I think we need to finally settle that one arm BB snatch challenge, friendo.
Do you have a Facebookz, m8?
Csulli, look at my log, and the glorious volume from today.
[quote]strongmanvinny wrote:
I think we need to finally settle that one arm BB snatch challenge, friendo. [/quote]
I’m scurred lol. Okay I will do my best to remember it tomorrow. I am hoping I can do 135, although I can promise it will look nasty as absolute hell.
[quote]spar4tee wrote:
Do you have a Facebookz, m8?[/quote]
Ye. Chris Sullivan
I tried being Facebook friends with Spock, but we failed to find each other hahaha
I very seldom post anything on the fbook though.
10/27/2013
Did 5 sets of 10 ab wheel and 10 sets of 10 pull-ups at home.
This is something I want to do daily for a while. In fact I wish I had remembered to work more abs sooner. Hopefully a month of training will be enough to show some core strength improvement in time for the deadlift meet.
Went to the Rush since it was Sunday.
EZ Bar Curls:
4 sets of 12 with between 90 and 110 pounds.
superset with
Skullcrushers:
4 sets of 12 with 110
Face down incline dumbbell curls:
4 sets of 10-12 with 30’s
superset with
Incline dumbbell tricep extensions:
4 sets of 12 with 30’s
Slow with a good squeeze bodybuilding style. Make the light weights hard.
2 sets to failure on every bicep and tricep machine in the gym.
Played around with some various grip pull-ups, including holding on to two baseballs and doing pull-ups.
Did some blast strap rear delt work. I very much like these bodyweight rear delt stuff. I’ll have to do that more often.
I do feel a bit drained from training heavy deadlifts two days in a row. Gotta be said.
[quote]csulli wrote:
[quote]spar4tee wrote:
Do you have a Facebookz, m8?[/quote]
Ye. Chris Sullivan
I tried being Facebook friends with Spock, but we failed to find each other hahaha
I very seldom post anything on the fbook though.[/quote]
That ain’t enough. I already tried a while back lol. Just add me. Quincy Cambrel.
[quote]furo wrote:
Great job on the 495lb deadlift and the press PR!
I was just thinking about our earlier conversation on what humans are capable of and what we’re evolved for physically. I’m really fascinated by the topic and I’d like to hear more about your views on it. You mentioned evidence against humans being adapted for long-distance running and I’d be really interested to see that and any other information you might have. Do you see strength as a large component of paleo-man’s capabilities?
Sorry if it’s a weird question lol. Hope you’re doing well.[/quote]
There was actually a TNation article on it that I wish I could find.
Anyway the Tarahumara tribe is like the focal point of his book since they do all kinds of crazy ultrarunning and “persistence hunting.” Endurance hunting for humans is pretty darn energy inefficient, and the cultures who practice it (including the Tarahumara) live off a diet virtually 100% consisting of farmed legumes and other vegetables. They’re vegetarians. They don’t actually live off of persistence hunting, and it’s doubtful that any human ever did.
His argument about evolutionarily being designed as endurance hunters is a stretch imo. Whenever you bring evolution into the mix you have to start with the great apes. That’s our best understanding of our evolutionary background at this time. None of them are anything close to endurance based animals. They are built for slow ambulation with bursts of speed and extreme bursts of strength.
One of the ways in which humans diverge from apes is our much higher volume of “spinal grey matter”. This contains all kinds of motor neurons and stuff. Basically it grants us extreme dexterity, because our bodies can fire only as many individual muscle fibers as are absolutely required for any task. This is why we can play violin concertos. Chimps on the other hand don’t have that kind of control. One of the reasons they have such high relative strength is because they more or less cannot help but fire all of their muscle fibers at once. The human body doesn’t like to let you do this.
Like I said this was evolved for dexterity reasons enabling us to build tools and perform extremely complex tasks. However it has the added benefit of being a key factor in endurance running. Engaging the minimum amount of muscle needed at any one time grants vastly improved endurance, however I don’t believe that was the original intended purpose; simply something people found out they could do as a byproduct.
What humans REALLY evolved to be (besides intelligent) was adaptable. We’re the most adaptable complex organism on the planet. The fact that we CAN get absurdly good at long distance running doesn’t mean nature intended that for us, it’s just one of the many things we can choose to mold our highly adaptable bodies to do.
