The difference between a ‘dead spot’ and a pause is… what? Duration I’m guessing? Seems so arbitrary, if both are less than 2 seconds.
The difference is whether you take tension off of the muscle or not. That’s a huge difference.
[quote]JayPierce wrote:
The difference is whether you take tension off of the muscle or not. That’s a huge difference.
[/quote]
Wouldn’t that would actually make Flipcollar’s squat a 1rm since he locked out every rep at the top?
No.
[quote]JayPierce wrote:
No.[/quote]
Could you explain the difference? I unfortunately don’t understand it, and I feel like I may be missing something.
Why would you want me too explain it? Try it for yourself. Take your 10 or 12 or 20 rep squat max, and try it without locking out.
Better yet, flip can record himself repping 350 for 20 without locking out, and prove me wrong altogether.
[quote]JayPierce wrote:
Why would you want me too explain it? Try it for yourself. Take your 10 or 12 or 20 rep squat max, and try it without locking out.
Better yet, flip can record himself repping 350 for 20 without locking out, and prove me wrong altogether. [/quote]
That’s what I’m saying though. If locking out determines when one has reached the rep max, I feel like his set was actually a 1rm.
I believe you misunderstand me. I have no intention of proving anyone wrong or right. I simply want to understand what you are saying.
I actually perform quite a few no-lockout sets in my training. I’m currently doing something like that to rehab my hamstring.
I don’t ever squat to depth though, because I like to watch the world burn.
[quote]JayPierce wrote:
Why would you want me too explain it? Try it for yourself. Take your 10 or 12 or 20 rep squat max, and try it without locking out.
Better yet, flip can record himself repping 350 for 20 without locking out, and prove me wrong altogether. [/quote]
My aerobic conditioning is not sufficient to do this, so I will not be proving you wrong.
[quote]T3hPwnisher wrote:
video of zero squats[/quote]
345= 0 rep max. no reps to depth. My rep calculator indicates your 1rm is 239.
[quote]flipcollar wrote:
[quote]T3hPwnisher wrote:
video of zero squats[/quote]
345= 0 rep max. no reps to depth. My rep calculator indicates your 1rm is 239.[/quote]
I’m trying to get the highest zero rep max.
[quote]flipcollar wrote:
I guess my set of 10 reps that I did at 405 was actually my 4 rep max, because, if I recall correctly, I paused between the 4th and 5th rep. Possibly even longer than 2 seconds. Could have been 3. Which, according to the 1rm calculator I just used, would have made my 1rm about 445. Which means I probably didn’t actually squat 515, because math.[/quote]
this site really needs a like button 
[quote]T3hPwnisher wrote:
[quote]JayPierce wrote:
Why would you want me too explain it? Try it for yourself. Take your 10 or 12 or 20 rep squat max, and try it without locking out.
Better yet, flip can record himself repping 350 for 20 without locking out, and prove me wrong altogether. [/quote]
That’s what I’m saying though. If locking out determines when one has reached the rep max, I feel like his set was actually a 1rm.
I believe you misunderstand me. I have no intention of proving anyone wrong or right. I simply want to understand what you are saying.
I actually perform quite a few no-lockout sets in my training. I’m currently doing something like that to rehab my hamstring.
I don’t ever squat to depth though, because I like to watch the world burn.
[/quote]
I wasn’t born yesterday, my friend. I know exactly where you were going with your argument.
If you squat both lockout and no-lockout, you already know that there’s a major difference in how hard it is and how it affects the muscles involved.
[quote]flipcollar wrote:
[quote]JayPierce wrote:
Why would you want me too explain it? Try it for yourself. Take your 10 or 12 or 20 rep squat max, and try it without locking out.
Better yet, flip can record himself repping 350 for 20 without locking out, and prove me wrong altogether. [/quote]
My aerobic conditioning is not sufficient to do this, so I will not be proving you wrong.[/quote]
Exactly my point. You can’t do it. So relative to the program being discussed, that is not a weight you can handle for 20 reps.
[quote]JayPierce wrote:
[quote]flipcollar wrote:
[quote]JayPierce wrote:
Why would you want me too explain it? Try it for yourself. Take your 10 or 12 or 20 rep squat max, and try it without locking out.
Better yet, flip can record himself repping 350 for 20 without locking out, and prove me wrong altogether. [/quote]
My aerobic conditioning is not sufficient to do this, so I will not be proving you wrong.[/quote]
Exactly my point. You can’t do it. So relative to the program being discussed, that is not a weight you can handle for 20 reps.[/quote]
I guess. But I can’t really handle any weight for 20 reps the way you’ve described it. I’m not positive I could do 135 that way. So are we suggesting that if I were to do this program, 100 lbs would be appropriate? I don’t really think that’s what you mean.
[quote]flipcollar wrote:
[quote]JayPierce wrote:
[quote]flipcollar wrote:
[quote]JayPierce wrote:
Why would you want me too explain it? Try it for yourself. Take your 10 or 12 or 20 rep squat max, and try it without locking out.
