On November 17 2011 09:35 eshlow wrote: OMG I'm soooooo happy I'm almost done with my book. lol. Almost a weight off my shoulders
Pun intended? :D
Can't wait for it!!
lol, I'm not sure if any of you guys wanna buy it though. It's about bodyweight training and it's gonna be about 529 pages long and 50 bucks on amazon
So you pretty much really need to be invested in bodyweight training to want to buy it.... unless you just wanna support me. :p (which I would gratefully accept of course)
More information here if you guys wanna check out table of contents and whatnot:
Maxed out my bench too since i couldnt CJ/snatch to save my life after that lift, still putting up around 275 (close miss at 285) even though i havent benched consistently in a year (when i started oly lifting)
Just came back from holidays and just saw this. Good stuff Decaf (took you long enough though ). We'll see what I can do in some time. A miss like your 535lb try basically never happens to me. I am ass weak from the ground, but when I get the bar to move 5-10cm from the floor, I don't face problems until the lock-out.
Yeah, that was pretty much the first deadlift I've ever missed, and apparently what it looks like when I try more weight than I can handle :p.
On November 17 2011 12:42 Dalguno wrote: I have a really hard time controlling my eating. Straight up, have for quite a while now. I've always been trying to figure out how to fix it, and I think I may have found something.
The last little while I've been eating a small breakfast, going to school without eating anything there. When I get home, I'll eat one big meal, and arbitrarily not eat after 4PM. It's been working wonderfully. I just want to make sure this is ok. I'm not really feeling "hungry" at any point. I get extremely close, but not quite there. I am trying to lose weight, and have been eating about 300 cal for the breakfast, 1300 for the big meal.
Is this unhealthy, or should I be ok?
1300 is way too much for one meal. The more, smaller meals you can divide your caloric intake into the better. Even if you lose weight in the short term, it's unhealthy. Ideally you should divide your calories into about 5-6 smaller meals (varies per person), or 3 meals and a couple snacks. It helps regulate your blood sugar/insulin levels, gives you more balanced energy throughout the day, and actually increases your caloric requirements.
Pretty much what LonelyMargarita said is wrong. It's complete broscience, and you'll be perfectly fine if you get most of your calories in a few big meals as opposed to multiple small meals; your body is incredibly good at regulating itself, so the important thing is really that you get into a pattern that you are comfortable with.
You'll note I linked to a study, whereas you did not. I could link to ten other sites saying the same thing, if you'd like.
There is no studies showing any relationship between meal frequency and fatloss, a higher meal frequency have been shown to make you hungrier actually.
For maximum muscle gain there was a study a few weeks ago which, if I recall correctly, said you want to eat every 4-5 hours. But since Dalguno is trying to lose weight what he does should be perfectly fine.
I said his diet is unhealthy, which is what he asked, not that he wouldn't lose weight. In fact my link even confirmed he would lose weight more easily on his current, unhealthy diet. If he doesn't care about high cholesterol, mood swings, lethargy, and being more at-risk for diabetes, then he can stick with his diet and lose some weight. To me it just seems like an unsustainable "diet" though, and I think people should make lifestyle changes if they want to change their weight in the long run.
On November 17 2011 12:42 Dalguno wrote: I have a really hard time controlling my eating. Straight up, have for quite a while now. I've always been trying to figure out how to fix it, and I think I may have found something.
The last little while I've been eating a small breakfast, going to school without eating anything there. When I get home, I'll eat one big meal, and arbitrarily not eat after 4PM. It's been working wonderfully. I just want to make sure this is ok. I'm not really feeling "hungry" at any point. I get extremely close, but not quite there. I am trying to lose weight, and have been eating about 300 cal for the breakfast, 1300 for the big meal.
Is this unhealthy, or should I be ok?
1300 is way too much for one meal. The more, smaller meals you can divide your caloric intake into the better. Even if you lose weight in the short term, it's unhealthy. Ideally you should divide your calories into about 5-6 smaller meals (varies per person), or 3 meals and a couple snacks. It helps regulate your blood sugar/insulin levels, gives you more balanced energy throughout the day, and actually increases your caloric requirements.
