You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!
The banners on the left side and below do not show for registered users!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.
Sports, Sports Entertainment and FitnessTHIS SPACE OPEN FOR ADVERTISEMENT. YOU SHOULD BE ADVERTISING HERE!
Athletics, Hockey, Soccer, basketball, organize games/events, aerobics, nutritional supplements. Also the home for sports and sports entertainment threads.
the fact is you will be able to squat heavier with a wider stance, rather than narrow unlike what you initially stated.
hip flexion and plantar flexion is all dependent on each individual's biomechanics.
also, do you normally talk to people with terms like "plantar/dorsi flexion, pronation, dorsal, etc". no one will know what you mean.
You were rambling on about biomechanics, hip flexion, etc so I gave a response in the same manner. If you're gonna talk about biomechanics, might as well use the terms. Seeing as my comment was kinda directed at you, hence the quote, I used those terms because if you are what you say you are, Bhkin then you should have an idea of what those terms are.
And, like you said, since hip flexion and plantar flexion is dependent on the individual's biomechanics, it makes sense that he can squat more with a narrow stance, then a wide stance because he is quad dominant.
Referring to your previous post about wide stance activating more glutes and hamstrings, of which he is lacking at the moment, he will be able to squat more with the narrow stance.
Yes, if he starts developing his posterior, he could probably squat more with wide stance, but that's a different direction from where I was getting at.
There are no principles, there are only events. There is no good and bad, there are only circumstances. The superior espouses events and circumstances in order to guide them.
You were rambling on about biomechanics, hip flexion, etc so I gave a response in the same manner. If you're gonna talk about biomechanics, might as well use the terms. Seeing as my comment was kinda directed at you, hence the quote, I used those terms because if you are what you say you are, Bhkin then you should have an idea of what those terms are.
And, like you said, since hip flexion and plantar flexion is dependent on the individual's biomechanics, it makes sense that he can squat more with a narrow stance, then a wide stance because he is quad dominant.
Referring to your previous post about wide stance activating more glutes and hamstrings, of which he is lacking at the moment, he will be able to squat more with the narrow stance.
Yes, if he starts developing his posterior, he could probably squat more with wide stance, but that's a different direction from where I was getting at.
Capiche?
I do understand those terms, I just find it quite annoying. But hey, that's just me, and my problem I guess. You can challenge my educational background all you want, but no one is impressed when you use terms such as quadratus lumborum, and tensor fasciae latae's.
I still don't agree that a narrow stance activates more quads than a regular stance, or even wide stance. It may be harder to in general to perform the movement compared to a regular stance squat, but I believe that has more to do with the average person doing more regular stance/wide stance squats as opposed to narrow.
Is it fact/scientifically proven that narrow squats target the quads more, or is this just from YOUR experience with YOUR body.
I do understand those terms, I just find it quite annoying. But hey, that's just me, and my problem I guess. You can challenge my educational background all you want, but no one is impressed when you use terms such as quadratus lumborum, and tensor fasciae latae's.
I still don't agree that a narrow stance activates more quads than a regular stance, or even wide stance. It may be harder to in general to perform the movement compared to a regular stance squat, but I believe that has more to do with the average person doing more regular stance/wide stance squats as opposed to narrow.
Is it fact/scientifically proven that narrow squats target the quads more, or is this just from YOUR experience with YOUR body.
Does undergraduate in HKIN. Doesn't like to use HKIN terms. Must've been a tough 4 years for you eh?
You might think you're just using normal vocab, but you're really not. Hip flexion, biomechanics, glute, hamstring activation are all hkin terms. I could totally just say, squeeze my ass and bend at my hip and some average joe would know what I mean.
First off, I never said narrow stance activates more quads. I said, it's more quad dominant meaning there is less usage of hamstrings and glutes. If you were to use ratios and compare quad-hamstring/glute numbers, the ratio would be bigger for narrow stance than wide stance.
They may or may not activate quads in the same magnitude, but one thing for sure, is that you will likely activate more glutes and hamstrings with a wide stance.
There are no principles, there are only events. There is no good and bad, there are only circumstances. The superior espouses events and circumstances in order to guide them.
When you are enthusiastic about bodybuilding, or any sport or hobby for that matter, you want to know everything you can about it. You want to know what's the best exercise, what rep range will give you an edge, how to best structure your split so that you eek out every gain that you can. This thirst for knowledge is a healthy one - and is a sign that you are thinking, that you care.
But it can also hold you back. With the wealth of information available, especially in the internet age, it's all too easy to get caught up in the minutia, to start wondering if this or that exercise will pack on the size better, whether XX supplement will be the difference between success and failure. The next thing you know, you're spending too much on supplements, switching up your routine every other week to use that new magic routine you read about, or getting discouraged over results that don't seem up to par with the promises of the muscle mags.
