At the End of 2011

2011 was an eventful year on all levels, from personal to professional to lifting. I did not make huge progress in poundages lifted but I did gain a bit of ground while dropping about 8-10 lbs. compared to my average weight in 2010.

Training was turbulent and I suffered several painful lower back injuries which held me back on the squat and stopped all deadlift progress. It took me a month or so to rebuild my squat from sets of five with just the bar to "heavy" sets with two plates per side, and during this period I did no deadlifting. I managed to build back to consistently pulling in the low 400s, which is shitty when compared to my goal for 2011 (to pull over 500) but still better than the painful triples with 135 that I was reduced to for a while.

The final numbers achieved in 2011 are as follows:

Squat

2010 Best: 475 lbs. at cca. 207 lbs. (bodyweight from memory)
2011 Best: 480 lbs. at cca. 198 lbs.
Increase: 5 lbs., but definitely stronger at a much lower BW. I am happy with the squat improvement.

Bench Press

2010 Best: 352 lbs. at cca. 207 lbs.
2011 Best: 360 lbs. at cca. 198 lbs.
Increase: 8 lbs. Could have been better, but I'll definitely take it.

Deadlift

2010 Best: 455 lbs. at cca. 208 lbs.
2011 Best: 445 lbs. at cca. 200 lbs.
Increase: -10 lbs., i.e. a decrease. I was probably good for a 460-470 pull before the really bad injury, as my deadlift for reps was never stronger. Poor performance - will have to double the DL efforts in 2012.

Overhead Press

2010 Best: 225 lbs. at cca. 210 lbs.
2011 Best: 235 lbs. at cca. 198 lbs.
Increase: 10 lbs. Did not push the OH press as hard as the bench press, but saw better improvement than on the bench. Pretty good.

Goals for 2012:

Squat 500 lbs. - I think this is realistic and I should hit it after a few cycles of heavy singles.
Bench press consistently in the upper 300s. 400 is still a long way off, but who knows...
Deadlift 500 lbs. - an ambitious goal, but I think I can hit it with some specialized pull work.
Overhead press 250 lbs. - focus more on overhead pressing and do less benching.

Bodyweight could comfortably move to 220, I think it'd do me good and I'll still be pretty lean. At 5'11" and 198 lbs. I don't look or feel heavy enough for really big lifts.

Happy Holidays and here is to good lifting and no injuries in 2012!

5/3/1 Nutrition

I generally avoid nutritional discussion, but I got some major inspiration from the wisdom of Jim Wendler this morning:

"(On kitchen utensils) First of all, you don't need pots and pans. You need a pot and a pan. The pan is to cook (many) grilled cheese sandwiches. Grilled cheese fucking rules and should be eaten three to four times a day as I've found a direct correlation between being awesome and the uninhibited consumption of grilled cheese.

As for the pot, you need that to cook and sterilize your Fina. That should be a given.

So make sure you have a pan big enough to cook 2-3 grilled cheese at once and a pot big enough to house a massive bottle of Fina."

I'll take a pass on the Fina, but the grilled cheese sounded right on the money this morning. So I had two sandwiches. As for the pot, use it to cook stews, curries and even whole chickens.

How to make grilled cheese in a pan (for the cooking impaired):

Step 1: Take two slices of bread per sandwich.

Step 2: Butter two slices of bread per sandwich.

Step 3: Slice enough cheese.

Step 4: Find a pan. If making more than one sandwich, make sure the slices can fit into the pan with room to spare, otherwise they will not cook properly.

Step 5: Heat the pan.

Step 6: Place slice(s) of bread, buttered side down, into the pan. Place cheese on top of (unbuttered) side of the slice. Place the other slice atop the cheese so that the buttered side is on top.

Step 7: Grill for about a minute and a half, or until frying side is brown and crispy.

Step 8: Flip sandwich over and grill until other buttered side is brown and crispy. Be careful, it will brown much more quickly than the first slice.

Step 9: Eat and enjoy.

Burning Out - Time to Refocus

Went running yesterday and as a result was horribly sore in the legs and calves today.

In retrospect, the reduced calories thing has been a bad idea. I have been at under 2,000pretty consistently over the past two weeks (on some days not more than 1,500) and it is really destroying my lifts. My BW is now below the 205 mark for the first time in a long while; while I want to get below 200 - it will only take me a few more pounds - I do not want to lose all my strength, and it seems to be fading fast.

I have made the mistake of training too hard, too many exercises for too many total repetitions, for this caloric intake. I will need to turn to a more abbreviated routine for the time being, and the old Anthony Ditillo program seems like a good place to start.

I have also torn two callouses on my right hand which is making pullups a very painful experience. Overall it can be said that I feel like crap.

Today's training:

Clean & Press:

Warmup 1 set
160 lbs x 3 (this already felt too heavy)
170 lbs x 3 (worse)
180 lbs x 8 (sheer murder, had to cheat to get the last couple of reps in which I normally don't do at this weight)

Partial press rack to eye level 155 lbs x 5, 185 lbs x 5

Pullups 5x5

Incline board situps 1 set

PM workout:

Press to eye level 135 lbs x 5, 155 lbs x 5, 185 lbs x 4, 205 lbs x 3, 225 lbs x 1

Close-grip paused bench press 185 lbs x 2, 225 lbs x 2, 245 lbs x 2, 275 lbs x 1, 295 lbs x 1 (last time I hit the CGBPs heavy my regular BP soared, hoping for a repeat)

Bicep and tricep work 4 sets each

These two-a-days seem to be doing the trick when energy is low.

Kepler Telescope: Finally Doing The Right Thing

Heard about this on the awesome Bill Maher show, and it's unbelievable:

Kepler Telescope

After all the cash spent in assorted douchebaggery, mankind takes a step in the right direction. Perhaps the number of people "into crazy" is going down.

"Kepler Mission Scientific Objective:

The scientific objective of the Kepler Mission is to explore the structure and diversity of planetary systems. This is achieved by surveying a large sample of stars to:

1. Determine the abundance of terrestrial and larger planets in or near the habitable zone of a wide variety of stars;
2. Determine the distribution of sizes and shapes of the orbits of these planets;
3. Estimate how many planets there are in multiple-star systems;
4. Determine the variety of orbit sizes and planet reflectivities, sizes, masses and densities of short-period giant planets;
5. Identify additional members of each discovered planetary system using other techniques; and
6. Determine the properties of those stars that harbor planetary systems"

Science one, idiotism zero (it's still way ahead, but we're getting there).

Stay intelligent!

Yuri Vlasov, Author?

One of my favorite blogs just published an old interview with weightlifting great Yuri Vlasov.

Apparently this superb lifter, who set twenty-eight world records and won two Olympic medals (a gold and a silver), four World and six consecutive European championships in his sport of choice, was also a distinguished and published writer. Considered a nerd due to his bespectacled appearance, Vlasov, by profession a radio engineer, went on to crush all stereotypes both about weightlifters and about men of education.

Not to be accused of slowing down, six years ago (at the age of seventy) he lifted 185 kgs in a Masters' competition. And is still writing. A true legend.

A Whiff Of Iron Game History: The Game of Weights And Its Origins by G. Le Roy

An interesting tidbit I found in the Iron Game History Online Journal, Volume 5, No. 2, this text tells us of the early days of public strongman performances:

The Game Of Weights And Its Origins: Performing in Public Squaresfrom Le Roy, G: Strength Athletics and Swedish Gymnastics

The first man who had the idea of performing weightlifting feats in public was named Jean Broyasse, and he was born in Lyon in 1798. Jean Broyasse did not then work (at least at the start) with weights that were as perfected as those whose shapes have become classic today.

His materials were obtained from a German named Stücker who since the age of twenty had (for reasons which we do not know and which, moreover, do not interest us) lived in France. Let us note in passing, that it was claimed that after his sudden and unexplained death that he had obtained the greater part of his income from espionage. Stücker enjoyed physical exercise very much and loved feats of strength. He met Jean Broyasse in a Lyon tavern. At this time Broyasse was a newly poor man,or more precisely, he was in the process of becoming a pauper. He was not a brigand—he could even be called an intellectual since he was studying law.

