where 'troll' = sarcasm/satire/poking fun/joking, not literally eliciting a reaction
Fitness/Lifting troll thread
Collapse
X
-
-
-
Re: Fitness/Lifting troll thread
There was an instructor reading Anne Carson translations and a cooldown of improvised goddess poses.
"The class, “Sappho and Sweat,” was the second offering from “Heavy Breathing,” which its co-founders describe as “a summer series of free critical theory seminars in the form of absurd, artist-led conceptual fitness experiences.” The idea came to Lisa Rybovich Crallé, a multimedia artist, last year. She and Sophia Wang, a dancer who recently completed her Ph.D. in literature, were collaborating on a sculptural installation when they took a long walk up a hill and discovered that discussing Aristotle’s conception of topos while huffing could be uniquely stimulating."
what the fuckComment
-
Re: Fitness/Lifting troll thread
EVERYTHING WRONG WITH REDDIT FITNESS IN A SINGLE POST
HOLY SHIT EVERY COMMENT IS LIKE A CARICATURE AND I COULD HAVE WRITTEN THIS WHOLE THING AS SATIRE
- starting strength
- complete ignorance of strength percentiles and typical rates of progression
- extrapolation from your personal anecdote
- using yourself as soapbox for achievement
- "Take note, Fittit" like following fucking starting strength is that complicated
- "not typical but totally achievable" "eat moar add weight (verbatim quote)" "it's not rocket science" well no shit it's not rocket science this is why this is an atypical result, because the variables that determine results are not commensurate with execution in something so simple and if it were rocket science you'd see results proportional to effort you fucking wastelands of reflective thought
and then this majesty of a comment:
"These are easily typical results if you just stick to a solid program and eat. at 230 that gives him a 2.17x bw deadlift"
same problems as before but then we add:
- idiotic reddit bodyweight logic completely ignorant of the fact that muscle fibers do not grow or adapt to the CNS at the same proportion or rate as body weight
- ignorance of the fact that bodyweights classes are not in fact a rate of strength development but a rate of strength development under a continuous strength training program
this one is arguably worse:
"At three months ago, a 405lb deadlift was still very much a beginner's pull. Totally reasonable with dedicated, smart training and diet, he could progress that much in 3 months time."
let's go over just a small number of factors that determine how fast someone gains muscle and strength:
- cortisol levels
- testosterone levels
- IGF-1 levels
- thyroid levels
- estrogen to testosterone ratio
- endogenous insulin release
- mechano growth factor release
- growth hormone promotion by various pathways
and this is just off the top of my head
and since strength is a CNS adaptation to larger muscle fiber size all elements of that need to be taken into account as well
if for a moment you think I am full of shit you are welcome to read the PLETHORA OF DIFFERENT HYPERTROPHY VARIABLES that determine the rate at which muscle can grow which, since strength is central nervous system recruitment of muscle fibers, directly affects strength potential. surprise, there really aren't many, which means that the variable explaining existing hypertrophic differences is fucking obviously a combination of metabolic pathways and hormones and growth factors beyond most people's control, you dumbfucks
this is as idiotic as someone who raised their LSAT score from 150 (below average) to 180 (perfect) in a matter of a month of studying claiming anyone can. actually, no, it's worse, because that's far more single-variable since LSAT is directly to IQ in some ways, and strength/muscle development has far more metabolic factors affecting it
oh it can't be reddit fitness without someone bullshitting a lot about form and jumping to ridiculous conclusions:
"Hiked it, no lock-out, sadly no rep. Work on your hip strength with deep squats. Lose the wraps and use chalk. Other than that you show good effort."
these people need to practice their flexion on single-neck noose hangs for 1 static repLast edited by Arch0wl; 09-15-2015, 08:51 PM.Comment
-
Re: Fitness/Lifting troll thread
I lurk a number of forums (SS included) from time to time. Your post reminds me of something I came across recently (tangentially related):
We note on here often that the best lifters very rarely make great coaches. What you usually see, and what a large % of the SSC pool is made up of, are pretty good lifters, people who have excellent numbers compared to regular folks but mediocre numbers compared to the best. Like me, for example. We're good enough to have some success with it and so stay with it for a while; but we're not so good that just anything we do works and makes our numbers go up. We need to observe carefully and try different things to get better, and we do this long enough to become competent coaches ourselves, whereas many people who have less success don't stay with it long enough, and many who have more success never had to try as many different things or have as much focus on technique as we did.Basically, all boiled down, the claim is that those for whom a thing comes intuitively and easily are not the best equipped to teach it to those for whom it does not come intuitively or easily. Seems like a pretty logical assertion, supported by lots of people's observations. I don't think I'll ever understand why some people are so reluctant to accept that this should (must, really) be the case.Last edited by Reincarnate; 09-15-2015, 09:59 PM.Comment
-
Re: Fitness/Lifting troll thread
I've read that before
the best lifters don't make the best coaches because the best lifters have paracrine signaling and leverages and a host of other things that are astronomically rare and the likelihood of being a best lifter and best coach simultaneously is statistically unlikely due to the sheer improbability of these two gifts intersecting
even something like testosterone and various anabolic hormones and their effect on muscle/strength development, I have now learned, is not as cut-and-dry as people would think. even *if* your body has elevated anabolic hormones circulating and causing receptor binding that doesn't mean it's going to localize growth factors in response to a training stimulus in the same way as it does in another person
here is one growth factor discovered just like, ten years ago: http://bjsm.bmj.com/content/39/11/787.full
"MGF is responsible for replenishing the pool of muscle stem cells,3,4 and this provides the means by which strength adaptation occurs after exercise and/or local muscle damage."
if you have even one inefficiency in a metabolic pathway this can blunt the effects of hypertrophy or strength adaptation
meanwhile if the biochemical stars align in a person they can maximize these things
it's truly a genetic battle, but just how many tiny factors can be influenced by genetics is staggering -- there's even a gene that affects response rates to exogenous testosteroneComment
-
Re: Fitness/Lifting troll thread
It's pretty insane how complex it all gets, and really disappointing that more people don't take this complexity into healthy consideration, even if only on a superficial level. Without that consideration, we get more attribution errors / misinformation and broscientific garbage tossed around.
The fitness subreddit is... bleh. I'll just say that I think the FAQ is probably the only worthwhile thing there, for the most part.Last edited by Reincarnate; 09-15-2015, 11:01 PM.Comment
-
Re: Fitness/Lifting troll thread
I am actually in the works of creating a fitness blog / website / whatever where I will just collate a lot of this content, but in the mean time this should be useful for you:
Last edited by Arch0wl; 09-16-2015, 01:26 AM.Comment
-
Re: Fitness/Lifting troll thread
I've been debating whether i should stick with SS to gain back the strength that i lost from the long break I took from lifting and just keep going till I stop progressing linearly, or if i should just start up on a PPL now, i really don't want to go T-Rex mode. p.s. lmao at this guy playing huniepop in the middle of the rec center.Last edited by .Gazelle.; 09-16-2015, 12:02 PM.

Originally posted by LeKrispyKremeRap music is music. However, It's not in the traditional sense of how we understand music. The vocals are filled with slangs that gangs used since the 70s and a lot of the instrumentations are replaced with "Street Sounds" instead of traditional instruments. Music is defined as any combination of sounds that is pleasing to the ear, so while one person may find it as "noise" another person can find it pleasing to the ear and so call "vibe" with it as how I think the kids would say it these days.Comment





Comment