Post: #26

6'1
220lb

1RM
Squat: 282
Deadlift: 320
Bench Press: 164

Total = 766

Post: #27

You should be deadlifting more than you squat (generally speaking), I hope you guys are going ATG when giving these numbers.

Post: #28

(02-29-2012 10:37 AM)Hades Wrote:  Most of the big dudes that I have seen throwing around many plates on the squatting rack, deadlift, or the bench press have trouble doing a pullup or more than six or seven close-handed pushups. Haven't met one who could do a proper bridge yet either. These are the same guys who have to take several aspirin a day just to function.

Yup. Guys who lift barbells seem to live in a fantasy world where they think they aren't doing isolation exercises. Bullshit, you're doing a slightly better version of Cybex machines. There's very little balance or true strength involved in bench pressing, deadlifting, etc. You're working a couple muscles and destroying your joints and ligaments to get "swole". Check your vanity and work on true strength.

In closing, I don't give a fuck if you bench 800 lbs, or squat 1000.
THIS DUDE IS INFINITELY STRONGER THAN YOU.



THIS DUDE IS INFINITELY STRONGER THAN YOU.



...except, he won't need a walker to move his abused joints and ligaments when he's 60.

Post: #29

Oh boy.

New category of trolls.

The Functional Strength Troll.

These guys will show up and explain why doing 25 push-ups is superior to deadlifting 1,000 pounds.

Post: #30

(02-29-2012 04:04 PM)MikeCF Wrote:  Oh boy.

New category of trolls.

The Functional Strength Troll.

These guys will show up and explain why doing 25 push-ups is superior to deadlifting 1,000 pounds.

It was only a matter of time

Post: #31

(02-29-2012 04:04 PM)MikeCF Wrote:  Oh boy.

New category of trolls.

The Functional Strength Troll.

These guys will show up and explain why doing 25 push-ups is superior to deadlifting 1,000 pounds.

Mike, Functional Strength Troll has been around since the dawn of time.

He just hasn't been able to manifest himself in the Roosh V forum until now.

His natural habitat is the Swiss and Bosu Ball area with a staple diet of Kettlebells and Crossfit.

Post: #32

(02-29-2012 03:58 AM)violão Wrote:  I see plenty of swollen guys who hit the gym and put up big numbers, but they can't do 5 pushups. They can't do a pullup. They can't do leg lifts. Can't do 10 dips. They cant do a full (hamstrings touch the calves) squat with their heels touching.

Big weights =/= real strength. Don't be that guy. I'm not trying to be a hater, but check yourself. If you can't control your own body weight, why are you putting up 325 lbs?

It's always little guys who troll about functional strength.

If you're a guy who looks good and is getting noticed, you really don't hate on other guys with different goals.

Bodybuilders and powerlifters joke towards each other with "you have a gut," and "nice beach muscle" lines.

But it's all good natured.

But show me a "ripped" 150 pound man, and I'll show you a bucket of hate.

Post: #33

(02-29-2012 04:04 PM)MikeCF Wrote:  Oh boy.

New category of trolls.

The Functional Strength Troll.

These guys will show up and explain why doing 25 push-ups is superior to deadlifting 1,000 pounds.

I don't hash on the guys using deadlifts, squats, and bench press all that much. I know plenty of people who are strong as bears who do little more than these.

I think that progressive calisthenics is overall better than using steel since you can get very strong over a period of years (with no gym) while more easily avoiding injury.

It's more than feasible that someone could use nothing but progressive calisthenics, get to very advanced levels (two working sets: one-armed pushups, one-legged squats, one-armed handstand pushups, one armed pullups, etc), and compete well against dedicated powerlifters after a week or two of dicking around with a barbell.

Sidenote: Kettlebells are fun as hell.

Post: #34

(02-29-2012 05:15 PM)Hades Wrote:  

(02-29-2012 04:04 PM)MikeCF Wrote:  Oh boy.

New category of trolls.

The Functional Strength Troll.

These guys will show up and explain why doing 25 push-ups is superior to deadlifting 1,000 pounds.

I don't hash on the guys using deadlifts, squats, and bench press all that much. I know plenty of people who are strong as bears who do little more than these.

I think that progressive calisthenics is overall better than using steel since you can get very strong over a period of years (with no gym) while more easily avoiding injury.