Nature had endowed him with great muscularity. When Stücker returned to Germany, he left to his friend Broyasse his weights composed of roughly cast masses of iron which were riveted with chains and handles to assure a good grip. The remainder of the bars was just as roughly put together. Jean Broyasse could not resist his bohemian nature, so he abandoned his studies there and put his athletic abilities to a professional use. First, he joined a traveling circus, but later he became enamored of absolute freedom, and he decided to work on his own by performing in public squares. He did not make a fortune, but he lived the way he wanted to.

Broyasse was still performing when there appeared in Paris a certain Wolff who modestly called himself “the Rock of Luxemburg.” Naturally, he was not the Rock of anything; he was an extremely mediocre strongman. However, he had a very practical sense when it came to the husbanding of his physical strength: he did not like to get tired. He also worked with phony weights (it was he who imported this sort of thing to France). All of his weights were fakes; not a single piece of his equipment was genuine, not even the cannon which he carried on his shoulder and with which he walked around the crowd, with his moneybag in his hand. In addition, the public, which was not as informed as it is today, granted him its credulity . . . and its money. Wolff looked like he could lift mountains, but in reality he could not lift much at all; he performed his feats with such ease that everyone was amazed.

As one might imagine, almost at once Wolff had his imitators, and thus a number of specialists in street performances began to develop, their work becoming more and more suspicious. Quite some time ago the first foundry for faked weights and barbells was opened in Paris. Strongmen had adopted a sort of vague drapery as a
costume, something like a short tunic which made vague references to antiquity.

It was around 1814 that Laroche appeared. To the act of weightlifting he added that of the human burden. His act consisted of getting under a cart filled with fifteen men, then buttressing himself with his knees and his hands, lifting the load as high as his waist. An assistant had the duty of turning the wheels to prove beyond doubt that the cart had left the ground. This was a rather happy time for Laroche. In his later days he abandoned strength feats for prestidigitation, and he sported frightening costumes of a demented design, with crimson velvets made more garish by gold embroidery. And to those who stood dumbfounded in front of this flamboyant apparition, Laroche, who was quite satisfied with himself, announced to his spectators, “Formerly, I amazed them with what was underneath; today, I amaze them with what is overhead.” The “human burden” feat was taken up again several years later by someone named Paris.

Felice Giordanino, who was a contemporary of Laroche, established a career in Paris under the name ofFelice Napoli. He hailed from Naples. He started out by lifting weights which, incidentally, he was particularly good at, especially “juggling.” But since he gradually grew stronger and stronger, he added several sensational feats to his first exercises, for example, the one that involved breaking stones on his chest. He earned a great success with this. The turn consisted of the following: Napoli lay down on his back, and a stone measuring about 50 centimeters wide and 10 centimeters thick was placed on his chest. A man broke the stone in two with a blow from a mallet.

His “bar trick” was also wildly successful. It involved taking an iron bar of one centimeter in diameter and bending it in the middle by striking it on his forearm. After two or three blows, the bar curved in at the middle. Several contemporaries of Napoli attempted the same feat with no other result but that they were seriously bruised. In the end the hoax was revealed: the two extremities of the bar were iron, but the middle part was lead and completely hollow!

“Samson’s March,” also devised by Napoli, saw its appearance on the weightlifting scene. To perform this feat Felice was decorated with 20-kilogram weights; he had them all around his waist, on his shoulders, a string of them across his chest, below his knees, at the base of his thighs, and his shoes had lead soles. Then, thus accoutered and after being loaded with solid iron bars across the back of the neck, he walked about the distinguished audience.

With Gérard of Lyon, who dates from the same time, we emerge into what we can call “classic weightlifting performances.” Gérard was neither an eccentric nor a “character”; he was an extremely strong man who did very correct lifts. It was he who became enraged during a performance in a circus, and grabbed his manager who was costumed as a gendarme, ready to play his role in the pantomime. After picking up the man and carrying him at arms’ length to police headquarters, he found a magistrate who was astounded by this hilarious scene. Gérard asked if he could rule that this minor Barnum might pay his employees the emoluments that were greatly in arrears. The director settled with Gérard, even reimbursing him, and then invited him to disappear from the troupe on the double quick.

Then there is Vigneron, the Cannon Man. With him, weightlifting performances were graced with a sensational feat. He had a cannon weighing around 180 kilos in which was a strong charge of powder. He placed the cannon on his right shoulder, then touched the light to the fuse. The difficulty consisted (aside from the strength needed to lift and support such a weight) in bending the body forward at the correct moment in order to compensate in advance for the recoil of the piece.

Vigneron, who had performed this feat more than 800 times was its victim in Boulogne-sur-Mer under very tragic circumstances. He had lifted his cannon onto his shoulder, and as usual waited for the moment when the flame would light the fuse. The cannon did not fire. Growing impatient, Vigneron began to put the cannon on the ground, and balanced it on his shoulder with the barrel facing toward his chest. At the instant when the breech touched the ground, the shot fired, and the strongman was killed instantly. As a cannon man, Vigneron had numerous imitators. The most famous was Mr. Vuillod, an amateur, who today is a senator from the Department of l’Est.

Alfred Ferrand and Vincent “the Iron Man” were two amazing strongmen. They always performed together, and one man’s story is intimately linked to the other’s. The queerness of their character was the cause of some hilarious adventures such as the one that happened to them in Monaco where luck was not favorable to them—something they could not admit without starting a revolution. Accordingly, they revolted willingly enough against the established prince who did not agree with their personal ideas. They had a high opinion of their athletic prowess, and truly their strength justified their pretensions.

Vincent and Ferrand attempted to recover their expenses by taking a trip to London (without guaranteed reward) in order to challenge a German strongman who proclaimed himself the finest in the world. Vincent had great difficulty in concluding a match with this rival whom he convinced himself he was certain of dominating, but finally, it came to pass. Not only did Ferrand and Vincent easily perform all the feats of the German, but they even performed others which their rival was incapable of doing when his turn came. The fame of the two Frenchmen became prodigious in London, and the entire population of the English capital flocked to applaud them at the Aquarium.

Robert “the Man Seller” was a mediocrity compared to nearly anyone else. There are several cock-and-bull stories attached to his name that he obligingly allowed to be put abroad and which added nothing to his reputation (which was overrated even during his own time). Consequently, his time on the public squares was of short duration.

A group performing on the Place Louvois one day produced a plowman from the Nivernais named Jean-Pierre de Montastruc. He was a freak of nature: hunchbacked, deformed, with huge arms and incredible ham-like hands; but despite everything, he was very strong (clumsier than he was strong, however). Feats have been attributed to him whose authenticity seems to be equivocal. Consider the following: he still worked the soil when one day he encountered a cart driver on the road whose wagon was loaded with wheat and was stuck in a rut. Jean-Pierre, it is said, got under the vehicle, lifted it on his back, pulled it from the rut and placed it back thus in the middle of the road. This often-told legend, presented for the consideration of a credulous public, does not inspire confidence. Here is another: He was plowing. A passerby approached and asked directions, and Jean-Pierre picked up his plow with two hands, and bending his arms in order to point out the path which stretched out before him, put the errant traveler back on the right track. Once more, this one is extreme fantasy.

Although he was very strong, he was above all a phenomenon who attracted attention by his deformity. When he was seated in the middle of a train seat and he extended his two arms laterally, the tips of his fingers touched the walls of the car.

Another product of the province was the miller of Darnétal who came to Paris to “do weights” but who never made a very lasting impression and is remembered only vaguely. It was he, who in Darnétal where he worked, lifted to arms’ length and transported a ladder a few meters farther on which a man had climbed carrying a 100-kilo sack of flour.

Louis the Mechanic was endowed with huge hands and specialized in lifting block weights by the rim. When he extended his fingers, his thumb touched the base of a liter bottle and his little linger touched the tip of the neck. He also had a special barbell that was terrifying because of its uncommon dimensions, but this selfsame weight which looked as if it weighed twice that of others, in reality weighed less than half.

Weightlifting met its Beau Brummel in the person of Henri Joigneret who (along with Alphonse Grasse) was a perfect model of correctness and elegance in the presentation of feats. Joigneret and Grasse were all the rage in Paris. The former was one of the founders of the earliest weight training gymnasiums in Paris. After having established himself in the Rue Mazagran, he moved to the Avenue des Tilleuls and a little afterwards passed the torch to the famous Paul Pons.

