Jordan Derksen
Total Posts: 392
|
08-31-21 10:13 AM - Post#912950
Thanks for that Kyle. I've seen your 25% rules before, but I got a different perspective out of it this time. That's really good stuff.
The rule works across all 3 powerlifts if you compare apples to apples (raw and drug tested records). My weight is right between 181 and 198 right now, but if I stripped the fat off 181 would be reasonable. Current raw drug tested lifts in 181 class are Squat: 662, Bench (full meet): 468, Deadlift: 766.
The 50%'s would be 331, 234, and 388. With some decent training those are all doable, sustainable, and much more strength than the average human would need.
At this moment in my barbell detrained state the only one I could do is the deadlift, but I could get close to the others.
The 5k on the other hand... lets just say I'm working on 1 mile for now. And by working I mean going for a half hearted "run" every week or two.
"Just don't be shit" is reminiscent of Jim Wendlers "NOV".
|
Kyle Aaron
Total Posts: 1911
|
09-01-21 06:58 AM - Post#912968
Yes. I thought about the various numbers a lot, and obviously you can argue back and forth which to include... when you've got a lot of numbers then testing is an issue, fatigue and all that. Obviously I like the squat, but... well, depth. Especially if the person is training on their own. And the bench? Well, I'm male, we all like the bench, but... you know, people say, "Once I started squatting, I was so much better at everything, it changed my life." People say, "Once I deadlifted properly, it fixed my back, it changed my life." Nobody says a big bench press changed their life.
Deadlift seemed the best choice, in that it does do good things for people, and the performance isn't fuzzy at all - you either picked the thing up, or you didn't. Yeah okay there might be a sloppy lockout or something, but there's not going to be 200lbs in that, is there. So it's pretty straightforward.
The interesting thing is, this 25% mark - basically nobody does all 3 of deadlift, 5km and broad jump at 25+% on day one if they were previously sedentary. Maybe 1 of them. Past 30yo or so and sedentary, none of them. But if they were active in some way - hey, all 3 is common.
So that 0-25% range really is the realm of the long-term sedentary person.
|
BrianBinVA
Total Posts: 5140
|
09-01-21 09:52 AM - Post#912971
The deadlift and the broad jump are excellent for testing, IMO. Both very simple to do, no real form issues outside of the elite level.
Thankfully, no one interested in this type of thing is on that level so don't need to worry about Andy Bolton's latest a-ha cue with the deadlift for himself...
I will grudgingly admit to the utility of something like a 5k or Cooper test as another measuring stick, but I will graciously decline to take part -- walking all day for me. :-)
|
Kyle Aaron
Total Posts: 1911
|
Did not complete scores nil! But seriously: if there's some test you won't even try... I dunno, but didn't some guy say something about "standards and gaps"? You just discovered your gap.
I score each 0 to +3 based on the quartile. The next thing measured is family history. It's 1 point for each grandparent who lived past 80yo, and another point if they lived past 90. I mean, if all 4 grandparents lived past 90 you are probably going to be alright whatever you do, and if all 4 died before 80 you might want to have regular checkups.
Lastly - and this is in draft form - I look at your social circles. Married... happily? 1 point. Friends - some person you'd give a kidney to, and vice versa? 1 point. Actively involved in the community in some way, like church or foodbank or tutoring local kids? 1 point.
I thought of this last in talking with a doctor friend. On my gym wall I've got a 5 rules for health, and the first is "have friends". There are a lot of studies on this. After our conversations, he now asks in his consults, "Is there someone you'd go to if you were in trouble?" because he noticed those without friends didn't live as long or well.
And we know married people tend to live longer. The women keep the men alive, that's for sure - they make us go to the doctor!
As well, I was talking too with my son about our rabbi, who throughout the lockdowns here in Victoria has still been running around dropping off Pesach care packages and food packages to poor families and ringing people up to see how they are and all that. And he has five children - and another on the way. I said, "I don't think the rabbi ever suffers from depression."
So I added in the social stuff.
- Deadlift quartile 0 to +3
- 5km run quartile 0 to +3
- Jump quartile 0 to +3
- Family history 0 to +8
- Social circles 0 to +3
- Score out of 20, if that's important to you.
So if someone has got all zeroes... okay, we're worried about you.
