Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

So has even SS' Chase converted to [email protected] style programming?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #76
    Originally posted by Lane Foulks View Post

    It maybe an arrogance thing. "We are SS, we don't need to talk to anyone else." Although, two of your most educated coaches left partly due to not talking about it. This whole thing has been a large PR hit against SS.
    I suppose that wouldn't surprise me. Sadly my suspicion is that the kind of utter, loud confidence and manly man posturing is going to attract a lot more people than the #nuanced arguments.

    Comment


    • #77
      Originally posted by Lane Foulks View Post

      It maybe an arrogance thing. "We are SS, we don't need to talk to anyone else." Although, two of your most educated coaches left partly due to not talking about it. This whole thing has been a large PR hit against SS.
      Honestly I don't think that this is necessarily PR hit for SS. If anything they are just cementing "the brand" and further appealing to the type of person to whom they already cater. Narrowcasting, or whatever... Those of us who bought in to some degree but are less diehard about the brand are certainly a bit turned off by it, though I suspect given enough time that was bound to happen anyway for one reason or another.

      The bigger problem IMO is that there appears to be a pretty clear disconnect between SS the brand (mostly Rip, and Reynolds/BBL to some degree) and SSOC. It sounds like SSOC and individual SSCs don't necessarily want to narrowcast to the same degree that the brand does. Whether that's for business reasons or some higher purpose is debatable, but I think it could cause problems down the line. Maybe that SSC revolt Jordan keeps talking about...

      Comment


      • #78
        Originally posted by Joe Wilson View Post

        Honestly I don't think that this is necessarily PR hit for SS
        Have you seen the state of the forums lately?

        Originally posted by Joe Wilson View Post

        Maybe that SSC revolt Jordan keeps talking about...
        The SSC revolt already happened - it's called the bridge and it was one of the catalysts for the current situation.

        The release of the bridge and it's adoption by so many of the SSCs marked the point where Rip completely lost control of the brand.


        Squat: 250/550 Bench: 135/300. Deadlift: 273.5/602 Press: 90/200
        Dietary Strategy.
        Log.

        Comment


        • #79
          Originally posted by Ryan Hartigan View Post

          Have you seen the state of the forums lately?



          The SSC revolt already happened - it's called the bridge and it was one of the catalysts for the current situation.

          The release of the bridge and it's adoption by so many of the SSCs marked the point where Rip completely lost control of the brand.

          Personally, I'm hoping more SSC's find their way here. Good lord, imagine if BBM got Andy Baker? I mean I don't particularly think that's going to happen, but still, what a thought.

          Comment


          • #80
            Ultimately, Jordan, Austin and Leah became so much more trustworthy in my eyes once they cut ties with SS.

            When I first learned about SS, I usually saw Austin or Jordan sitting besides Rip on the Q&A videos where Rip & co would regularly go on rants about a variety of topics in very extreme ways while Jordan and Austin sat and watched (except for that climate change rant where Austin didn't want to partake and left his seat). I thought "Ok these guys might be my best bet to get strong, but damn sometimes they seem so dogmatic and not very nuanced at all - I wonder if that influences their strength training advice too". By association I thought the same about Jordan and Austin at first as they all represented the organisation at that point, even if they themselves did not participate in those rants. It was only a bit later that I realized how wrong my first impression was.

            Comment


            • #81
              Make sure to play the video before reading the comic.




              Click image for larger version

Name:	UslessRPE.jpg
Views:	247
Size:	90.9 KB
ID:	11576

              Comment


              • #82
                If people haven't seen it, Jordan went for the kill shot on instagram live yesterday. He said he isn't convinced low-bar squats are necessarily better than high bar for hamstring development. Rip is going to lose his shit!

                Comment


                • #83
                  Were a lot of SSC's using the Bridge though?

