CSC Gets Back into Shape 10/1/11

[grim]

If you have shoulder problems that make it uncomfortable/painful when you bench, you should try the ISO/Hammer Strength machines. They isolate the muscle better than free weights so it's more actual chest being worked other than shoulders. I know a lot of guys at the gym that have issues with free bench and use this as an alternative.

The issue is that i am actually missing a major muscle in my shoulder from surgery its not that it hurts its that my left side is much weaker than my right. So when i bench if my left side gives out im screwed when i free weight bench i can just swing the weight down. I do use those machined for chest though they are great!!!

[bulldog]

If you have shoulder problems that make it uncomfortable/painful when you bench, you should try the ISO/Hammer Strength machines. They isolate the muscle better than free weights so it's more actual chest being worked other than shoulders. I know a lot of guys at the gym that have issues with free bench and use this as an alternative.

Why can I lift so much more on ISO/Hammer strength than free bench! Yesterday I did three plates on each side; so 270lbs, but I cannot do that on a free weight bench....sucks. Then on a bench machine I can hit 310...such difference!

[RajunCajun]

Why can I lift so much more on ISO/Hammer strength than free bench! Yesterday I did three plates on each side; so 270lbs, but I cannot do that on a free weight bench....sucks. Then on a bench machine I can hit 310...such difference!

Keep in mind that the machines weights, especially pulleys, vary greatly from machine to machine. 100lbs on one machine might feel like 75 or 115 on another machine. It's amazing how much it changes because of geometry, pulley # selection and counterweights.

When you don't have to steady the weight through a full range of motion, you can lift a lot more, ya know. It's great stimulation to use isolation machines but you can create serious muscle imbalances that can lead to injuries. If all you do is machines, it's a lot easier to hurt yourself when lifting or working in the real world because your joints and core won’t be as strong and balanced as they should.

[3D]

Why can I lift so much more on ISO/Hammer strength than free bench! Yesterday I did three plates on each side; so 270lbs, but I cannot do that on a free weight bench....sucks. Then on a bench machine I can hit 310...such difference!

As far as the Hammer Strength machines go, it's all about leverage. While sitting straight up and pressing as opposed to lying on your back your body position has a better angle on the resistance of the weight which makes it easier to press. The Smith machine is a different type all together. Since the bar only weighs 15 lbs plus has a pulley system which makes it equal to about 5 lbs of actual resistance, people tend to "think" they are doing more weight than they actually are.

[3D]

The issue is that i am actually missing a major muscle in my shoulder from surgery its not that it hurts its that my left side is much weaker than my right. So when i bench if my left side gives out im screwed when i free weight bench i can just swing the weight down. I do use those machined for chest though they are great!!!

Wow. Yea, you got me on that one. Missing a muscle is crazy to hear. I have a friend that has half of a bicep. He ripped it apart in a parachuting accident and they had to do surgery to remove the damages parts. Now he looks like he works out in only one arm. LOL I always make fun of him when he wears short sleeves.

[bulldog]

Thanks Nate!

In this months Muscle and Fitness (Dec Issue) there is a article titled "Winter Bulk" which gives a detailed list of workouts to do to add mass. Seems like it was listing to start really heavy and slowly decrease it. Check it out!

These will also help:
http://www.bodybuilding.com/fun/muscfitjan07_cover.htm

http://www.fitnessuncovered.co.uk/bl...r-muscle-bulk/

http://www.menshealth.com/mhlists/ga...scle/index.php

[grim]

Wow. Yea, you got me on that one. Missing a muscle is crazy to hear. I have a friend that has half of a bicep. He ripped it apart in a parachuting accident and they had to do surgery to remove the damages parts. Now he looks like he works out in only one arm. LOL I always make fun of him when he wears short sleeves.

Yea its a real pain in the ass sometimes, When i wear a wife beater you can see where its missing but ive managed to cope and try my best to do equal weights on both sides.

last nights workout was back and triceps and for some reason turned out to be 30 minutes longer than normal and felt freaking great i had a lot more energy than normal and didn't get worn down at all.

