I KO'ed Functional Training

Training Bodybuilding
201

Yes he will hit hard but not harder. I know what I’m talking about in this area…take my word for it…I hit much harder than guys who can bench over double what I can.(I still wish to bench more than them though) There are exceptions however and they’re called big benching fighters.

As for measurement…thats easily done with pressure guages…even a simple punch bag game in arcades can tell you were your at if your punches are of the weaker variety.

All the best
OMC

[quote]John S. wrote:

How did you test who hit harder?(im not saying it isnt possable). But you have to admit the more you added to your bench you hit a lot harder. You can not disagree with me that a guy who benches 400lbs is not going to hit like a truck.[/quote]

202

People get upset when people who havent mad progress start telling them how to make progress.

How would you feel if you were an NBA player and the kid who didnt make his High School’s B team started criticizing your jump shot?

It would be like me telling a professional chef how he should be cooking.

Also. That video of Pfister was kind of funny. Im sorry but the balancing on two swiss balls was hilarious.

203

Also, how did we get to talking about fighting here?

Im sure that some bodybuilders would get their asses kicked by some MMA fighters. It makes sense.

However, how many MMA fighters do you see doing one legged bosu ball push press with the pink dumbells?

Last time I checked, most of them trained hard and heavy with the same big compounds that bodybuilders do. The end is different, but the means is quite similar.

204

[quote]fightingtiger wrote:
People get upset when people who havent mad progress start telling them how to make progress.

How would you feel if you were an NBA player and the kid who didnt make his High School’s B team started criticizing your jump shot?

It would be like me telling a professional chef how he should be cooking.

Also. That video of Pfister was kind of funny. Im sorry but the balancing on two swiss balls was hilarious.[/quote]

Some people get upset when they take every comment as a personal attack on their training methods.

If I say “I think free weights are more useful to real world strength than machine weights”, it’s because thats what I believe. Regardless of how big my biceps are. This is discussion of methods and it’s not always the biggest guy who’s right.

A lot of you guys think that if your not huge you have no idea about exercise. There is a lot more to the fitness industry than bodybuilding.

205

I trained under the theory of poliquins were my concentric portions of exercises were always explosive. As a result my power is impressive. Thats one way in which training can make a difference.

Also fibre types plays a part. Look at videos of Tyson…especially a young tyson training the heavy bag. Its scary. Guys of similar size could never hit that hard no matter how hard they train…guys suited to be a boxer will usually inevitably become a fighter.

OMC

[quote]fightingtiger wrote:
Also, how did we get to talking about fighting here?

Im sure that some bodybuilders would get their asses kicked by some MMA fighters. It makes sense.

However, how many MMA fighters do you see doing one legged bosu ball push press with the pink dumbells?

Last time I checked, most of them trained hard and heavy with the same big compounds that bodybuilders do. The end is different, but the means is quite similar.[/quote]

206

[quote]Andrew Dixon wrote:

There is a lot more to the fitness industry than bodybuilding.

[/quote]

Yes you are right,

sad, isn’t it.

207

[quote]Andrew Dixon wrote:
<<< A lot of you guys think that if your not huge you have no idea about exercise. There is a lot more to the fitness industry than bodybuilding.
[/quote]

Where are the people in this thread (or any other one like this) who have said that “if you’re not huge you have no idea about exercise.”?

Or that bodybuilding is the only use for weight training?

What HAS been said is that ALL styles of training provide function. You guys are the ones castigating others for not training functionally, as usual. Who has started a conversation by saying that what you do is illegitimate, unworthy or dumb?

The only posts like this are in response to you or somebody else attempting to belittle their useless training and let’s not kid ourselves. The absence of function is the same thing as useless.

208

Trib I think he was refering to a general stigma…not a quote…In some instances he is right. --Only some however.–

Often I’ve detected an under current of “your wrong and you must be wrong because your not huge like me”. People who feel like this are free to do so. I think ultimately it will hold you back however. If I am criticised by someone who has not achieved as much, I don’t scoff at them…I look at my jump shot/ punch etc…assess…reassess and either change or maintain.

In this way I improve as a person and as an athelete or body builder.

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:

Where are the people in this thread (or any other one like this) who have said that “if you’re not huge you have no idea about exercise.”?

Or that bodybuilding is the only use for weight training?

