corribdude wrote: » Tiger Woods isn't an expert golfer? Michael Phelps isn't a expert swimmer? I never said they were expert coaches, I was just making the point that age isn't a factor when you are deciding if some is an expert in their field as someone said Transform couldn't be an expert in his at a mere 32 years of age.
kevpants wrote: The thing about Rippetoe is he's not a great coach so the argument is invalid. Who's he ever coached? About a million average lifters. Who else?
Transform wrote: » Look guys over and over i have said starting strength sounds 100% better than the usual split style programs or just 15 exercises in one session that i have seen been given out so lets leave it at that - what i have a problem with is people sending readers else where when the info should be HERE.
on reading SS - i really have higher priorities than reading another book on getting started on weights, sorry. rather read pubmed, or such sites.
Finally on the 99% of peoples goals being fat loss and increased fitness and strength - this is what i see week in week out and MY stats back this up.
How many people do i use heavy squats with every week - out of 30-35 sesssions possibly about 2-3. Deadlifts/lunges/step ups are another matter though - easier to teach and less risk of injuring a client.
Mikel wrote: » I don't think that follows, there's a world of difference between me and elite level athletes like that guy Hanley posted videos of, a different animal to the rest of us. I would rather a guy who was good at coaching 'average' lifters myself.
kevpants wrote: » Have to disagree. You and I are exactly the same animal as Konstantinovs. He's just stronger. An elite coach knows how to get to an elite level.
DM-BM wrote: » Are you seriously saying that you think coaching is the only difference between being elite or not ?
Mikel wrote: » He's not 'just stronger' If you had his coach could you replicate what he did?
Mikel wrote: » His body can do things you can only dream of. The job of a coach of an elite level athlete like him or Michael Pelps, Michael Johnson, Ian Thorpe and the like is to eke out the last tiny percentage of performance out of someone who is already at an elite level and probably approaching their genetic potential. No comparison with taking Joe Bloggs from untrained and uncoordinated to squatting 150kg safely. Completely different things.
kevpants wrote: » And now you're arguing elite coaches are only good for that last few %? So they don't know anything else about their sports bar the last 1 or 2 %?
kevpants wrote: » He is just stronger. Seems like we're eeking towards the genetics excuse again. Just waiting for someone to say he has a genetic advantage so we can all feel comfortable with never getting anywhere near an elite level in anything
kevpants wrote: I'm baffled by this. He can do things I can only dream of? God now we really are in full blown genetics excuse territory. People should do themselves a favour and forget about genetics. Elite athletes don't care about genetics, just 2nd rate ones who never made the grade. You think he doesn't dream of lifting heavier than he does?
kevpants wrote: And now you're arguing elite coaches are only good for that last few %? So they don't know anything else about their sports bar the last 1 or 2 %?
kevpants wrote: You're actually saying an average coach is better for an average lifter because then everyones at the same level? Unbelievable
d-gal wrote: The hip drive sh!t again causes increased risk because to initiate this movement your torso has to become more horizontal and it increase pressure on the lumbar spine and spinal discs. It's not worth the risk for more emphasis on the posterior chain, lot more safer beneficial exercises
Mikel wrote: » Incidentally, 5 pages of a thread critiquing his squat form and not one of the supposed experts has given the reason why his spine shouldn't be neutral and why he shouldn't 'hip drive' the way he does. Interesting.
PeakOutput wrote: » thats not what i meant and you know it a person can be a great coach without having coached elite athletes and the average coaches all over the world are jsut as important as the people who coach the elite athletes
Mikel wrote: » Right, cos we could all reach the elite level if we would just work hard enough right?
Mikel wrote: » Who says they should care about them? I could just as well say 'elite athletes don't care about Newton's Laws' Doesn't mean they don't have an effect.
Mikel wrote: » Genetics is not an excuse, it just a recognition that some are more gifted than others, bell shaped curve and all that.
