-------------------- 1 --------------------
#1. Hahn's comments on pulldowns - from Berserker .
Top
Date: Thu, 20 Aug 1998 19:48:32 PDT From: "Berserker ." <berserker78@hotmail.com> Subject: Hahn's comments on pulldowns Fred Hahn wrote: "Let me first say that this is all the more reason for training to failure. To not do so would result in even less stimulation to the muscles you claim are not failing. Fact is we don't know what fails exactly. It is not always the biceps. Perhaps, the way in which some people perform this exercise (all that yanking and heaving), causes their biceps and forearms to fail first. If this exercise is performed correctly (I'm not going to get into that now) you will not fail because of your biceps. In fact, I'm not sure exactly what muscles are failing at the point of muscular failure when this exercise is done properly." Hmm. That may be so. But it is my completely uneducated guess that the lats may fail before the biceps do because of fiber mismatching. If the lats are fast twitch and the biceps are slow twitch, wouldn't the lats fail before the biceps because they have less endurance? Like I said, don't kick my butt, I'm not an expert. Speaking from experience, I can say my biceps always fail before my lats, and I don't do pulldowns. I do close-grip, palms-up chin-ups, and I use a 4-1-2-1 cadence. There is no heaving or jerking. Later, Ben ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
-------------------- 2 --------------------
#2. Re: please clarify, Mr. Thomas? - from Juan Castro
Top
Date: Thu, 20 Aug 1998 19:56:15 PDT From: "Juan Castro" <castrojuan@hotmail.com> Subject: Re: please clarify, Mr. Thomas? >From: por1axt@por10.med.navy.mil (axtomas) >There was also some talk about the Quads and contraction of various=20 >parts of it. >I will dig out a reference for that as well in the near future, but befor= >e I >try and dig through my filing cabinet, let me inform you of what it >contains. >-the nerve supply to the quads has been disected and shown to containa >separate nerve supply to vastus medialus. >-electromyography has shown VM to contract separetly from the rest ofthe >quads. >-injection of a small amount of saline into the knee joint inhibits VM >contraction, but not the rest of the quads. >i.e. don't exercise your quads if your knees are swollen!? >And I have seen a several freaks of nature, who are able to contract VM >independantly of the rest of the quads. I can only do so with my knee fu= >lly >locked out. Does this say that there is selective training of the quads? Are leg extensions necessary? Thanking you, Juan ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
-------------------- 3 --------------------
#3. OUCH!!!! - from Berserker .
Top
Date: Thu,20 Aug 1998 19:59:40 PDT From: "Berserker ." <berserker78@hotmail.com> Subject: OUCH!!!! I saw a guy the other day at the gym doing stiff leg deadlifts. Pretty big guy, like linebacker-big. He put about 275 on the bar, squatted down with his back rounded to pick up the bar, and quickly let the bar hit the bottom of the squat rack. He then quickly reversed directions, paused, and leaned back so far, I could feel it myself. He repeated the process about 12 times. Of course we all see guys at the gym doing stuff like this. My question is why do they seemingly never get hurt? It seems like all the talk about explosive lifting being dangerous is mostly paranoia. I myself believe that this type of training can lead to injuries in the long run, but it obviously doesn't happen to everyone immediately. I mean, that guy at the gym was doing some pretty harsh stuff, right? I myself got strains pretty easily doing slow dips, so common sense tells me to avoid this type of training. On the other hand, I hear guys complaining every so often about how much their shoulders hurt. They then proceed to do wide-grip pulldowns or lateral raises, not to mention bouncing the bar off their chest doing bench presses. I thought this would be a nice change of pace from the debates which typically center around whether explosive lifting makes you jump higher or not. Later, Ben ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
-------------------- 4 --------------------
#4. Re: HIT Digest #184 - from Beber0190@aol.com
Top
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 1998 00:05:40 EDT From: Beber0190@aol.com Subject: Re: HIT Digest #184 In a message dated 8/20/98 6:10:28 PM Pacific Daylight Time, hitdigest@geocities.com writes: << I know that powerlifters use bench press shirts to cut down on injuries and allow them to lift higher weights. Are they good or bad for us regular weightlifters? If l use these things to train with higher weights, will I be able to press more when I finally take the shirt off? In other words, do these things have any real effect on physiology or are they are crutch that once used always need to be used? >> Powerlifters use bench shirts to increase poundage, not to cut back on injuries. They probably contribute more to injury than to safety. For a person training for overall strength and appearance, the bench shirt is of little use. Basically, if, for example, a person can bench 400 lbs, and the bench shirt adds enough spring to his movement to allow him to add 50lbs, then he can lift 50 more lbs with it, making it useful for contests. But, in regular training, although more weight is being lifted, what good is it, if the shirt is lifting those extra pounds?