This is my pseudo-scientific assessment of overall health.
I used to score diet and lifestyle stuff like drinking and smoking, but essentially no-one who has good habits struggles with the 3 tests, and none who have bad habits do well in the 3. Diet and lifestyle and the cause, and the scores are the effect.
Edited by Kyle Aaron on 09-02-21 02:52 AM. Reason for edit: No reason given.
|
BrianBinVA
Total Posts: 5140
|
Did not complete scores nil! But seriously: if there's some test you won't even try... I dunno, but didn't some guy say something about "standards and gaps"? You just discovered your gap.
Meh -- I just find running to be unnecessary and injurious (to me). I know plenty (esp you and Andrew, LOL) disagree, and that's fine. Some people (e.g., my wife) are good runners, and some (me) are not. The ones who are not, running can lead to some bad outcomes. I'm not gonna mess up my ankles or knees to take a test.
I can and do walk all day (average steps for this year are 17,200 per day, 16,700 average for the last two years), and I can carry stuff for distance, or swim a mile without stopping (just done about two weeks ago, in the ocean). Two of my grandparents lived to mid-90s, and two died before 80, so I guess I'm in the middle, genetically. Hopefully inherited more from the Sardinian side!
|
Mr. Kent
Total Posts: 583
|
Ironic how this conversation seems to have 'pivoted' into a more comprehensive discussion on standards...I love it.
Kyle, I find your standards and developing rubric excellent! Thank you for sharing. Will you be releasing the finished version here any time soon? And when I say finished version I mean the complete 'scoring guide'. For example, what are the 5k times for each quadrant, etc.
Edited by Mr. Kent on 09-02-21 09:34 AM. Reason for edit: No reason given.
|
Kyle Aaron
Total Posts: 1911
|
Meh -- I just find running to be unnecessary and injurious (to me).
Back when I wasn't closed every second day with my state in semi-permanent lockdown, essentially all the males under 50 who came to me said one of two things: either "I got up to 90-110kg squat and then backed off to work on form... that was two years ago," or "I hurt my back deadlifting." Most told me it was something inherent in the movement or their body which made heavier or less injurious lifts possible.
I'm getting a similar sensation here.
Some people (e.g., my wife) are good runners, and some (me) are not. The ones who are not, running can lead to some bad outcomes.
Like I said, a score of +0 indicates either health problems now or in the future. And you report health problems of joint issues, so there you go.
But if you don't want to run, don't run - your body, your choice. I'd be very surprised if you can't - but if you don't want to, don't. But at least be bloody good at lifting instead.
Likewise, if someone doesn't want to lift - they'd best be bloody good at running.
Will you be releasing the finished version here any time soon? And when I say finished version I mean the complete 'scoring guide'. For example, what are the 5k times for each quadrant, etc.
There's no mystery, mate. It's just the WR numbers, with the caveat that it's middleweight women and men in the open age group. If you're bigger than middleweight you'll lift more, probably, but run and jump less. Smaller, other way around. So I just compare to the middleweight.
And I do open age rather than by class because as you get older you come into the issue of a lack of participation - there are not many 80yo women, for example, who deadlift, nor who cover 5km at any speed, let alone who do both. And if we asked them to jump their doctor would appear from behind a bush to tell them not to.
What standard should we choose for them? I previously noted that athletic performance doesn't drop off as much as we might expect with age. You've got to get to a 70yo woman and 85yo man before you get 50% the performance of the open class for marathons and powerlifting, and 85yo woman and 95yo man before you get 50% of the best performance for 100m sprint.
But here are the open numbers, anyway.
Women
DL WR for 63kg class = 221kg; 0-55 scores +0, 56-111 scores +1, 112-166 scores +2, 167+ scores +3
5km WR 14'07"; 56'20" up, 28'10" to 56'19", 18'46" to 28'09", under 18'45"
Standing broad jump WR = 3m; 0-0.75, 0.80-1.5, 1.55-2.25, 2.30+
Men
DL WR for 83kg class = 331kg; 0-83, 84-166, 167-248, 249+
5km WR 12'35"; 50'20" up, 25'10" to 50'19", 16'46" to 25'09", under 16'46"
Standing broad jump WR = 4m; 0-1, 1.05-2, 2.05-3, 3.05+
However in practice I don't think a few kg or seconds here or there are relevant for health (though very relevant for performance), so I just round it to,
Deadlift = multiple of 60 (women) or 80 (men), rounding down
5km = 54'+, 27-54', 18-27', under 18'
Jump = each multiple of 0.75 (women) or 1 (men), rounding down
I've trained a few people who scored +6 between these three qualities, no higher. Of those I've trained who started at +0, those under 50 can do +3 in their first 3-6 months, though the over-50s take 12-24 months instead. Most stay there, though some push one of the qualities and get a total of +4. Diminishing returns, and all that.
