Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Rippetoe's New Article - Must Read If You Have Strength Questions

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #91
    I think the relevant question would be whether it would be an easier task for the powerlifter (assuming you mean a powerlifter, not a weightlifter, who also benefit by being stronger) to learn the one-armed chin-up or for the gymnast to learn to deadlift a competitive amount of weight.

    What do you think?
    The Champagne of Beards

    Comment


    • #92
      Originally posted by Gorbag View Post
      I can tell you for sure that also a 150 pound powerlifter sucks in doing one armed chins from a dead position, if he have not trained especially for doing just that. It only confirms that "strength" is spesific and that we compares apples and oranges by comparing the "strength" of a gymnast and the "strength" of a weigthlifter...
      Don't confuse skill and technique with strength. Gymnastics takes a lot of practice. A one arm chin involves a lot of technique and practice to learn how to properly balance yourself and control the movement. Strength won't teach you technique in other sports. That's why Rippetoe says to build a strength base with barbells, and then practice for your sport.

      The whole point is that strength is general. Becoming strong won't make you a top football player, but it will make you a Bette one. Becoming stronger won't teach you MMA, but it amplify your training. Strength is your ability to produce force, and it applies to every physical pursuit. Barbells are the best way to attain it, and allow you to fully exhaust your generic potential.

      Comment


      • #93
        Originally posted by quikky View Post
        Don't confuse skill and technique with strength. Gymnastics takes a lot of practice.
        And don't confuse or underestimate the element of skill and technique in barbell compound movements! It's a lot of neurological pathways in play by a skilled lifter, so thinking that this is a "pure strength" movement is wrong since such a movement doesnít exist. Athletes from various sports that have regular testing in barbell movements soon learn all the subtle tricks in the book to get the weight up to passing their tests without necessary creating much more physiological strength adaption to what they are doing.

        Originally posted by quikky View Post
        The whole point is that strength is general.
        Certainly not, one of the first things you will learn when attending sport-school is that "strength" is always specific, except the physiological adaption that happens in the muscle cell. Even movements that are very similar may give a very different outcome whether you have trained for it or not...
        "All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident."

        - Schopenhauer

        Comment


        • #94
          Originally posted by quikky View Post
          Don't confuse skill and technique with strength. Gymnastics takes a lot of practice. A one arm chin involves a lot of technique and practice to learn how to properly balance yourself and control the movement.
          You don't need to balance when you're hanging, you probably meant to control swing. Either way, I hope you didn't mean to say that a one arm chin up isn't a strength move.
          I used to seriously post here, now I prefer to troll.

          Comment


          • #95
            Originally posted by Gorbag View Post
            And don't confuse or underestimate the element of skill and technique in barbell compound movements! It's a lot of neurological pathways in play by a skilled lifter, so thinking that this is a "pure strength" movement is wrong since such a movement doesnít exist. Athletes from various sports that have regular testing in barbell movements soon learn all the subtle tricks in the book to get the weight up to passing their tests without necessary creating much more physiological strength adaption to what they are doing.
            Then their tests have standards that are too low. Of course a totally detrained lifter will progress rapidly as he learns the movements of the compound lifts. How does that refute the necessity or usefulness of strength?

            Originally posted by Gorbag View Post
            Certainly not, one of the first things you will learn when attending sport-school is that "strength" is always specific, except the physiological adaption that happens in the muscle cell. Even movements that are very similar may give a very different outcome whether you have trained for it or not...
            I'm not sure what you mean by sport-school. We don't have such a thing here in the U.S. to my knowledge. But they're wrong if they say that "strength" is always specific.

            Nobody's arguing whether training the movements of a particular sport is an important part of being good at that sport. But between 2 weightlifters, 2 Jiu Jitsu fighters, 2 Wrestlers, or 2 Football quarterbacks (even 2 golfers) of equal levels of skill in their individual sport, the stronger will prevail.

            Show me someone who squats 500 lbs to depth and I'll show you someone who can leg press an impressive amount of weight, even if he's never trained the leg press. Strength is undeniably general.
            The Champagne of Beards

            Comment


            • #96
              What are we arguing again?
              I used to seriously post here, now I prefer to troll.

              Comment


              • #97
                Originally posted by iniQuity View Post
                What are we arguing again?
                I forget. Probably calories in/calories out. Or how much butter is appropriate to put in a cup of coffee. Or whether I should paint iodine on my junk before or after sitting in an ice bath.
                The Champagne of Beards

                Comment


                • #98
                  A very pointless discussion until the "general strength " guys defines "strength" and put up the corresponding testing movements to measure it, which they still refuses to do...
                  "All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident."

                  - Schopenhauer

                  Comment


                  • #99
                    Originally posted by RichMahogany View Post
                    I forget. Probably calories in/calories out. Or how much butter is appropriate to put in a cup of coffee. Or whether I should paint iodine on my junk before or after sitting in an ice bath.
                    You would likely need to use less iodine for complete coverage if applied after the ice bath.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Gorbag View Post
                      A very pointless discussion until the "general strength " guys defines "strength" and put up the corresponding testing movements to measure it, which they still refuses to do...
                      Have to say, I'm perplexed by your request that we somehow try to prove an adaptation is GENERAL by proposing SPECIFIC tests.
                      The Champagne of Beards

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by RichMahogany View Post
                        Have to say, I'm perplexed by your request that we somehow try to prove an adaptation is GENERAL by proposing SPECIFIC tests.
                        So, you are into metaphysic's then, operating with a abstract concept of "general strength" that never can be tested or measured whatsoever?
                        "All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident."

                        - Schopenhauer

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by RichMahogany View Post
                          Show me someone who squats 500 lbs to depth and I'll show you someone who can leg press an impressive amount of weight, even if he's never trained the leg press.
                          I have personally observed cyclists that never barbell squatted in their life, outpress powerlifters in one legged legpress, what does that tell us?
                          "All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident."

                          - Schopenhauer

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Gorbag View Post
                            I have personally observed cyclists that never barbell squatted in their life, outpress powerlifters in one legged legpress, what does that tell us?
                            That your cyclists train the leg press.
                            The Champagne of Beards

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by RichMahogany View Post
                              That your cyclists train the leg press.
                              Right answer! And also that that they had more leg pressing "strength" than the powerlifters in those tests. I am sure that the powerlifters would have shown better back squat strength and the olympic weigthlifters the best front squat strength though, since strength basically is specific to what you have trained for! And just for the record, you also get a secondary "general" carryover effect from physiological adaptions, but that's not only from barbell movements...
                              "All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident."

                              - Schopenhauer

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Gorbag View Post
                                Right answer! And also that that they had more leg pressing "strength" than the powerlifters in those tests. I am sure that the powerlifters would have shown better back squat strength and the olympic weigthlifters the best front squat strength though, since strength basically is specific to what you have trained for! And just for the record, you also get a secondary "general" carryover effect from physiological adaptions, but that's not only from barbell movements...
                                I'm not sure what point you're proving here.
                                Back to my icy bathtub full of iodine.
                                The Champagne of Beards

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X