As for Alphonse Grasse, he was incomparable from the point of view of the elegance of the feats. He had a very personal “style” and “manner.” Obviously, there are stronger men than he, but probably no better when it came to the way he lifted.

Jules and Justin Barrois were from Joigneret’s school. No trickery here, just good work: no “spectacular feats,” nothing but arm extensions, snatches, jerks, and a bit of acrobatics because the public demanded it.

Two men whose names should be mentioned are François Vilher and Dubois, even though they did not lift professionally except for a very brief appearance. Ah! How those two seriously discredited performing in the public squares! When their colleagues saw them leave, it was with great relief. They later moved on to wrestling. It was claimed that they were the inventors of “chicanery,” but it was inept fakery: deception on the lowest scale, approaching the clumsiest duping of the public ever known. At any rate, it would appear that it was they whom we must thank for “counter-chicanery,” that is to say, the presence of a paid accomplice in the anonymous crowd listening with mouths agape to the barker’s patter. He was the “shill” who played the unexpected amateur who challenges the professionals.

Like others in the history of old-time strongmen, Faouët, the “Beast of the Jungles” and the “Muscular Apollo,” was primarily a wrestler, whose names are mentioned here but not remembered.

Professionals were not and never had been a uniquely French specialty, as we have seen from the start with Wolff, the Rock of Luxemburg. Around the time which interests us, foreigners produced several people who lifted weights better than most; they were without well-established principles since no rules existed which imposed a single and unified manner of performing the movements. In a general way, the diversity of the French and foreign schools have been maintained up to the present. It has only been about fifteen years since the codification of weightlifting has been definitively standardized. But now we digress from our subject.

Foreigners had their professionals as well for whom weightlifting was merely a prelude to bizarre feats well designed to strike the public’s fancy. The sporting character of their exhibitions was certainly the least thing that concerned them; the theatrical side of the question interested them much more since their first desire just as well was to make sure of box office receipts.

Germany and Austria have produced quantities of professionals and particularly that sort of specialist known as “‘chain breakers.” As for legitimate weightlifting, one can count among the obscure unknowns more interesting subjects than among the famous circus performers. Among those whose names have come to us and who are considered interesting men are Hans Beck and Carl Abs.

Hans Beck of Achdorf in Bavaria was a butcher-boy when he abandoned his profession to become a strongman. The muscles which he possessed were of a very real quality. He trained in a Munich club and came to be very strong. His specialty was the globe barbell which he lifted in three movements; unfortunately, the first movement was assisted by a resting point on his abdomen which is not allowed in France where the shouldering must be done in one move. Along with Stangelmeier, Beck founded one of
the most famous clubs in Bavaria.

Carl Abs of Mecklenburg approached Joigneret a bit when it came to the elegance of his lifting. Otto Kohler was of German extraction, and he performed for a long time under the direction of his father, Frederic Kohler, who coached a weight training club in Mount-Clemmons. He was quite strong, but he always professed a certain penchant for wrestling and met several times with William Buldon [sic. this should read Muldoon] and Louis the Strangler.

Austria has produced a man whom the entire athletic world agrees in recognizing as a strongman of the highest quality: Wilhelm Turck, who was born in Vienna in 1859. Unfortunately, Wilhelm Turck has not escaped criticism from us. His lifting is not done in the purest style—not by a long shot. It is not that his weights are phony (far from it), but his lifting performance was so lax, so innocent of any methodology that he drew several justified cautions. Wilhelm Turck’s principles can be summed up thus: lift the weight any way you can just so long as you lift it. Using this process, he was able to shoulder extraordinary poundages without worrying about the contortions with which he was obliged to put himself through to attain those results. It is a way of doing things that the French school does not wish to accept, and in this it is absolutely correct.

Modern Russia has furnished some interesting subjects. Doctor Krajewski, who was president of the St. Petersburg Athletic Club and director of physical exercise at this club, is very busy there. One can cite among the long list of best men in this elite circle Yousoff, de Ianslew, William Moor Znamenski of St. Petersburg; Schmelling, who is especially good at wrestling, and more recently Elliseieff, who came to Paris several years ago.

England has not exactly been poor in weightlifting specialists. Montgomery of London is one of the finest names to cite. He is more elegant in his lifting than he is really strong; he was, however, still a vaudeville strongman. Sanderson the Swede lifted without Clan but was endowed with an amazing natural strength.

The Japanese physique does not (to say the least) lend itself to weightlifting. That is why Japan has primarily produced acrobats, wrestlers, and jiujitsu fighters in the realm of professional performers. The only man performing feats of physical strength and who has left a name in this specialized area is a certain Matsada Sora Kichi, who first saw the light of day in 1847 in a little village near Yeddo.

Like all the men of his race, Sora Kichi was very small, but he was astoundingly muscular. He specialized in lifting beer barrels, and he was able to do feats with these massive casks that stronger men than he have never been able to do. He has never been seen in France; he works regularly in the music halls of the United States.

Sora Kichi—this name was certainly borrowed— was of high pedigree. He was an errant nobleman of Japanese society. By the time he was twenty years of age, he had gotten into many scrapes, and his family, despairing of his ever making something of himself, broke off relations with him. One would never imagine that this person would be capable of the athletic feats which he accomplishes.

Sora Kichi was forced to leave Japan after an incident which nearly cost him his life. He had requested an audience with the Mikado, but this went unanswered. He sought an explanation for the man’s silence and not finding a plausible one in his reasoning faculties, he resolved to get to the bottom of things. He positioned himself on the Mikado’s route, and when the ruler arrived in a carriage traveling at a slight trot, Sora Kichi broke through the crowd, evaded the bodyguard’s notice, seized the landau by the rear springs, and stopped it in just a few meters before the police were even able to intervene. [Editor D. Chapman’s note: Clearly impossible, of course.] Surrounded by guards, he engaged in a Homeric struggle in the course of which he seriously wounded two or three of them. He was like a Barnum in New York.

Modern strongmen have redeemed the errors of the unscrupulous lifters of the past: men like Joseph Bonnes of Narbonne, Louis Uni (“Apollon”) of Marsiliargues, Robert of Paris, Jean-François the Breton, Victorius, Noël Rouverrolis (“The Gaul”), Émile Deriaz, Robert, Vasseur, Maspoli, and Lancoud. The best lifter, the man who seems to us “the most all-around” in the first world championship organized several years ago was, without a doubt, Bonnes, who was given the title of world champion.

Fatman's Note: There you have it - true strong men, fakes (even specialized shops for producing false weights), elaborate performances, strange costumes, rivalry, bickering, criticizing of different lifting styles, even a bizarre death in the strongman circuit long before steroids... not much seems to have changed in the Iron Game over the centuries after all. Yet under the myriad different emotions and legends still lies the deep-rooted fascination with men of strength and their feats. Raise a mug of beer or whatever your poison happens to be and toast these giants of old. Then go lift something heavy.

An Interesting Study On Vegetarian vs. Non-Vegetarian Diets

This little gem caught my attention today:

Vegetarianism is healthy, but not because of lack of animal protein

(Article summarizes a study found here)

In brief, the four healthiest nations in Europe consume (on average) copious amounts of animal products. Vegetarian diets have a proven effect on the reduction of risk of heart disease and stroke, most likely due to a much lower cholesterol intake, but vegetarians are just as likely to die of cancer as non-vegetarians - they even run a slightly higher risk of stomach cancer, which was a huge surprise for me - and experience a higher death rate from "other causes".

Although the author takes the "saturated fat is bad for you" view that has become the target of rabid attacks from some "experts" and experts on nutrition, his explanation seems very reasonable. Note that among the four nationalities E. Ginter lists as the healthiest three consume a lot of fish products - Icelandic, Swedes and Norwegians - while the Swiss are predominantly meat-and-cheese eaters.

Of course, the four nations listed in the study also happen to live in countries ranked as the most prosperous in the world in terms of citizens' well-being (Norway actually tops the list, which I would have to agree with from personal experience), which alone might have an effect on overall health regardless of diet.

