The couch thread

___________ · Post by **___________** » Sat Nov 18, 2006 6:07 am

*****

stosh · Post by **stosh** » Sat Nov 18, 2006 11:53 am

nafod wrote:
elrodjr wrote:
Jason wrote:elrodjr,

Force is not less.

Force = m x a
Are you saying acceleration is not different between a pullup and a kip? Surely not.

Mass is the same; acceleration way different. And remember, acceleration is an integral over the distance.
They are different. But if we're talking about work, it doesn't matter.

If acceleration is different, then the force must be different. If the force is different, then the work is different.

Jason · Post by **Jason** » Sat Nov 18, 2006 12:36 pm

Hey Spells. You are dumb sometimes. They are different exercises but that changes nothing. A deadhang Snatch and a Swing Snatch are different exercises but the end result is the same. You moved a certain amount of mass a certain height.

Talk all the shit you want about Glassman. It doesn't change the facts about measureing work.

Different muscles groups? How about additional muscle groups? Anyway, who cares about muscles groups. This ain't Muscle and Fitness.

Jason · Post by **Jason** » Sat Nov 18, 2006 12:40 pm

Yes the force is different BUT not reduced as claimed.

Force = M x A

Since Mass is constant teh only wany you can change the force is by changing the acceleration. And we all agree that there is great A during akip, creating greater force, not less.

Don't let you hate get in the way of your smarts.

PC Polar Circle Person · Sat Nov 18, 2006 2:16 pm

Hagbard Celine wrote:This is awesome.

Greatest thread of all time on the internets of this and any other world.

True knowledge right there. I wonder how someone can even continue to exist without reading all this important info.

nafod · Post by **nafod** » Sat Nov 18, 2006 2:17 pm

Marc wrote:My name is Marc and I'm a Koolaid drinking, dick in the ass, Couch cum guzzling faggot ass mother fucker.

I won't argue with that.

nafod · Post by **nafod** » Sat Nov 18, 2006 2:21 pm

elrodjr wrote: If acceleration is different, then the force must be different. If the force is different, then the work is different.

Work = the force integrated over the distance (just multiplied if the force is constant). You have a different force -vs- position profile for a kipping pullup as opposed to a regular pullup, but when the integrating is all done, the work is the same.

dalexan242 · Post by **dalexan242** » Sat Nov 18, 2006 2:37 pm

Its fine if you determine that 20 kipping pullups are twice the "power/work" of 10 strict pullups, or that 20 kipping pullups or twice the work as 10 one-arm pullups, but that doesn't necessarily make the kipping pullups "better." That's like saying that one 200 lb. snatch is "better" than 3 strict 200 lb. military press reps because you're travelling the same total distance in a fraction of the time.

nafod · Post by **nafod** » Sat Nov 18, 2006 3:15 pm

dalexan242 wrote:Its fine if you determine that 20 kipping pullups are twice the "power/work" of 10 strict pullups, or that 20 kipping pullups or twice the work as 10 one-arm pullups, but that doesn't necessarily make the kipping pullups "better."

Yep. Depends on what your goals are. I'd use the analogy between a mil press and a push press.

Shaf, thanks for the picture of Marc and Gene. Marc's the one on the left, of course. Go Gene Go!

[img:304:300]http://img134.imageshack.us/img134/681/twodogstb8.jpg[/img]

Maza · Post by **Maza** » Sat Nov 18, 2006 3:36 pm

AptlyNamed wrote:Physics is just measuring the movement of the weight, of mass, not the effort involved by the athlete.

Grandpa's Spells wrote:If phyiscal work can be improved by transferring strict upper body work to upper/lower body work by kipping, it can be further improved by just switching to a standing vertical jump that moves your center of mass the same distance. Hell, you're moving the same body weight for the same distance faster and for more reps. Must be better, right?

Jesus Christ, how many times do people have to point this out (these quotes are just a couple of examples from this thread.) How is measuring the work performed relevant to a training effect when comparing different exercises? I could probably set up a pulley system that would at least quadruple the amount of times I could lift my bodyweight a given distance, but that's no basis for comparing that exercise to pullups.

Hank Scorpio · Post by **Hank Scorpio** » Sat Nov 18, 2006 4:37 pm

Maza-- I dig the new avatar.

This thread has come full circle with all this nitpicking about pullups. Anybody who has ever done dead hand vs kip "knows" that the kip makes it easier. The added amplitude or exaggerated movement at the bottom helps generate momentum on the rebound, and your body then moves upward more easily than if you performed a strict repetition. The two are most definitely not the same exercise. It's like belly bouncing a bench press.

But, what's more interesting is to see that this discussion has gotten back to the dissecting the kind of claims that started it--

i.e. @fit claims that the barbell snatch trajectory is more conducive to power development than that of the KB or DB snatch.

Now that we have some new math geek participants along for the ride, maybe we can settle that one once and for all.

Jason · Post by **Jason** » Sat Nov 18, 2006 6:52 pm

I'm a geek and I do not believe that a BB is more conducive to power development. I'll demo this in the next issue of The Performance Menu.

Jason · Post by **Jason** » Sat Nov 18, 2006 6:53 pm

Not the next issue but soon.

Ross Hunt · Post by **Ross Hunt** » Sat Nov 18, 2006 7:35 pm

rjudo wrote:If ya'll spent more fucking time squatting instead of pretending that your scientists, MAYBE your max squats would actually exceed 290lbs.

Rick

If this is directed to me----

Have you seen my train? Do you know how hard I train or how frequently I train? I can count on the fingers of one the hand the number of times I've trained less than nine hours a week in the past half a year. Intellligence in training is what I need, not more work ethic.

