I work as a trainer in a MMA gym, my part is the boxing and conditional part, for the grappling and kicking stuff we have other trainers. For the boxing guy in the beginning, when my guys gas out, that is mostly from low VOmax. They can't get enough oxygen in their blood, and i don't have a prowler here in the gym, so i fix this with a round of tabata, i let them snatch kettlebells, 16 and 24 kilos, depending on their weight class. Heavy weight lifting does provide a fair bit of vOmax, but probably not enough for a round of boxing. But since i have read the blue book and the grey book and follow Mr. Rippetoe, i am convinced that strength training is the most important aspect in this, so i let my guys only do ONE round of tabata training, that is enough, since this are competing energy systems, and you can do only so much before you get to a point of diminishing returns. In the beginning i fucked that up and worked the fighters up to two or three rounds of kettlebell snatches, but that was to much, since boxing and kicking and wrestling is on their to do list as well, and they were real fatigued then and their fighting game went downhill. So i did return to one round tabata. I hope that helps.
On Patrick's question what body fat percentage range does it become no longer possible for the person to rely on body fat storage along with protein intake to still function properly for a strength program?
Interesting question about who’s stronger, the tall guy or the short guy moving the same weight but over a different distance. Rip said something about it being easy math...got me thinking, strength aside, you could argue the taller lifter has done more ‘work’ couldn’t you? Work = force x distance. The taller lifter would be accelerating a mass over a greater distance. Just food for thought.
Yeah, it takes more force to move a weight a longer distance. In order to discuss it, you need to first define "strength". Rip's definition is fine, but applied to S/B/D it's just as arbitrary as the Wilkes, or any other definition. If you hooked them up to some apparatus like a scale or dynamometer, and defined strength as who can produce the most tension in the apparatus, you might get a different winner for the competition (but nobody wants to see that).
"Yeah, it takes more force to move a weight a longer distance." No it Didn't you guy pay attention?? It doesn't take more force to move a weight over a longer distance, nor could you just redefine what strength or force are just like that, so "Rips definition is fine" is not the right approach, Rip's definition is THE definition of it, period... it is the force applied against an EXTERNAL resistance, the distance does not matter... and the question was not about "work" but about Strength, as far as strength, the weight lifted on the bar is the force production which equals strength, it take the same STRENGTH to move 400 pounds one inch, than to move it one yard or ten... the FORCE necessary is the same no matter the distance!! In other words (yet), you don't get stronger by moving the same weight longer distances!! If that were the case then you could move a ten pound weight for a mile and end up being able to lift one hundred pounds... it just doesn't work like that. If you need to move a table that weighs 100 pounds it doesn't matter how tall or short the guy is, what matters is that the guy can apply a force of 100 pounds regardless of how tall he is or how fat he is or any other factor. If you can apply less than 100 the thing won't move, and if you can apply MORE than 100 fine too but you only need 100 to move the thing...
28:38 "...are you not concerned about spinal integrity?... I'm always concerned about spinal integrity... the human spine is not as delicate as everyone seems to think it is..." I love this guy!!... such hidden innuendo or soft sarcasm cannot be found anywhere else!! It works great because he is of course RIGHT about this. The human spine is not a delicate thing to be overprotected more than any other part of the body; though people might get that impression because a belt is one of the few things people use to lift heavy.
Rip: “The guy who moves the most weight is stronger, regardless of ROM” Also Rip: complains about big arches in the bench, because lifting more weight along a shorter ROM doesn’t mean you’re stronger. The reality is that Rip’s definition of strength is partially arbitrary, because it's based on arbitrary test movements determined by varying individual anthropometry and technique, and not on some objective absolute unvarying measure of work. Not that there's anything wrong with that. The guy’s question was valid though.
Seems you missed the point entirely. Two people deadlifts at full ROM but ones taller, doesn't mean stronger because 2 fully completed ROMs has one that's 2-3 inches longer. Someone benching more weight, with a purposefully shortened ROM from the extreme arches (not a full rep) isn't your real rep number aka strength
People who hate on Starting Strength linear programming don't make any sense...its the easiest, most parsimonious way to become strong as possible while learning the fundamentals of Strength training. They always have these arbitrary statements that have no place in the argument like "there's not enough volume!"
the single arm lady could use some kind of belt to chain system that wraps around the back of her upper back/neck and connects at the bar in place of her arms, she can use the good arm to stabilize it and she can stand up. it should work the same muscles.
33:41 "...now, you don't get to a four-plate press within two or three years, unless you weigh 450 pounds..." So many people at my gym insist on avoiding the time limit on that, they see me squatting 455 pounds for reps and they too want me to tell them how they can do it NOW!! The five pounds at a time explanation kills their enthusiasm; and I you see their faces die when they consider the time they must spend TRAINING CONSISTENTLY to achieve that, maybe not three years but not a month or two either!!
To elaborate on Patrick's discussion even further (I was in chat when he called) if you cut carbs with everything else it doesn't matter how obese you are, your metabolism goes down eventually in accordance with your diet in order to obtain an equilibrium. This could take months but eventually it happens, which is why ONLY cutting calories doesn't work for most trying to permanently lose weight. That may not be the case for those of us who strength train because we constantly trigger responses from the body, but it is in the general population. But if you cut out all carbs and force your body to eat all the fat that's already on it, there is actually a RISE in metabolism because the body knows there is plenty of food in that state. You can't seriously strength train in that state (I know this full well myself), just demonstrating further what Rip said about him being surrounded by food. That's literally what's going on. And the guy who fasted for a year was Angus Barbieri and literally lived only on his fat (and a vitamin supplement) and water for over a year. He lost 275 lbs in 382 days which was almost 1 lb per day. So according to the numbers, his skyrocketed metabolism was burning around 3,000 calories per day in a perfectly sustained way while he sat around and did nothing. Anyone interested in fasting their weight off can check out Dr Fung's book on it. It should be obvious that it's by far the most efficient way to lose fat, and if you do it long enough (few days) your body goes into preservation mode where your muscle and bone mass are not affected.