What HAS been said is that ALL styles of training provide function. You guys are the ones castigating others for not training functionally, as usual. Who has started a conversation by saying that what you do is illegitimate, unworthy or dumb?

The only posts like this are in response to you or somebody else attempting to belittle their useless training and let’s not kid ourselves. The absence of function is the same thing as useless.[/quote]

209

[quote]Fulmen wrote:
n3wb wrote:
Prof X dosent “laugh on the inside” at people who are bigger and stronger than him regardless of how they train.
At least not in the posts I have seen from him.

Your stats came into play when you talked shit about a 400lb squat.

I’m sorry, I should’ve specified. I wasn’t laughing at him achieving a 400 lb squat, but he felt that 400 lbs was a fine place to stop goal-wise, when I believe that if you can do 400 lbs, why not go 415?

In fact he gave me advice on shit on the second day I was there. It’s not like we were hostile to each other. [/quote]

Yeah, I didn’t notice any hostility till someone started with the usual “Well I could beat you up!” nonsense.

210

[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:
Yeah, I didn’t notice any hostility till someone started with the usual “Well I could beat you up!” nonsense.

[/quote]

I think that all started when I wrote that I’d rather have Ronnie Coleman on my side in a bar fight than some small guy who could do medicine ball pushups. I also posted two pictures so my example was very specific.

Of course that didn’t stop someone from bringing Royce Gracie into my example for some unknown reason.
Which seemed to start an entire shitstorm of “big guy” vs. trained MMA fighter crap which was so far off my intended example it’s hard to figure.

Not sure just how more specific I’d have to be in order to make a simple point stick but whatever.

211

[quote]Professor X wrote:
Goodness Gracious (whatever that means), I didn’t redefine words on the fly. I gave you the definition as it has been in bodybuilding circles for decades. [/quote]

The person replying to you used the corect use of the term to when he argued that machines can eliminate use of some stabilizers and thus are in that respect less “functional” than free weights. You equivocated definitions in response to attack that person’s argument. You were wrong. Look up the equivocation fallacy.

[quote]Professor X wrote:
This is like arguing against the use of the term “upper chest”. No, you don’t have an “upper chest” but a pec major and pec minor. That doesn’t erase the legitimacy of the term as it relates to bodybuilding.[/quote]

Again, you are wrong. Lookup the pectoralis minor. It’s a small muscle that articulates the scapula. It’s not related to the upper/lower chest arguments. You meant to say the clavicular and sternal heads of the pectoralis major. Oops, you’re wrong again.

[quote]Professor X wrote:
that site you gave for “stabilizer muscle” lists the definition as " A muscle that contracts with no significant movement to maintian a posture or fixate a joint. ". [/quote]

This supports my definition, not yours. If listing definitions is your way of conceding an argument without admitting you were wrong, very well, I accept.

212

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
Andrew Dixon wrote:
<<< A lot of you guys think that if your not huge you have no idea about exercise. There is a lot more to the fitness industry than bodybuilding.

Where are the people in this thread (or any other one like this) who have said that “if you’re not huge you have no idea about exercise.”?

Or that bodybuilding is the only use for weight training?

What HAS been said is that ALL styles of training provide function. You guys are the ones castigating others for not training functionally, as usual. Who has started a conversation by saying that what you do is illegitimate, unworthy or dumb?

The only posts like this are in response to you or somebody else attempting to belittle their useless training and let’s not kid ourselves. The absence of function is the same thing as useless.[/quote]

I’m pretty sure I never criticized anyone here for the way ‘they’ trained unless I was being(or trying to be) constructive. I made a stupid comment about laughing at a non chin up and thats about it…maybe you can dig up some of my personal attacks.

All trainng does provide ‘some’ function , I agree with that.

Some many on this board have thrown the go back to your BOSU ball and pink dumbbells comment at me and others, yet they have no idea how I train.

You have to be so fucking careful how you say shit on these boards. I find most of my energy is spent trying to explain what you guys misinterpreted or tweaked for your own argument. You know what I mean because it happens at your end as well.

At the end of the day, I trust what I know to be a good way of doing thing. I’m good at my job, my clients get results. I love this job and couldn’t imagine doing anything else.

