the higher forces, wear some other components out (negative effect).
So? A car with a really weak motor will still not drive fast, even if other components are at a lower risk for "wearing out".
Of course. That's why I said the positive outweigh the negatives up until a certain point (which people are usually far from).
5353
Injury, Prehab, & Rehab talk for the brittlebros / Re: Upper back pain when dead lifting
« on: July 21, 2011, 02:44:37 pm »
Well, in theory, your center of gravity will be a bit lower and your back will be a bit straighter.
5354
Injury, Prehab, & Rehab talk for the brittlebros / Re: Lower back injuries and olympic lifts
« on: July 21, 2011, 02:42:59 pm »
By the way, discovered something else:
If I point my feet A LOT to the sides then I can bend forward without much pain if at all in the buttock. If I have my feet oriented forward, then the pain is pretty severe at the top of my left buttock. I think this is consistent with the piriformis syndrome.
Now this is something to keep in mind while squatting - it appears that if I have a narrow stance and the feet are not oriented to the sides at least a for a bit (or more) then bad things will happen. I'm writing this because other people might experience the same thing and they didn't discovered it.
PS. And seriously, that's a back extension.
If I point my feet A LOT to the sides then I can bend forward without much pain if at all in the buttock. If I have my feet oriented forward, then the pain is pretty severe at the top of my left buttock. I think this is consistent with the piriformis syndrome.
Now this is something to keep in mind while squatting - it appears that if I have a narrow stance and the feet are not oriented to the sides at least a for a bit (or more) then bad things will happen. I'm writing this because other people might experience the same thing and they didn't discovered it.
PS. And seriously, that's a back extension.
5355
Strength, Power, Reactivity, & Speed Discussion / Re: Who would jump higher and why?
« on: July 21, 2011, 02:28:53 pm »How it's a contradiction? I think mass is detrimental but additional leg muscle at a sub ~2.5 squat helps more than it kills. Meaning - you get a higher force output as a + but you need more effort from the CNS/core/other untrained small muscles to move as a - . I see the CNS power in absolute terms (like everyone of us having a battery in their bodies) that is drained more by the additional mass it has to move around, regardless of it's nature.
Adding muscle cannot be detrimental and useful at the same time because there is only one net effect in the end. This net effect might be the result of independent mechanisms, but what matters is the outcome of a higher, equal or lower VJ.
If you put a bigger and heavier engine in a car, it will have a bigger power production (positive effect) but it will burn more fuel and maybe, due to the higher forces, wear some other components out (negative effect).