ExRx.net
http://exrx.net/forum/

Comments for Ruci
http://exrx.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=15&t=6064
Page 1 of 2

Author:  Rucifer [ Mon Jun 15, 2009 4:01 pm ]
Post subject:  Comments for Ruci

Yea the name has magnificent on the end on it on the actually journal in the other forum...decided to keep that out. Thought I might hear helpful advice from you guys!

Author:  pdellorto [ Wed Jun 17, 2009 6:07 pm ]
Post subject: 

Incline Bench - come on, you already know the answer - most effective for what?

You can search back, we discussed bench angle fairly recently. :)

Author:  Rucifer [ Thu Jun 18, 2009 11:46 am ]
Post subject: 

Hey thanx. You also commented on my dip post as well. I will go back to general forum and research, but I am looking to hit upper pecs the most, not lower or shoulders. I will go see...

Author:  pdellorto [ Thu Jun 18, 2009 7:49 pm ]
Post subject: 

Yeah, check it out. I think the more inclined, the more shoulders get involved. The general consensus seems to be either 45 or 30 degree angle on the bench.

Anyway I'm glad to be of help.

Author:  Rucifer [ Sun Jul 26, 2009 2:32 pm ]
Post subject: 

Anyone know of the percentage you should be able to full squat over regular squat? Like if I could squat 235 with regular how much on a full squat I should be able to do (or roundabout figure I guess).

Author:  Proper Knob [ Sun Jul 26, 2009 3:09 pm ]
Post subject: 

I take it you mean, parallel compared to as far down as possible?

For me, my full squat is around 80% of what i can squat to parallel.

Author:  Rucifer [ Sun Jul 26, 2009 3:49 pm ]
Post subject: 

Proper Knob wrote:
I take it you mean, parallel compared to as far down as possible?

For me, my full squat is around 80% of what i can squat to parallel.


Exactly...

I've started to do full squats instead of parallel ones, but had to really drop some weight. But, for some reason they aren't nearly as awkward for me as parallel squats were. And I felt destroyed after them, so I wasn't really too concerned with the weight drop, just curious...

Author:  jps [ Sun Jul 26, 2009 5:20 pm ]
Post subject: 

Your new workout looks identical to mine......I have had good results so far from it. I have been doing AXBX.....curious how you are doing your push/pull. ?

As far as squats go, I have never even tried a parallel squat....lol. I have very good flexibility and went straight for the deep squats. So using the 80% rule, my parallel squat would be 230....sound much better than 185...lol.

Author:  Rucifer [ Mon Aug 24, 2009 7:46 pm ]
Post subject: 

Why did my squat used to be sweet (for me, squatting 255lbs ten times was awesome) but now can't ever seem to peak over 200, no matter how much my other stuff improves? Grr....

Author:  Rucifer [ Sun Oct 18, 2009 12:38 pm ]
Post subject: 

I am sort of wondering if I am going to end up having a muscle imbalance or something with my current routine. Basically I have tallied up my push to pull ratio and it goes like this-

Upper Body- 2 vs 1 on full body, 2 vs 3 on upper body day, for a total of 5 to 5

Lower Body- 1 Pull on full body, 4 to 1 on lower body day. Granted one of them is calf raise. So that totals 3 to 2 if you don't count the calf raise.

So yea 2 of my pushes are the hip thrusts and glute bridges...should I be worried if push to pull ratio isn't equal?

Author:  Jungledoc [ Sun Nov 15, 2009 4:28 pm ]
Post subject: 

I just noticed that no one answered your last question.

I don't think of lower body lifts as "push-pull" so much as quad-ham/glute, or anterior-posterior chain. I think it's important to include both.

For upper body, the push-pull ratio is more important in regards to shoulder issues. Most of us overdo the push, so it's a good idea to think about it, and make sure that we include enough pull. Your routine isn't bad at all.

I was originally coming here to ask you about TKD. Have you been doing it for long?

Author:  KPj [ Mon Nov 16, 2009 6:29 am ]
Post subject: 

People normally disagree but in my opinion, your upper body push:pull ration should be about 1:2..... 2x more pulling than pushing...

For lower body I also don't think much about push vs pull or hip vs knee dominant or whatever. I just train lower body, really. However, I always try and get a little more posterior chain work than quad work but it would depend no what you needed most. Most need more posterior chain work....

Regardless, if you're not in pain or don't look like quasimodo then I wouldn't worry too much about getting imbalances.

KPj

Author:  Rucifer [ Tue Dec 08, 2009 3:45 pm ]
Post subject: 

@ Jungledoc- I actually just took a class of Taekwondo at my college I goto. It was interesting enough to get me looking for a place to do it in my free time. I often wonder how Asian Societies came up all different forms of martial arts, while western socieities answer was boxing. Not that boxing isn't admirable in of itself- just not the same as the Asian martial arts.

@ KPJ- How does a 1:2 ratio up top work for you? I feel like I'm slacking off a bit on my pulling movements and might punish myself for it :green:

Author:  pdellorto [ Tue Dec 08, 2009 6:00 pm ]
Post subject: 

Rucifer wrote:
I often wonder how Asian Societies came up all different forms of martial arts, while western socieities answer was boxing. Not that boxing isn't admirable in of itself- just not the same as the Asian martial arts


Well, boxing, various kinds of wrestling (catch wresting, belt wrestling, shirt wrestling, etc.), pankration, savate, and a vast array of armed styles ranging from mixed-weapon styles (ala the Masters of Defence in England, google George Silver) to single-weapon styles like those for the longsword, rapier, or smallsword. Western martial arts have a very broad and very deep history, but they don't get as much press as the Asian ones.

But it's there if you look. If you'd like to find out more about it, google ARMA or grab a copy of Green's Enyclopedia of the Martial Arts and read about the various arts.

Sadly, though, "just boxing" is pretty much the common view, but it's about as accurate as saying "doing the machines for 3 sets of 10" is weight training. :wink:

Author:  KPj [ Wed Dec 09, 2009 4:32 am ]
Post subject: 

Rucifer wrote:
@ KPJ- How does a 1:2 ratio up top work for you? I feel like I'm slacking off a bit on my pulling movements and might punish myself for it :green:


It works great. I've been up at 1:3 and 1:4 when things have been bad. There was a time when the only 'pushing' I done was push up holds so, it was probably an even bigger ratio at one point but that was due to injury. You need to train OUT of balance to get back IN balance...

Also with todays desk culture, most people are dominant in the internal rotators. Most spend far more time with the scap protracted, elevated, the thoracic spine flexed, shoulders internally rotated. So, when you're not in the gym, your 'pushing:pulling' is far more in favour of pushing therefore, it makes sense to counter that in the gym.

Also, consider the muscle mass in the back compared to the chest. Clearly more in the back so, it makes sense to train the back more than the chest.

You can only try these things and see how you feel, though.

KPj

Page 1 of 2 All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/