Overall, he article provides one of the most balanced, honest approaches to the topic I have ever come across, without pro-vegetarian rants about how meat-eaters and milk-drinkers are all predestined to die prematurely, or any of the "paleo diet" anti-grain bullshit that is a popular pseudo-scientific point of debate these days. Rated very cool in my book.

Happy New 2011!

Just got back from my travels and will be looking for a gym soon. Didn't do too much in the meantime, but didn't stop training either. My program was far from regular but generally it went something like this:

Day 1 - Cable training, pull
Day 2 - Cable training, push
Day 3 - Several pushup, squat and abdominal variations for a lot of sets
Repeat

Managed to keep the bodyweight down despite heavy eating and drinking (or at least managed not to gain too much), muscle tone is still okay. Will probably hit the gym tomorrow to see how the strength levels are holding up. I'm planning to restart the 5/3/1 program as soon as possible, using the numbers I managed to hit in the last two weeks of training as my maxes. Will see how that goes.

R.I.P. Ronnie James Dio (10 July 1942 - 16 May 2010)

On May 16 Ronald James Padavona, who achieved world-wide fame under the name Ronnie James Dio, lost a six-month long battle with stomach cancer.

He will be remembered first and foremost as the vocal power of one of the most influential metal bands of all time, Black Sabbath, where he replaced another heavy metal icon, Ozzy Osbourne. Dio will later quit Sabbath and go on to form the band Dio with drummer Vinny Appice. At the time of his death he was also heavily involved in another project, Heaven and Hell, together with several former Sabbath musicians.

A heavy metal icon, Dio will be remembered for his extraordinary vocal performances, lyrics, and the "devil's horns" gesture which he popularized and turned into a symbol worshipped by metalheads across the globe. One of my favorite heavy metal vocalists of all time, he leaves behind a legacy of great albums and live performances from the golden era of heavy metal and beyond. A true legend. R.I.P. Ronnie James Dio.

Ancient Physical Culture Through Wrestling/Grappling

Here is an article I wrote not-so-recently for the Bodyweightculture site (www.bodyweightculture.com):

The recent resurrection of interest for all things “old-time” when it comes to the development of physical strength, endurance and health, has led to a veritable avalanche of articles, books and courses that cover old-time greats and their training methods. Some of these works are genuinely useful; others seem to be riding the wave of popularity, endeavouring to squeeze out the last dime out of the pockets of strength enthusiasts worldwide. This, however, is not an article about the inherent inhumanity of contemporary capitalism, or an attempt to expose modern marketing frauds. The purpose of the article is to provide a comprehensive overview of exercise protocols followed by wrestlers of the Far and Near East since ancient times. It is not the product of unbiased, direct and detailed research, rather a compilation of works already available through the Internet, and should be taken as such. Nothing more, nothing less.

Since the dawn of time, various forms of grappling have been employed by men in all parts of the world as a method of strengthening the body and mind and preparing for the one and only true pastime of humanity: war. Just as baseball is called The Great American Pastime, murder and war deserve the title of The Great Human Pastime. Slaughtering each other by the dozens over issues real and imagined is what has defined us as a species over the centuries. The history of humanity also notes brief interruptions in the wonderful game of slaughter; these annoying breaks, distastefully termed peace, were necessary so that the armies could re-stock on fresh “cannon fodder” (if such a term can be used in the era pre-dating the invention of the cannon), sow and reap the fields to provide rations for the armies, and investigate new murdering and marauding possibilities for the next round of happy hostilities. However, it soon became obvious that the ancient warrior was kind of out of his depth in times of peace – once the field work was done, there wasn’t a whole lot for him to entertain himself with. Boredom ruled and tempers flared easily, and more often than not comrades-in-arms turned onto each other over petty insults. The “corporations” in whose interest the wars were waged in the first place (in this instance – the ruler, major nobles or a religious organization) found that the worthy practice of hewing off one’s neighbour’s head was damaging quarterly profit reports (these go back further than one would think), so they hastily developed sets of activities that would replace pillaging and rape in times of peace, assuaging the tempers of the testosterone-driven sword and axe-wielders until their aggression could be used in a more productive manner.

Such was the origin of martial arts, and exercise in general. Under these new rules, man could maul and beat up his fellow man without running the risk of (serious and mortal) injury that would render one or both participants incapable of killing other people in times of war. This manner of physical exertion took on many forms in various parts of the globe, but the main idea remained the same: grappling, striking, running and marching with and without weapons, and various tests of martial skill including dueling with weapons. Different national and ethnic traditions determined countless “flavor” differences, so the Japanese developed jiu-jitsu, Indians developed Kushti, Europeans had pankration (much like UFC today) and the Medieval wrestling styles, and the Anglo-Saxon world spawned the honored art of catch wrestling. This article aims to take a closer look at the wrestling traditions of India and Central Asia, which seem to be closely related, not so much in terms of techniques and holds used as in terms of training methods. Emphasis will be placed on these shared strength and conditioning methods, while the actual techniques, holds, chokes, etc. are best studied under qualified supervision.

The training of Indian wrestlers has received a lot of media attention since the birth of the concept of “functional training”. Firstly, we shall disambiguate between the terms Indian wrestling (correct use) and Hindu wrestling (incorrect, yet more prevalent use, of which I have been guilty myself in the past). The reason for the use of Hindu in conjunction with this term has to do with general ignorance and the fact that the programs that sparked interest for these ancient training methods used this term. Many of the famed “Hindu” wrestlers in fact came from Kashmir and other parts of pre-Partition India dominated by proponents of the Islamic faith, and the most famous “Hindu” wrestler of all time, The Great Gama Baksh, was a devout Muslim who must be turning in his grave every time someone refers to him as the “famous Hindu wrestler”. It would be like calling the Japanese fighting arts Buddhist wrestling, or dubbing catch wrestling Christian wrestling. For this purpose, the native word Kushti will be used in the place of Indian wrestling.

However, the strength and conditioning traditions commonly related to Kushti have never been limited to the great expanses of the Indian sub-continent. The mountain ranges of Kashmir and today’s Pakistan flow into the highlands of Afghanistan, then northward and westward into the turbulent Middle East and the mythical countries of Central Asia. Commerce and conquest have forged close links between the rival nations since ancient times, and a lot of them share a common ethnic background, despite speaking different languages or praying in different temples. The interweaving of diverse cultures has lead to the spread of traditional wrestling practices among the nations of this part of the world, and behind this wave followed traditional strength and conditioning practices. Through Ottoman and Mongol conquest and settlement, these ancient traditions have made their way into Europe.

So where did this type of wrestling originate? Is it Indian, Kazakh, Uzbek or Turkish? Was wrestling brought on horseback, from the frozen steppes of Mongolia, where similar wrestling styles exist and competitions are held to this day? Or did Persia, that beacon of science and progress in ancient and medieval times, give birth to club swinging and wrestling-specific bodyweight exercise regimens? We will never know. A much more likely answer is that all of these cultures participated in the development of these exercises. Even today, the wrestling traditions of these countries retain many elements that make each national wrestling tradition unique and different from the others.

After this long-winded introduction, let us turn to the main part of the article – conditioning exercises:

Dands, Baithaks and Bodyweight Exercises

The staple conditioning exercises of the fabled Kushti practitioners, these two exercises have become know as the “Hindu Pushup” (dand) and the “Hindu Squat” (baithak or bethak). Descriptions of these two exercises abound on the internet; therefore I will omit them from this article. Both of these are performed for very high reps – Indian wrestlers regularly perform thousands of these every day in addition to their other training. Great Gama Baksh reputedly worked up to five thousand baithaks and three thousand dands per day at the peak of his career. He would enter a trance-like state and intone the name of God with every repetition; for this deeply religious man faith was the chief source of strength during these extreme tests of physical prowess. It was not uncommon for the dirt and mud floor of the akhara (wrestling pit) to bear a perfect outline of a wrestler’s body due to the effusion of sweat during these intense workouts. Hindu squat thrusts were also employed as a conditioning exercise.