                  Comment


                  • #84
                    Originally posted by MitchellCole View Post
                    If people haven't seen it, Jordan went for the kill shot on instagram live yesterday. He said he isn't convinced low-bar squats are necessarily better than high bar for hamstring development. Rip is going to lose his shit!
                    I don't 100% remember, but didn't he say he isn't convinced low bar is superior to high bar just in general too? I recall him bringing up points I've read previously in a Nuckols article... so the Starting Strength idea is low bar back squat is recruiting more muscle mass therefore it is the better lift and helps you lift heavier loads etc, but it doesn't seem like this is the case. It seems like you can lift more with low bar because it puts less stress on your spinal erectors, or because it's easier on your back. Your spinal erectors are the limiting factor for high bar and even more so for front squats, because those lifts stress it more.

                    https://www.strongerbyscience.com/hi...squatting-2-0/

                    Comment


                    • #85
                      Originally posted by Squib View Post
                      I don't 100% remember, but didn't he say he isn't convinced low bar is superior to high bar just in general too? I recall him bringing up points I've read previously in a Nuckols article... so the Starting Strength idea is low bar back squat is recruiting more muscle mass therefore it is the better lift and helps you lift heavier loads etc, but it doesn't seem like this is the case. It seems like you can lift more with low bar because it puts less stress on your spinal erectors, or because it's easier on your back. Your spinal erectors are the limiting factor for high bar and even more so for front squats, because those lifts stress it more.

                      https://www.strongerbyscience.com/hi...squatting-2-0/
                      I remember him saying something like this too!

                      Comment


                      • #86
                        Originally posted by MitchellCole View Post
                        If people haven't seen it, Jordan went for the kill shot on instagram live yesterday. He said he isn't convinced low-bar squats are necessarily better than high bar for hamstring development. Rip is going to lose his shit!
                        meh.... according to Rippetoe himself, even the SS-LBBS doesn't "develop" the hamstrings.
                        Hamstrings in either squat only act in mostly isometric contraction to aid the action other muscle groups doing to heavy lifting.

                        If you HBS at paralell with similar mechanics, probably the same thing is occurring, to a smaller degree.

                        If you HBS and divebomb ATG and bounce off of your calves, then yeah, I don't seem the hammies working much except for max intensities/weights.

                        Comment


                        • #87
                          Originally posted by neandrewthal View Post
                          Make sure to play the video before reading the comic.




                          Click image for larger version

Name:	UslessRPE.jpg
Views:	247
Size:	90.9 KB
ID:	11576
                          this ^ is pretty good.

                          Could've done a lot more:

                          Girl in front row looks like she's awkwardly disgusted looking down at the table, think could: "not this again".

                          Guy next to her w/ beard looks very bored.

                          Comment


                          • neandrewthal
                            neandrewthal commented
                            Editing a comment
                            Yep, then there's also the whole Austin conveniently runs out of coffee during the CO2 lecture.

                        • #88
                          Originally posted by Squib View Post
                          I don't 100% remember, but didn't he say he isn't convinced low bar is superior to high bar just in general too? I recall him bringing up points I've read previously in a Nuckols article... so the Starting Strength idea is low bar back squat is recruiting more muscle mass therefore it is the better lift and helps you lift heavier loads etc, but it doesn't seem like this is the case. It seems like you can lift more with low bar because it puts less stress on your spinal erectors, or because it's easier on your back. Your spinal erectors are the limiting factor for high bar and even more so for front squats, because those lifts stress it more.

                          https://www.strongerbyscience.com/hi...squatting-2-0/
                          Doesn't the low bar place the moment on the hip and high bar puts it on the knee? I'm pretty sure that is why most can lift more weight on low bar.

                          Comment


                          • #89
                            It's always interesting from an outsider's perspective how many points of disagreement quickly become salient given the right conditions.

                            there seems to be limits to a deductive reasoning approach to strength training, and this is broadly speaking a main point of contention.

                            Comment


                            • #90
                              Originally posted by Alex View Post
                              Doesn't the low bar place the moment on the hip and high bar puts it on the knee? I'm pretty sure that is why most can lift more weight on low bar.
                              I'd highly recommend you read through that link, and then the link within those links, if you want a more in-depth explanation about why what you're saying might not necessarily be the case. I mean maybe what you're saying contributes as well, but Nuckol's argument about the spinal erectors is compelling. This article is tackling the issue of hip or knee dominant squats being illusory:

                              https://www.strongerbyscience.com/sq...ee-dominant-3/

                              But to be honest my view is how Nuckol's ends the article: "Just stop worrying about the minutia and squat." I just find it juicy that Jordan is outright rejecting the biomechanical models of the lifts laid out in Starting Strength now (and maybe even NLP).

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X