-------------------- 5 --------------------
#5. Re: HIT Digest #184 - from Dave Jones
Top
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 1998 08:16:19 -0500 From: Dave Jones <kajukenbo@ibm.net> Subject: Re: HIT Digest #184 > > 1. MA Training > by: Andrew M. Baye <drewbaye@gdi.net> > 2. Self-Defense training > by: Henry Jung <hjung@jp.FCNBD.COM> > Date: Mon, 17 Aug 1998 21:45:21 -0400 > From: "Andrew M. Baye" <drewbaye@gdi.net> > Subject: MA Training > > I agree with all of the statements made so far on the digest about MA > training, but I thought I should explain a few things. > > First, I realize that full contact sparring with no pads (just mouthguards > and open hand gloves) is dangerous. BUT, depending on your situation, > sometimes it's not as dangerous as not having the skills when necessary. > > Second, I realize that grappling is extremely effective, and that itcan be > practiced in a safer manner than striking. I am familiar with both > Greco-Roman style wrestling and Judo and have an understanding of Chin-Na > wrist, elbow, shoulder and leg locks. BUT, as Tino mentioned, grappling's > usefulness is limited to one on one situations. When faced with multiple > attackers it is suicide to tie up with one person. Especially when they are > armed. Again, how you train depends on your situation. > > Third, I am well aware of the differences between full contact sparring and > a real fight, and the limitations in sparring for preparing for such. We > also practiced various self-defense drills at either full or half speed > (depending on the techniques involved) and learned a lot from each other > that way. My favorite target is the throat, but I'd never strike someone > there in practice. > > Maybe all of us who are into MA should find another mailing list or message > board, since this is probably not appropriate for the HIT digest. > > Andrew M. Baye > The SuperSlow Exercise Guild, Inc > http://www.superslow.com > > -------------------- 2 -------------------- > Date: Tue, 18 Aug 98 11:13:03 +0900 > From: Henry Jung <hjung@jp.FCNBD.COM> > Subject: Self-Defense training > > Hello, > > I'm an assistant at the Brazilain jiujitsu dojo in Tokyo. Grappling does > have it's limitations, but concrete is not really one of them. A skilled > grappler will use the concrete to proactively cause more abrasions on the > non-grappling exponent and minimize his own injuries. Also in regardto > multiple opponents (very valid) I remember what Carlson Gracie said,"Why > worry about many when you can't defeat even one?" > > Best, > > Henry > To cut bandwidth, I first Reccommend Joining the Pro Gym / American Kajukenbo Association Mailing List at <http://geocities.datacellar.net/~progym> to carry on this discussion. First, it is free, second, it is what I created the list for *grin* To be brief, as looking at my credentials in my signature suggests, I am VERY familiar with both sides of this "argument" so I will break my responses down. 1. Grapplers with good striking skills handle multiple opponents BETTER than fighters without both. It is that simple. 2. If 1 opponent can take you down 90% of the time if he wants to (fact) then what makes you think 2 or MORE can't? That is simply flawed logic. You need grappling EVEN if you PLAN on fighting multiple opponents. 3. I have been _thrown_ to the concrete BEFORE and AFTER training with the Gracie Family. After taking Gracie Jiu Jitsu for 2 years, I knew how to land and fall correctly. I WON the second time I was thrown down... 4. The only ways this discussion bears on HIT is: a. Martial Artists usually have a HIT mentality b. Weight Training makes you a more efficient martial artist c. Pushing & Pulling in grappling is very similar to a lot of free-weight exercises. I am sure Rob would appreciate everyone staying on topic as much as possible. You are free to join the Pro Gym List or E-mail me directly of you want to disciss this further. Yours in the Arts Dave Jones Certified Instructor, Pro Gym Defense & Arrest Tactis, Moro, Illinois -- Dave Jones Instructor & 2nd Degree Black Belt, Kajukenbo Self Defense Blue Belt, Gracie Jiu Jitsu (Under Royce & Rorion GRACIE) Black Belt Tae Kwon Do, Boxing Coach, etc. al. Check out my martial arts school: <http://geocities.datacellar.net/~progym/>
-------------------- 6 --------------------
#6. Time to reach failure? - from Tino, Allen J (Al), NPG NNAD
Top
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 1998 13:00:20 -0400 From: "Tino, Allen J (Al), NPG NNAD" <atino@att.com> Subject: Time to reach failure? It seems to be accepted that there is an optimal time to reach failure inan exercise. For example, I've read: butt/hips: 90 to 120 seconds rest of lower body: 60 to 90 seconds upper torso: 40 to 70 seconds How well established are these numbers? Do they represent some kind of boundary between anaerobic and aerobic mechanisms? How well understood is the physiology of muscle "failure": what causes a muscle to "fail"? Al Tino atino@att.com
-------------------- 7 --------------------
#7. Re: Bench Press Shirts - from Richard Eastwood