Squats and pushups, albeit not always of the “Hindu” variety, are staple conditioners throughout the Central Asian wrestling world. The reason? These exercises are simple to master and require no equipment, yet they work. Done in hundreds of repetitions, they will increase your muscular endurance and give the heart and lungs a great workout – precisely what one needs for a wrestling match. Even performing them for 20-30 reps sporadically throughout the day will produce an invigorating effect.

An interesting addition to any pushup routine is the use of a pushup board. Originally used by Persian pahlavani (“heroes”, a term used to denote wrestlers and strongmen; evolved into pahlwani in India and pehlivan and its derivatives in the Turkish-speaking nations of Central Asia), this device is essentially a small wooden plank elevated on two blocks, or “legs”. The athlete holds the ends and performs dands, possibly some other joint mobility exercises as well. The Persian name for this device is Takhteh Shena, and it is thought that this type of exercise was introduced to India by Persian wrestlers fleeing Mongol invaders in the thirteenth century. Upon arrival, it was combined with yoga practices that already existed in the area, and thus evolved the staple bodyweight exercises of Kushti practitioners. If one breaks down the movement pattern, the dand is a combination of three yoga poses performed dynamically (“downward dog” to “plank/crocodile” to “upward dog” or “cobra”). Be as it may, Steve Maxwell, a well-known physical trainer, has resurrected this simple, yet effective training tool; he offers them through his site, pushupboard.com, along with a DVD with exercise instructions. of course, if you don’t have ten thumbs when it comes to making things like I do, you could probably knock one together yourself.

Other bodyweight exercises used by grapplers from Indian akharas to Iranian zoorkhanes included:

Spinning, a practice which develops balance and spatial awareness and which is related to the religious practice of Sufi whirling among members of the ascetic Sufi Tariqah of Islam, more commonly known as dervishes or darvishes. This whirling dance, one of the most physically demanding forms of worship around, originated in Iran (Persia), but its most prominent practitioners are the Turkish Mevlevi Order in and around the Konya region. Did the physical aspect of this exercise predate the spiritual or vice versa? This is a tough one to answer, so I will leave that to someone else.

Stomping, which was a dance performed as kicking practice. Here it is interesting to note that the Sumo wrestlers of Japan employ the same training method, that of stomping on the ground for high repetitions to develop strength. They also use the teppo, which is a wooden log on which palm strikes are performed with the heel of the hand in the same pattern.

Squatting, which was not done for high reps as in the case of Kushti practitioners, but more as a dance for the general strengthening of the legs for kicking. It should be noted here that almost all mentioned traditions – Iranian/Persian, Turkish, Mongolian, Indian – use some form of dancing as preparation for the wrestling bouts, usually to the beating of drums and other ethnic instruments. It can be concluded that dancing is viewed as important for developing body control, balance and poise. Traditional dances are also one hell of a workout!

Bodyweight exercises have been around since the dawn of man, and their effectiveness and simplicity of use have earned them a permanent spot in the training regimens of wrestlers and other athletes, ancient and modern alike. I have separated pole and rope climbing in a separate section, as I feel that they require more detailed attention.

Yoga

The relationship between Yoga and the dand and baithak has already been touched upon above. I must say that I am largely unfamiliar with Yoga and dislike rambling on about stuff I’m not familiar with, therefore this type of training should be covered in detail by someone else. It should suffice to say that wrestling exercises are most closely related to the “sun salutation” Yoga sequence, surya namaskar; some bridging and calisthenic-type elements from yoga asana are also utilized. Breathing control is also extremely important in all wrestling scenarios. Steve Maxwell writes that it is in fact assumed that asana originated from wrestling practices, as the original yoga texts only describe a couple of yogic exercises, most of which were seated positions).

I am uncertain about the extent of yogic exercises used in non-Indian training systems, but joint mobility work would be very similar, even if the Turks and Iranians don’t call their mobility work “yoga”. Some of the Iranian (Persian) training methods include exercises similar to the dand, done on the pushup board, so it is relatively easy to establish a connection here.

Perhaps the best illustration of yoga-type exercises for wrestlers comes not from India and Iran, but from the opposite side of the world. Brazilian jiu-jitsu expert Rickson Gracie demonstrates some of these exercises in his documentary Choke. Clips are available for free viewing on YouTube.

Gada/Meel/Jori

This type of training refers to apparatus exercises performed with leverage implements – clubs, maces, but also sledgehammer-like devices. Club swinging was introduced into Western physical culture through the British conquests of India, and primarily included light club swinging.

What follows is a disambiguation between the three terms in the sub-title, and some very brief notes on their use:

Gada: this is the Hindu term used for the mace or “mace-bell”. This exercising implement was developed from the weapon of the same name and shape, and carries a connotation of aggression and strength in many ancient cultures. In fact, the mace is the first implement developed specifically for the purpose of killing other human beings. Prior to the invention of the mace, weapons of war were hunting implements, like the knife, spear and bow. In India, maces are a symbol of strength and the favoured weapon of the monkey-god Hanuman in Hindu religion (the patron of warriors, warfare and strength). Often confused with the club, the gada is generally longer (it has a longer handle) and almost all of the weight is centered on the top (the “head”), which produces a superb torque effect as the implement is swung around. The gada is principally used for swinging motions in which both arms are employed; the principal muscles worked are the shoulders, arms, hands, fingers and core. They would range from 20 to 60 lbs. in weight, but special heavy gadas were made in excess of 100 lbs. Now, lifting a nicely balanced barbell with two arms is not much of a strength feat, but swinging a 60-lb. gada around the head will provide more than a decent workout. This, in fact, was the most popular move – simply swinging the mace around one’s head in one direction, then reversing the circular motion. Simple, but by no means easy.

Older texts mention the use of two smaller gadas, which would be similar to using a pair of meels, which are described below.

Meel: this is the Persian version of the club; the most precise description I’ve been able to find is that it seems like a cross between the mace and the swinging club (jori). Unlike the mace, meels are used in pairs and utilized in a number of ways, from circular swinging, straight-arm swinging, levering exercises, etc. They would weigh anywhere between 5 and 40 kgs. (11 to 88 lbs.). The lighter ones are designed to improve the wrestler’s stamina, and used in sets of 100 reps or more. Heavier ones are used to develop strength. The heaviest pair weighed cca. 140 lbs. (per meel), so one can easily get the picture of the insane amount of strength required to control a pair of these implements.

Exercising with meels is a national sport in parts of Iran, and they even hold official competitions as part of the traditional wrestling tournaments. The official move with meels constitutes holding them by the handles with arms at 90 degrees (halfway position of a hammer curl), then lifting them over and behind the head, reversing the motion and repeating this one meel at a time. This is done to the beating of a drum – the faster the rhythm, the faster the swings.

Jori: this is the term generally used to describe light swinging clubs of the bowling-pin-shaped variety used in turn-of-the-century physical culture. The size and shape of these implements varies, much like the meel. They are also used in pairs. Club swinging was featured as an Olympic sport in 1948 under the term Rhythmic Gymnastics, but discontinued shortly after.

Heavy pillar-like joris were termed ekka, and had the appearance of a cylinder tapering toward the handle. Really extreme jori and ekka practitioners used implements studded with nails and blades – an added incentive not to touch them to any part of the body during performance. Again, the idea was to swing and lever the club all over the place.

Another type of heavy club is the karela, which looks like the archetypal wooden club (think of what cavemen use in cartoons and you’re pretty much on the money). This device was used two-handed like the gada, and the exercises were much more limited in comparison to the joris, meels and ekka, which were used in pairs.

Mallakhamb and Rope Climbing

The art of mallakhamb, or pole climbing, has already been described in an excellent article here on www.bodyweightculture.com, and I really have nothing to add there. Rope climbing is probably the best upper-body exercise of all time, and it is brutally simple. A rope is climbed either by using the hands and feet, or the hands only. Extremely strong folk will benefit from climbing the rope one-handed, in leaps. Rope climbing will develop the arms, specially the biceps, far better than any pullup, chinup or bicep curl variation. For those who lack the strength for rope climbing, grabbing a rope like you’re going to climb it and performing pullups is an excellent exercise. Strength will come quickly, as there is very little technique to be mastered. The rope is merciless – you’re either strong enough to climb it or not.