|
BrianBinVA
Total Posts: 5140
|
I don't want to hijack this thread further, but just to be clear, I don't have joint issues, and that's the point. Running *can* cause those issues for me, so that plus the fact that I just hate running makes it an EV- activity for me. Walking plenty is plenty, especially as we get older.
And you're correct, it's definitely not that I "can't" run, it just makes me miserable every time I start, and I've started probably two dozen times in the past decade. I mean, look at me, now that it's soon to be fall, I'm thinking of starting again now! But all that said, hill sprints are about the only type of running-related activity I enjoy (again, I know Andrew thinks these are rubbish and guessing you do too), so that's what I know I will actually do, which always seems the most important thing to me in anything fitness-related.
Edited by BrianBinVA on 09-02-21 12:21 PM. Reason for edit: No reason given.
|
Justin Jordan
Total Posts: 854
|
09-02-21 12:54 PM - Post#913017
I suspect, but cannot prove, that if you can walk (actually walk, not jog or run) 3 miles in 45 minutes you're probably as cardio vascularly fit as you'd ever need to be.
|
BrianBinVA
Total Posts: 5140
|
I suspect, but cannot prove, that if you can walk (actually walk, not jog or run) 3 miles in 45 minutes you're probably as cardio vascularly fit as you'd ever need to be.
I suspect the same. None of my Sardinian relatives in their 90s has ever been for a jog just to log some miles, but they walk everywhere.
To me, the two cardio numbers that matter for health (not performance) are BP and resting heart rate. Something like Vo2 max that would unquestionably be improved for a non-runner by adding running is more of a performance measure to me, and not a health one. My BP at last check in January was well within normal range and my RHR was 49 BPM, and I've lost approximately 20 pounds since then, so I assume the BP number, at least, is probably a bit "better" now. Not sure how much those numbers could be improved *for me* by running.
But having said everything I've said in this thread, I still come back to people need to experiment and find what works for them and mostly let go of the idea of trying to hit arbitrary numbers, no matter what those numbers are. I concentrate on things that work for me, but those same things might not work or might not work the same for someone else. Taking it a step further, the things that "work" for me for where I am in life now at 44 are not the same things that "worked" for me when I was 34, or 27.
I know running is great for a lot of people, whether just mentally because they enjoy it, or because it helps them in some way with their health (controlling weight, BP, etc), and I'm not slagging off running, it's just not something that works for me at this time.
Edited by BrianBinVA on 09-02-21 01:24 PM. Reason for edit: No reason given.
|
Jordan D
Total Posts: 771
|
I'm not slagging off running, it's just not something that works for me at this time.
I slag off running all the time. You should try it. It's fun.
|
Justin Jordan
Total Posts: 854
|
I suspect, but cannot prove, that if you can walk (actually walk, not jog or run) 3 miles in 45 minutes you're probably as cardio vascularly fit as you'd ever need to be.
I suspect the same. None of my Sardinian relatives in their 90s has ever been for a jog just to log some miles, but they walk everywhere.
There've been studies that show walking speed is a decent predictor of longevity.
The problem with a 5K run as a test is that if you don't want to run, you're not getting a good time on it - if you can even manage it at all. You can have a decent, by Kyle's standards, deadlift and broad jump without training for the test.
I don't think that's the case for running even a relatively short distance like the 5K - if you don't have a running background, there's issues. Although 25% of the world record time is....not a run.
|
iPood
Total Posts: 2360
|
I can and do walk all day (average steps for this year are 17,200 per day, 16,700 average for the last two years)
That’s fantastic!
Does this happen on purpose (like going for a swim or lifting KBs) or the walks are just ingrained in your lifestyle?
"I think we often spend too much time focusing on max fitness
and not nearly enough on maintaining our minimums.