It's more than feasible that someone could use nothing but progressive calisthenics, get to very advanced levels (two working sets: one-armed pushups, one-legged squats, one-armed handstand pushups, one armed pullups, etc), and compete well against dedicated powerlifters after a week or two of dicking around with a barbell.

Sidenote: Kettlebells are fun as hell.

I'm sorry dude but how could someone who only does calisthenics compete with a powerlifter? There is no competition.

I don't know why people do the whole weights vs calisthenics/bodyweight argument.They compliment each other.

If we're talking about building a lean, muscular physique that women love, then there is no substitute to lifting heavy weights, that's undisputed.

Just because you lift weights doesn't mean you necessarily get injured. Sure you get scrapes and stuff which will occur as part and parcel of the iron game, that's just how it is.

However if you learn proper form and technique there's no reason why you have to be busted up and slip your disc from deadlifting.

Quote: progressive calisthenics

In my opinion that is a contradictive term. Because bodyweight is not progressive, it remains constant (or should) therefore you reach a level that you cannot overcome without weights. I'm not sure what bodyweight exercises could make someone be able to deadlift 500lb.

It's like the game vs lifestyle stuff on here.

I do pushups in between all my worksets of deadlifts, squats etc and they're good for overall shoulder health. But I wouldn't think of building a huge set of traps or arms to show off with just my bodyweight.

Post: #35

(02-29-2012 06:18 PM)dk902 Wrote:  

(02-29-2012 05:15 PM)Hades Wrote:  

(02-29-2012 04:04 PM)MikeCF Wrote:  Oh boy.

New category of trolls.

The Functional Strength Troll.

These guys will show up and explain why doing 25 push-ups is superior to deadlifting 1,000 pounds.

I don't hash on the guys using deadlifts, squats, and bench press all that much. I know plenty of people who are strong as bears who do little more than these.

I think that progressive calisthenics is overall better than using steel since you can get very strong over a period of years (with no gym) while more easily avoiding injury.

It's more than feasible that someone could use nothing but progressive calisthenics, get to very advanced levels (two working sets: one-armed pushups, one-legged squats, one-armed handstand pushups, one armed pullups, etc), and compete well against dedicated powerlifters after a week or two of dicking around with a barbell.

Sidenote: Kettlebells are fun as hell.

I'm sorry dude but how could someone who only does calisthenics compete with a powerlifter? There is no competition.

I don't know why people do the whole weights vs calisthenics/bodyweight argument.They compliment each other.

If we're talking about building a lean, muscular physique that women love, then there is no substitute to lifting heavy weights, that's undisputed.

Just because you lift weights doesn't mean you necessarily get injured. Sure you get scrapes and stuff which will occur as part and parcel of the iron game, that's just how it is.

However if you learn proper form and technique there's no reason why you have to be busted up and slip your disc from deadlifting.

Quote: progressive calisthenics

In my opinion that is a contradictive term. Because bodyweight is not progressive, it remains constant (or should) therefore you reach a level that you cannot overcome without weights. I'm not sure what bodyweight exercises could make someone be able to deadlift 500lb.

It's like the game vs lifestyle stuff on here.

I do pushups in between all my worksets of deadlifts, squats etc and they're good for overall shoulder health. But I wouldn't think of building a huge set of traps or arms to show off with just my bodyweight.

Sure someone who does calisthenics can compete with a powerlifter. Think about it. If you can do a one-armed handstand pushup, that's pressing your entire body weight over your head with one arm. I could eventually be able to shoulder press something like 400 pounds.

If you can do many one-legged squats, like one set of 25, according to the calculator you should be able to two-legged (deep) squat your bodyweight at least one set of 25, for a final one-rep max calculation of (using a 215 pound bodyweight) roughly 600 pounds.

here's the calculator
http://www.timinvermont.com/fitness/orm.htm

Check out Paul Wade's "Convict Conditioning" if you're interested. He placed third in a 1987 California powerlifting competition and did not train with weights.
The idea of progressive calisthenics is that you start with something basic, like knee pushups, and you work until you meet a progression standard (two working sets), with the end goal being an elite level, like one-armed pushups. Your bodyweight doesn't change, but the exercise does.

I do basic bodyweight stuff (close pushups, back bridges, close squats etc), and I can deadlift 315 no problem.