Every grappler, fighter or tactical professional (fireman, policeman, soldier, etc.) should start climbing ropes immediately if he/she is not already doing it. Indian wrestlers would also perform “rope mallakhamb” routines, which are incredibly difficult, even more so than mallakhamb itself.

Nal/Gar Nal and Other Weighted Implements

The nal is a round stone weight with a carved-out centre into which a handle (usually wooden) is inserted. They are of progressive weight to suit the developing strength of the user, which shows that even the ancients fully understood that you need to lift heavier weights to get stronger, a concept that completely eludes 95% of the gym-going population of today. Their compact size makes them adaptable for dumb-bell type exercises, but heavy nals exist which require two hands to use and go up to 400 lbs. in weight. It is part of the Indian strength training tradition. The most common exercise with the smaller nals was the two-dumbbell clean and press.

The gar nal is also an Indian concept. It is a nal without the handle in the centre (in essence, a stone circle) and was commonly used to add weight to bodyweight movements like the dand and baithak by placing it around the athlete’s neck. Running with a gar nal was a popular exercise; the Great Gama was reputed to use a 100-lb. gar nal and run for about a mile. Doesn’t sound like very far, but one needs to try it to appreciate how difficult this really is.

Another popular exercise with the gar nal was a get-up type of exercise. The wrestler would kneel in front of a gar nal, lift it up on its side and place his head through the hole in the weight. Placing it around his neck, he would then proceed to stand upright from the kneeling position. After assuming an upright stance, he would press the gar nal from his shoulders to overhead.

Stone balls, much like ones used in today’s Strongman contests, were probably the most popular weighted exercise in India, but also other parts of the world. Villages would hold contests in stone ball lifting, and in some areas lifting a stone ball of at least 200 lbs. in weight was considered a rite of passage into manhood. The most popular exercise was lifting it off the ground and throwing it behind one’s back with a jerk. They were also used to add weight to the baithak, or just to pick up and run/walk with. All these exercises developed tremendous strength and power in the practitioners.

The “Indian barbell” or sumtola resembled a “log” device used in contemporary Strongman competition. It was essentially a log made out of a special type of wood, and weighed the same on both ends (hence the name in Hindu). It was used for clean-and-jerk, swing and tricep extension-type exercises, but also in various presses in front of the body, like the Neider press in body-building (only done at various angles). They also varied in weight to match the strength of the user. Extremely heavy sumtolas were attached to ropes and dragged across the dirt and mud floor of the akhara to level it out. A couple thousand years later, the West “discovered” sled dragging as a strength and conditioning method.

Moving on to the Persian wrestling tradition, we find the kabadeh, a bow-shaped iron rod with heavy chains attached on either side. They weighed between 10 and 50 kgs (22 to 110 lbs.) and were swung around the body of the user, much like a heavy double flail, a weapon used by medieval horsemen in Europe. This gave excellent workout to the core, grip and shoulders, but non-proficient users ran a high risk of nasty injury. I guess it wasn’t for beginners to physical culture.

Opponents of the bench press will be surprised by the practice of sang (“shield”). These shield-shaped implements were made of solid wood and weighed between 60 and 120 kgs. (132 to 264 lbs.). They were used in a rolling floor exercise where they were pressed alternatively (like a dumbbell floor press), but with a twist of the entire body toward the opposite side of the pressing arm, much like an arm-bar exercise with kettlebells described by Pavel Tsatsouline. So press with the left – twist to the right until you’re on one side, then alternate.

Sandbags also featured heavily in the training of wrestlers in India and elsewhere. Filled with grain as often as sand, sandbags were used in a plethora of exercises, many of them involving bearhug-and-carries, throws for distance, etc. Every muscle of the body can be trained with the use of a sandbag, either by using sandbag-specific exercises or by replicating barbell movements.

Grainy black-and-white images from turn-of-the-century India reveal that the Indians also used “regular” barbells, i.e. two stone weights connected by a wooden rod. It is conceivable that the exercises performed with those implements were pretty similar to modern-day lifting exercises. It is pretty obvious that Indian, Persian and other wrestling nations did not slack off on work with weighted implements, unlike what many would want the public to believe.

Wrestling and partner exercises

Wrestling an opponent is a strength and conditioning workout in itself, as anyone with a shred of grappling experience will attest. Great Gama would wrestle around 40 opponents per day in addition to regular training, and eventually worked up to 80 per day in his prime. Back then a bout lasted until one of the opponents was defeated, and matches could go on for hours. What is also interesting is that the wrestling practice was arranged in a “progressive resistance” manner: an experienced wrestler would first wrestle boys as a warm-up, then newbies, then work his way up the ranks of the wrestlers until finally going against his peers.

Partner exercises varied. Some of them simply involved partner lifting and carrying, like squats with a partner on the back, partner carries, or wheelbarrow walks. Wrestlers would also do dands with a training partner sitting on their back.

Another popular training method was for the partner to provide manual resistance to the athlete performing a particular exercise, a method that is still commonly used in military training today. For example, two wrestlers would face off and lock hands, alternatively pushing and pulling against the resistance provided by the other. With this type of training, your imagination is the limit.

As can be seen from the information presented above, wrestling-specific strength and conditioning training is a tradition going back hundreds, perhaps even thousands of years. Two intense training sessions a day, coupled with immense caloric intake, created the wrestling legends that took the world by storm as soon as progress made international wrestling matches possible. The Great Gama Baksh was undefeated throughout his wrestling career; he easily overpowered the behemoth Stanislaus Zbysko of Poland, the most feared wrestler of the Old Continent. Georg Hackenschmidt and Karl Gotch, considered the two greatest wrestlers of all time, feared this man so much that they never accepted to fight him. Other legends, like the terrible Turks Ahmed Madrali and “Kara Mustafa” (“Black Mustafa”) dominated European wrestling for years. They trained with total devotion, living a sound lifestyle of exercise, self-control, diet and celibacy. As Vincent Giordano, the author of the wonderful collection of Kushti information, The Physical Body, stated, their strength eventually transcended its mere physical aspects and became an expression of their spiritual strength as well.

Anyone interested in the training of ancient wrestlers should consider purchasing this DVD collection. Also make sure you check out Steve Maxwell’s site, if not for the information on ancient training methods, then for the excellent general training ideas.

Training Myths - My Take

I posted this not-so-short text on one of the forums that I frequent. It was inspired by a "discussion" that I had with some brain-washed fucktard on another forum that I frequent, as well as the general attitude among the posters on that forum. Yes, it is not a secret: dragondoor.com is one of my favorite forums, also one of the most frustrating. I have read excellent training advice there, but it seems that the people who actually train hard, lift heavy and know their shit are being drowned out by the morons who want people to kiss their ass because they bought a kettlebell, or to spout abuse at the "mullets" at the gym. It seems that having or wanting a finely moulded physique presents a sort of offense to these people. I also have a big problem with the down-right crappy layout of the forum, where threads just pile one atop the other. Whatever. I still go there on the random chance that one good post by Jack Reape or Dave Whitley or someone else won't get buried under a couple dozen threads about the "WTH effect".

I shall now delve into an analysis of cow excrement conceptions that abound on the internet. I’ve probably said before, but you should be subjected to at least one test of basic intelligence before they let you log onto the Web. Contrary to my previous beliefs, I have come to the conclusion that freedom of information is dangerous and that the formula:

Abundance of Information + Lack of Processing Capacities = Disaster

Is truer than ever in this era of accessible info.

Back when I was doing graphical design (of sorts), I “obtained” the last version of the Adobe Illustrator software. An excellent programme by anyone’s standards. However, I installed it onto my old computer which lacked sufficient processing capacities, so I would often lose hours of work due to crashes. It is the same way with morons reading stuff on the Web. I found a way out – bought a better computer. Most people don’t have the option of re-wiring their brain for proper function.

Statement no. 1:“The (insert exercise name 1) is not a functional movement. It should be replaced with (insert exercise name 2).”