It seems we need to think sustainable rather than obtainable.
Meaning whatever we do today, we can do it again tomorrow.
Never taking so much from ourselves that we can't."
Dan Martin |
Edited by iPood on 09-02-21 03:31 PM. Reason for edit: No reason given.
|
BrianBinVA
Total Posts: 5140
|
I can and do walk all day (average steps for this year are 17,200 per day, 16,700 average for the last two years)
That’s fantastic!
Does this happen on purpose (like going for a swim or lifting KBs) or the walks are just ingrained in your lifestyle?
Bit of both, depending on the day. I'm very lucky that my life is pretty walkable, especially by American standards.
Today, for example, it's 4:15pm and I'm at 13,800 steps. The only special "walk just to take a walk" steps in there are about 3,000 from my post-workout, pre-lunch walk. Otherwise, I walked my kids to school this morning, then walked to the grocery store to pick up a few things, then home. Then my mid-day walk, and then walked up to get the kids from school and home after that. Later on, I will walk over to a friend's for some libations around the fire pit since it is finally not 9,000 degrees here. Plus I'll move around a bit making dinner and putting the kids down, etc. I'm guessing I'll end up around 18,500 today with no special effort.
Other days, like if I find myself at only 12,000 at 10pm for some reason, I'll just pace around my house for a half hour. :-D
|
RupertC
Total Posts: 1479
|
09-02-21 05:32 PM - Post#913028
How about being able to hike for four to five hours over moderately hilly terrain without complaining? If you can do that, you're probably fine, even if you've never pushed through the indignity of being an adult beginner who hasn't run since school...
| Check out my critical-thinking blog at sharpenyouraxe.substack.com |
|
Kyle Aaron
Total Posts: 1911
|
09-03-21 02:41 AM - Post#913040
I suspect, but cannot prove, that if you can walk (actually walk, not jog or run) 3 miles in 45 minutes you're probably as cardio vascularly fit as you'd ever need to be.
I think you're correct. That's basically a "1" score, the equivalent of deadlifting your bodyweight or jumping a yard. The 25-50% of WR zone is where health is.
The problem with a 5K run as a test is that if you don't want to run, you're not getting a good time on it - if you can even manage it at all. You can have a decent, by Kyle's standards, deadlift and broad jump without training for the test.
You can if you're active. I've trained a lot of people from sedentary, and as I said, some will get in the lower end of the 25-50% zone on one of the three, but nobody on all three.
If someone walks everywhere at a brisk walk doing your 3 miles in 45' regularly, that person could do a walk/jog of under 30'. Likewise, if the person did a lot of yard work with hand tools, or did some sort of manual labour, when they got in the gym they'd certainly be able to deadlift more than their bodyweight.
Likewise if you had some person do Prince Phillip's daily walk and bodyweight exercises we were talking about a while back, that person would easily hit the 25-50%, at least until 60yo or so when their good or bad genetics have a chance to show up.
This reminds me a bit of a discussion here a year or two back where there was a lifter in his 70s saying, "hey, just teach yourself the snatch." People did this up to about 1980 or so - now, they don't. DJ had some piece about this, I think it was the Geezer Advantage article, about how if you're a certain age, in school you vaulted pommel horses and climbed ropes and did situps with medicine balls and kicked balls and threw balls and went for a run and - but if you're under that age, you sat at a computer.
If you've been active for your lifetime you sometimes don't realise what an advantage that is in dealing with physical challenges, compared to the person who's been sedentary.
There was a study a while back where they asked the doctors in a state to look at pictures of kids and put them in the BMI categories of "overweight", "obese" and so on, just visually. The doctors assessed the overweight kids as normal, and the obese ones as merely overweight. It's just that they were so used to seeing big kids their idea of "normal" had changed.
It can happen the other way. If you've been active for a lifetime, chances are a lot of your family and friends are, too. And then you don't realise that deadlifting bodyweight would be a significant challenge for most people they'd actually have to train for, and - walking 3 miles in 45 minutes? Why would you walk 3 miles, that's what the car is for!
Walking 3 miles in under an hour, deadlifting your bodyweight and jumping a yard isn't much to an active person, but it's a huge deal to a sedentary person.