With all due respect you’re a computer technician and prof is a dentist. I’m sure your much better and fixing computers and the prof can probably clean his teeth quite well. It possible youre learning as much as I am about strength, nutrition, stress, rehab, massage, etc, but I doubt it.

Its not all about personal experience under the bar. I see how clients respond to certain things and learn from that. Usually after trying stuff out on myself first.

I’ll make sure I communicate more clearly in the future. I just hope you guys will actually consider whats said…and challenge whats been said.

213

[quote]derek wrote:
CappedAndPlanIt wrote:
Yeah, I didn’t notice any hostility till someone started with the usual “Well I could beat you up!” nonsense.

I think that all started when I wrote that I’d rather have Ronnie Coleman on my side in a bar fight than some small guy who could do medicine ball pushups. I also posted two pictures so my example was very specific.

Of course that didn’t stop someone from bringing Royce Gracie into my example for some unknown reason.
Which seemed to start an entire shitstorm of “big guy” vs. trained MMA fighter crap which was so far off my intended example it’s hard to figure.

Not sure just how more specific I’d have to be in order to make a simple point stick but whatever.

[/quote]

Yeah, I responded to your Ronnie post before I saw the medicine ball dude. Regardless, the Gracie comment I made seems justified to me.

Oh, yeah…I didn’t realize it was Ronnie. So the ex cop factor along with the massive amounts of strength he has would be handy.

214

If I can just post my $.02…Being a swimmer, I decided to take a break before trying out for my college team and just hit the weights.

I added a lot of isolation, apart from the Full-body splits that I always had to do with swimming. The result: When I got back in the water, after only a couple weeks of training like this (no DOMS from lifting, mind you) I was slooooww…It had never happened before, and I had to start from square one again in order to get to my previous level of coniditioning. I didn’t make the team, but that’s beside the case.

For me, I personally don’t see how in terms of swimming, me doing cable crossovers or front raises will help me swim. Just from personal experience, compound exercises have always given me the best improvement in my strokes.

215

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
What HAS been said is that ALL styles of training provide function. You guys are the ones castigating others for not training functionally, as usual. Who has started a conversation by saying that what you do is illegitimate, unworthy or dumb?

The only posts like this are in response to you or somebody else attempting to belittle their useless training and let’s not kid ourselves. The absence of function is the same thing as useless.[/quote]

Naturally, that’d depend on your goals. If you’re an olympic swimmer following a bodybuilder’s routine would be useless (or non-functional) for your intended goals (you’d be too big and heavy).

If you want to be a bodybuilder, doing 20 reps of 225 isn’t going to help you to grow very much, so that type of training would be useless for its intended function.

More than anything it’s about frame-of-reference and intentions.

If a guy says “I’m training to be functional” the question is: “What’s the function”? If they don’t have an answer, it just means don’t know what they’re doing or why they’re doing it.

216

[quote]detazathoth wrote:
Fulmen wrote:
DrVonNostrand wrote:
My dad can beat up your dad.
detazathoth wrote:
I actually KO’ed Functional Training the other day, with my squirt gun.

Please leave crappy jokes at the door.

I’ve got another question-why are all those who say they’re using “functional training” always doing total body? I never see a guy using splits and using that terminology.

Once again, I have to stress for the fucking retards on this site that when it comes to routines, do what you want; I’m just curious and want a question answered.

Indirectly blame Chad Waterbury? I reall don’t know, and I doubt there is any concrete answer to it. I personally think it a defense mechanism for people who are afraid to gain weight because their abs are going to disappear for a while.

[/quote]

Or a defense mechanism for people who are afraid of the enormous amount of work squats and deadlifts take.

I find these “functional” proponents are just not willing to do the more difficult exercises. So they wallow in mediocrity (like the OP said).

So being “functional” to me, means less effort. What benefits can there be to putting out less effort?

Great original post BTW!

217

[quote]Professor X wrote:
Tiribulus wrote:

Why is it so difficult to just grant that ANYTHING fulfilling a need is possessed of function insofar as it succeeds?

Because it is hard to admit that the big guy in the corner who is doing everything they’ve read from this and that trainer as being wrong is seeing great progress from it.

I honestly think it is that simple. If it weren’t that simple, there wouldn’t some need to try to justify being smaller at every possible opportunity from hypothetical fights (even though most have probably never even been in a real fight) to running up stairs.[/quote]

Prof X…very good post! Anyone who jusifies being smaller in the way you describe is just insecure anyway.

