[quote]Nominal Prospect wrote:
a bunch of stuff.[/quote]
Man, If you are having that hard a time, smething is seriously missing with your conditioning.
Also, whats with the twink boy they have demonstrating the deadlift and squat?
Poor bugger looks like he’s going to break.
[quote]Nominal Prospect
The lady in the pics is using a heavier weight than many powerlifters could manage.[/quote]
Are you “wacked”?? No, seriously.
[quote]jtrinsey wrote:
Nominal Prospect wrote:
During the movement, the dumbells dig into your sides unless you forcefully contract your lats and hold your arms a few inches away from your body.
I’m no expert… but I’m pretty sure the lats are not a shoulder abductor.[/quote]
They don’t need to be.
This man is contracting his lats:
This man isn’t:
fitness.patrickavella.com/progresspics/fr043006.jpg
The point should be crystal clear now.
[quote]jtrinsey wrote:
The bigger the dumbells, the more difficult this becomes. Doing a partial iron cross hold with heavy dumbells’s is no joke. Doing it while simultaneously front squatting elevates the difficulty to a whole other level.
Maybe if you were front squatting that would be the case, but I don’t think holding them at your side qualifies.[/quote]
A squat is a squat, in terms of lower body mechanics. The two major variants of the lift are quad-dominant and the so-called “hip dominant” variation used only in powerlifting. Front Squats, Olympic Squats, and DB squats all fall into the first category. “Hip Dominant” form could more properly be considered a deadlift variation with the load situated on the back, rather than a true squat. Just the term, to “squat”, implies bending at the knees, not the waist.
[quote]jtrinsey wrote:
You can’t hitch the 'bells up and ride them up your legs as you would a bar.
Umm… why COULDN’T you hitch when doing this movement? Besides, when the hell do you ride a bar up your legs?[/quote]
The weight is held at your side, with nothing but empty space behind it. What are you going to hitch it against, your sides? That would be nigh-impossible. With a bar, hitching is easy and quite common. Go watch one of DieselWeisel’s pulls.
[quote]jtrinsey wrote:
I’ll give you that, although I don’t think squatting with a narrow stance is neccessarily a good thing for athletes.[/quote]
No? It’s only the basis of power generation in all field sports.
People talk about the crossover benefits of hip extension to sports, but what they don’t do is differentiate between true hip extension and back extension. The hip joint, like a lever, operates in two directions. A curl won’t elicit the same gains as a chin-up, right? Why not? They’re both elbow flexion. Well, it’s the same situation with the hip. In sports, power is generated with the torso in a relatively upright position and the legs pushing off against the ground – in other words, squatting upwards, a combination of gluteal extension at the hip and quadriceps extension at the knees (also, foot extension due to the contraction of the plantar flexors). There are practically no circumstances in which athletes have to generate vertical pulling power with pure back extension. So why are we having athletes focus so much on back extension movements and in so doing, training the wrong side of the lever?
DB squats are a dream come true for field athletes – so think again.
[quote]jtrinsey wrote:
Maybe it’s just my monkey arms, but I get nowhere near ATG when doing this. The bells hit the floor about 6" or so before I get to the fully bottom position.[/quote]
That may well be a problem for some, but in the worst-case scenario most people should still be able to hit parallel.
[quote]jtrinsey wrote:
That’s the only thing more difficult about this, you have to grip the weight while you do it. Your grip is going to give out long before you get to a weight that would be able to do much of anything for your leg strength.[/quote]
Everyone likes to complain about grip being a limiting factor whenever I bring up this lift. I would ask you this: how have you been doing pulls up till now – have you been holding the bar with your teeth? If your grip allowed you to pull a bar, it will allow you to pull DB’s. Use straps. Nuff’ said.