Pretty much what LonelyMargarita said is wrong. It's complete broscience, and you'll be perfectly fine if you get most of your calories in a few big meals as opposed to multiple small meals; your body is incredibly good at regulating itself, so the important thing is really that you get into a pattern that you are comfortable with.
You'll note I linked to a study, whereas you did not. I could link to ten other sites saying the same thing, if you'd like.
There is no studies showing any relationship between meal frequency and fatloss, a higher meal frequency have been shown to make you hungrier actually.
For maximum muscle gain there was a study a few weeks ago which, if I recall correctly, said you want to eat every 4-5 hours. But since Dalguno is trying to lose weight what he does should be perfectly fine.
I said his diet is unhealthy, which is what he asked, not that he wouldn't lose weight. In fact my link even confirmed he would lose weight more easily on his current, unhealthy diet. If he doesn't care about high cholesterol, mood swings, lethargy, and being more at-risk for diabetes, then he can stick with his diet and lose some weight. To me it just seems like an unsustainable "diet" though, and I think people should make lifestyle changes if they want to change their weight in the long run.
how can you say his diet is unhealthy when he didnt even specify what he eats? are you saying that eating only one big meal every day will make you depressed, lethargic, moody and more at risk for diabetes? that sounds even more like broscience than "eat 6 small meals to stoke the metabolism" tbh
edit: just read your link, I guess that IS what you are saying. I'm not knowledgeable enough to contradict you sadly! maybe we can have someone smarter than me link some study to disprove you! but everything I have read so far said that it doesnt matter when you eat. there is even a whole program/lifestyle built around the "one big meal per day"-theory (see: warriordiet.com).
On November 17 2011 12:42 Dalguno wrote: I have a really hard time controlling my eating. Straight up, have for quite a while now. I've always been trying to figure out how to fix it, and I think I may have found something.
The last little while I've been eating a small breakfast, going to school without eating anything there. When I get home, I'll eat one big meal, and arbitrarily not eat after 4PM. It's been working wonderfully. I just want to make sure this is ok. I'm not really feeling "hungry" at any point. I get extremely close, but not quite there. I am trying to lose weight, and have been eating about 300 cal for the breakfast, 1300 for the big meal.
Is this unhealthy, or should I be ok?
1300 is way too much for one meal. The more, smaller meals you can divide your caloric intake into the better. Even if you lose weight in the short term, it's unhealthy. Ideally you should divide your calories into about 5-6 smaller meals (varies per person), or 3 meals and a couple snacks. It helps regulate your blood sugar/insulin levels, gives you more balanced energy throughout the day, and actually increases your caloric requirements.
Pretty much what LonelyMargarita said is wrong. It's complete broscience, and you'll be perfectly fine if you get most of your calories in a few big meals as opposed to multiple small meals; your body is incredibly good at regulating itself, so the important thing is really that you get into a pattern that you are comfortable with.
You'll note I linked to a study, whereas you did not. I could link to ten other sites saying the same thing, if you'd like.
There is no studies showing any relationship between meal frequency and fatloss, a higher meal frequency have been shown to make you hungrier actually.
For maximum muscle gain there was a study a few weeks ago which, if I recall correctly, said you want to eat every 4-5 hours. But since Dalguno is trying to lose weight what he does should be perfectly fine.
I said his diet is unhealthy, which is what he asked, not that he wouldn't lose weight. In fact my link even confirmed he would lose weight more easily on his current, unhealthy diet. If he doesn't care about high cholesterol, mood swings, lethargy, and being more at-risk for diabetes, then he can stick with his diet and lose some weight. To me it just seems like an unsustainable "diet" though, and I think people should make lifestyle changes if they want to change their weight in the long run.
Maybe you should read the actual study instead of referencing some layperson's "news article review" of the study
Although if he's having trouble with caloric intake I would just focus on high quality foods and eat normally. But that's just my opinion.
If I could do that, I completely would. I've tried for a really long time, and it just hasn't worked. I think arbitration, like I've elaborated on, is the only way for me.