Post: #36

Once I did 26 pullups in a row. Took me a while of training to get there.

/e-brag

Post: #37

@violão can you prove with statistics or studies that gymnasts have less lifetime injuries than powerlifters?

a quick google search shows a multitude of nagging problems and diseases associated with gymasts such as wrist problems, hip flexor problems, knee problems. etc.

the same quick search done on powerlifters brings up this article which links to legitimate articles stating weight lifters have one of the lowest injury rates of all sports http://www.livestrong.com/article/419939...dangerous/

Post: #38

(02-29-2012 05:15 PM)Hades Wrote:  I think that progressive calisthenics is overall better than using steel since you can get very strong over a period of years (with no gym) while more easily avoiding injury.

It's more than feasible that someone could use nothing but progressive calisthenics, get to very advanced levels (two working sets: one-armed pushups, one-legged squats, one-armed handstand pushups, one armed pullups, etc), and compete well against dedicated powerlifters after a week or two of dicking around with a barbell.

Do you have any evidence for either of these claims?

I believe Mark Rippetoe had a page in his book outlining how barbell training has a lower injury rate than any major sport. Gymnastics? Good one.

There's no way you could simulate a heavy squat with bodyweight exercises. At most, with a one legged squat, you're squatting some fraction of your bodyweight on one leg. How does that compare in any way to a 2x or 3x BW squat? A heavy powerlifter couldn't suddenly rip 20 pullups out without training for it usually. What does either of these situations prove about anything?

Here are my numbers:

BMI: 25.7

highest completed 5RM - estimated 1RM (5RM*1.15)

Press - 135 - 155
Bench - 205 - 235
Squat - 240 - 275
Deadlift - 315 - 360
Weighted Dip - 1.33*BW (i.e. 0.33 extra)

Big 3 Total: 870 (estimated not actual though)

I've been increasing steadily on the weeks that I eat enough.

And honestly, I'm not in it for my health. I'm in it to feel good, look good and fuck well.

How important have you guys found squatting to your overall muscular development?

Post: #39

(02-29-2012 04:00 PM)violão Wrote:  

(02-29-2012 10:37 AM)Hades Wrote:  Most of the big dudes that I have seen throwing around many plates on the squatting rack, deadlift, or the bench press have trouble doing a pullup or more than six or seven close-handed pushups. Haven't met one who could do a proper bridge yet either. These are the same guys who have to take several aspirin a day just to function.

Yup. Guys who lift barbells seem to live in a fantasy world where they think they aren't doing isolation exercises. Bullshit, you're doing a slightly better version of Cybex machines. There's very little balance or true strength involved in bench pressing, deadlifting, etc. You're working a couple muscles and destroying your joints and ligaments to get "swole". Check your vanity and work on true strength.

In closing, I don't give a fuck if you bench 800 lbs, or squat 1000.
THIS DUDE IS INFINITELY STRONGER THAN YOU.



THIS DUDE IS INFINITELY STRONGER THAN YOU.



...except, he won't need a walker to move his abused joints and ligaments when he's 60.

And these dudes are infinitely stronger than those dudes.

Post: #40

(02-29-2012 08:53 PM)basilransom Wrote:  

(02-29-2012 05:15 PM)Hades Wrote:  I think that progressive calisthenics is overall better than using steel since you can get very strong over a period of years (with no gym) while more easily avoiding injury.

It's more than feasible that someone could use nothing but progressive calisthenics, get to very advanced levels (two working sets: one-armed pushups, one-legged squats, one-armed handstand pushups, one armed pullups, etc), and compete well against dedicated powerlifters after a week or two of dicking around with a barbell.

Do you have any evidence for either of these claims?

I believe Mark Rippetoe had a page in his book outlining how barbell training has a lower injury rate than any major sport. Gymnastics? Good one.

There's no way you could simulate a heavy squat with bodyweight exercises. At most, with a one legged squat, you're squatting some fraction of your bodyweight on one leg. How does that compare in any way to a 2x or 3x BW squat? A heavy powerlifter couldn't suddenly rip 20 pullups out without training for it usually. What does either of these situations prove about anything?