[quote]jtrinsey wrote:
And how exactly can you not “heave it up with your back as easily”? Just… straighten you legs earlier. In fact, I would say it’s MUCH EASIER to good-morning this one up then with a barbell. Shit, just ask anybody to pick up a light dumbell and look what they do: all back.[/quote]
This one is easy to answer. When you’ve got a loaded bar in front of you, the center of gravity is far in front, and this makes you compensate by leaning back further than you would otherwise. With the load at your sides, the CoG is equal to a person’s natural center of gravity while standing. It lies precisely along the coronal plane (which splits the body into front and rear halves). You could not possibly devise a more natural weight-bearing position.
It is true that most people have a natural inclination to lift something off the ground with their backs instead of their legs (greater mechanical advantage), and using a bar simply exacerbates this condition. The simple fact of having to get the bar to clear the knees on a front pull situates the load in a far-anterior position which necessitates a high degree of trunk flexion and subsequent back extension. If the weight was located at your side instead, it would be “behind” the knee even before you picked it up, thus minimizing the problem.
[quote]jtrinsey wrote:
Nominal Prospect wrote:
Bars are inferior to dumbbells. They allow people to use various tricks to shorten their ROM and lift more weight without actually getting stronger. The bells don’t give people the same opportunity. That’s why I said this exercise would hit powerlifters the hardest.
Damn… so that’s been the problem with all those powerlifters. They haven’t actually gotten stronger, they only squat 600+ by shortening their ROM! Give 'em some 50 pound dumbells and they’ll fall right over![/quote]
It is no secret that if you had a PL’er narrow his squatting stance and increase his ROM, his lifting poundage would decrease by several hundred lbs. or more. Not over a given period of time, but the second he attempted the lift with the altered mechanics.
When you modify the mechanics of a lift to enable you to lift more weight, that extra poundage being moved is not coming on account of any additional strength you have gained. Especially not when said modification can be made on any given day, with any given individual. The problem with so-called “fat lifters” is that they’re so fixated on the numbers game that they forget what they are actually supposed to be doing: that is, LIFTING the weight, moving the load under their own power. Bullshit like this is why powerlifting has yet to be accepted into the Olympics and be taken seriously by the international weightlifting community. Real weightlifters try to maximize their ROM, not the other way around.
So yes, I’m saying that you don’t actually get “stronger” by cutting your ROM in half on the bench press, and the fact that I even have to point this out shows what kind of a screwed-up mentality a lot of people have when it comes to strength.
[quote]jtrinsey wrote:
WTF is the “extreme position” of which you speak? It looks like she’s about 4-5" below parallel and practically doubled over at the waist.[/quote]
You just described it. It’s not everyone who has the balance and flexibility to go a2g. DB Squats offer a great way to learn.
[quote]jtrinsey wrote:
Think some barely-able-to-walk fat lifter with a 50" gut could do that?
Yes… yes as a matter of fact I do.[/quote]
Alright…well you’re wrong.
[quote]jtrinsey wrote:
No… no it OBVIOUSLY does NOT neccessarily involve aerobic capacity. Do you know what “aerobic capacity” is? Do one rep of those and tell me how much of your aerobic capacity was used. I suppose sprinters and bodybuilders could both use these, but the last I checked most of them are doing just fine with more useful exercises such as barbell squats.[/quote]
I guess you weren’t aware that all energy systems are continually utilized by the body at all times. Do several sets of DB Squats with 10 reps or more, and I guarantee you that your aerobic capacity will start to kick in in a big way. There is a reason why the term “breathing squats” was invented. Now, granted, this probably will not help you run a marathon, but it is precisely the type of short-to-medium duration aerobic conditioning that is required by athletes in all field sports. This is what GPP is all about. It is not long distance running for skinny fags. That type of “training” doesn’t even belong in the gym.
[quote]jtrinsey wrote:
I almost feel like this post was a joke, you said so much stuff that was just… retarded. I don’t understand.[/quote]
Yes, I wrote a lot and I have defended those claims against your allegations. What’s more, I think I did a good job of it. I’m still convinced that 'bell squats are the best thing since toasted bread. I will remain so until someone can prove otherwise.