In the modern West, it's actually an achievement to be physically active for decades on end. Being physically active in the First World is like having a personal library of 500 books in the Third World.
Don't underestimate your achievements, guys.
|
BrianBinVA
Total Posts: 5140
|
09-03-21 10:12 AM - Post#913057
If you've been active for your lifetime you sometimes don't realise what an advantage that is in dealing with physical challenges, compared to the person who's been sedentary.
There was a study a while back where they asked the doctors in a state to look at pictures of kids and put them in the BMI categories of "overweight", "obese" and so on, just visually. The doctors assessed the overweight kids as normal, and the obese ones as merely overweight. It's just that they were so used to seeing big kids their idea of "normal" had changed.
It can happen the other way. If you've been active for a lifetime, chances are a lot of your family and friends are, too. And then you don't realise that deadlifting bodyweight would be a significant challenge for most people they'd actually have to train for, and - walking 3 miles in 45 minutes? Why would you walk 3 miles, that's what the car is for!
Walking 3 miles in under an hour, deadlifting your bodyweight and jumping a yard isn't much to an active person, but it's a huge deal to a sedentary person.
In the modern West, it's actually an achievement to be physically active for decades on end. Being physically active in the First World is like having a personal library of 500 books in the Third World.
Don't underestimate your achievements, guys.
These are excellent points, Kyle. I remember when that study came out, and it certainly applies in spades to adults too. If you live in the West, then you are just used to seeing really big people, from kids on up, and it's important for those of us who hang out in places like this forum to be reminded from time to time. And also to be reminded from time to time that even a bodyweight deadlift is vastly beyond most people, even if it seems like nothing to many of us.
And the size of people seems to be going more the wrong way every day. Usually the school drop-off and pick-up is something I do, but since the kids are just now back to school full-time after almost 18 months, their mother has been coming along too, and seen a lot of people she hasn't seen in ages. After we dropped the kids on Monday, she said "you must be the only person who lost weight during the pandemic -- these people all got BIG." But I'm not sure the people in question really see it that way -- it's just what they're used to and what they always see.
Aside # 1 -- @ipood -- I ended up walking an additional errand to the pharmacy yesterday evening, so made it to 20,000 steps without any particular effort to do so.
Aside # 2 -- tried a broad jump when I got back from my post-workout, pre-lunch walk yesterday, for the first time in ages. Made it 104" (or 8'8") barefoot on grass -- could maybe go a bit further in shoes on a hard surface. That's not a huge jump, but I'm only 5'6"/66", so it's a bit more than 1.5x my height, which I'm happy with. As a short-arse who doesn't weigh much, I'm always trying to convince people standards should be measured taking into account height and bodyweight. :-D
So, TL; DR -- stay active -- I don't think you'll regret it.
|
Jordan Derksen
Total Posts: 392
|
This reminds me a bit of a discussion here a year or two back where there was a lifter in his 70s saying, "hey, just teach yourself the snatch." People did this up to about 1980 or so - now, they don't. DJ had some piece about this, I think it was the Geezer Advantage article, about how if you're a certain age, in school you vaulted pommel horses and climbed ropes and did situps with medicine balls and kicked balls and threw balls and went for a run and - but if you're under that age, you sat at a computer.
If you've been active for your lifetime you sometimes don't realise what an advantage that is in dealing with physical challenges, compared to the person who's been sedentary.
This is so true.
I had an easy time teaching myself to lift from watching videos. It never made sense when people couldn't just watch a demonstration and do. This is not attributed to talent - I'm not particularly athletic (just watch me try to throw) - but I did grow up 'playing' as Dan would call it. Not sports, I hated structured sports, more parkour and free running stuff. Climbing buildings and structures, having parkour challenges in playgrounds, rock climbing, jumping and rolling around, just being a kid. I had a few very active friends so it was all just fun. Even when we did watch tv it was typically old martial arts movies during which we typically would do pushup, pullup, and situp challenges.
In my very limited experience coaching, sports didn't always translate to motor intelligence but something like gymnastics always did. "I played baseball" didn't mean you were gonna be easy to teach. But "I did figure skating" or "I did gymnastics" always did. Even if it was just for a few years as a young kid. Master the body first and the rest is easy.