Here are my numbers:

BMI: 25.7

highest completed 5RM - estimated 1RM (5RM*1.15)

Press - 135 - 155
Bench - 205 - 235
Squat - 240 - 275
Deadlift - 315 - 360
Weighted Dip - 1.33*BW (i.e. 0.33 extra)

Big 3 Total: 870 (estimated not actual though)

I've been increasing steadily on the weeks that I eat enough.

And honestly, I'm not in it for my health. I'm in it to feel good, look good and fuck well.

How important have you guys found squatting to your overall muscular development?

Progressive calisthenics avoid injuries to delicate tissues like rotor cuffs and ACLs by gradually building them up. Holding a barbell forces the elbows to go out at odd angles that leave the shoulder vulnerable to injury, which does not occur during any calisthenic workout. A side effect of p.c. is active stretching, where muscles and ligaments are stretched under tension. This does not happen during typical strength training.

Ask anybody who's been lifting weights for years, and they'll bitch continuously about aches and pains. Back pain, leg pain, shoulder pain; I even heard there was one enterprising powerlifter who snapped both wrists while trying to deadlift without safety equipment. Their guts explode the second they take off the belt. The problem is that their wrists, hands, core, joints, and general ligaments are too weak. There's no point to being strong if the peripherals can't work in conjunction or you're in pain because of strength training.

I'm sure Mark Rippetoe has done his research, and I won't bother contesting it. Progressive calisthenics is not a sport anyway.

As for squatting, it's very important for general muscular development. My most dramatic strength increases were done through the squat.
I'm not sure how you personally go about squatting. Do you stop when your knee is at a right angle?

If that's the case, then a standard one-legged pistol squat (where your ass touches your calf) is definitely comparable. I can now squat ~1/3 more than my bodyweight when I stop at (or slightly below) a right angle, because I've built up considerable strength using deep pistol squats. You're at such a mechanical disadvantage when you go that low (and that slowly) that strength is inevitable. Try doing one.

Sure, you'll never get to the same level as a squatter who can do three times their bodyweight, but that's when you have the option of incorporating a kettlebell or weighted vest.

As I said in the other post, the author of "Convict Conditioning" placed third in a California institutional powerlifting competition and did no training with weights.

Post: #41

i do normal powerlifting and can vouch for single legged pistols. i just did 7 sets of 5 on each leg and i'm sore like it was my first time ever lifting and i lift on the regular for years

i dont use any "equipment" when powerlifting. no belt, no wraps, no knee wraps, no nothing beyond lifting shoes and chalk. and even deadlift barefoot. when you start slow and build up, the ligaments tendons and bone density increase along with your muscle strength.

holding a barbell does not force your elbow out and bad angles. holding a barbell incorrectly certainly will though.

BW exercises are useful and should be used in conjunction with power lifts, olympic lifts, running, and other things for a balanced workout over time. to say one is solely the answer for everything is wrong

Post: #42

(02-29-2012 04:04 PM)MikeCF Wrote:  Oh boy.

New category of trolls.

The Functional Strength Troll.

These guys will show up and explain why doing 25 push-ups is superior to deadlifting 1,000 pounds.

lmao, the more I read this section the more I realize trying to help with health and fitness on here is pointless...lifting is evil, every noob is a gear expert, and the only reason people are overweight is carbs. Its all so simple. Jumping jacks, deli meat only and jacking tren alone and all your health problems be solved lol

Post: #43

No, they are not trolls. For those of you who think those who train exclusively calisthenics are pussies/ can never reach the strength of a power lifter, check out this T-nation interview with Chris Sommers, coach for the USA Junior National Gymnastics Team.

Quote:T-Nation: That's impressive. I've heard stories that these athletes can lift a surprising amount of weight in the deadlift and other lifts, even though they never train these lifts. Is that true? And if it is, how's that possible?

Sommer: Gymnastics training does indeed build incredible strength. For example, I was not a particularly strong gymnast, yet I was able to do a double bodyweight deadlift and weighted chins with almost 50% extra bodyweight on my very first weight training attempts.

One of my student’s, JJ Gregory, far exceeded my own modest accomplishments. On his first day of high school weight lifting, JJ pulled a nearly triple bodyweight deadlift with 400 pounds at a bodyweight of 135 and about 5’3" in height. On another day, he also did an easy weighted chin with 75 pounds, and certainly looked as though he could've done quite a bit more. We’ll never know for sure because the cheap belt I was using at the time snapped.

http://www.t-nation.com/free_online_arti...le_no_iron

Quote:In my opinion that is a contradictive term. Because bodyweight is not progressive, it remains constant (or should) therefore you reach a level that you cannot overcome without weights.