Good explanation, I was intending on debating you if you came weak but I agree. Certain cultures have relied on a type of endurance hunt that takes them on km walk/runs each day. Definitely not efficient but the body will adapt to it. I agree.
[quote]spar4tee wrote:
[quote]csulli wrote:
[quote]spar4tee wrote:
Do you have a Facebookz, m8?[/quote]
Ye. Chris Sullivan
I tried being Facebook friends with Spock, but we failed to find each other hahaha
I very seldom post anything on the fbook though.[/quote]
That ain’t enough. I already tried a while back lol. Just add me. Quincy Cambrel.[/quote]
Facebook:
“You may know some of Quincy’s friends”:
Andrey Malanichev 3 mutual friends
Steve Goggins 3 mutual friends
Ernie Lilliebridge Sr. 4 mutual friends
lol
[quote]csulli wrote:
There was actually a TNation article on it that I wish I could find.
Anyway the Tarahumara tribe is like the focal point of his book since they do all kinds of crazy ultrarunning and “persistence hunting.” Endurance hunting for humans is pretty darn energy inefficient, and the cultures who practice it (including the Tarahumara) live off a diet virtually 100% consisting of farmed legumes and other vegetables. They’re vegetarians. They don’t actually live off of persistence hunting, and it’s doubtful that any human ever did.[/quote]
Thanks for the in-depth reply!
The book mentioned, and I’ve seen a documentary on, tribesmen in Africa using persistence hunting as well as the Tarahumara. A camera crew actually filmed the hunt in entirety, I believe it took 6 hours.
I get what you are saying about it being energy inefficient, but in the documentary I watched 3 men chased a huge male antelope-type animal (I believe it was a Bongo) that looked to weigh around the 300kg mark (obviously hard to judge). I’d imagine that would put them in a huge calorific “profit” so to speak.
It makes complete sense what you are saying about the Tarahumara primarily survive on a vegetarian diet, but I guess that doesn’t rule out the fact that they could supplement it with meat occasionally. I did a summer of research at a national nutrition institute here in the UK and I spent a lot of time looking into the paleolithic diet. It was the thinking at the time that paleolithic man would have grazed on nuts/veg and fruit for the majority of the time and feasted on meat when he got the chance (hunting methods weren’t ever discussed). That would fit in as a similar pattern to distance runners eating mostly legumes and vegetables and occasionally persistence hunting.
[quote]csulli wrote:
His argument about evolutionarily being designed as endurance hunters is a stretch imo. Whenever you bring evolution into the mix you have to start with the great apes. That’s our best understanding of our evolutionary background at this time. None of them are anything close to endurance based animals. They are built for slow ambulation with bursts of speed and extreme bursts of strength.[/quote]
I get what you are saying about relating it to great apes, but I’m not necessarily convinced that it means that we share that much in the way of physical characteristics with them. They have evolved for a completely different environment after all, it makes sense that humans have evolved advantages for our particular environment that aren’t necessarily replicated in them.
And to make a comparison to another animal genus, the big cats - while all closely related - have incredibly diverse and wide-ranging physical attributes and abilities. From extreme speed to combat to climbing and swimming. Why couldn’t the great apes have the same variety in physical abilities? Why would humans have to be designed for “slow ambulation with bursts of speed and extreme bursts of strength” just because gorillas are?
[quote]csulli wrote:
Like I said this was evolved for dexterity reasons enabling us to build tools and perform extremely complex tasks. However it has the added benefit of being a key factor in endurance running. Engaging the minimum amount of muscle needed at any one time grants vastly improved endurance, however I don’t believe that was the original intended purpose; simply something people found out they could do as a byproduct.[/quote]
I’m not a huge fan of coincidences, especially in evolutionary terms. It seems that we have far too many endurance-advantages for it just to be down to chance.
[quote]csulli wrote:
What humans REALLY evolved to be (besides intelligent) was adaptable. We’re the most adaptable complex organism on the planet. The fact that we CAN get absurdly good at long distance running doesn’t mean nature intended that for us, it’s just one of the many things we can choose to mold our highly adaptable bodies to do.[/quote]
I completely agree that the main advantage humans hold over other species is our adaptability, but I think that is intrinsically linked WITH our intelligence, rather than coexisting with it. I believe that the number one reason that we are so adaptable is that we are so intelligent, though obviously other factors play a part (opposable thumbs for manipulating tools, excellent thermoregulation for surviving different climates etc).