A local school has taken up 'fitness' as the new thing in gym class. They're teaching them to squat, deadlift, etc. While I do think it's better than nothing I would rather we make a return to the large monkey bar/playground structures complete with rings, rope ladders, and climbing ropes that all school gyms used to have and have since been deemed 'unsafe' and removed by the safety police. Now we've replaced mastering your body in an environment with lifting weights because crossfit. I think we're losing something in that trade off especially for younger kids. Not that you can't lift weights as a kid, but weights should be an accessory to a strong gymnastics/calisthenics based foundation.
Maybe I'm biased because, to bring this thread back around, I'm pivoting myself back to a foundation of body weight mastery and ditching the heavy weights. It's a pivot that I've seen some older men make. Whenever I've met an older active man who didn't have a history of pain replete with surgeries and injuries I usually ask them what they do. Without fail - they ditched the weights in their 30's or 40's and got into body weight fitness. Those guys tend to be very spry and active into their 50's and 60's and beyond. Now, not that it can't be done, I compare that to the men I've met who kept with weights and didn't know when to hang it up or pivot - they usually had several surgeries and injuries and couldn't perform basic life tasks without pain. They were plagued with life altering restrictions, can't lift arms over their head, back pain, etc.
Obviously there's ways to keep lifting weights and stay healthy. Dan and company has presented many good options. I plan to keep my weights and use them occasionally - but with hard limits on them.
Edited by Jordan Derksen on 09-03-21 10:59 AM. Reason for edit: No reason given.
|
iPood
Total Posts: 2360
|
09-03-21 12:23 PM - Post#913061
Aside # 1 -- @ipood -- I ended up walking an additional errand to the pharmacy yesterday evening, so made it to 20,000 steps without any particular effort to do so.
That’s the kind of consistency I’m trying to achieve one day.
"I think we often spend too much time focusing on max fitness
and not nearly enough on maintaining our minimums.
It seems we need to think sustainable rather than obtainable.
Meaning whatever we do today, we can do it again tomorrow.
Never taking so much from ourselves that we can't."
Dan Martin |
|
iPood
Total Posts: 2360
|
Maybe I'm biased because, to bring this thread back around, I'm pivoting myself back to a foundation of body weight mastery and ditching the heavy weights. It's a pivot that I've seen some older men make. Whenever I've met an older active man who didn't have a history of pain replete with surgeries and injuries I usually ask them what they do. Without fail - they ditched the weights in their 30's or 40's and got into body weight fitness. Those guys tend to be very spry and active into their 50's and 60's and beyond. Now, not that it can't be done, I compare that to the men I've met who kept with weights and didn't know when to hang it up or pivot - they usually had several surgeries and injuries and couldn't perform basic life tasks without pain. They were plagued with life altering restrictions, can't lift arms over their head, back pain, etc.
As of late, I tend to find myself gravitating towards an extremely easy and daily training. Something that might be seen as replicating mild manual labor, if you know what I mean.
Something along the lines of, say, 100 “squinges” (one goblet squat followed by a goat bag swing), 100 pushes, 100 pulls, 10 minutes of crawling and 10 minutes of loaded carries. Plus loooooooong daily walks in the woods.
Low weights, possibly low tempo, low reps and a ton of extremely easy sets done throughout the day.
I don’t know why, but this appeals to me in a very BIG way.
"I think we often spend too much time focusing on max fitness
and not nearly enough on maintaining our minimums.
It seems we need to think sustainable rather than obtainable.
Meaning whatever we do today, we can do it again tomorrow.
Never taking so much from ourselves that we can't."
Dan Martin |
|
Jordan D
Total Posts: 771
|
09-03-21 01:28 PM - Post#913065
Not sure which thread to put this in, but I think a lot of these can be managed by treating them as skills and not as “training.”
Running, for example. Sorta sprint 50 meters 3 times, once or twice a week. Your body retains the ability to run. No further adaptation needed. If you’re walking plenty, you have the baseline cardio and mechanics to run when necessary. Why force adaptation for a 5k, something no human being would ever do unless in athletic competition? It adds some vague health benefit? More so than walking? Than jumping jacks or hitting the heavy bag? How? What does it take away? Most elite boxers today have given up roadwork in favor of swimming because the risk/reward ratio is higher.
Most of us already do this with things like swimming, jump roping, and tumbling. Skills to maintain, not to be trained beyond the basics. Because…why? Is “more” actually “better”?