I posted here a while back discussing the difference between “compound” and “functional”. I won’t delve into that again. A push-up is not more functional than a bench press, unless the press is performed with a very low weight. In this case you can benefit more from doing the push-up and you’re wasting your time on the bench. There is some carryover, but it’s not the same exercise. In much the same manner as there is carryover between the bench press and the military press, but using one to train for the other just doesn’t make sense. I will repeat myself and state that unless you can do 15-20 proper pushups (PROPER!!! i.e. none of the floor-humping crap) you have not earned the right to do bench presses.As for the definition of “functional”, a bench press will be immensely more “functional” to the powerlifter. The push-up will also serve some function, like improving shoulder stability and stuff. To a rock climber, a pullup will be more functional than the deadlift, especially a pullup on rafters or thick beams, or on two or three fingers, as it mimics the climbing pattern better. Now the deadlift is the King of Functional Exercises, judging from the genuflection it receives on the “functional fitness” sites, but in this instance it’s not “functional”.For the record, I prefer the use of the terms “general and specific physical preparedness”. Not that anyone cares.

Statement no. 2:“The bench press sucks!!! Military press is the way to go. It’s so much more functional.”

Okay, here are two general observations after studying a sizeable population of the anti-benching brigade:

a) They universally SUCK at the bench press;

b) They almost universally suck at the military/overhead press too. However, here the disadvantage is lower, as very few people ever do the standing overhead press. A bench press of 200 lbs. is hardly impressive in any setting. An overhead press of 132 lbs (yes, that’s two hands) will seem Herculean to people who have never tried it, or do it as an afterthought of heavy benching;

c) They say “How does lying on your back and pressing a weight correlate to real-life situations?” Well, how often do you press people overhead in real-life situations? Or am I just really sheltered?This is a continuation of the old “if I can’t do it, it can’t be good” mentality. The overhead press is a tremendous strength builder, but give each exercise its due.

Statement no. 3:“Weighted chinups build bigger biceps than barbell/dumbbell curls”

This can be disputed, but IMHO the answer is NO. Were this true, all the Pro Bodybuilders would switch to chinups. The actual answer is a happy medium – for max size, you need both compound and isolation exercises.“But my arms grew 2 inches since I substituted chinups for curls!”Yes. This happened because you used 5 lb. dumbbells for curls, then started training chinups with something called INTENSITY. Plus it’s not really hard to go from a 12” arm to a 14” arm.The winner of the Most Cretinous Response for the month of March was a guy on dragondoor.com, a useful forum that I occassionally visit. After I’d made a comment kinda along the lines of what I wrote above, he posted something along the lines of “no, ‘cause that’s not functional, ‘cause you wouldn’t climb a mountain using your biceps”. I sometimes shed a tear for the havoc all the “functional training” info has wreaked on the poor moronic minds of these unfortunates.

Statement no. 4:“Bodybuilding is ridiculous! I hate those mullets!”

Almost everyone who states this is a reformed “muscle pumper” who lost years and years of training in futile efforts to follow the routines of the Champs. Frustrated and experiencing diarrhea from all the overpriced supplements they spent their cash on, they turned against their former brethren and now despise them with a passion. Come on. They’re the same as you. So maybe now you stumbled on the Secret that’ll take your top deadlift from 200 to 220 (whoopee). About 3% of you will actually attain decent muscular development. Don’t you have some compassion for someone who’s doing the same mistake you used to? Were you not once worthy of the term “mullet” yourself?The truth is, most of you are still closet bodybuilders. You’re still after the elusive 18” arm and writhing, massive pectorals. Don’t lie, I know. That’s why you keep changing even the “functional” routines you’re on. That’s why you post your “functional” workouts, but omit the few concentration curls you sneak in somewhere towards the end. You can say no, kick and scream, but there’s no lying to yourself.

Statement no. 5: – from the opposite end of the spectrum:“Bodyweight guys have hardly any muscle. Weights are better for building muscle.”

or another variant:

“Bodyweight exercises create small, hard muscles, while weights produce bigger muscles with less shape”

Although I see the fallacy of this statement, it’s hard to argue against it with someone who’s a firm believer in it. Many of the guys pushing BW stuff don’t look like someone who exercises regularly (or, in fact, at all). Furey is fat and appears to lack muscle mass. Pavel is pretty thin, with wiry muscles. So are most of the RKC dudes, although they’re not BW-only, but the misinformed group kettlebells and BW exercises in the same category. Why this occurs is unknown to me, I can venture a guess that they think of these exercises as “non-barbell”. The mind of the idiot is superbly complex in some areas.I’m already boring everyone by repeating myself, so here I go again: resistance is resistance. Load is defined as a percentage of the maximum resistance opposed (lifted) for a number of reps, like 60% of 3RM. Whether you use weights, BW, cars, dogs, cables, or something else is pretty irrelevant. Now many BW-only guys think that pushups, pullups and situps are al they have to do for high reps to be muscular and ripped. Think again. The progressive system must be employed, i.e. once you can do many reps with a certain resistance, make it harder. This is common sense. Pumping out 300 pushups or situps a day won’t make you bigger, just like doing bench presses with 50 lbs. won’t get you very far.Most of the guys asking this question are frustrated ex-weight-trainers who failed to use the progressive principle and made no progress whatsoever. If you didn’t build any muscle using weights, don’t you think the progression method you’re (not) using is to blame, instead of the means of exercise?

Another point: mostly-BW athletes come from combat sports or professions like law enforcement, military, etc. Combat athletes consciously avoid muscle gain (usually), as it would place them into a higher weight category, hence at a disadvantage. “Tactical” professions require muscular endurance rather than strength, plus the nature of the job (lack of sleep, irregular eating patterns, high stress) sabotages their recovery and muscle-building abilities. Think about it, there is a reason for everything.

I’m sure I’ll think of more bullshit claims. But I leave those for another day.

My Thoughts on Functional Exercise

Over the years I've read more than my fair share of discussions that have prompted me to re-evaluate my ideas on "functional strength". This is a topic that gets discussed frequently in the strength training communities, and almost inevitably ends up in a pissing contest with all sides throwing out ridiculous arguments at each other. I will try to offer my definition of "functional strength" and "strength" in general; if you disagree, please observe the post description (the letters under the blog title).

I would like to state three things at the very start:

1) There are many, many exercises that target muscles in isolation for the purpose of bringing them up to the overall development level of the body, either in terms of strength or in terms of size. A good example would be the dumbbell concentration curl for the biceps. There is nothing wrong with the practicing of these exercises, and I encourage trainees to use them. Sure, some of them develop aesthetic aspects of the muscles worked with little increase in strength. Also, some people are more concerned with appearance than with strength. Some are not really concerned with strength at all, although it is impossible to develop a muscle without increasing its strength to at least some degree. Different people have different choices. I don't focus on the aesthetic part of exercising, although I try to maintain the size and shape that I have, but I have full support for people who do. their goal is just as valid as mine. To say that these exercises have no place in someone's training is an ignorant and narrow-minded standpoint to say the least. Unless you're a strength/conditioning/fitness trainer with some influence in the "game", you shouldn't really be bashing the way other people train. The best you can do is offer some advice based on personal experience.

2) There is no such thing as "dysfunctional exercise" (which, I guess, would be the opposite of "functional"). The function of a tricep kickback is the delopment of certain aspects of the tricep muscle. The tricep kickback, when performed properly and with appropriate muscle tension, can bring about this change in the tricep. Therefore, it is "functional", as it satisfies that particular function. The function of the barbell back squat is to develop strength in the legs and to some degree core and posterior chain, add mass to the lower body and, indirectly, upper body, even effect a testosterone release. For the listed tasks, the barbell back squat is "functional", whereas the tricep kickback is pretty useless. Using the barbell back squat for tricep development, on the other hand, is a waste of time. I'm sure you understand what I'm trying to say. You could argue that the tricep kickback has limited carryover to athletic performance (a vague term if there ever was any - who could be stupid, ignorant and superfluous enough to group ALL sports and activities in existence under the umbrella term "athletic performance" in this context?), but that has NOTHING to do with "functionality". After all, bodybuilding is an athletic endeavour too, right?