[Keyser Soze]

I'm the same way. I lost 70% of the joint surface in my right shoulder. Really limits how heavy I can go. I can only do machines. Sucks. I miss doin dumbell press. I'm back in physical therapy a couple times a week to try and get some more strength back in it. Thank god for good insurance.

[grim]

I'm the same way. I lost 70% of the joint surface in my right shoulder. Really limits how heavy I can go. I can only do machines. Sucks. I miss doin dumbell press. I'm back in physical therapy a couple times a week to try and get some more strength back in it. Thank god for good insurance.

After 4 years i just got back into doing dumbell press it takes time that's for damn sure!! I still cant bench press though and i have accepted i may never be able to.

[RajunCajun]

As far as the Hammer Strength machines go, it's all about leverage. While sitting straight up and pressing as opposed to lying on your back your body position has a better angle on the resistance of the weight which makes it easier to press. The Smith machine is a different type all together. Since the bar only weighs 15 lbs plus has a pulley system which makes it equal to about 5 lbs of actual resistance, people tend to "think" they are doing more weight than they actually are.

How does the body position, upright vs laying down, make any weight easier to move if the "resistance" is the same at both angles? That would have absolutely no affect on the power output of a particular muscle group if all other varibles are =. The difference from one machine to another comes from the difference in geometry, and body position relitive to the range of motion of the machine and how it is loaded. By that I mean, changes in distance of the grips to the body, or closer or farther from each other, or are the handles traveling in a straight line away from the body or along a curved path. You are right about the counter weight but even reducing the "effective" weight of the bar to say 5lbs-10lbs, doesn't account for the HUGE differences in weight that one can lift from free wieght to Smith machine. That is from the degrees of freedom that are reduces because the bar is stabalized in all linear and rotation directions except one. Your muscles don't have to balance and hold steady, they just push, all together and all the force is acting on a straight line.

[3D]

How does the body position, upright vs laying down, make any weight easier to move if the "resistance" is the same at both angles? That would have absolutely no affect on the power output of a particular muscle group if all other varibles are =. The difference from one machine to another comes from the difference in geometry, and body position relitive to the range of motion of the machine and how it is loaded. By that I mean, changes in distance of the grips to the body, or closer or farther from each other, or are the handles traveling in a straight line away from the body or along a curved path. You are right about the counter weight but even reducing the "effective" weight of the bar to say 5lbs-10lbs, doesn't account for the HUGE differences in weight that one can lift from free wieght to Smith machine. That is from the degrees of freedom that are reduces because the bar is stabalized in all linear and rotation directions except one. Your muscles don't have to balance and hold steady, they just push, all together and all the force is acting on a straight line.

As far as a Smith Machine vs Flat Bench, it's not a HUGE difference in weight one can do. The difference is on average about a 40 lb difference. Hmmmm, kinda makes sense because an olympic barbell weighs 45 lbs..... Smith Machine is relatively the same body position as Flat bench. It will vary from person to person depending on their preferences and understanding of proper bench press technique. These two (Smith and Flat Bench) can pretty much be classified as the same thing. When talking Hammer Strength machines, body position doesn't play a big role in the main technique since you are sitting upright. True, the motion is a slight curve away from the body, true the grips are a different angle and it plays a part in how heavy or light the weight feels but when sitting upright your angle of "attack" is opposite of when lying on your back. It is always easier to push 315 lbs while sitting than it is lying on your back because of gravity. While sitting, you don't have to fight the force of gravity as much so the weight seems a bit lighter. You may call it geometry or whatever, but when it comes down to it, it's nothing but "leverage" to me.