The 80/20 Rule
Dr. Joseph Juran, working on quality and management principles in the 1930's and 1940's observed a universal principle that he called the "vital few and trivial many", in which 20 percent of something is responsible for 80 percent of the results. This became known as the Pareto Principle, or the 80/20 rule. This rule means that in anything 20% is vital and 80% is trivial. For example, Juran observed that 20% of the people owned 80% of the wealth. Or that 20% of defects caused 80% of the problems. You can apply this rule to almost anything.
The value of the 80/20 rule is that it reminds you to focus on the 20% that matters. You should identify and focus on these things. So in bodybuilding, what are they? I would say that the 20% that matters includes:
Researching & following a good, fundamental, bodybuilding program. (Not a perfect one, it doesn't exist).
Putting in hard work in the gym, consistently, over a long period of time.
Following the rule of progression, and ensure that over time you are lifting more weight, more reps, or more sets.
Having good nutrition. Eating enough good stuff, and not too much bad stuff over the course of a day.
Getting adequate recovery.
Adjusting your plan periodically, based on your results and your experiences.
Which basically means: Train. Eat. Rest. Repeat. Week in and week out. Focusing on the basics will give you 80% of your results.
So if that's the important 20%, what's the 80% that's trivial? Well in my opinion it's details like these:
Should I do 3 sets of 8 reps or 5 sets of 10 reps?
What's better, 1.25g protein per pound or 1.37g/lb, or 1.5 g/lb.?
I'm doing BB curls, should I be doing DB curls or EZ bar curls instead?
What's the best angle for incline barbell presses?
If I don't get 30g of protein within half an hour after training, is my session wasted?
How much should I be lifting for my height / weight?
Are DB flyes better than using the Pec Dec?
Etc. Etc. Etc. Honestly, that stuff doesn't make a difference. Or rather, if it does it makes a relatively small difference (20%); or only makes a difference for a relatively small few who are at the limits of their physical development. For most of us average Joes, it just doesn't matter! Sure, if you have a wrist issue, EZ curls may bump into that 20% of things that matter, but in general it doesn't make that much of a difference.
The muscle mags would like to convince you different, since they want you to continuously tune in to find out if you're doing everything right. If you're "in the know" about the latest "hollywood workout". Whether you're missing a miracle supplement that just got invented in a secret Swiss lab.
That way lies madness, my friends.
Objective Evidence
So how do we know this is true? Well, first of all look at the wide variety of workout programs, splits, exercise selection, training frequency, and equipment recommendations from various top bodybuilders over the years. Do they all agree? No. Do they recommend all the same things? Don't think so. Do they all train the same way? Nope. But it's not the 20% they disagree on, it's the 80%. Which stands to reason, since the 80% only makes a small difference, and most of that is individual anyway. What's right for one person is not always right for another.
But they all agree on the value of the big, compound movements. They all preach eating enough, eating right, getting enough protein, and having intensity in the gym. They all agree that results take hard work and consistency and a balanced workout routine. They agree on the 20%.
As further evidence that sometimes the small things don't matter: how often have you seen some dipstick in the gym using terrible form doing nothing but crappy curls and yet having jacked arms? It happens. Sure, he might get injured periodically. Sure, he might have no calves. But when it comes to those arms, he's doing at least 20% of things right.
Final Thoughts (Cliffs)
So what do you take away from all that? It's simple: do your homework and spend your time and effort on the 20% of the details that matter - that's Thinking. Don't waste your time sweating the 80% of the trivial details that make little or no difference - that's over-analyzing.
I don't pretend to have all the answers, and you should figure out what those "20%" things are for yourself by reading and thinking. But once you do, focus on that and don't let the "80%" of minutia derail you from what really matters.
There are no principles, there are only events. There is no good and bad, there are only circumstances. The superior espouses events and circumstances in order to guide them.
everything aside, tried to find some time to get a quick snap of my progress
Losing the abs (at about 11-12% bf), and weight's gone up a bit in the process as well..but so has the lean muscle mass Will start shredding it out again the coming year
There are no principles, there are only events. There is no good and bad, there are only circumstances. The superior espouses events and circumstances in order to guide them.
Last edited by instantneedles; 10-28-2012 at 11:55 PM.
Reason: added another pic
Yep. I blacked out my face if that counts
no point in photoshoping it as its just a progress pic. my dp is photoshopped with contrast tho. will post unphotoshopped version of back pic soon
There are no principles, there are only events. There is no good and bad, there are only circumstances. The superior espouses events and circumstances in order to guide them.