218

[quote]Andrew Dixon wrote:

<<< All trainng does provide ‘some’ function , I agree with that. >>>

[/quote]

Listen to yourself man. “alright, well ok, SOME function”

For God’s sake dude, SPIT IT OUT!!! It may hurt the first time, but you’ll adapt the longer you practice.

Come on, try it [quote]“ALL training is functional if it moves the subject closer to their goals”[/quote] You may have to get drunk and sob it out through a shower of tears, but you can do it.

I’m laughin here… really. I still think you’re a pretty good ol boy, but what the hell!!! I have granted you your profession as a legitimate, upright way to make a living with the assumption that you are a good specimen of your trade, but you flat down WILL NOT relinquish your bloody fisted grip on this one damn word.

BTW, I learned computers the same way I did weight training. By personal research and doing it. I am VERY good at my job and do not have one minute,s classroom time under my belt. On the other hand I know plenty of people with plenty of “education” who can’t map a network printer. This is directly analogous.

There are highly educated tech people who are really good and some who are brain dead morons. There are entirely uneducated, in the formal sense, tech people who are really good and some who are brain dead morons.

There are highly educated trainers/trainees who are really good and some that are outright dangerous, same goes for formally uneducated ones.

In this game formal technical knowledge is like supplements. It helps IF you’re already on the right track and does nothing for you if you’re not.

219

[quote]Racarnus wrote:
BLAH, BLAH, BLAH
[/quote]

This guy needs to get a bunch of his buddys in Adidas running suits together and have a cerebral circle jerk. I’ll donate a Village People’s Greatest Hits CD to set the mood.

220

[quote]dreads989 wrote:
If I can just post my $.02…Being a swimmer, I decided to take a break before trying out for my college team and just hit the weights.

I added a lot of isolation, apart from the Full-body splits that I always had to do with swimming. The result: When I got back in the water, after only a couple weeks of training like this (no DOMS from lifting, mind you) I was slooooww…It had never happened before, and I had to start from square one again in order to get to my previous level of coniditioning. I didn’t make the team, but that’s beside the case.

For me, I personally don’t see how in terms of swimming, me doing cable crossovers or front raises will help me swim. Just from personal experience, compound exercises have always given me the best improvement in my strokes.[/quote]

First let me say that I don’t think anyone here is arguing that every athlete should train the exact same way. The point is that the “functionality” of a resistance training program depends on the desired function. The demands of swimming are very different from those of professional bodybuilding, so obviously the method used in achieving those goals will probably also be different.

Ok, that being said, you mentioned that you stopped swimming and completely focused on the weights, and that when you returned it took you a while to build back up to your previous level of conditioning (I assume you mean endurance). Unless your resistance training program was set up in a way that would tax your cardiovascular system to a similar extent as swimming, then you’re obviously going to lose some endurance.

Also, I seem to recall reading somewhere that athletes generally experience a decrease in performance following an intense strength/mass building period. The reason is that you lack the ability to control the new found strength which you have just built. I know that when I first really got into resistance training I noticed that when I played sports I felt out of control and my performance actually decreased. However, once I was again able to control my strength, my performance improved dramatically.

But, to blame your lack of endurance on the fact that you had included isolation exercises into your routine is probably incorrect. A stronger muscle is a stronger muscle, regardless of the exercise used to make it stronger. It really doesn’t matter if you perform weighted chins or standing barbell curls, if the result is that your biceps brachii becomes stronger, then the exercise has done it’s job.

Now, it’s true that compound exercises do tend to teach the body how to use it’s muscles in a coordinated manner, and allow one to use greater loads, they aren’t necessarily “better” for developing strength in every muscle involved. For instance, your lats may be extremely strong and therefore may do the majority of the work. Thus, even though the biceps are technically involved in the movement, they may not receive enough stimulation to noticeably increase their strength. In such a case, also doing direct bicep work would probably be beneficial.

Once again, I don’t think anyone here is suggesting that you not do heavy compound exercises, or that those exercises aren’t great for developing a good foundation of strength. I just don’t agree with the idea that isolation exercises wouldn’t also be of benefit (or worse yet, decrease athletic performance).

Good training,

Sentoguy