I think we’re all missing the point here.
I’d hit it.
[quote]tedro wrote:
I think we’re all missing the point here.
I’d hit it.[/quote]
Only if she loses the bandana.
Yours truly after hammering every single energy system across the entire aerobic/anaerobic spectrum with db squats
[quote]derek wrote:
The most I’ve deadlifted was 585 and I can’t even get a pair of 40’s out of the rack![/quote]
I have problems with those damn 40’s as well. Good thing there’s a chick like the one in the picture in my gym. For a few tubs of protein powder, she is kind enough to unrack and hand me those buggers so that I can somehow get my dumbbell curls done. Of course it costs extra if by some strange coincidence they are lying on the floor and she has to squat down and lift them up as well.
One day, I was standing in line with all those overweight powerlifters and non-functional bodybuilders who had the same problem, patiently waiting for my turn to have the chick hand me those elusive 40’s, when something dreadful happened.
The powerlifter standing first in line suddenly spotted a chunk of a protein bar somebody must have dropped a while ago lying on the floor between his Chucks. With a delighted grin, he bent down to pick it up.
Unfortunately, he was already holding the dumbbells the chick had handed him and with a sickening thud, they crashed to the floor as his knees gave away. He ended up gasp in the down position of a dumbbell squat, aka the extreme position. Immediately, the whole gym fell silent. You could have heard a needle dropping.
Requiring strength, full body development, aerobic capacity and a certain dose of je ne sais qua, squatting the load was far too difficult for the poor guy to perform. Conversely, he persistently refused to let go of the dumbbells as he knew very well that it would have meant going to the back of the queue and waiting an excruciating half an hour again for the chick to help him get the bells into a position where he could take over. He tried to hitch, something he had done time and time again with one of those inferior barbells, but he couldn’t.
Then, a miracle happened: Suddenly, the guy’s aerobic energy system kicked in and he managed to lift the dumbbells a few inches. Some Army Special Forces who were converting their bodies into killing machines by squatting pairs of 20’s in a remote area of the gym quickly rushed over, grabbed some bumper plates and pried them into the gap between the dumbbells and the floor.
The ROM having been shortened, the powerlifter got stronger. He arched his back, braced his core and with a valiant effort, managed to return to a standing position. A trickle of blood came out of his left nostril and most of the other gym members resumed their training after a sigh of relief.
The whole issue was disturbing to say the least. Cold sweat had gathered behind my mask and the incident had scared me to an extent that my teeth turned white overnight. Even the chick’s bandana was soaked with sweat…
Shut up and squat,
Michael
[quote]skaklight wrote:
tedro wrote:
I think we’re all missing the point here.
I’d hit it.
Only if she loses the bandana.[/quote]
THAT would actually stop you? Ay yi yi.
Nominal Prospect has arguments for his contention. Also, he’s a personal trainer. Perhaps he’s got several clients making significant progress with this single exercise.
NP, show us the evidence, not just the theory. Show us before and after pics of your own radical progress after switching to this. Be sure to include stats. Start with how much weight you use for this, and how much you started with.
Less talk, more walk.
this reminds me of a trap bar deadlift…
Michael:
LMFAO!
[quote]HoratioSandoval wrote:
Nominal Prospect wrote:
The lady in the pics is using a heavier weight than many powerlifters could manage.
…
[/quote]
Umm, most 15 year old untrained boys could do a dumbell squat with 40s. (if those are even 40’s. They look tiny.)
[quote]Mondoterrifico wrote:
Nominal Prospect wrote:
The lady in the pics is using a heavier weight than many powerlifters could manage.
…
Umm, most 15 year old untrained boys could do a dumbell squat with 40s. (if those are even 40’s. They look tiny.)[/quote]
Judging from other things Nominal Prospect has written, agree or disagree, he doesn’t seem to be the dunce that this statement in isolation would make him out to be.