This is why Dan’s work on standards is so powerful, I think. Beyond the basic standard, wherever we set it personally, we’re just making personal choices about what’s fun.
If you can run a casual 100 or 400, and aren’t competing, then I submit you’d be better off NOT jogging any further, and instead, working on the ability to tumble, swim, throw things, lift things, and climb a tree.
|
Old Miler
Total Posts: 1744
|
09-03-21 04:12 PM - Post#913077
Why force adaptation for a 5k, something no human being would ever do unless in athletic competition?
If you were a skinny kid who lived 5k from school, and there were no buses or cars and you have to do it twice a day, you might end up running just to save some time. Or because you were procrastinating and had to be back. And humans have been competing athletically or dispatching messengers for as long as we have been around.
|
Steve W.
Total Posts: 181
|
09-03-21 04:32 PM - Post#913079
Why force adaptation for a 5k, something no human being would ever do unless in athletic competition?
If you were a skinny kid who lived 5k from school, and there were no buses or cars and you have to do it twice a day, you might end up running just to save some time. Or because you were procrastinating and had to be back. And humans have been competing athletically or dispatching messengers for as long as we have been around.
Yeah, but running uphill both ways barefoot in the snow every day gets pretty tiring ;-)
In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice; in practice, there is.
Just because it happened to you doesn't make it interesting. |
|
Jordan D
Total Posts: 771
|
09-03-21 05:11 PM - Post#913080
If you were a skinny kid who lived 5k from school, and there were no buses or cars and you have to do it twice a day, you might end up running just to save some time. Or because you were procrastinating and had to be back. And humans have been competing athletically or dispatching messengers for as long as we have been around.
That's quite an "if" and a lot of "might."
I'm all for running as a sport. I logged plenty of miles on the cross country team as a kid, and kept my Runners World subscription for years. But for general health and physical development, it's no more logically useful than BJJ, javelin throwing, crawling OS style, rock climbing, or pure Arnold-style bodybuilding.
In fact, I think running and bodybuilding are remarkably similar. Their global popularity is largely due to the marketing efforts of Phil Knight and Nike, and Arnold and Joe Weider, respectively. They sold a lot of shoes and a lot of protein powder.
Virtually everyone who's not a competitive runner or bodybuilder would be better off just walking, sprinting occasionally, and doing basic, minimalist weight training. That's no slight on the skinny kids who want to run, or the oaks who want to pump up their biceps and stand onstage in a speedo. Much like with Dan's quadrants, it's just differentiating between what athletes and non-athletes need to do.
|
Jordan Derksen
Total Posts: 392
|
As of late, I tend to find myself gravitating towards an extremely easy and daily training. Something that might be seen as replicating mild manual labor, if you know what I mean.
Something along the lines of, say, 100 “squinges” (one goblet squat followed by a goat bag swing), 100 pushes, 100 pulls, 10 minutes of crawling and 10 minutes of loaded carries. Plus loooooooong daily walks in the woods.
Low weights, possibly low tempo, low reps and a ton of extremely easy sets done throughout the day.
I don’t know why, but this appeals to me in a very BIG way.
Yes!! This is what I have stumbled on. I started a recent ‘do whatever I want’ program. It’s morphed into just doing sets of whatever I want whenever I want throughout the day and going for daily rep minimums/goals in whatever exercises I pick that day. How am I feeling today? Motivated? I walk into meeting rooms, close the blinds and practice freestanding handstand push-ups 5 times across my work day. Do some quick L-sits in a chair. Find racking in the facility and bang out a few pull ups when no ones looking. Not feeling as good? Just do some push-ups and air squats and rows? How many? Whatever.
It’s incredible.
In keeping with the insanely creepy algorithm of the internet, as I’m discovering this myself YouTube recommends me this YouTube video:
https://youtu.be/OsA0sGxX5VM
It’s a guy named the bioneer. He has lots of interesting training ideas.
|
Old Miler
Total Posts: 1744
|
09-04-21 04:29 PM - Post#913102
ho's not a competitive runner or bodybuilder would be better off just walking, sprinting occasionally, and doing basic, minimalist weight training.
I agree totally. My Dad, who's 80, walks every day. But trying to get him "sprinting occasionally" and doing "basic, minimalist weight training" is a big ask.