[RajunCajun]

As far as a Smith Machine vs Flat Bench, it's not a HUGE difference in weight one can do. The difference is on average about a 40 lb difference. Hmmmm, kinda makes sense because an olympic barbell weighs 45 lbs..... Smith Machine is relatively the same body position as Flat bench. It will vary from person to person depending on their preferences and understanding of proper bench press technique. These two (Smith and Flat Bench) can pretty much be classified as the same thing. When talking Hammer Strength machines, body position doesn't play a big role in the main technique since you are sitting upright. True, the motion is a slight curve away from the body, true the grips are a different angle and it plays a part in how heavy or light the weight feels but when sitting upright your angle of "attack" is opposite of when lying on your back. It is always easier to push 315 lbs while sitting than it is lying on your back because of gravity. While sitting, you don't have to fight the force of gravity as much so the weight seems a bit lighter. You may call it geometry or whatever, but when it comes down to it, it's nothing but "leverage" to me.

I've personally seen difference in bench press weight close to 100lbs, from free weight to Smith Machine. The simple counterweight of the bar on most of these machines doesn't explain these massive differences in weight. Besides moving the weight in the same general direction away from the body and having the same primary muscle group doing the work, there isn't much that the two really have in common as far as how they hit the body. Free weights dramatically change the affect on secondary and ancillary muscle groups because of the need to balance the bar, not to just push it up. Plus, add the affect of free weights on your core due to the need to balance it, and you are causing far more muscle groups to fire which requires more energy from the nervous system. This generally decreases the “total” amount of weight that can be lifted.

The thing that I’m having trouble hearing is that you are saying that gravity affects the weight differently when the person is lying down as compared to sitting up. You could call this a simple disagreement in semantics but what you are saying is simply not right, physics is physics. Gravity ALWAYS acts the same on every object on this planet, assuming you are “close” to the planet and not up in the outer atmosphere where it’s affects would slightly diminish. It pulls down, no matter how the body is positioned. The only difference will be the mechanical linkage that the weights are attached to. That linkage will change leverage and make a load easier or harder to lift, not gravity changing because you aren’t lying down and pushing straight up. The only difference in weight when lying down would be the weight of your arms and hands as you push them up. That weight is negligible compared to the load that you are pressing and makes virtually no difference.

Hopefully this makes a little sense. Like I said, it’s really a matter of semantics. We are kind of saying the same thing and the result is the same, but the cause has far more relevant variables then just gravity.

[3D]

I've personally seen difference in bench press weight close to 100lbs, from free weight to Smith Machine. The simple counterweight of the bar on most of these machines doesn't explain these massive differences in weight. Besides moving the weight in the same general direction away from the body and having the same primary muscle group doing the work, there isn't much that the two really have in common as far as how they hit the body. Free weights dramatically change the affect on secondary and ancillary muscle groups because of the need to balance the bar, not to just push it up. Plus, add the affect of free weights on your core due to the need to balance it, and you are causing far more muscle groups to fire which requires more energy from the nervous system. This generally decreases the “total” amount of weight that can be lifted.

The thing that I’m having trouble hearing is that you are saying that gravity affects the weight differently when the person is lying down as compared to sitting up. You could call this a simple disagreement in semantics but what you are saying is simply not right, physics is physics. Gravity ALWAYS acts the same on every object on this planet, assuming you are “close” to the planet and not up in the outer atmosphere where it’s affects would slightly diminish. It pulls down, no matter how the body is positioned. The only difference will be the mechanical linkage that the weights are attached to. That linkage will change leverage and make a load easier or harder to lift, not gravity changing because you aren’t lying down and pushing straight up. The only difference in weight when lying down would be the weight of your arms and hands as you push them up. That weight is negligible compared to the load that you are pressing and makes virtually no difference.

Hopefully this makes a little sense. Like I said, it’s really a matter of semantics. We are kind of saying the same thing and the result is the same, but the cause has far more relevant variables then just gravity.

yea, pretty much sounds like we are saying the same things. I'm not good with all the big words and pretty much have failed anything math ever since the 6th grade and physics may as well be an alien language to me.