Top
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 1998 12:50:08 +0100 From: "Richard Eastwood" <rpeast@Global.Net.UK> Subject: Re: Bench Press Shirts > I know that powerlifters use bench press shirts to cut down on > injuries and allow them to lift higher weights. > > Are they good or bad for us regular weightlifters? If l use these > things to train with higher weights, will I be able to press more when > I finally take the shirt off? In other words, do these things have any > real effect on physiology or are they are crutch that once used always > need to be used? > > If the former, then how do you use one? What mfg. makes the best(what > do you look for in one -- I know some are thicker > than others)? How do I figure out my size (I've read that contest > shirts should be smaller, but I'm looking for a regulat workout > version)? Where can I buy one (any good mail-order houses)? > > "I'll moider da bum." -- Tony Galento, heavyweight boxer, when > asked what he thought of William Shakespeare > > While the idea of adding an extra 45lbs to the bar may seem attractive, I*really* think you should forget buying a bench shirt. Even competetive powerlifters should think twice about using these things in training. This is one of the few things Fred Hatfield and me agree on - the reason beingthat the shirt, like wraps and powerlifting belts, is a crutch to lift more weight, nothing else. It takes the pectorals out of the movement, making the benchpress a partial movement and primarily a tricep/delt exercise. Your chance of injury is also greatly increased as you are exposing your body to a level of force it is unaccustomed to - I hope this changes your mind about getting a shirt; bottom line - 'lift to grow, not for show'. RichE
-------------------- 8 --------------------
#8. Martial Arts/Cardio and weights - from Robert Wolf
Top
Date: Sat, 22 Aug 1998 00:28:38 -0400 From: Robert Wolf <robartw@FTC-I.NET> Subject: Martial Arts/Cardio and weights Hi there, I think Andrew has a good idea in the fact that us martial arts guys should probably find a digest to debate things on, as I agree that this one is not the most appropriate. Though I would like to make one comment about grappling and sparring in general. I have found, through experience, that most fights(mine atleast)tend to happen in bars, or parking lots of bars.I know, I know, I should start hanging out at better places. Anyway, thereare, often times, many "unfriendly" things on the ground that I don't particurarly care to have sticking in me. This makes going to the groundvery unpleasant. Plus, many of the grappling arts tend to neglect the significance of the fall. Doing controlled take downs in the dojo is a world away from getting slammed on your back in a parking lot. In addition, not many people fight fair. As you are going to administer that beautiful leg sweep, he grabs a hold of your[insert any body part here]and brings you along for the ride. You then get to do a very thorough inspection of the grounds. At that point, the fight is over. There are other reasons that I get off of the ground as quickly as possible(such as his friends normallycome over and kick the crap out of you, he sticks his elbow out and you fall on top of it, etc)and try to stay on my feet. E-mail me if you wantto debate ground or standup fighting with me or know of some digests that wecan debate that topic on. As far as sparring goes, I don't think anyone has ever tried to pass it off as "real fighting", just as close as you can safely come. Bare hands sparring does nothing more to prepare you for a fight than does sparring with gear. All it does is get you hurt. I have some experiences with this, but won't bore you with my stupidity. I just don't suggest trying it. Now for my question about weight training. I do martial arts training, currently 3 times a week, for about 30 minutes each session. During this time, I basically do reaction drills, scenerio sparring, and some speed drills. Nothing too grueling. However, I do plan on becoming a Navy SEAL(SEa Air Land commando unit) and must do running. Quite a bit actually. I have just started and am only doing one mile, three times a week. This number will gradually increase to about 6 miles 4-5 times a week. I also want to incorporate weight training in with time to become stronger overall. I feel that it will be necessary due to the tremendous amount of physical stress one goes through at BUD/S(Basic Underwater Demolition/SEAL). I know that if I want to be able to do a lot of pushups, I should do pushups. However, I am trying to build a better base to start from, thenprogress to doing only calisthenics to build up my muscular endurance. So any suggestions on a weight training routine? One that I can do with that amount of running and not completely blow out. I know that if I eliminated my cardio, it would increase strength and size gains, but that is not an option. Any suggestions will be gladly accepted. Thanks for your time. -Robert Wolf
-------------------- 9 --------------------