By the way, just for a laugh I entered the 100 and 400 at a track meet on Wednesday, for the first time in years. And I have a lifetime of running behind me. "Occasionally" needs to be at least 2-3 times a month, or you are going to feel it when you sprint, and not in a nice way.
|
RupertC
Total Posts: 1479
|
09-05-21 11:33 AM - Post#913117
Not sure which thread to put this in, but I think a lot of these can be managed by treating them as skills and not as “training.”
Running, for example. Sorta sprint 50 meters 3 times, once or twice a week. Your body retains the ability to run. No further adaptation needed.
I actually tried this! Doing eight hill sprints twice a week meant that I could keep the mechanics. However, when I threw in a longer run once a week, there were synergies. The sprints magically got easier to recover from, as well as getting a little crisper.
The way I see it... If you can run 5k in half an hour or so after a short warmup while wearing running shoes and gym clothes, then you can easily dash for a train without a warmup while wearing leather shoes and a suit and carrying a rucksack. If you don't do the longer runs, though, dashing for a train doesn't seem to work even if you do sprints. Everything flaps!
| Check out my critical-thinking blog at sharpenyouraxe.substack.com |
|
Old Miler
Total Posts: 1744
|
09-05-21 05:28 PM - Post#913124
Yeah, but running uphill both ways barefoot in the snow every day gets pretty tiring ;-)
Uphill both ways? We've found the other end of the wormhole that produced the famous downhill 400m track in Monaco!
|
Steve W.
Total Posts: 181
|
Yeah, but running uphill both ways barefoot in the snow every day gets pretty tiring ;-)
Uphill both ways? We've found the other end of the wormhole that produced the famous downhill 400m track in Monaco!
Sure, back in the day, we didn't have "going downhill" like people do today.
EVERY direction was uphill -- and we liked it!.
Dana Carvey Grumpy Old Man
"Excuse me...Sir? You forgot your prostate."
In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice; in practice, there is.
Just because it happened to you doesn't make it interesting. |
Edited by Steve W. on 09-06-21 09:42 AM. Reason for edit: No reason given.
|
iPood
Total Posts: 2360
|
It’s morphed into just doing sets of whatever I want whenever I want throughout the day and going for daily rep minimums/goals in whatever exercises I pick that day.
I'm pretty sure there's a book in there that I wouldn't mind purchasing.
Just saying...
"I think we often spend too much time focusing on max fitness
and not nearly enough on maintaining our minimums.
It seems we need to think sustainable rather than obtainable.
Meaning whatever we do today, we can do it again tomorrow.
Never taking so much from ourselves that we can't."
Dan Martin |
|
Jordan Derksen
Total Posts: 392
|
09-08-21 10:27 AM - Post#913178
That would be an interesting book.
"Do whatever. Do whatever every day. Do whatever every day as much or as little as you want. Do whatever every day as much or as little as you want as often or as seldom as you want throughout the day.
Do whatever."
A 1 page e-book. That'll be 50 cents.
I'll name it "Treat Yo'self" in honor of parks and rec.
Of course, that would not be a beginner protocol. You need to have done a few programs first to get a feel for things. Then read all of Dan John's articles twice and join this forum for at least a year before you can begin to understand the meaning.
"Squinges" look like a great exercise. Isn't that Dan's butt blaster 4000? I'm gonna steal it.
Maybe I'll do it today. Or maybe I wont. Haven't decided yet.
|
WxHerk
Total Posts: 334
|
Nothing at all to add except a big THANK YOU.
About to complete my 58th solar circuit and my training is still ascending/accelerating, thanks in a big part to what I pick up on this forum. This thread is an absolute gold mine.
|
iPood
Total Posts: 2360
|
09-08-21 11:31 AM - Post#913181
"Squinges" look like a great exercise. Isn't that Dan's butt blaster 4000? I'm gonna steal it.
Yes, I steal from the Dans (John & Martin) on a regular basis. 
"I think we often spend too much time focusing on max fitness
and not nearly enough on maintaining our minimums.
It seems we need to think sustainable rather than obtainable.
Meaning whatever we do today, we can do it again tomorrow.
Never taking so much from ourselves that we can't."
Dan Martin |
|
Kyle Aaron
Total Posts: 1911
|
|
|