The idea that a trained powerlifter couldn’t manage this movement for reps with a set of 40lb dumbbells is ridiculous. I’m a 6,2 208 or 210 lb guy who is no spring chicken and have been training again for less than 9 months and I do sets of 10 with 50’s all the way down.
On the other hand this is no girly exercise. It is tough, it’s just not the apocalyptic life ending deal he’s claiming it is.
Isn’t this a dumbell deadlift?
So where is the anterior delt, pec, serratus, and tibialis anterior recruitment? Full body my ass.
[quote]Nominal Prospect wrote:
jtrinsey wrote:
Nominal Prospect wrote:
During the movement, the dumbbells dig into your sides unless you forcefully contract your lats and hold your arms a few inches away from your body.
I’m no expert… but I’m pretty sure the lats are not a shoulder abductor.
They don’t need to be.
This man is contracting his lats:
This man isn’t:
fitness.patrickavella.com/progresspics/fr043006.jpg
The point should be crystal clear now.[/quote]
Well perhaps your lats operate differently. Mind tend to be adductors, but maybe you’re special.
[quote]
jtrinsey wrote:
The bigger the dumbbells, the more difficult this becomes. Doing a partial iron cross hold with heavy dumbbells’s is no joke. Doing it while simultaneously front squatting elevates the difficulty to a whole other level.
Maybe if you were front squatting that would be the case, but I don’t think holding them at your side qualifies.
A squat is a squat, in terms of lower body mechanics. The two major variants of the lift are quad-dominant and the so-called “hip dominant” variation used only in powerlifting. Front Squats, Olympic Squats, and DB squats all fall into the first category. “Hip Dominant” form could more properly be considered a deadlift variation with the load situated on the back, rather than a true squat. Just the term, to “squat”, implies bending at the knees, not the waist.[/quote]
I wouldn’t exactly call oly front or back squats quad-DOMINANT, but I guess that’s a fine classification. Your hip-dominant definition again shows your ignorance towards powerlifting, but whatever.
[quote]
jtrinsey wrote:
You can’t hitch the 'bells up and ride them up your legs as you would a bar.
Umm… why COULDN’T you hitch when doing this movement? Besides, when the hell do you ride a bar up your legs?
The weight is held at your side, with nothing but empty space behind it. What are you going to hitch it against, your sides? That would be nigh-impossible. With a bar, hitching is easy and quite common. Go watch one of DieselWeisel’s pulls.[/quote]
Go watch some skinny frat boy try to pick up some heavy dumbbells and tell me you can’t hitch this movement. There’s no magical movement that always ensures good form. Some (preacher curls, barbell front squats, etc.) are more difficult to cheat with, but every movement can be cheated or done with poor form. I would actually say this is one of the easier movements to do so with.
Oh boy, here’s where it gets good:
[quote]
jtrinsey wrote:
I’ll give you that, although I don’t think squatting with a narrow stance is necessarily a good thing for athletes.