Better yet, flip can record himself repping 350 for 20 without locking out, and prove me wrong altogether. [/quote]
My aerobic conditioning is not sufficient to do this, so I will not be proving you wrong.[/quote]
Exactly my point. You can’t do it. So relative to the program being discussed, that is not a weight you can handle for 20 reps.[/quote]
I guess. But I can’t really handle any weight for 20 reps the way you’ve described it. I’m not positive I could do 135 that way. So are we suggesting that if I were to do this program, 100 lbs would be appropriate? I don’t really think that’s what you mean.[/quote]
Lol.
I just wish Jay’s writing style was as entertaining as Thiago “T3” Monteiro’s. This thread would be epic.
[quote]flipcollar wrote:
[quote]JayPierce wrote:
[quote]flipcollar wrote:
[quote]JayPierce wrote:
Why would you want me too explain it? Try it for yourself. Take your 10 or 12 or 20 rep squat max, and try it without locking out.
Better yet, flip can record himself repping 350 for 20 without locking out, and prove me wrong altogether. [/quote]
My aerobic conditioning is not sufficient to do this, so I will not be proving you wrong.[/quote]
Exactly my point. You can’t do it. So relative to the program being discussed, that is not a weight you can handle for 20 reps.[/quote]
I guess. But I can’t really handle any weight for 20 reps the way you’ve described it. I’m not positive I could do 135 that way. So are we suggesting that if I were to do this program, 100 lbs would be appropriate? I don’t really think that’s what you mean.[/quote]
I’m positive you could do 220 - 250. But, yes, it would be tough. It’s supposed to be.
[quote]dt79 wrote:
[quote]flipcollar wrote:
[quote]JayPierce wrote:
[quote]flipcollar wrote:
[quote]JayPierce wrote:
Why would you want me too explain it? Try it for yourself. Take your 10 or 12 or 20 rep squat max, and try it without locking out.
Better yet, flip can record himself repping 350 for 20 without locking out, and prove me wrong altogether. [/quote]
My aerobic conditioning is not sufficient to do this, so I will not be proving you wrong.[/quote]
Exactly my point. You can’t do it. So relative to the program being discussed, that is not a weight you can handle for 20 reps.[/quote]
I guess. But I can’t really handle any weight for 20 reps the way you’ve described it. I’m not positive I could do 135 that way. So are we suggesting that if I were to do this program, 100 lbs would be appropriate? I don’t really think that’s what you mean.[/quote]
Lol.
I just wish Jay’s writing style was as entertaining as Thiago “T3” Monteiro’s. This thread would be epic.[/quote]
NO NO NO!.. I’m not retard… Sick of learning you guys on what real rep max is…Eat tons lots protein!! Trust me I know…
[quote]flipcollar wrote:
I guess. But I can’t really handle any weight for 20 reps the way you’ve described it. I’m not positive I could do 135 that way. So are we suggesting that if I were to do this program, 100 lbs would be appropriate? I don’t really think that’s what you mean.[/quote]
50% of 1RM is a good place to start. Most lifters could hit 20 reps with 50% of 1RM. You might not have the metabolic conditioning to get through it at first, but you’d adapt pretty quick. I would do all of the sets, but end each one as soon as I had to pause. By the look of your 315 squat video, I’m pretty sure you could complete at least 4 sets with 255, and then probably drop a few reps for the last sets. Within three or four weeks, you’d be ready to increase the weight.
All theoretical, of course, because I wouldn’t recommend a program like this to any powerlifter. Two months of this program, with the amount of food that would be required to support it, would probably put you out of your weight class, anyway.
I might actually give it a go if I didn’t already have a high volume program that was working so well for me. I really would like to adapt my program to work each body part twice a week, though, as this one does.
[quote]JayPierce wrote:
I wasn’t born yesterday, my friend. I know exactly where you were going with your argument.
If you squat both lockout and no-lockout, you already know that there’s a major difference in how hard it is and how it affects the muscles involved. [/quote]
Again, I believe you misunderstand me. I am not having any argument here, I am wanting to know things.
This is honestly one of the biggest hurdles I encounter whenever I try to discuss something online. People tend to be too concerned with “winning” a conversation, when I just want to know things.
Right now, I don’t understand why flip’s video demonstrates a 10rm versus a 1rm. He locks out at the very first rep and takes tension off the muscle.
[quote]T3hPwnisher wrote:
Right now, I don’t understand why flip’s video demonstrates a 10rm versus a 1rm. He locks out at the very first rep and takes tension off the muscle.[/quote]
Because I wasn’t being as picky as some would like to think. I was pointing out that because he had to pause after the tenth rep, and because he was squatting roughly 75% of his 1RM, there is no way he could have hit 20 reps continuously, and so it did not qualify as a 20 rep max relative to the program being discussed.