Adarq.org

Week 108

Friday - 04/22/16

-= Workout Log =-

Pull ups
BW x 13                       >> 60sec rests.
BW x 5                         >> Was supposed to start with cable rows but someone was on them.
BW x 4

Lateral Raises
40's x 3                    >> 60sec rests.
45's x 13
45's x 5
45's x 4

Seated Cable Rows
210 x 3
230 x 10
230 x 4

Negative Dragon Flags
5
5

Rear Delt Incline W Flyes
35's x 3
40's x 12

-= Study Log =-

Mike Myers Network+ Exam Guide
Finished Chapter 16 of 21
Finished Chapter 17 of 21

FlashCards Deluxe - Chapter Notes
Chapter 16 notes done (27 cards)
Chapter 17 notes done (33 cards)

FlashCards Deluxe - Quiz Questions
Learned 145 of 283 cards

Saturday - 04/23/16

-= Study Log =-

Mike Myers Network+ Exam Guide
Finished Chapter 18 of 21
Finished Chapter 19 of 21

FlashCards Deluxe - Chapter Notes
Chapter 18 notes done (20 cards)
Chapter 19 notes done (53 cards)

FlashCards Deluxe - Quiz Questions
Learned 173 of 283 cards

Sunday - 04/24/16

-= Study Log =-

Mike Myers Network+ Exam Guide
Finished Chapter 20 of 21

FlashCards Deluxe - Chapter Notes
Chapter 20 notes done (22 cards)

FlashCards Deluxe - Quiz Questions
Learned 173 of 283 cards

A 5lb weight cut shouldn't really poop on your strength.  Back in the olden days when I was around your weight, I wouldn't notice a drop in strength until i lost around 10-15lbs.

Yeah true. I think I was saying that more because sometimes I feel like I'm stalling hard on my lifts for a while (last week was an exception) so I felt like if I cut down, I would drop strength. It would be cool to keep my theoretical squat max of 455 at a bodyweight of 195. I'd be okay with dropping down even to a 440 max though.

I bet he would become extremely reactive and his ground contact times would be lower, despite having the same power to bodyweight ratio.

Intuitively, I believe that as well. I just don't know why I do. I catn't put a reason behind it yet.

My confusion is that your taking a weightlifting exercise and trying to decide how it will make you jump higher when it doesn't directly measure any jump specific movement... See my remarks about bench press.  Jumping high is based on speed off the ground... That's it.  Squats involve slowing down before you reach this point.  In early November I weighed 225 and squatted 500.  Today I weight about 210 and can squat around 440.  My jump went from high 30s to mid 40s.  Squats simply don't have correlation for most athletes for the question to be meaningful.  It's my opinion and experince of most athletes I work with.  There are exceptions I'm sure.

That reminds me to accelerate through the top of the squat, even if the bar leaves my back for an inch. I've been forgetting to do that. There isn't much of a reason to slow down at the top! Same thing with the bench press.

Personally squats have had an excellent correlation to my DLRVJ. Squatting ~2.-2.1x my bodyweight, I've had a ~37 DLRVJ at bodyweights of 175lbs, 190lbs, and over 200lbs... I have videos on youtube right now of this, as well as journal entries on this site. People on this site have seen my skinny high school 175lb self tomahawking with two hands, and also my fatty self at 210lbs squatting parallel 405x4 nearly hitting my head on the backboard. More recently, I have another 2-hand tomahawk vid at a weight of 192lbs.

My RVJ has always had a very strong correlation to my squat:bw ratio provided my movement efficiency didn't go to shit. I get that back quickly though (also noted in my journals). It's why I have such a hard on for getting to a 2.25x bw squat right now. It seems due to the way I'm built/structured, increasing my relative strength while maintaining sufficient movement efficiency (read: bball a couple times a week, pepper in some dunks) is the fastest way to increase my RVJ.

I think I went off topic here. Anyway, I want to comment on this:

Jumping high is based on speed off the ground... That's it.

100% correct. Your velocity as soon as your toes come off the ground is what dictates your vert. What I'm interested in knowing is from a purely physics standpoint now, is if 400units of force for 200units of bodyweight accelerates you at the same rate as 300units of force for 150units of bodyweight. I believe the answer is yes. (edit: fwiw this calculator here says so as well http://www.higher-faster-sports.com/verticaljumpcalculator.html)

Next question to ask is what a ROFD curve would look like for both people. Perhaps your CNS may have a better ROFD curve in the higher bodyweight scenario because it's more accustomed to lifting heavier absolute weights. I know that there are other factors in play, though. Like ones that Raptor mentioned in his post.

Week 108

Wednesday - 04/12/16

-= Study Log =-

Mike Myers Network+ Exam Guide

FlashCards Deluxe - Chapter Notes

FlashCards Deluxe - Quiz Questions
Learned 145 of 283 cards

FlashCards Deluxe - Brain Dump
Created deck (306 cards)

I plan to read two chapters since I'm not lifting today. Completed turning a couple of brain dumps into flash cards on my phone. I plan to take the exam on May 7th. Should be done with readings in a week, then I have a week of re-reading notes, studying what I know the least, watching vids on what I know the least, and memorizing the brain dumps.

edit: didn't finish the chapter but i will tomorrow morning

Quote from: Dreyth on April 20, 2016, 01:58:12 pm

This discussion makes me wonder about a hypothetical scenario:

- Athlete weighs 200lbs, squats 2x bw
- Athlete cuts down weight
- Athlete weighs 175lbs, squats 2x bw still

How would his DLRVJ, SLRVJ, and SVJ been affected, assuming all other factors were held constant?

depends.

Yeah. But on what? And why?

i wish i knew some programming so i could make a simulation showing exactly how high someone would jump with factors like force output, ROFD, GCT, and bodyweight. that should tell me a lot. i wonder how they all come into play with each other. an automated force curve graph would be awesome too.

Those factors are inter-related so it confuses things. You see a lot of the highest jumpers have low GCT, so you might think "lower GCT = better." Well, not necessarily. For example... low GCT may be a byproduct of high ROFD. But what if we could keep the same force curve (and ROFD) but increase the GCT. that would mean a higher vertical since we are achieving higher peak velocities ala kingfish style! a ha!

But then there's the issue that a longer GCT (via deeper knee bend) could put someone in a less than advantageous position to jump higher because they can produce force faster by having the reversal come earlier (ala many jumpers not like kingfish). In that case, high ROFD is in a roundabout way a byproduct GCT!

edit: the above would be best for looking at the SVJ

Week 108

Tuesday - 04/19/16

-= Study Log =-

Mike Myers Network+ Exam Guide
Finished Chapter 13 of 21

FlashCards Deluxe - Chapter Notes
Chapter 13 notes done (22 cards)

FlashCards Deluxe - Quiz Questions
Learned 129 of 283 cards

Will lift and update later. De-load today.

Edit: didn't lift. too lazy. it was a de-load anyway so not so bad. i regret it though. also feeling sick.