The body adapts to a point. Generally speaking, the problem is always a calories in/calories out issue. People who complain they can't lose weight are just doing it wrong. Carnivore diet is a pretty easy way to lose weight too. But the people who just can't seem to lose weight would probably do a modified carnivore diet where they eat whatever they want and call it the carnivore diet. It's kind of like Rip talking smack about RPE when the people he is complaining about aren't actually using RPE. Fat people who just can't seem to lose weight are tedious to talk to. They're like people in restaurants talking about how tight their finances are and they can't get ahead.
@@james3876 Actually, it is well documented that cals in/out isn't so simple, because the metabolism does indeed slow down unless you cut carbs completely out. Just one example was participants of the Biggest Loser. Those who lost weight on the show never kept it off because they couldn't. They were followed and their diets were well documented years afterwards and they couldn't maintain the weight loss even though they maintained the calories. When they'd lower them even lower they'd lose some more then stop losing again. The law of diminishing returns works for loss as well as gains. Edit: And yes, RPE is complete and utter BS.
Former unicorn (fat fuck) checking in. I weighed in at 350lbs with 45-50% bodyfat when I started my NLP. I was able to make steady gains for 6 months on a slight caloric deficit before my deficit started to interfere with my gains.
old video but I think a good argument for Patrick's height question would've been "who's faster, an obese guy who loses a race against a skinny guy? the race was easier for the skinny guy so isn't the obese guy faster?"
Hi rip if you could only do one exercise for the rest of your life what would it be ?? Also due to gym closures what can we all do to maintain our strength ..
18:00 Conditioning is provided for by the practice of the sport, BUT some people think that more and more practice gives them more TALENT and that is also not the case. Mostly at higher levels the talent is already there, THAT IS WHY you were chosen ("drafted") and are paid to show off your skills in the specific sport; that is also why some stupid coaches look great if they got a lot of DRAFTED talent.... Talent also is seldom transferable AT THAT HIGHER level, to other sports. Meaning that IN HIGH SCHOOL it is common that the star in one sport is the star for any sport he or she practices. So for a 100 meter runner, doing a marathon is counterproductive, it seems from what I hear here...(??) It seems to be the case anyhow. Weight lifting for STRENGTH is the only thing you can improve and keep improving AT THAT LEVEL, that helps you also with your sport, for which you already have the talent.
I liked the conditioning question having trained my son for football in the off season when you can't play football one of the things that we do is prowler pushes. Football being an alactic sport we generally use 3 to 5 seconds bursts against varying weights on the prowler followed by a short Sprint and about a 25 to 30 second rest. We do rounds of anywhere from 6 to 12 repetitions trying to mimic the amount of plays on a drive and then will rest for3 to 5 minutes and do that again. That way you can get the alactic training That you get in football when you can't play football.
Maybe the trucker could get an anytime fitness membership? Every one I've been in has had racks and bars. Not sure how their ability to stop where they want goes while trucking.
TRT is often not the answer and has some significant downsides. In my early 30's i started doing SS and have trained as consistently as possible while having Hashimotos diagnosis, a very high stress job and young children. Before starting TRT my deadlift was 460 x 3, squat 405 x 3 x 4, press 170 3 x 4, bench 240 4 x 3. Now I'm in my mid 30s. Turns out my free test was at 199. If i can get strong-ish with my many handicaps so can you. The best benefits I've gotten from TRT are better sleep and mental acuity. I didn't suddenly get much stronger from 180mg of test cyp per week.
TRT will unquestionably make it easier to maintain and build muscle mass, relative to your base line. Whether someone takes full advantage of it depends on programming and nutrition. If life and work are very stressful, a mild anti depressant to treat general anxiety disorder, would be very effective at lowering the stress level and improving sleep quality.
@Chop Wood Well, it was worth it for me at that age. I did as much as i could naturally before i tried TRT. If you plan on having more children, hold off until you are done- TRT reduces many men's sperm count to zero.
Hi Mark, I am 48 years old male, 5’10”, 200lbs (20%BF), drug free, my current and best numbers for 5 reps are squat 225lbs, bench 165lbs, dead 270lbs, press 110lbs. What numbers do you think are realistic for me to achieve? Thank you, Tom.
I mean some of us bottom 3%ers come here to listen to your magnificent voice every Friday and you have a book for all your followers. I think Starting Strength could make the case for some favorable tax status treatment as a religious organization. "Son, give me some 3x5's and some hip drahve and all your gains will be provided."
1:20:00 Sure, that last guy was fun to laugh at. BUT Rip got it wrong as far as physics is concerned Work = Force times Distance = Energy Rip just wants to hear himself repeating that when Eddie Hall deadlifts 500kg off of the floor that he is stronger than when some skinny kid deadlifts four times his body weight. I've got no argument with how he defines strength. Nevertheless, Force times Distance=Work and that's just physics.
I'm a former fat bastard that started training while morbidly obese. I was able to build strength and muscle in a caloric deficit, which is the only real upside to being that fat. I'm getting closer to a healthy BMI, just wondering when I'm going to have to jump my calories up. Am 6'4, so figure probably by 250 I need to increase to 3500/day
First time Nick was allowed to talk that much without interruption. But Rusty wasn’t that lucky, and Bre was worrying being fired and couldn’t say a word.