The Weightlifters Thread

#2,551
#2,551
govols/cc said:
Maybe muscle failure is something you don't understand. Without a spotter(s) you're not. You could continue doing the negative if you could actually have the weight lifted assisted by a spotter(s) & hold the weight static after that until you reach complete failure. Lift for shape, lol.
Click to expand...

He is probably talking about the negative part of the rep. For bench, when you lower the bar. You love calling people out in every thread and arguing for no reason at all. You must have short man syndrome or something.
 
#2,553
#2,553
kwebbvols2344 said:
He is probably talking about the negative part of the rep. For bench, when you lower the bar. You love calling people out in every thread and arguing for no reason at all. You must have short man syndrome or something.
Click to expand...

He chimed in & I didn't call anybody out. Some people can't accept different opinions & views. You guys get sensitive when it happens. If you can absolutely prove me wrong about anything I say then do it. Yea he was talking about reaching muscle failure on negatives & it's impossible without a spotter.
 
#2,554
#2,554
I find it amusing you guys are arguing about terminology. Just explain a little better and we can all get along.

I refer to "negatives" as the lowering of the bar, or the resistance motion.

I call "burnouts" when I'm spent and have a spotter lift the weight and I let it down. cc refers to this as "negatives".
 
#2,555
#2,555
bamacheats said:
I find it amusing you guys are arguing about terminology. Just explain a little better and we can all get along.

I refer to "negatives" as the lowering of the bar, or the resistance motion.

I call "burnouts" when I'm spent and have a spotter lift the weight and I let it down. cc refers to this as "negatives".
Click to expand...

It's the same but you haven't reached muscle failure on negatives just because you can't lift the weight & perform another negative. Furthermore complete muscle failure is when you can't even hold the weight static.
 
#2,556
#2,556
Zercher squats are my new favorite squats. I find it very difficult to do front squats because I don't have the range of motion in my shoulders that is required because of a previous injury so I substituted Zerchers instead. Hurts so good.
 
#2,557
#2,557
I don't like back squats b/c I'm tall and have a long torso. I prefer doing other types of squats too. I like front squats and different variations of dumbell squats best. I have to be honest though, I hate training legs. I've been forcing myself for a few weeks to do them. I am going to keep plodding along until I'm doing them consistently again.

On another note, I'm down 7 pounds as of this morning. The progress isn't blazing but I'll take it.
 
#2,558
#2,558
govols/cc said:
It's the same but you haven't reached muscle failure on negatives just because you can't lift the weight & perform another negative. Furthermore complete muscle failure is when you can't even hold the weight static.
Click to expand...

So why can't you achieve that without a spotter? If I do one rep, and just hold the weight static until I can't anymore, you would call that failure? Even if I can do another positive? You're not making sense.
 
#2,559
#2,559
ORANGE & WHITE said:
I don't like back squats b/c I'm tall and have a long torso. I prefer doing other types of squats too. I like front squats and different variations of dumbell squats best. I have to be honest though, I hate training legs. I've been forcing myself for a few weeks to do them. I am going to keep plodding along until I'm doing them consistently again.

On another note, I'm down 7 pounds as of this morning. The progress isn't blazing but I'll take it.
Click to expand...

Maybe this is why I prefer front squats too. Never thought about it.
 
#2,560
#2,560
nbakerld said:
So why can't you achieve that without a spotter? If I do one rep, and just hold the weight static until I can't anymore, you would call that failure? Even if I can do another positive? You're not making sense.
Click to expand...

You wouldn't be able to hold it static anymore, but you'd be able to do a positive?
 
#2,562
#2,562
golfballs03 said:
You wouldn't be able to hold it static anymore, but you'd be able to do a positive?
Click to expand...

If I've only done one rep, and I have a second to pause and rest at the bottom, I'm pretty sure I could. I don't really know.

The glaring question is why you can't go to failure without a spotter if failure is achieved when you can no longer hold the weight static.
 
#2,564
#2,564
nbakerld said:
If I've only done one rep, and I have a second to pause and rest at the bottom, I'm pretty sure I could. I don't really know.

The glaring question is why you can't go to failure without a spotter if failure is achieved when you can no longer hold the weight static.
Click to expand...

Holding the weight static is the last stage. You do the reps until you can't do anymore. With a spotter you then focus on negatives. Lastly hold the weight static In the concentric position as long as you can. You can go to failure without a spotter but not doing negatives.
 
#2,565
#2,565
golfballs03 said:
Who goes to failure without a spotter?? You just let it down to a lower rest?
Click to expand...

I do, as long as I'm not holding something over my head or body, like barbell benchpress. There is a happy medium between slowly putting the weights on the ground and just letting them drop.
 
#2,569
#2,569
govols/cc said:
Holding the weight static is the last stage. You do the reps until you can't do anymore. With a spotter you then focus on negatives. Lastly hold the weight static In the concentric position as long as you can. You can go to failure without a spotter but not doing negatives.
Click to expand...

Again, this doesn't really make sense. You are weakest on the positive, then static, and then strongest on the negative (you can slowly drop more weight than you can hold). So if you can't hold the weight anymore, I contend you can still drop it. If you can do more controlled negatives then you haven't gone to failure.
 
#2,570
#2,570
govols/cc said:
Lift for shape, lol.
Click to expand...

WTF is this? Back to the old, "if you're not lifting to increase the amount of weight, there's no point" argument?

People have goals that are different than yours. Why do you have to belittle them? You act like this isn't a valid reason to lift.
 
#2,571
#2,571
nbakerld said:
Again, this doesn't really make sense. You are weakest on the positive, then static, and then strongest on the negative (you can slowly drop more weight than you can hold). So if you can't hold the weight anymore, I contend you can still drop it. If you can do more controlled negatives then you haven't gone to failure.
Click to expand...

Of course you can lower more weight than you can lift I said that. Just like you can hold more weight than you can lower. I'm not saying you gotta even go that far though. I'm saying you can't say you do negatives to failure just because you lift slowly & can no longer lift the weight.
 
#2,572
#2,572
Thrasher865 said:
WTF is this? Back to the old, "if you're not lifting to increase the amount of weight, there's no point" argument?

People have goals that are different than yours. Why do you have to belittle them? You act like this isn't a valid reason to lift.
Click to expand...

Tell me how to lift to simply shape a muscle. No matter how you lift, if youre putting in any effort, is gonna change your muscles shape, size, & strength, not just one element. If you're muscle doesn't "shape" the way you want what do you do? Add more weight? Do more reps? Will this not make you stronger &/or bigger. just saying.
 
#2,573
#2,573
For me, negatives are lowering a weight you can't move up. Not sure how you can do that without a spotted.

I believe baker is just talking about the negative motion, not the traditional "negatives."
 
#2,574
#2,574
govols/cc said:
Of course you can lower more weight than you can lift I said that. Just like you can hold more weight than you can lower. I'm not saying you gotta even go that far though. I'm saying you can't say you do negatives to failure just because you lift slowly & can no longer lift the weight.
Click to expand...

WTF? I said that you can lower more weight than you can hold. You can't hold more weight than you can lower. If you can, there are probably some scientists that would like to study you.
 
#2,575
#2,575
chavisut said:
For me, negatives are lowering a weight you can't move up. Not sure how you can do that without a spotted.

I believe baker is just talking about the negative motion, not the traditional "negatives."
Click to expand...

Yeah, the focus is on the negative part of the lift. You start cheating on the positive as you approach failure, but the negative is always done slow and controlled.
 
New Posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

Advertisement



Back
Top