On a different subject, I decided to switch to Neurocore since they came out with a different flavor (grape) and GNC had it on sale for $35. Also, since the guy at GNC always renews my gold card everytime I go in, I got an additional $5 off and got it for $30. So, I've read about 1000 reviews on it and about 999 of them said it was good stuff. I've been using it since Monday and I'm pretty impressed. It gave me some good energy and great pumps. The only downside would have to be the taste. It's pretty awful but I can get over that. With supplements, some taste good, some taste bad and some are just in between. FYI, I have been taking 3 scoops with 8 oz of water.

[dapper]

In April 2010, I wrote multiple things about the 'so-called' HCG Diet.
Mentioned it was a starvation plan.

Here's a link where the FDA pulled the plug on over the counter, (OTC) HCG drops.

The FDA and the Federal Trade Commission said over-the-counter weight-loss products containing human chorionic gonadotropin (HCG) are fraudulent and illegal, and the agencies have told seven manufacturers to stop selling them.

500 caloric intake is a starvation plan. When people go back to their normal intake, (whatever normal is) they gain back what the said they 'lost'. Some stores have a lost and found section.

Just the messenger...

[bulldog]

In April 2010, I wrote multiple things about the 'so-called' HCG Diet.
Mentioned it was a starvation plan.

Here's a link where the FDA pulled the plug on over the counter, (OTC) HCG drops.
500 caloric intake is a starvation plan. When people go back to their normal intake, (whatever normal is) they gain back what the said they 'lost'. Some stores have a lost and found section.

Just the messenger...

Weird because they are still selling HCG drops; just saw them at Wal-Mart this weekend. Must have found a loop hole...

[RajunCajun]

Weird because they are still selling HCG drops; just saw them at Wal-Mart this weekend. Must have found a loop hole...

There is no actual HCG hormone in the product sold at Wal-Mart. It's just the amino acids that are in the hormone. You can get these amino's in most BCA supplumets.

So, not really a loop-hole.

[bulldog]

There is no actual HCG hormone in the product sold at Wal-Mart. It's just the amino acids that are in the hormone. You can get these amino's in most BCA supplumets.

So, not really a loop-hole.

Nice! So basically it is all a "hoax" because most likely a 500 calorie a day is what loses the weight!

Who would have thought a 500 calorie a day diet would make you lose weight [sarcasm].

Yet one simple thing can allow you a 2000 calores a day diet and lose weight still.....exercise! But yeah exercise is hard

[Mother Goose]

In April 2010, I wrote multiple things about the 'so-called' HCG Diet.
Mentioned it was a starvation plan.

Here's a link where the FDA pulled the plug on over the counter, (OTC) HCG drops.
500 caloric intake is a starvation plan. When people go back to their normal intake, (whatever normal is) they gain back what the said they 'lost'. Some stores have a lost and found section.

Just the messenger...

Interesting, because I'm eating normal and haven't gained back any of the 20lbs I lost on it. Kristin is still losing weight while eating normal too. (and we've been off it for about a month)

Love it when people state things like it's fact, when they have never tried it.

[Mother Goose]

If it was just the 500 calorie diet, why didn't I lose any muscle mass? Isn't that what happens when you starve yourself? Why wasn't I hungry all the time? I know that before I tried it, if I didn't have my regular meals throughout the day, I'd be hungry all the time. But on the drops, I had no problem with 500 calories a day, and most days I was at least 50 cals under that.

[bulldog]

If it was just the 500 calorie diet, why didn't I lose any muscle mass? Isn't that what happens when you starve yourself? Why wasn't I hungry all the time? I know that before I tried it, if I didn't have my regular meals throughout the day, I'd be hungry all the time. But on the drops, I had no problem with 500 calories a day, and most days I was at least 50 cals under that.

The body will usually burn fat before muscle mass. So basically you would have to lose all/most of your fat before losing muscle mass. I know if I went down to 500 calories a day that I would lose a ton of muscle mass because my fat % is low and the body needs to get "fuel" from somewhere and will target muscle at that point.