Although if he's having trouble with caloric intake I would just focus on high quality foods and eat normally. But that's just my opinion.
If I could do that, I completely would. I've tried for a really long time, and it just hasn't worked. I think arbitration, like I've elaborated on, is the only way for me.
What Ive done in the past 2months is eat less carbs and eat higher protein foods. Ive found that by doing this I am alot less hungry most of the time.
my meals go like breakfast - 1 egg, 2bacon Lunch - small soup and a salad with (alot of) chicken breast and sometimes hardboiled egg Dinner - half a pound of meat and assorted vegetables
I dont find myself hungry at all compared to before I started this diet and i dont feel like its a diet, I feel like its just routine now.
Although if he's having trouble with caloric intake I would just focus on high quality foods and eat normally. But that's just my opinion.
If I could do that, I completely would. I've tried for a really long time, and it just hasn't worked. I think arbitration, like I've elaborated on, is the only way for me.
What Ive done in the past 2months is eat less carbs and eat higher protein foods. Ive found that by doing this I am alot less hungry most of the time.
my meals go like breakfast - 1 egg, 2bacon Lunch - small soup and a salad with (alot of) chicken breast and sometimes hardboiled egg Dinner - half a pound of meat and assorted vegetables
I dont find myself hungry at all compared to before I started this diet and i dont feel like its a diet, I feel like its just routine now.
Yeah, I definitely agree with less carbs. That's what I have a hard time with- I'm addicted to grains, frankly. If I lived on my own, I just wouldn't buy them, and probably be fine. I'm in high school, though, and my parents aren't too understanding about that addiction.
I'm not eating grains unless there's absolutely nothing else, which occurs from time to time. I think the low-carb (not particularly low, because I eat a decent amount of fruit) and high protein amounts that I eat is why I feel good about eating like this. I'm not ever "hungry." I'm not full, either, but I'm completely fine with that. I am trying to lose a bit of weight.
What should the bar feel like on my upper back? Is it basically the lowest spot where the bar can semi-comfortably stay without falling? I think I've squatted high-bar before, where the bar is basically on the most padded spot of my shoulder muscles, slightly higher than on this pic, I think.
"The low bar position for Squats. Notice the bar does NOT rest on my spine or neck, but on my back muscles. This allows for heavy Squats without sissy pad/towel."
On November 18 2011 05:03 glurio wrote: There is nothing wrong with high bar squats.
I squat high bar, I think funkie squats high bar; Decaf and dimsum squat significantly more weight than I do high bar. There's nothing wrong with it, it's just a choice that you make.
That was a really good video. I used to always do high bar but after watching that video I think I'll switch to low-bar, I want more emphasis on my ass and hamstrings, I don't care about transfer to cleans/jerks and all that stuff.
On November 18 2011 04:43 rEiGN~ wrote: Low-bar guys ahoy,
What should the bar feel like on my upper back? Is it basically the lowest spot where the bar can semi-comfortably stay without falling? I think I've squatted high-bar before, where the bar is basically on the most padded spot of my shoulder muscles, slightly higher than on this pic, I think.
"The low bar position for Squats. Notice the bar does NOT rest on my spine or neck, but on my back muscles. This allows for heavy Squats without sissy pad/towel."
There should be a "muscle shelf" created when you pull your shoulder blades together, the bar rests right on that and your hands trap it tight.
So today I did 2 PR, and also fixed the issue of my ass going up during Bench Presses. Powerlifting meet is next saturday, can't wait. I'll be really happy if I can deadlift bodyweight x3 (225kg) (also if I win, I need like 530-580kg total for that though).
My quad pain, which seemed to be severe, turned out to be nothing. My right knee feels a bit weird last 10 days or so but fuck it, i'll deload and fix that next week.
Also on Squats i'm wearing knee wraps, dunno if we should count them on the PR thread. Here are the videos:
EPT
). We'll see what I can do in some time. ![[image loading]](http://stronglifts.com/wp-content/uploads/squat-bar-position.jpg)