Yes, your bodyweight is constant, but you increase the difficulty and muscle building potential of the exercises through leverage.

Quote:A case in point would be a cross pull (basically a straight arm pull-up where the arms pull out to the sides) compared to a regular pull-up. The bodyweight is the same in both cases; however, the cross pull is several orders of magnitude harder than the pull-up, resulting in significantly higher strength and muscle gains.

Read the article.

Post: #44

(02-29-2012 11:23 PM)reaper23 Wrote:  BW exercises are useful and should be used in conjunction with power lifts, olympic lifts, running, and other things for a balanced workout over time. to say one is solely the answer for everything is wrong

I agree with this. In the last 6 months I've bounced between crossfit, free weights, HIIT w/ jump rope, 25lb kettle bell, 14lb medicine ball, constantly walking with heavy boots, and rebuilding heavily armored 30 ton vehicles. This clusterfuck of a workout program has given me better gains than sticking solely to 1 program. My muscles aren't confused, they are totally bewildered.

Post: #45

I dont think anybody said that bodyweight execises in themselves were useless, incorporating variety into your routine is a great thing its the bodyweight troll that has to come in and say every big guy ive seen throwing around 4 plates aside cant even do this and that...its nonsense...many ways to skin a cat here folks, I like the variety to keep myself functional. If I just lifted heavy my mobility suffered and first and foremost Im an athlete but for some the goal is size, the aesthetic, the thrill of lifting massive poundage, you can be pro bodyweight exercises without tearing down the other. As MikeCF pointed out earlier, you never hear the big boys at the gym ripping on the crossfit guys for being smaller than them they dont care, do your thing but you will hear the smaller guys rip on the big boys saying they cant do this and that, its all juice blah blah blah its hate, do your thing and shut up

Post: #46

personally i do crossfit with a heavy focus on power / oly lifting.

out of five work outs each week 4 will be a power or oly lift with one being a metcon. and on those four power/oly days, after the man lift of the day we will likely do some conditioning exercise.

in the warm ups we do a variety of BW exercises as well as yoga moves and lots of stretches.

after all that we'll wrap up with max pull ups or dips or something like that.

then i train muay thai.

you gotta change it up, just doing one thing will make you just good at that.


i'm going to read that article on bw stuff though, i am curious to see how they build strength that represents cleans and other big hip movements.

Post: #47

(02-29-2012 08:53 PM)basilransom Wrote:  How important have you guys found squatting to your overall muscular development?

Critical.

I've read several places that training quadriceps releases more testosterone, and that should boost your overall performance. If I consistently do my leg routine, overall hypertrophy is more efficient (in my case).

Hypertrophy is the most amazing feeling I know.

After blowing my load inside a hot girl, that is...

Post: #48

ElJefe is that the pump you're talking about? The first time I ever experienced that was at work last summer. I had to drag this 1000lb+ pallet of sugar across the room every few hours. After I would do it I would just sit there in bliss, it was legitimately akin to that feeling you get right after you blow your load.

Post: #49

squats will develop traps and legs, but it is not a good OVER ALL body developing exercise. There really is no good over all body developing exercise, which is why you should train all muscles.

Post: #50

Squats give you a major boost in testosterone.

They also give you balls.

Do 20-rep squats for 6 weeks, and you'll be bigger all over and badder.

Quote:Squattin’

By Dale Clark

Way down this road, in a gym far away
A young man was once heard to say,
“I’ve repped high and I’ve repped low,
No matter what I do, my legs won’t grow.”

He tried leg extensions, leg curls and leg presses, too
Trying to cheat, these sissy workouts he’d do
From the corner of the gym where the big men train,
Through a cloud of chalk in the midst of pain.

Where the big iron rides high and threatens lives,
Where the noise is made with big forty-fives,
A deep voice bellowed as he wrapped up his knees,
A very big man with legs like trees,

Laughing as he snatched another plate from the stack,
Chalking his hands and his monstrous back,
Said, “Boy, stop lying and don’t say you’ve forgotten
Trouble with you is you ain’t been squattin’.”

©Dale Clark 1983.