No? It’s only the basis of power generation in all field sports. [/quote]
No, indeed it isn’t…
[quote]
People talk about the crossover benefits of hip extension to sports,[/quote] And there’s a reason for that… [quote] but what they don’t do is differentiate between true hip extension and back extension.[/quote] And there’s no real need to. [quote] The hip joint, like a lever, operates in two directions. A curl won’t elicit the same gains as a chin-up, right? Why not?[/quote] Because there’s heavier loading and more joints involved in a chin-up. [quote] They’re both elbow flexion. Well, it’s the same situation with the hip. [/quote] Awful analogy. A better one would be the difference between a back extension/reverse hyper and a squat. [quote]In sports, power is generated with the torso in a relatively upright position and the legs pushing off against the ground[/quote] Dude, I don’t know what sports you play, but I don’t see a whole lot of sporting actions performed upright torsos in most sports I watch and play. [quote]-- in other words, squatting upwards, a combination of gluteal extension at the hip and quadriceps extension at the knees (also, foot extension due to the contraction of the plantar flexors).[/quote] Please don’t lecture people when you get something as basic as this wrong. Muscles contract, joints extend. [quote] There are practically no circumstances in which athletes have to generate vertical pulling power with pure back extension.[/quote] And there are even fewer circumstances where the trunk is locked into place and “pure hip extension” is performed. [quote] So why are we having athletes focus so much on back extension movements and in so doing, training the wrong side of the lever?[/quote]
Because… it’s important! Have you ever seen somebody jump? Lotta back extension going on there…
Alright, let’s all do a field test. Let’s all try two vertical leaps. One where we keep the knees relatively locked and just jump by bending over and extending the back rapidly and pushing off with the toes and another where we keep the back locked (think sissy squat) and just jump by extending the knees and ankles. Which one did we jump higher with? Ok, thought so.
[quote]
DB squats are a dream come true for field athletes – so think again. [/quote]
Whew, good thing my sport is played on a court so I don’t have to worry about that.
[quote]
jtrinsey wrote:
Maybe it’s just my monkey arms, but I get nowhere near ATG when doing this. The bells hit the floor about 6" or so before I get to the fully bottom position.
That may well be a problem for some, but in the worst-case scenario most people should still be able to hit parallel.[/quote]
Then… don’t call them ATG squats when NOBODY is getting their ass anywhere close to the grass with this movement.
[quote]
jtrinsey wrote:
That’s the only thing more difficult about this, you have to grip the weight while you do it. Your grip is going to give out long before you get to a weight that would be able to do much of anything for your leg strength.
Everyone likes to complain about grip being a limiting factor whenever I bring up this lift. I would ask you this: how have you been doing pulls up till now – have you been holding the bar with your teeth? If your grip allowed you to pull a bar, it will allow you to pull DB’s. Use straps. Nuff’ said. [/quote]
Again, comments like this make me question whether you’ve ever done a dumbbell squat. I’m pretty sure I’d have a hard time holding on to 250# dumbbells, if they even manufactured them.
[quote]
jtrinsey wrote:
And how exactly can you not “heave it up with your back as easily”? Just… straighten you legs earlier. In fact, I would say it’s MUCH EASIER to good-morning this one up then with a barbell. Shit, just ask anybody to pick up a light dumbbell and look what they do: all back.
This one is easy to answer. When you’ve got a loaded bar in front of you, the center of gravity is far in front, and this makes you compensate by leaning back further than you would otherwise. With the load at your sides, the CoG is equal to a person’s natural center of gravity while standing. It lies precisely along the coronal plane (which splits the body into front and rear halves). You could not possibly devise a more natural weight-bearing position.[/quote]
Sure you could, it’s called a trap-bar deadlift. Again, watch most people do dumbbell squats, they usually let the bells drift a little past the toes and put more back into it.
[quote]
It is true that most people have a natural inclination to lift something off the ground with their backs instead of their legs (greater mechanical advantage), and using a bar simply exacerbates this condition. The simple fact of having to get the bar to clear the knees on a front pull situates the load in a far-anterior position which necessitates a high degree of trunk flexion and subsequent back extension. If the weight was located at your side instead, it would be “behind” the knee even before you picked it up, thus minimizing the problem.[/quote]
Again… there’s something called a trap-bar deadlift. Been around for a while. Check it out.
[quote]
jtrinsey wrote:
Nominal Prospect wrote:
Bars are inferior to dumbbells. They allow people to use various tricks to shorten their ROM and lift more weight without actually getting stronger. The bells don’t give people the same opportunity. That’s why I said this exercise would hit powerlifters the hardest.
Damn… so that’s been the problem with all those powerlifters. They haven’t actually gotten stronger, they only squat 600+ by shortening their ROM! Give 'em some 50 pound dumbbells and they’ll fall right over!
