BodyRecomposition Support Forums  

Go Back   BodyRecomposition Support Forums > General information > Articles on the Main Site
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Unread 06-11-2011, 12:51 AM
popupwindow popupwindow is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 1,906
Default

Good article. Where do you get the questions from? People that have emailed you? Common questions you see pop up on various sites? Off the forum?
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Unread 06-11-2011, 05:52 AM
Underhanded's Avatar
Underhanded Underhanded is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: MA
Posts: 567
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by popupwindow View Post
Good article. Where do you get the questions from? People that have emailed you? Common questions you see pop up on various sites? Off the forum?
Sometimes Lyle will mention he pulled the question from the forum or from the comments of a previous article. Otherwise, there is this too:

http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/support
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Unread 06-11-2011, 09:42 PM
ja_trembl ja_trembl is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 63
Default

I'm definitely never getting near 3/4/500 and don't care too, but is 1.5x 2x and 2.5x bodyweight a good ratio for balance in developing strength that you can scale down? For example, would halving everything to .75x bench, bodyweight squat, 1.25x DL be the same idea in terms of balance or does that miss something?
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Unread 06-11-2011, 10:51 PM
PerformanceAthlete PerformanceAthlete is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 443
Default

depth on the squat has to be an objective based thing. a lot of "bro's" THINK they squat 3 plates, but their 1/4 squats are just embarrassing.

i think form on all 3 lifts can be subjective, but its about personal pride then
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Unread 06-11-2011, 11:19 PM
popupwindow popupwindow is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 1,906
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ja_trembl View Post
I'm definitely never getting near 3/4/500 and don't care too, but is 1.5x 2x and 2.5x bodyweight a good ratio for balance in developing strength that you can scale down? For example, would halving everything to .75x bench, bodyweight squat, 1.25x DL be the same idea in terms of balance or does that miss something?
You can scale it down, but it's not set in stone, someone may have long arms and thus deadlift 500lbs easily but struggle to bench press 250lbs. Or someone with short arms may bench 300lbs+ long before they pull 500. Balanced strength is more to do with agonists and antagonists, like having lots of horizontal pulling strength to balance your bench pressing, or lots of vertical pulling strength to balance your overhead presssing, but that's going to come from smart program design (usually a 3:2 or 2:1 ration of pulling to pushing).

Quote:
Originally Posted by PerformanceAthlete View Post
depth on the squat has to be an objective based thing. a lot of "bro's" THINK they squat 3 plates, but their 1/4 squats are just embarrassing.

i think form on all 3 lifts can be subjective, but its about personal pride then
I think most serious lifters would agree that depth is fairly objective, outside of geared PL feds. Squat so the hip crease is below the knee, touch your chest on the bench without bridging your hips or bouncing it off your sternum, or a pause at the bottom if you're using strict raw PL rules, and deadlift without hitching.
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Unread 06-12-2011, 07:50 AM
lylemcd's Avatar
lylemcd lylemcd is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 22,641
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by PerformanceAthlete View Post
depth on the squat has to be an objective based thing. a lot of "bro's" THINK they squat 3 plates, but their 1/4 squats are just embarrassing.

i think form on all 3 lifts can be subjective, but its about personal pride then
That's why I explicitly said that these numbers assume certain things about the form being used. And 1/4 squat and heave ho bounce off the chest bench press aren't them.

Note that bros who use poor form never have big deads since it's not a lift you can really cheat.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Unread 06-12-2011, 07:51 AM
lylemcd's Avatar
lylemcd lylemcd is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 22,641
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by popupwindow View Post
I think most serious lifters would agree that depth is fairly objective, outside of geared PL feds. Squat so the hip crease is below the knee, touch your chest on the bench without bridging your hips or bouncing it off your sternum, or a pause at the bottom if you're using strict raw PL rules, and deadlift without hitching.
Parallel squat used to be a very strictly defined thing. Now it's not because of PL'ing and 87 different federations defining legal squat differently.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Unread 06-12-2011, 05:53 PM
Nikola Nikola is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 193
Default

The article was a nice read but having a bigger dead lift than squat does make some sense to me at least. Not because some one has correctly worked out and attempted their max but for other reasons.

Some of my friends including me, are literally scared of stacking the squat bar with weight because when we are hitting the 5-9 range, at times it gets dangerous..going below parallel but sometimes falling back or the bar slipping are things that get us scared.

with the dead lift, the only thing you worry about is grip and maxing out isn't nearly as scary nor are we ever reluctant to max out during dead lifts.

just my 2 cents.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Unread 06-12-2011, 05:55 PM
lylemcd's Avatar
lylemcd lylemcd is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 22,641
Default

If you're falling back or the bar is slipping during squats, then you need to learn how to squat. And 'being a chicken' isn't a good reason
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Unread 07-02-2011, 09:34 AM
dchabby dchabby is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 119
Default

Can these numbers be applied to women as well or is there a different set ?
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:46 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.