3) I believe in all kinds of strength, from max effort to endurance. One thing that particularly annoys me is the concept of "relative strength". You know, the old "if I weigh 100 lbs and lift 150 lbs I'm much stronger than the 200-lb guy lifting 270". Or even my favorite: "if I weight 100 lbs and can do 10 pushups, I'm just as strong as the 200-lb guy who can also do 10". I never really grasped the concept of "less is more" in this sense. Basic physiology will reveal that just because a man weighs 200 lbs., he doesn't have DOUBLE the factors that effect strength output. This idea ignores minor differences, like height, bone size, etc. Yes, my ego would soar at the idea of the 350 lbs. guy who squats 500 lbs. being weaker than myself, but it just isn't true.Okay, so what forms can this "functional strength" take? Strength can be expressed in the following forms:

Maximum dynamic effort - "grind" lifts: this is the basic idea behind the bench, squat, deadlift, bent-over row, curl, etc., etc. Sure, you need explosiveness to blast through the sticking points and the best powerlifters in the world work on this aspect extensively, but the bar moves slowly thoughout the movement, sometimes stalling. This type of strength is developed by training with heavy poundages for low-rep sets, sometimes even singles. For the big compound lifts, accessory work is usually done for assistant muscle groups (also with low-rep sets, moderately heavy to heavy weight). Speed work, necessary for overcoming the insufferable "sticking points" (i.e. weak portions of the lift), focuses also on low-rep sets performed as fast as possible. It is estimated that the heaviest weight a movement can be performed explosively with is around 60% of the "grind" one-rep max, although I'm sure this varies immensely across the board.Not all "grind" lifts are done with weights, though. This category would certainly include non-plyometric bodyweight exercises - one-armed pullups and pushups, one-leg squats and pistols, handstand pushups, as well as gymnastic exercises on the rings. It's not what you're exercising with, it's the type of effort that makes the difference - al these exercises require a lot of muscle working together in order to "muscle out" that max-effort rep.

Maximum dynamic effort - explosive lifts: these would be the Olympic lifting staples, like the clean and jerk and snatch, also to include variations: power clean, power snatch, various high pulls, etc. The idea is to move as much weight as possible using a "quick" lift, a superbly coordinated effort of several muscle groups that hoists the bar to a sufficient height for the athlete to be able to get under it and complete the lift. The clean and jerk consists of two separate rapid motions - the "clean" part, where the bar is brought to the "rack" position at shoulder height, and the "jerk" part, where the athlete dips beneath the bar and explodes it to an overhead lockout position. The snatch is probably one of the most marvellous displays of athleticism around, where the bar is brought from the ground overhead in a single explosion of strength and power. The same movements can be performed with dumbbells or kettlebells. These quick lifts can be combined with "grinds", resulting in the clean and strict press, probably the single most productive exercise around for overall strength and even size. The quick lifts are best trained with low-rep, multiple sets, as they are pretty demanding CNS-wise.

Bodyweight plyometrics would also be included here, although not those of the repetitive kind. Maximum depth jumps would qualify, as would the vault event in gymnastics.

Maximum static strength - overcoming isometrics: in this type of exercise, the athlete is attempting to lift or otherwise overcome a supramaximal resistance in a given position. Since the resistance is supramaximal, i.e. more than the maximal resistance he/she can overcome in that position, no movement occurs (but a whole load of muscular effort). The main disadvantage with this type of exercising is the relative nature of the effort. If you're doing maximal-effort pushing agaist a wall, how can you determine if you're pushing harder than in the previous session? This issue can be alleviated by using loaded barbells/dumbbells, but then progress can only be measured in exercises that resemble barbell/dumbbell exercises, while the greatest value of isometrics is that you can work muscles and joints from ALL angles. To resolve this issue, Pete Sisco and John Little, the authors of Power Factor Training, devised a machine that measures strength output in isometric overcoming holds. I have not used this device, so I cannot vouch for its effectiveness. The good old Bullworker is also convenient. Training protocols with isometrics usually quote the 3-6 second duration range as most effective for max efforts.

Maximum static strength - yielding isometrics: here the objective is to work against active resistance. Again, no movement occurs, but instead of you working against an immovable resistance, the resistance tries to move against your effort to stop this motion. Obviously, you have to have an active resistance to work against. The most commonly used solution are free weights - place a barbell loaded to a supramaximal weight in a power rack, get under it, lie on a bench, take it off the pins and hold for time. Make sure you have a very reliable power rack. The obvious disadvantage of this method is the fact that for max strength work you need equipment - weights, and a lot more than you usually use, as well as a strong power rack or some other support system.

Partial lifts - a combination of static and dynamic strength: supramaximal repetitions within a limited range of motion (shorter than that used for the "real" exercise) is a method that combines both static and dynamic training. This would include quarter-squats, push presses off the rack, overhead press lockouts bench press lockouts, below and above-the-knee deadlifts, etc. These are usually done in the strongest range of motion, as their purpose is to "skip" the weaker range (including the sticking point) and overload the muscle in a position where it is capable of more work. They also get the CNS accustomed to the "feel" of a much heavier weight.

Dynamic strength-endurance - repetition method: this includes high-repetition sets of barbell, dumbbell and/or bodyweight exercises with the primary purpose of developing work capacity in the areas being worked, but also for increasing the capacity of the cardiovascular system to perform work at a certain intensity. This kind of stamina is vital to competitors in all sports where repetitive moderate intensity effort is required for prolonged periods of time, such as rowing, grappling, boxing, etc. It is also great for fat loss "without the dishonor of running", to paraphrase a popular maxim. Strength-endurance is definitely a form of strength - even the powerlifter, the paradigm of one-rep "grind" effort, needs this type of strength, as a powerlifting meet can last an entire day and entail nine max-effort movements (or better) plus a ton of warmup and maintenance work. The exercises are usually performed explosively, with low to moderate weights.

Static strength-endurance - yielding and overcoming efforts for time: although some would argue that this type of training can even be counter-productive, many sports and athletic activities rely heavily on "isometric endurance". Think of the grip of a judoka on his opponent's lapel, or the stance of the karate practitioner. Definitely a must.

Carries for time or distance - combining static and dynamic strength-endurance: Dan John, the celebrated strength and athletics coach and former discus great, said that there are three ways of developing strength: lifting something overhead, lifting something off the ground, and carrying something for distance and/or time. And if he said it, you better believe he's right. Farmer and yoke carries are part of strongman competition now, and justly so. They have been building tremendous amounts of strength for centuries now.

Non-gravitational resistance - elastic resistance: ah, my pet cables. I love cable exercises not only for their convenience, but for the way they develop strength from any possible angle. Gravity is an excellent provider of resistance (and it's free and always available), but the cable creates its own direction of resistance depending upon the direction it's placed in. Cables also provide a way to work around the problem of diminishing muscular effort as the movement progresses, which is present with barbells: the further you stretch them, the more resistance you encounter, so you're effectively overloading the stronger part of the movement while remaining able to overcome the lower resistance at your sticking point.

Non-gravitational resistance - resistance of materials: this would include bending of iron and steel bars, nails, rebar and the like, ripping of telephone books and cards in halves and quarters, etc. In other words, it is not the weight of the object that provides the resistance - it is the properties of the material from which the object is made. One could argue that cable training falls into the same category, but I think they should be viewed separately. The resistance offered by an iron bar does not increase as it is bent, and you don't require the super-concentrated total-body effort required for bending and ripping to stretch cables (even heavy ones).

Human resistance: this is probably the most underrated form of strength training there is, and also one of the most effective. It is developed by pitting your strength directly against another human, as in wrestling and other grappling sports, and combines most of the expressions of strength described above, plus entails an element of technique too. In my grappling years I encountered a few guys who had immense "human throwing strength". They never lifted weights, or if they did used light poundages, and most of them definitely did not have the advantage of superior technique - their throw attempts were relatively slow and inefficient. Yet when you tried to force them into a disadvantageous position they seemed rooted to the ground. Their grip was vice-like, despite never doing grip-specific work apart from... grappling. I would advise all would-be strong guys and gals to give some form of grappling a go. It develops strength, endurance and a whole new outlook on sports and life in general.

This is by no means a comprehensive list. I would greatly appreciate if someone would think of something to add to this ramble. In conclusion, a person who wishes to be considered "strong" must train for all sorts of strength. Of course, if your strength training is taken up to "improve athletic performance", try to determine which of these expressions of strength suits your particular sport best, then work it into the ground.