It is no secret that if you had a PL’er narrow his squatting stance and increase his ROM, his lifting poundage would decrease by several hundred lbs. or more. Not over a given period of time, but the second he attempted the lift with the altered mechanics.[/quote]
Yes and I’m sure if you asked all those oly lifters to do powerlifting squats their poundages would plummet as well. It’s called not being used to a movement!
[quote]
When you modify the mechanics of a lift to enable you to lift more weight, that extra poundage being moved is not coming on account of any additional strength you have gained. Especially not when said modification can be made on any given day, with any given individual. The problem with so-called “fat lifters” is that they’re so fixated on the numbers game that they forget what they are actually supposed to be doing: that is, LIFTING the weight, moving the load under their own power.[/quote] So… who’s power are they moving it under- Weeju the warrior king? [quote]Bullshit like this is why powerlifting has yet to be accepted into the Olympics and be taken seriously by the international weightlifting community. Real weightlifters try to maximize their ROM, not the other way around.[/quote]
And… what does that have to do with a dumbbell squat, THAT YOU CAN’T EVEN GO ATG WTIH??? Shit, I can at least see an argument if you were arguing for ATG front or back squats…
[quote]
So yes, I’m saying that you don’t actually get “stronger” by cutting your ROM in half on the bench press, and the fact that I even have to point this out shows what kind of a screwed-up mentality a lot of people have when it comes to strength.[/quote]
There’s a difference between competition and training. Competition, the goal is to lift the most weight. Training is to help you prepare to do this. Nobody recommends super-wide stances or ridiculous arches to athletes.
[quote]
jtrinsey wrote:
WTF is the “extreme position” of which you speak? It looks like she’s about 4-5" below parallel and practically doubled over at the waist.
You just described it. It’s not everyone who has the balance and flexibility to go a2g. DB Squats offer a great way to learn.[/quote]
I actually disagree strongly. I train 14-18 year old female volleyball players who largely have no weight training experience when they first start. Watching them pick up a dumbbell for the first time… all back,. DB squats (the way you recommend) don’t do anything to help this problem. Goblet squats, db front squats, barbell front squats and box squats all do.
[quote]
jtrinsey wrote:
Think some barely-able-to-walk fat lifter with a 50" gut could do that?
Yes… yes as a matter of fact I do.
Alright…well you’re wrong.[/quote]
Nuh uh!
I think that guy could master the mighty dumbbell squat…
[quote]
jtrinsey wrote:
No… no it OBVIOUSLY does NOT necessarily involve aerobic capacity. Do you know what “aerobic capacity” is? Do one rep of those and tell me how much of your aerobic capacity was used. I suppose sprinters and bodybuilders could both use these, but the last I checked most of them are doing just fine with more useful exercises such as barbell squats.
I guess you weren’t aware that all energy systems are continually utilized by the body at all times.[/quote] In fact I was, you just seem to be aware that the degree to which they are utilized changes quite a bit. [quote] Do several sets of DB Squats with 10 reps or more, and I guarantee you that your aerobic capacity will start to kick in in a big way.[/quote] Ok, as I said… do 1 set of 1 DB squat and ask me how much of your aerobic capacity was used. It has nothing to do with the movement, it has to do with the time spent doing the movement. Again, master basic concepts before you start lecturing people. [quote] There is a reason why the term “breathing squats” was invented.[/quote] Yes… and it has nothing even remotely kinda close to anything having to do with dumbbell squats and aerobic capacity. [quote] Now, granted, this probably will not help you run a marathon, but it is precisely the type of short-to-medium duration aerobic conditioning that is required by athletes in all field sports.[/quote] I would say most athletes in field sports need a lot more anaerobic conditioning than aerobic, but ok… [quote] This is what GPP is all about. It is not long distance running for skinny fags. That type of “training” doesn’t even belong in the gym.[/quote]
Well… at unless of course your sport is long-distance running I suppose.
