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 - LBSS

Pages: 1 ... 558 559 [560] 561 562 ... 668
8386
sup?


MAVS 2011 NBA CHAMPIONS

2-1 miami, sup?


a great series is what's up. i'm over hating lebron and the heat, they will absolutely have earned it if they pull this series off. i'd still like dallas to win so dirk and kidd can get theirs before it's too late, though.

8387
wide stance is only for people who plan to be soliciting sex in bathrooms in the minneapolis-st. paul airport. if your stance is too narrow there no one can see your coded foot taps. narrow stance, which protects the bunghole rather than inviting penetration by anonymous strangers, is much better suited to building general leg strength.

duh.

8388
Pics, Videos, & Links / Re: beast
« on: June 06, 2011, 11:16:35 am »
oh god, oh god, oh god, oh god, oh god

8389
Progress Journals & Experimental Routines / Re: Age vs Vertical
« on: June 06, 2011, 11:10:50 am »
I hate that shit, when I feel like I can get 1-2" below peak with ease, over and over but then can't get beyond it. Oh well, just gotta try to do better next time.

8390
Progress Journals & Experimental Routines / Re: ADARQ's journal
« on: June 03, 2011, 03:22:35 pm »
get a shave and a haircut, you fucking hippie.

dunks at 3:45 and 9:00 are extra nice.

8391
jet lag caught up with me

BW = ???
SORENESS = hamstrings a tiny bit, not really noticeable
ACHES/INJURIES = none
FATIGUE = moderate to high

session 1: volume

- warm up

- sprints : 10-20's
2 x 60%, 4 X 90%

- DLRVJ
x 15-20 == started with some drop steps, then second full run-up was very good considering how tired I was today, probably legit 32, grabbed rim easily. downhill from there, though, most other jumps in the 30.5 range. oh well, still felt pretty good.

- squat 3 x 5
285,285,285

- BSS 3 x 5
skipped because i think these are causing some knee pain, gotta get that figured out

- light calf raise: 4 x 5
185,185,185,185

- core
--chin up x 10+3+3 lol
--dip + 43 x 3, +33 x5,5 lol
--ab wheel roll out 3 x 20

- stretch

upper body is weeeeeak. fml.

8392
Introduce Yourself / Re: I like running
« on: June 02, 2011, 11:47:44 am »
As you've already experienced, you can't do everything at once. If you want to work on strength, you have to dedicate some time and effort to it, and that includes recovery time. If you're running twice a day, especially if you're running hard, that might get problematic.

As an example, you could replace 3 days of running with weight training for two months, eat a bunch more protein than you're probably used to, and see how much progress you make on the strength side. Your endurance will suffer a little but you can always get it back, and if you want to progress in one area another will have to suffer for a little while. Then, when August rolls around and it's time to start getting into track shape again, cut the weights back to one or two times a week, heavy-ish but low volume, and add the running days back into the mix.

What weight training, you ask? Hardly matters. You're a beginner so you'll make progress doing nearly anything as long as you keep your form solid (i.e. don't get hurt) and add weight to the bar. For instance:

jump squat or power clean/snatch 3 x 2
squat 3 x 5
bench 3 x 5
chin ups 3 x 5 (add weight once it gets easy)
DL or trap bar DL 1 x 5
core x whatever (leg raises, ab roll outs, etc.)

The main takeaway is: if you want to lift productively and are already training twice a day, you're gonna have to cut back on some part of your training. This will not hurt you, especially in the off-season, and in the long run may make you faster.

8393
Was in San Francisco visiting friends from Thursday-Tuesday. Absolutely amazing. Didn't work out but did get in plenty of catch, hiking and stretching and mostly just relaxing and being around people that I miss a lot and wish I could see more often, but they live 3,000 miles away.

Got back late last night and DC is now basically the Amazon but with less biodiversity. Didn't sleep well and hadn't worked out in days so was planning to just get in the gym, warm up, sprint a bit, jump a bit, do some random other shit, stretch and call it a day. Mission accomplished, plus a pleasant surprise.

BW = 170.2 and lean as fuck, you jokers who said I didn't have abs in those pics a while back should see me now. I got abzzzz, kids.  8)
SORENESS = none
ACHES/INJURIES = none
FATIGUE = moderate

- warm up
shot around, lacrosse balled the buhjesus out of my shoulders and hips

- sprints x 15y
2 x 70%, 2 x 90%

- drop step VJ
a few submax, maybe 10

- DLRVJ
a few submax, maybe 8, but 4 or 5 were 30.5+ with a couple of 31-31.5's and a possible 32. wowthatwasnutswtf.