Mikel wrote: » Alternatively, maybe you're right and if I got the right coaching and worked hard enough I could out sprint Usain Bolt. There's not settling for excuses, and then there's refusing to stare facts in the face.
kevpants wrote: » What!? A few posters did. I said myself I lost all my heavy squats forward because my hips were coming up faster than the bar. Hip drive ends up with the lifter having to do a Good Morning at the top. Hardly the most efficient method. Hip drive would be grand if the bar was sitting on your hips but it's not, it's sitting at the tob of a big long bendy thing called your back. As for the neutral spine, that's Rippetie's excuse for looking down. Neutral spine means nothing, it's one of his catch phrases like hip drive. Head up helps with chest up which helps jeep your core solid which is what is keeping your back andgle and making sure the bar moves up when you push up. Those reasons ok?
kevpants wrote: » As for the neutral spine, that's Rippetie's excuse for looking down. Neutral spine means nothing, it's one of his catch phrases like hip drive. Head up helps with chest up which helps jeep your core solid which is what is keeping your back andgle and making sure the bar moves up when you push up.
kevpants wrote: » I said myself I lost all my heavy squats forward because my hips were coming up faster than the bar.
kevpants wrote: » Hip drive ends up with the lifter having to do a Good Morning at the top.
DM-BM wrote: » Not if you keep your upper back locked, your chest up, and don't let your hips rise faster than the bar.
brianthebard wrote: » So once you are ready to move up out of the hole, what would be the correct way to do it? Do the hips move first? Does the chest push back? this thread is starting to confuse me a bit tbh.
kevpants wrote: » So a squat then yeah? That's what you're describing. I agree you're bang on with how you should squat. But then what the feck is hip drive?
DM-BM wrote: » Well, my understanding of it is, hip drive is basically when you concentrate on driving your hips up out of the bottom of the squat, as opposed to trying to lead with your chest, or drive your feet through the ground. keeping your head in a position, where you can focus on a spot 5 or 6 feet in front of you can help with this, but i don't believe its essential, when you know what hip drive feels like. If you concenrtate on hip drive and neglect to keep your back tight and your chest up, regardless of head position, your either going to be shoved forward and loose it or have to good morning it. The whole movement needs to be balanced, and done in a way that the angle of your back stays as constant as possible. Focusing only on driving your hips and neglecting your back, will result in a mess.
kevpants wrote: » That's the thing. Rippetoe's technique would seem to suggest your hips move first which is gonna end up with you losing it forward. But that would be going against his other rule which is that your back angle should stay solid. That begs the same question, what is hip drive? I just think there are a lot of contradictions in his rules and then when you see him putting it in place it all looks wrong.
kevpants wrote: » I know he's old but you'd expect his technique to be bang on, it isn't.
kevpants wrote: » For one, don't keep your chest up???? WTF! kevpants wrote: » I think he believes that when some one tries to squat for the first time they have a tendency to lead with the chest, so he tries to teach them what hip drive is by enitially exagerating it. Hence the "don't keep your chest up" while he is pushing on his back. When he has the guy with a bar on his back, he does tell him to keep his chest up, but again it's about balancing hip drive and your back angle. kevpants wrote: » Secondly. Show me the "hip drive " in Rips set of 10 compared to the guy who was apparently doing it all wrong in the above video. I don't know how to show it to you , if you can't see it. In the video above, the first few squats that guy does he seems to lead with his chest and doesn't drive his hips. In Rips set of ten, it does look to me, that he is trying to drive his hips up. Now they are not perfectb ut hip drive is present.
kevpants wrote: » I think he believes that when some one tries to squat for the first time they have a tendency to lead with the chest, so he tries to teach them what hip drive is by enitially exagerating it. Hence the "don't keep your chest up" while he is pushing on his back. When he has the guy with a bar on his back, he does tell him to keep his chest up, but again it's about balancing hip drive and your back angle. kevpants wrote: » Secondly. Show me the "hip drive " in Rips set of 10 compared to the guy who was apparently doing it all wrong in the above video. I don't know how to show it to you , if you can't see it. In the video above, the first few squats that guy does he seems to lead with his chest and doesn't drive his hips. In Rips set of ten, it does look to me, that he is trying to drive his hips up. Now they are not perfectb ut hip drive is present.
kevpants wrote: » Secondly. Show me the "hip drive " in Rips set of 10 compared to the guy who was apparently doing it all wrong in the above video.