[quote]
jtrinsey wrote:
I almost feel like this post was a joke, you said so much stuff that was just… retarded. I don’t understand.
Yes, I wrote a lot and I have defended those claims against your allegations. What’s more, I think I did a good job of it. I’m still convinced that 'bell squats are the best thing since toasted bread. I will remain so until someone can prove otherwise.[/quote]
Dude, the dumbbell squat is just a trap-bar deadlift that you can do less weight with. Get over yourself. No matter how many complicated-sounding terms you use incorrectly, you’re not going to change the fact that there’s nothing special about a dumbbell squat.
mike2507’s contribution makes this one of the best TN threads ever.
Tedro’s “I’d hit it comment” solidifies this rating; however, without the selfless supporting posters who no doubt wanted to be the first to respond “I’d hit it” (since we could all see it coming) but instead waited patiently for the time to be right for a deftly placed “I’d hit it” (like we all had forgotten) makes this thread truly memorable.
Thank you NP.
By the way-if she was doing overhead squats with heavy dumbbells and good form-you would be right.
mike2507’s contribution makes this one of the best TN threads ever.
Tedro’s “I’d hit it comment” solidifies this rating; however, without the selfless supporting posters who no doubt wanted to be the first to respond “I’d hit it” (since we could all see it coming) but instead waited patiently for the time to be right for a deftly placed “I’d hit it” (like we all had forgotten) makes this thread truly memorable.
Thank you NP.
By the way-if she was doing overhead squats with heavy dumbbells and good form-you would be right.
Thanks for the kind words, guys.
By the way, I met the chick in the sauna today. On entering, I hit a most muscular pose and a piece of rotten flesh fell off my hamstring due to the heat. The girl stood up form the wooden bench she had perched her tight, perky body on and slowly let her tongue glide over her lips. Only wearing a towel, she came up really close to me and whispered into my ear:
If you could get the benefits of both the squat and deadlift in one super movement, you’d do it. Now, I’ve shown you that exact exercise.
At that point I knew: I was in like Flynn. We had a stimulating chat and the girl turned out to be quite kinky. She was highly into quad dominance, shoulder abduction and other wicked stuff. After a brisk shower and some facial tonic for myself to ensure that flawless complexion the cardio bunnies so dig we exchanged telephone numbers.
Off to the Sex Forum to ask for some advice on my next move…
[quote]SkiMonkey42 wrote:
Maybe you could save yourself by saying you meant to post this link instead:
Deadlift [/quote]
I don’t know what the hell that guy’s doing, but it sure isn’t a deadlift.
NP, you are a moron. End of discussion.
[quote]OneEye wrote:
SkiMonkey42 wrote:
Maybe you could save yourself by saying you meant to post this link instead:
http://spidersport.com/dead-lift_en.php
I don’t know what the hell that guy’s doing, but it sure isn’t a deadlift.
NP, you are a moron. End of discussion.[/quote]
Yeah… I sorta looked at it and was like :s
Gotta love the extended neck position. And how is lower back is almost rounded over in the bottom position.
[quote]Mondoterrifico wrote:
HoratioSandoval wrote:
Umm, most 15 year old untrained boys could do a dumbell squat with 40s. (if those are even 40’s. They look tiny.)[/quote]
Where are we getting the magical “40”
figure from, people? I see 3 regular-diameter plates on either side, plus a smaller one at each end. Assuming those plates are standard size, and there’s no reason to think otherwise, she is lifting:
2 x(3x10) + 2 x 5 = 70 lbs./side = 140 lbs. total
Very respectable.
40 lb. Dumbells look like this:
Those look a SHITload smaller than the ones being used in the pic. About half the size, probably because weight being used in one is, indeed, half of the other.
Glad you had your fun and wrote your stories, but now it seems the myth of the “20/40 lb. dumbells” is over.