#9. Re: Lactic Acid - from James Krieger
Top
Date: Sun, 23 Aug 1998 11:20:56 -0700 From: "James Krieger" <jkrieger@wsu.edu> Subject: Re: Lactic Acid >From: "Kirk, Malcolm" <mskirk@uswest.com> > >P.S. Evidently everyone can stop blaiming lactic acid for muscle >tiredness and the like. Athletes with lactic acid injected into their>muscles were able to perform just as well as when not first >injected.....and that research was evidently done YEARS ago. I have *heard* of the research you are referring to, but have not seen itdirectly. From my understanding, lactate was injected into the muscles of the athletes, NOT lactic acid. There is a difference between the two. Lactic acid is lactate and proton; when lactic acid is produced in muscle tissue, this proton dissociates from the lactate and it is the protons which cause a drop in muscle pH and contribute to fatigue. Lactate can actually be used as a fuel source. James Krieger "Al Di Meola really concentrated on playing fast when he was young, I think his main prerogative was to burn. He even openly admitted it in his earlystages. He said, 'I wanna be the fastest player in the world.' And that'sthe same attitude I have right now, 'cause I'm still young. I have years to color my playing. I know I hear certain things now that I will eventuallycolor it with. But for now, I'll burn." - Chris Impellitteri
-------------------- 10 --------------------
#10. Re: Lat pulldowns and muscular work - from James Krieger
Top
Date: Sun, 23 Aug 1998 11:16:31 -0700 From: "James Krieger" <jkrieger@wsu.edu> Subject: Re: Lat pulldowns and muscular work >From: JawDogs@aol.com > >biceps. Perhaps, the way in which some people perform this exercise (all that >yanking and heaving), causes their biceps and forearms to fail first.If this >exercise is performed correctly (I'm not going to get into that now) you will >not fail because of your biceps. You are always only as strong as your weakest link. Simple biomechanics and anatomy dictates that the biceps and forearms are ALWAYS involved in a lat pulldown, and since these muscles are weaker than the larger muscles of the latissimus dorsi, these muscles will always fail first. If the weakest muscles did not fail first, than people would never need to use accessories such as wrist straps; straps are used because grip often fails before the prime movers do in many exercises. >The point is, Lyle (and I don't yet understand why you and so many others like >you cannot understand this), is achieving anything less than muscularfailure >is, well, LESS muscular work. Aren't you now claiming that more is better here? One set to failure is LESS muscular work than two sets to failure. James Krieger "Al Di Meola really concentrated on playing fast when he was young, I think his main prerogative was to burn. He even openly admitted it in his earlystages. He said, 'I wanna be the fastest player in the world.' And that'sthe same attitude I have right now, 'cause I'm still young. I have years to color my playing. I know I hear certain things now that I will eventuallycolor it with. But for now, I'll burn." - Chris Impellitteri
-------------------- 11 --------------------
#11. Re: Baseball players, George Foreman, and nutrition - from James Krieger
Top
Date: Sat, 22 Aug 1998 17:20:37 -0700 From: "James Krieger" <jkrieger@wsu.edu> Subject: Re: Baseball players, George Foreman, and nutrition >From: JawDogs@aol.com > >And yes. Because the Babe ate hot dogs all day long and drank gallonsof booze >and was still the Babe, and because The Mick hit towering homeruns unmatched >by anyone, even McGuire, while completely hungover You cannot compare the baseball players of yesteryear with today's baseball players. Today's players are far much more advanced in their abilities than the players of old times. If McGuire played in Mickey Mantle's era, he would probably hit 80 home runs a season or more. On the same token, if Babe Ruth played in today's game, he probably wouldn't make it past the single A farm system. Babe Ruth and Mickey Mantle were great players fortheir day, but they are nothing like today's players. Also, it is very possible that Ruth and Mantle could have been even better players if theyhadn't indulged as they did. >, and because George Foreman >is still the athlete he is and eats well, whatever he wants, in fact does >prove that nutrition has very little to do with exceptional athletic >performance. This does not prove that nutrition has very little to do with exceptionalathletic performance. It simply proves that George Foreman, along with Ruth and Mantle, are/were very gifted athletes. There are many different types of athletic sports; depending upon the demands of the sport, nutrition may or may not play a big role in performance. In baseball, it does not playas big of a role because not much movement occurs in baseball. Most of the athletes are standing around during the game, and most of the rapid movements that are needed are fueled by the ATP-PC system. Factors such as glycogen depletion do not come into play and thus diet does