- pull ups and chin ups x some

- push ups and chest-tap push ups x some

- KB swings 3 x 8 x one of the big ones

- stretch

it's brutal outside. window A/C unit is going in right the fuck now.

8394
some math/physiology dudes at my gym are trying to figure this out as part of a larger project to help measure work done over the course of a workout. they're crosstarded, unfortunately, but otherwise they're both very smart so it should be kind of cool to see what they come up with.

bit of a useless post, this one, but anyway, interesting thread, wot wot, pip pip cheerio, my, what's that over there?!?!

<runs away>

8395
sick.  :highfive:

8396
Progress Journals & Experimental Routines / Re: ADARQ's journal
« on: June 01, 2011, 10:16:41 am »
New side goal: disprove this.

Quote from: Rip
It's NOT done all the time, and that is simply bullshit. Any athlete that has a legit TRAINED 36-38" SVJ started out with a 30-32+. Show us your data, and show us the video of the jump test method you use.

My SVJ when I started all this business was 25". I have the video somewhere. On my best days now it's probably 29". I care much, much, much more about RVJ and I'm a lot closer to 36" RVJ (obviously), but if I had a 36" SVJ I could dunk a soccer ball from a standstill. That would be neat.

edit: Assuming you're HB and Lance is Reverse Hypertrophy, Lance was on some straight TLDR shit in that thread.

8397
Strength, Power, Reactivity, & Speed Discussion / Re: Dancing
« on: May 26, 2011, 01:25:58 pm »
LBSS,

Now you're creating a strawmen. I never said blacks were better dancers and I never said dumb people were better dancers. I said people thought to be highly intelligent that think a lot generally aren't good dancers (or good athletes).  And they aren't. Regardless of skin color.   The evolution of the human brain particularly with regards to front brain development does explain why if you link that with movement skills.

okay, fair enough. you never actually said that dumb(er) people were better dancers than (more) intelligent people. but that's a pretty logical next step from "more intelligent people tend to be worse dancers." i mean, if they're worse dancers, then they have to be, well, worse than somebody. because your category was "more intelligent people," then by default the compared-to category is "less intelligent people." i mean, right? is "less intelligent people" not basically the same as "dumber" people? if not, forgive my laziness earlier. i should have changed all references to "dumb" or "dumber" people to "less intelligent people," to be more in keeping with your original statement.

i never said in my responses that you'd said that black people were better dancers, but i think i get why you thought i was implying that. for the record, i was thinking of, among other people, this unbelievably nerdy guy (the dude went to st. john's college: they learn calculus by reading principia mathematica) i met at a wedding recently who was cleaning UP with the bridesmaids and other female guests because he'd started swing dancing when he was a kid and never stopped. not that he was even swing dancing at the wedding, he was just dancing. panties were flying off all around him. if i didn't already have a girlfriend to dance with my clumsy ass and then have sex with me later, i would have been envious as shit.

the point is, you're still just making the strange, possibly true (but probably not) conjecture that people who "think a lot" or who are "thought to be highly intelligent" are not as good dancers as people who "think less," as defined by yourself. and i'm telling you that whether they're "thought to be intelligent" is probably completely irrelevant to whether they're good dancers or not. to my mind, unless you can prove it in some way other than a casual reference to "the evolution of the human brain with regards to front brain development" (what does that even mean?), then you're just babbling.




also, lamp, "young males of west african descent" =/= "black people." barack obama is also referred to as black, but he's half kenyan and half white (irish). if you can link to those studies, i'd love to see them. "young males of west african descent" is at least a somewhat defined category. ffs.

8398
Pics, Videos, & Links / Re: The best plant I have ever seen
« on: May 26, 2011, 10:16:10 am »
that one, where he tips it to himself, is insane. he's the only person i've ever seen do that. made this comment in the other thread but: ACTUAL original dunk = awesome.

8399
BW = 170
SORENESS = very tiny amount in hamstrings, barely worth mentioning
ACHES/INJURIES = anterior right knee, but it was gone by the end of the workout
FATIGUE = low

- warm up

- MSEM squat 1 x 4
295

had a work thing that went really late so didn't get to the gym until, well, really late. that's all i had time/motivation for. i also found out on my way to work out my brother relapsed last weekend, so, yeah. that kind of killed whatever energy i had. the 295 was incredibly easy, fwiw. bouncing off my back.

 :(

8400
Progress Journals & Experimental Routines / Re: Kingfish
« on: May 25, 2011, 10:35:28 am »
well, i meant, hopefully, by december, it'll be 100%RM, not supra. never mind.

anyway, strong stuff.

Pages: 1 ... 558 559 [560] 561 562 ... 668