Last edited by instantneedles; 10-29-2012 at 12:04 AM.
everything aside, tried to find some time to get a quick snap of my progress
Losing the abs (at about 11-12% bf), and weight's gone up a bit in the process as well..but so has the lean muscle mass Will start shredding it out again the coming year
Spoiler!
about a year ago, around october as well
Current
About 3 months ago
strong lats and serratus m8
did you have long and lanky arms before you started lifting?
did you have long and lanky arms before you started lifting?
thanks bro, appreciate it
my arms were average length to begin with. Before lifting, i just had an overdeveloped chest and no lats from all those years of pushups, so had sort of a kyphotic posture... so I wouldn't say long arms, but a bit lanky
once i started working out my back, things balanced out
There are no principles, there are only events. There is no good and bad, there are only circumstances. The superior espouses events and circumstances in order to guide them.
Does undergraduate in HKIN. Doesn't like to use HKIN terms. Must've been a tough 4 years for you eh?
You might think you're just using normal vocab, but you're really not. Hip flexion, biomechanics, glute, hamstring activation are all hkin terms. I could totally just say, squeeze my ass and bend at my hip and some average joe would know what I mean.
First off, I never said narrow stance activates more quads. I said, it's more quad dominant meaning there is less usage of hamstrings and glutes. If you were to use ratios and compare quad-hamstring/glute numbers, the ratio would be bigger for narrow stance than wide stance.
They may or may not activate quads in the same magnitude, but one thing for sure, is that you will likely activate more glutes and hamstrings with a wide stance.
You need to read and write properly. You are being challenged because you have issues clearly explaining yourself. That is the main reason why I am on your ass.
You can keep challenging my undergrad degree all you want. You are the one IN school right now. Been there, done that. And no, it wasn't a tough 4 years.
I use terms that are used in HKIN, but at least the lay person understands what they are. What do I have to prove to people, when I speak like some geek University professor with a pocket protector, who was never athletic enough to play sport, and could only "teach". If you want to get specific, and cheeky, every word i just typed out in this sentence is "used" in Hkin.
Quote:
Originally Posted by instantneedles
^example of quad dominance in the narrow squat. just sayin'
that's an example from heresay from one person. I asked for actual data.
You need to read and write properly. You are being challenged because you have issues clearly explaining yourself. That is the main reason why I am on your ass.
Likewise.
Quote:
You can keep challenging my undergrad degree all you want. You are the one IN school right now. Been there, done that. And no, it wasn't a tough 4 years.
I'm not challenging your undergrad, I just find it ironic that you are annoyed by more technical terms when you have an hkin degree at the same time. Almost like its foreign matter for you. Clearly, you've been away from school too long.
Quote:
I use terms that are used in HKIN, but at least the lay person understands what they are. What do I have to prove to people, when I speak like some geek University professor with a pocket protector, who was never athletic enough to play sport, and could only "teach". If you want to get specific, and cheeky, every word i just typed out in this sentence is "used" in Hkin.
Quote:
that's an example from heresay from one person. I asked for actual data.
Serious? Squatting narrow with proper form working the same muscles in the same way as squatting wide with proper form? Don't know if you've ever tried squatting both ways, or if you squat at all, but anyone that does squat will tell you that a narrow stance squat works more quads.
As simple as it gets, different form= different movement & different focus on muscles.
I could search up my a few peer-reviewed articles and some textbook info, but as brought up, that would be the trivial 80% of things that won't matter. Going into tiny numbers with things, as with counting macros, is pointless unless you're competing at an elite level.
There are no principles, there are only events. There is no good and bad, there are only circumstances. The superior espouses events and circumstances in order to guide them.
any of you guys look into what a lot of pro athletes are using for leg recovery ?
full length leg sleeves... this is one of the only ones available for public mass sale from what I found Shop Now
I been seeing NBA players using this religiously for about 2 years now, every NBA team rec room has these, and a lot of players even have them at home they use on off days...I'm definitely looking into buying one because my legs are the first thing that fatigue on my body. I thought it would cost a few grand, but this thing it's priced at a reasonable $1100 roughly
__________________ (oO:::\___/:::Oo) (DPE-wheels) // Satin Cocaine White
any of you guys look into what a lot of pro athletes are using for leg recovery ?
full length leg sleeves... this is one of the only ones available for public mass sale from what I found Shop Now
I been seeing NBA players using this religiously for about 2 years now, every NBA team rec room has these, and a lot of players even have them at home they use on off days...I'm definitely looking into buying one because my legs are the first thing that fatigue on my body. I thought it would cost a few grand, but this thing it's priced at a reasonable $1100 roughly
Still seems pretty steep! Unless you are a competitive athlete. Why not just do the good cold/hot baths!
You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!
The banners on the left side and below do not show for registered users!
Must've been a tough 4 years for you eh?
Will start shredding it out again the coming year