not play as much of a role. Diet plays more of a role in maintaining or increasing lean body mass in baseball players, which can ultimately lead to improved performance. Diet can also play a psychological role because it can effect factors such as alertness, which can ultimately effect performance. When you start looking at activities where glycogen depletion can occur, such as endurance events, then diet becomes a major factor in the performance of the athlete. A high carbohydrate diet is necessary in athletes that constantly are depleting muscle glycogen. Excess bodyfat, in which diet plays a major role, can also hinder an athlete depending upon the activity. A track athlete that runs any distance fromthe 100 m to the marathon needs to be as lean as possible, since body fatis simply excess weight that must be carried around which can hinder performance. James Krieger "Al Di Meola really concentrated on playing fast when he was young, I think his main prerogative was to burn. He even openly admitted it in his earlystages. He said, 'I wanna be the fastest player in the world.' And that'sthe same attitude I have right now, 'cause I'm still young. I have years to color my playing. I know I hear certain things now that I will eventuallycolor it with. But for now, I'll burn." - Chris Impellitteri
-------------------- 12 --------------------
#12. Re: Plyometrics and a contradiction - from James Krieger
Top
Date: Sat, 22 Aug 1998 17:00:46 -0700 From: "James Krieger" <jkrieger@wsu.edu> Subject: Re: Plyometrics and a contradiction >From: JawDogs@aol.com > >If, in fact, plyometrics are so great how come the athletes that use them >today never seem to get any better? World records are still set all of the time. Track athletes now run faster, jump higher, etc., than track athletes 10 years ago. Also, athletic performance reaches a point of diminishing returns. As athletes get better and better, the less likely they are to get better, and the smaller the improvements over previous bests. For example, there is a limit to how fast a human can run the 100 m dash. Improvements in the world record will not occur for years on end until humans are running it in 1 second. As the world record for the 100 m reaches the limit of human performance, the frequency of world record performances drops significantly. There will come a time where someone will hold the record in the 100 m dash that will never, ever be broken. >I don't see any records being broken >(though I do see toes and feet and other body parts broken) through the use of >plyometrics. Hmmm. Many of today's records in Olympic sports such as track and field far exceed records of a long time ago. >According to Doug McGuff MD, plyometrics do the exact opposit of whatits >proponants think it does. It does not, in fact, condition the stretchreflex >response, it damages it. This comment exposes a complete contradiction in the philosophy of the SSadvocates. First, they say that practicing plyometrics will decondition the stretch reflex. Therefore, practicing my vertical jump, which is a plyometric activity, will actually decrease my performance in the vertical jump. On the other hand, the SS people say that to improve your performance in a particular skill, like vertical jump, you must practice that skill. So, which is it? Is practicing my vertical jump going to increase my vertical jump or decrease it? >The blinking of the eyes is somewhat involuntary. Any >one with contacts knows that it takes a while to retrain the blink reflex when >putting contacts in. After a while, it becomes very easy and you no longer >blink when putting contacts in. The repeated act of sticking your finger in >your eyes detrains the blink reflex. Stretch-shortening cycles and the blink reflex are completely different phemonena and you cannot compare the two. Analogies do not represent proper science. > The same thing happens when plyometrics >are performed. The constant voluntary abuse of the involuntary reflexsystem >(which is set up to be involuntary for a very good reason) is dulled and >detrained setting an athlete up for more injury. When that reflex is needed it >may not come. This obviously does not happen, because plyometric training has been shown to increase vertical jump performance (1). 1. Gehri, D.J., M.D. Ricard, D.M. Kleiner, and D.T. Kirkendall. A comparison of plyometric training techniques for improving vertical jump ability and enrgy production. J. Strength Cond. Res. 12(2):85-89. 1998. James Krieger "Al Di Meola really concentrated on playing fast when he was young, I think his main prerogative was to burn. He even openly admitted it in his earlystages. He said, 'I wanna be the fastest player in the world.' And that'sthe same attitude I have right now, 'cause I'm still young. I have years to color my playing. I know I hear certain things now that I will eventuallycolor it with. But for now, I'll burn." - Chris Impellitteri [Nothing against James at all, but this is absolutely the END of this thread. If people want to cover these issues, let's start fresh. Rob O]