However, I don’t think your theory that we can simply adapt to long-distance running if we choose to holds water - we must be intrinsically evolved to be superior at it. We can’t just choose to be stronger than bears, we can’t choose to be better swimmers than seals or better climbers than orangutans, but we do have an innate ability to out-endure them and I don’t think that can be coincidence.
Anyway, sorry for the extra-long post and I hope it didn’t come across as antagonistic at all. I really haven’t made my mind up at all on the issue, but it really interests me and I love discussing it.
[quote]csulli wrote:
[quote]spar4tee wrote:
[quote]csulli wrote:
[quote]spar4tee wrote:
Do you have a Facebookz, m8?[/quote]
Ye. Chris Sullivan
I tried being Facebook friends with Spock, but we failed to find each other hahaha
I very seldom post anything on the fbook though.[/quote]
That ain’t enough. I already tried a while back lol. Just add me. Quincy Cambrel.[/quote]
Facebook:
“You may know some of Quincy’s friends”:
Andrey Malanichev 3 mutual friends
Steve Goggins 3 mutual friends
Ernie Lilliebridge Sr. 4 mutual friends
lol[/quote]
Oh Gawd. I know.
[quote]csulli wrote:
What humans REALLY evolved to be (besides intelligent) was adaptable. We’re the most adaptable complex organism on the planet. The fact that we CAN get absurdly good at long distance running doesn’t mean nature intended that for us, it’s just one of the many things we can choose to mold our highly adaptable bodies to do.[/quote]
Couple that with being energetically efficient.
So what I am gathering from my reading of this log is…and correct me if I am wrong, but if I were to bench press without my shirt on, then my bench press would go up about 100 lbs?
[quote]trivium wrote:
So what I am gathering from my reading of this log is…and correct me if I am wrong, but if I were to bench press without my shirt on, then my bench press would go up about 100 lbs?[/quote]
10/28/2013
My low back was pretty fried, so I took it very easy on squats today. Deadlifts are the priority, and I need to be recovered for Friday.
Pause Squats:
135 5x
185 5x
225 5x
275 3x
315 2x
315 2x On the top two sets I took both reps to rock bottom and gave them a 3-5 second long pause. Trying to make leg day more difficult without having to use much weight so as to take it easy on the low back.
DB Shrugs:
I used the 75’s and did 10 reps with the right, 10 reps with the left, and 10 reps of both. That is one set. I did 4 sets.
Bench:
45 10x
135 10x
185 5x
225 5x
245 3x
265 1x
282.5 1x lol 1.25lb plates
300 3x
225 18x
OMG so if you find Quincy then that means you can find me cause we’re friends!!
WHEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE
[quote]Spock81 wrote:
OMG so if you find Quincy then that means you can find me cause we’re friends!!
WHEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE[/quote]
Achievement Get!
Become Jenn’s Facebook Friend!
(that’s what it would say if we were in Minecraft)
I just thought of this the other night but it makes sense that we have the capability to do well in an endurance sens. IF YOU LOOK AT THE FIRST SETTLERS OF NORTH AMERICA THEY WALKED ACROSS THE BERING STRAIT THEN MOVED DOWNWARDS OVER THOUSANDS OR HUNDREDS OF YEARS. Depending on what you lived off of and how far shit was from your den you did what you had to do. Humans are continuously adapting and changing physical characteristics to live easier in their surroundings, which is really trippy to think about.
I remember reading that children are now being born with longer bodies and bigger heads because of they way we have been living for the past couple hundred years. We no longer need super jacked mofo’s to hunt a moose with a bow and arrow and to beat wild boars into submission. This is part in why I hope that through some bro sci-ency way that lifting weights will make my offspring genetic muscle mutants in the future. lol
[quote]Jlabs wrote:
This is part in why I hope that through some bro sci-ency way that lifting weights will make my offspring genetic muscle mutants in the future. lol[/quote]
It will in a legitimate sci-ency way. It’s called genetic memory, and it’s awesome.