Restrict your jackassery to subjects you're familiar with.

rjudo · Post by **rjudo** » Sat Nov 18, 2006 8:03 pm

I'm familiar with this, xfit boy. Men who can't squat 300 fucking pounds have no business arguing with people about what may or may not be the best training methods. Run on back to the xfit board where 290 lbs makes you a big leaguer. Shit, a few more lbs and you can be elite maybe. And take fuckin Nafod with you. Ya'll can drink some more kool-aid and yap all day with couch and his disciples about theories.

___________ · Post by **___________** » Sat Nov 18, 2006 8:18 pm

rjudo wrote:I'm familiar with this, xfit boy. Men who can't squat 300 fucking pounds have no business arguing with people about what may or may not be the best training methods. Run on back to the xfit board where 290 lbs makes you a big leaguer. Shit, a few more lbs and you can be elite maybe. And take fuckin Nafod with you. Ya'll can drink some more kool-aid and yap all day with couch and his disciples about theories.

Fuck XFit.

bill fox · Post by **bill fox** » Sat Nov 18, 2006 9:03 pm

[quote="Ross Hunt
I can count on the fingers of one the hand the number of times I've trained less than nine hours a week in the past half a year. [/quote]

6 whole months, damn, that's like a lifetime.

___________ · Post by **___________** » Sat Nov 18, 2006 9:12 pm

bill fox wrote:
Weak Cunt wrote: I can count on the fingers of one the hand the number of times I've trained less than nine hours a week in the past half a year.
6 whole months, damn, that's like a lifetime.

To a zit faced, teenage Xfitter, yes, yes it is.

I can count on the fingers of one hand the number of times I've done MMA/Jits/Wrestling less then 9 hours a week in the last decade. And I'm bout 1/2 of Bill's ages.

What the fuck is with these dumbassed fucking Xfitters anyways?

Ross Hunt · Post by **Ross Hunt** » Sat Nov 18, 2006 9:14 pm

bill fox wrote:[quote="Ross Hunt
I can count on the fingers of one the hand the number of times I've trained less than nine hours a week in the past half a year.

6 whole months, damn, that's like a lifetime.[/quote]

The expert on the back squat breaks his silence at last!

Maza · Post by **Maza** » Sat Nov 18, 2006 10:04 pm

Gentlemen please! For the sake of the forum, please don't allow this thread to turn ugly.

nafod · Post by **nafod** » Sat Nov 18, 2006 10:20 pm

rjudo wrote:And take fuckin Nafod with you.

After paying 100 bucks for my lifetime IronGarmx membership (platinum preferred)? I don't think so.

I ultimately could care less about @fit. I just like slapping down bullshit, and the @fit-hate-induced stupidity here makes it a target rich environment. Sorry if I'm messing up your @fit hating circle jerk.

Crust Bucket · Post by **Crust Bucket** » Sat Nov 18, 2006 10:39 pm

nafod wrote:Sorry if I'm messing up your @fit hating circle jerk.

No one could mess that up except for maybe Geno and that would be difficult even for him.

___________ · Post by **___________** » Sat Nov 18, 2006 10:43 pm

nafod wrote:After paying 100 bucks for my lifetime IronGarmx membership (platinum preferred)? I don't think so.

I ultimately could care less about @fit. I just like slapping down bullshit, and the @fit-hate-induced stupidity here makes it a target rich environment. Sorry if I'm messing up your @fit hating circle jerk.

Dilrod,

@fit is stupid. Is this not rational & obviously?
Only a man who drinks 23 chromosones straight from the hose believe that running around in circles & doing kipping pullups will make you deadlift 700 pounds.

Ross Hunt · Post by **Ross Hunt** » Sun Nov 19, 2006 1:18 am

rjudo wrote:I'm familiar with this, xfit boy. Men who can't squat 300 fucking pounds have no business arguing with people about what may or may not be the best training methods. Run on back to the xfit board where 290 lbs makes you a big leaguer. Shit, a few more lbs and you can be elite maybe. And take fuckin Nafod with you. Ya'll can drink some more kool-aid and yap all day with couch and his disciples about theories.

Did I say that I do XF?

If you'd read my post with a little care, maybe you'd have realized that I'm actually attacking a notion that's pretty popular at CrossFit.

Tell me where I said I was a big shot.

My training log is on the P&B. Glance at it before you criticize my work ethic. You might find a lot of dumb mistakes and overtraining, but you won't find a single week where I haven't squatted at least three times. Work ethic is not my problem, so as I see it, I don't stand to lose anything from engaging in a discussion on how to train.

Even if it kept me out of the gym--which the couple minutes I spend on this every other day or so never has--that wouldn't necessarily be a bad thing. If there's one thing I've done wrong in the past year or so, it's been that I haven't backed off appropriately.

Incidentally, how much weight have you lifted from the floor to overhead? Jerked from rack? Overhead squatted? Snatched? Do you really want to go through all this crap?

Bram · Post by **Bram** » Sun Nov 19, 2006 1:43 am

Jason wrote:Hey Spells. You are dumb sometimes. They are different exercises but that changes nothing. A deadhang Snatch and a Swing Snatch are different exercises but the end result is the same. You moved a certain amount of mass a certain height.

Talk all the shit you want about Glassman. It doesn't change the facts about measureing work.

Different muscles groups? How about additional muscle groups? Anyway, who cares about muscles groups. This ain't Muscle and Fitness.

By this reasoning, a 50kg barbell front squat with the weight racked on your shoulders would have the same workload as a 50kg front squat with the weight held in hands at shoulder height with arms extended.

Measuring work with this bullshit = what's the fucking point

If I'm missing something clue me in.