If what RajunCajun said is true the HCG supp sold now is filled with BCAA's and those are your branch chain amino acids and are know to help curb hunger (same concept as protein which is filled with amino acids and why it fills you up so fast); I take 4 BCAA's pills right after I work out (within 5 mins) so that it uses that to "recover" and makes me not starve by the time I get home and eat. BCAAs curb hunger because they are insulinogenic, and by ingesting them when blood sugar's low (hence hunger) you get more ketogenesis and blood sugar stabilizes (hence not hungry).

Now you also said you started eating healthier though right and watch your portions. Those toow things alone can help so much. Even just being more careful on what you eat helps a lot.

Also, never under-estimate the "placebo" effect! It has been proven over and over that it works! I wear one of those "energy bracelets" when lifting and swear it works, yet I have had numerous people show me it is all "placebo"; yet I still wear it every gym day and swear it make mt damaged tendons hurt less!

[Mother Goose]

I am eating healthier and not as much as I would before. But this weekend I wasn't good at all and didn't gain anything. But at the same time, I couldn't finish my New Mexican Enchilada plate at Jack n Grill on Saturday night. I use to finish that and ask for seconds.

But just using a general statement like those people will gain it all back is crap. It's just the stupid ones that don't watch themselves and think that the HCG is a cure all and don't stick to the protocol.

And I know about the placebo effect. I went into the diet not thinking it would work, so I wasn't thinking about the stuff I was taking. I just stuck to the protocol and it ended up working for me, and for Kristin. I've tried the eat hardly anything "diet" before and I lost weight, but not where I needed to lose it. On this, I lost it in my mid section mostly, which is where I need it most. I actually have room in my leathers now, it's awesome.

[bulldog]

I am eating healthier and not as much as I would before. But this weekend I wasn't good at all and didn't gain anything. But at the same time, I couldn't finish my New Mexican Enchilada plate at Jack n Grill on Saturday night. I use to finish that and ask for seconds.

But just using a general statement like those people will gain it all back is crap. It's just the stupid ones that don't watch themselves and think that the HCG is a cure all and don't stick to the protocol.

And I know about the placebo effect. I went into the diet not thinking it would work, so I wasn't thinking about the stuff I was taking. I just stuck to the protocol and it ended up working for me, and for Kristin. I've tried the eat hardly anything "diet" before and I lost weight, but not where I needed to lose it. On this, I lost it in my mid section mostly, which is where I need it most. I actually have room in my leathers now, it's awesome.

Nice, I love Jack and Grill especially the Green Chili Chicken Enchiladas (with a fried egg on top). I can say that is a giant serving and if you ate that in one sitting that was a lot of calories! I don't think I have ever finished it (although I probably could).

I bet you just being more careful of what you eat now is making a huge difference! As I have said before it is more of a lifestyle change than a diet and your new good habits are paying off.

Next you get tons of muscle and then you burn the calories twice as fast as a normal person; that is my trick as I eat like a pig now!

[Mother Goose]

Nice, I love Jack and Grill especially the Green Chili Chicken Enchiladas (with a fried egg on top). I can say that is a giant serving and if you ate that in one sitting that was a lot of calories! I don't think I have ever finished it (although I probably could).

I bet you just being more careful of what you eat now is making a huge difference! As I have said before it is more of a lifestyle change than a diet and your new good habits are paying off.

Next you get tons of muscle and then you burn the calories twice as fast as a normal person; that is my trick as I eat like a pig now!

That's what I get, but with the red chili.

For sure. I'm also not eating any sugar if I can help it. You can't have any sugar on that diet, so I think it helped me get off the stuff. Which, I think, was another one of my issues. Diet Mt. Dew is my new friend. I just used this as a catalyst to continue losing and get back to a healthier weight.

[Keyser Soze]

Interesting, because I'm eating normal and haven't gained back any of the 20lbs I lost on it. Kristin is still losing weight while eating normal too. (and we've been off it for about a month)

Love it when people state things like it's fact, when they have never tried it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TqqB8NjcKJU

When the heck are we gonna be able to embed vids?