Goosey
.
Like
This. Everybody just needs to practice a bit more comprehension when reading and replying to threads. Powerlifters need not be applying powerlifting rules to everything and non-powerlifters need to use more specificity when replying to PL threads. Powerlifting and strength training are both the same and different. One more specific, one more generalised, saying that sumo deadlifts are cheating in a Pl thread is just as fucking stupid as saying that you only need to focus on the big 3 in a general strength thread.
@El Freako ; not sure if anyone was calling a Sumo Deadlift cheating, just saying that some of them were more of a Squat (or Jefferson Squat) than a Regular Deadlift.
rofl I am "Weak as a kitten" from 4 hours per week of training. That's a bit rich young fella. My 12 year old son can put almost as much weight overhead as you and he trains for less than 90 minutes. I guess the rest of nattys are just kittens.
Don't you bench +160?
You are all bodybuilders at the end of the day.
+170 and I don't train more than 90 minutes a session -probably never have - and only a couple of times a week atm. I'm also doing "high bar" squats. I don't think it's retarded to suggest that strength or "powerlifting" sessions could be or should be 60-90 minutes long.
Some WL I know train 2, sometimes 3 times per day and I guarantee they are not doing more than 60-90 minutes per session on that frequency of training.
I'm seeing a lot of sanctimonious twaddle from the PL brigade when it comes to healthy debate about training. PL, WL and Strongman are cousins of Bodybuilding. They all "build the body" to be bigger, more powerful or stronger. You are all bodybuilders at the end of the day.
May as well go get my nuts cut off now.
I thought it was the other way round, bodybuilders are guys who, deep down, just want to be powerful but can't hack the long training sessions.
+170 and I don't train more than 90 minutes a session -probably never have - and only a couple of times a week atm. I'm also doing "high bar" squats. I don't think it's retarded to suggest that strength or "powerlifting" sessions could be or should be 60-90 minutes long.
Some WL I know train 2, sometimes 3 times per day and I guarantee they are not doing more than 60-90 minutes per session on that frequency of training.
I'm seeing a lot of sanctimonious twaddle from the PL brigade when it comes to healthy debate about training. PL, WL and Strongman are cousins of Bodybuilding. They all "build the body" to be bigger, more powerful or stronger. You are all bodybuilders at the end of the day.
NoDude why don't you fucking read shit before you post? Did you miss the several posts I made where I said that looking at a single aspect is as pointless as asking if a single drop of water was 1% or 10% of an entire hurricane.
Again you missed the point because it IS retarded to say that a strength or powerlifting session should be 60-90 minutes long. Why? Because ff it disagrees with experiment it is wrong. In that simple statement is the key to science. It does not make any difference how beautiful your guess is. It does not make any difference how smart you are, who made the guess, or what his name is – if it disagrees with experiment it is wrong. That is all there is to it. People get great results with training for a very long time.
Should powerlifting sessions be 90 minutes or 360 minutes in length? Yes.
Dude why don't you fucking read shit before you post? Did you miss the several posts I made where I said that looking at a single aspect is as pointless as asking if a single drop of water was 1% or 10% of an entire hurricane.
Again you missed the point because it IS retarded to say that a strength or powerlifting session should be 60-90 minutes long. Why? Because ff it disagrees with experiment it is wrong. In that simple statement is the key to science. It does not make any difference how beautiful your guess is.There are again epistemological flaws in what you have to say.
The scientific process involves the testing of hypotheses. Sometimes we choose the classical experimental process to test a hypothesis. Scientific process is served whether the results provide support to a hypothesis or the results lead us to rejecting the hypothesis.
The Experimental process that most of understand are one way of testing hypotheses. In the world of knowledge outside of lab coats and Bunsen burners have inductive and deductive loops of inquiry.
Inductive processes are where we induce a hypothesis from the available information for example I can see a large number of chickens without heads and they don't peck - my hypothesis is that a chicken needs a head to live.
The deductive process is where we seek out information to test a hypothesis. "I think the moon is made of Cheese, Grommit - I know, let's go to the moon and taste it"
Ya Ya fuckin ya anyway. If an experiment delivers data that supports a hypothesis, then a scientist's duty is try to disprove the hypothesis. Part of the interrogation will target easy things such as the experimental method. If I'm doing science properly I don't have to accept the results of the experiment if I think the data are questionable and I will certainly question whether the experiment was even a rigorous test of the hypothesis in the first place.
I think the moon is made of cheese and there's insufficient data available from the moon landings to completely refute this hypothesis.
Like a finger pointing at the moon. Don't look at the finger or you will miss all its cheesy glory.
Dude why don't you fucking read shit before you post? Did you miss the several posts I made where I said that looking at a single aspect is as pointless as asking if a single drop of water was 1% or 10% of an entire hurricane.
Again you missed the point because it IS retarded to say that a strength or powerlifting session should be 60-90 minutes long. Why? Because ff it disagrees with experiment it is wrong. In that simple statement is the key to science. It does not make any difference how beautiful your guess is.There are again epistemological flaws in what you have to say.
The scientific process involves the testing of hypotheses. Sometimes we choose the classical experimental process to test a hypothesis. Scientific process is served whether the results provide support to a hypothesis or the results lead us to rejecting the hypothesis.
The Experimental process that most of understand are one way of testing hypotheses. In the world of knowledge outside of lab coats and Bunsen burners have inductive and deductive loops of inquiry.
Inductive processes are where we induce a hypothesis from the available information for example I can see a large number of chickens without heads and they don't peck - my hypothesis is that a chicken needs a head to live.
The deductive process is where we seek out information to test a hypothesis. "I think the moon is made of Cheese, Grommit - I know, let's go to the moon and taste it"
Ya Ya fuckin ya anyway. If an experiment delivers data that supports a hypothesis, then a scientist's duty is try to disprove the hypothesis. Part of the interrogation will target easy things such as the experimental method. If I'm doing science properly I don't have to accept the results of the experiment if I think the data are questionable and I will certainly question whether the experiment was even a rigorous test of the hypothesis in the first place.
I think the moon is made of cheese and there's insufficient data available from the moon landings to completely refute this hypothesis.
Like a finger pointing at the moon. Don't look at the finger or you will miss all its cheesy glory.
What the fuck are you talking about? It's retarded to say that a powerlifting workout SHOULD be under 90 minutes. Because PLENTY of people have great success with doing a lot, lot more. You cannot refute this. Just shut the fuck up already
Dude why don't you fucking read shit before you post? Did you miss the several posts I made where I said that looking at a single aspect is as pointless as asking if a single drop of water was 1% or 10% of an entire hurricane.
Again you missed the point because it IS retarded to say that a strength or powerlifting session should be 60-90 minutes long. Why? Because ff it disagrees with experiment it is wrong. In that simple statement is the key to science. It does not make any difference how beautiful your guess is.
What the fuck are you talking about? It's retarded to say that a powerlifting workout SHOULD be under 90 minutes. Because PLENTY of people have great success with doing a lot, lot more. You cannot refute this. Just shut the fuck up already
Don't try and talk science Oni. You are failing miserably.
Dude why don't you fucking read shit before you post? Did you miss the several posts I made where I said that looking at a single aspect is as pointless as asking if a single drop of water was 1% or 10% of an entire hurricane.
Again you missed the point because it IS retarded to say that a strength or powerlifting session should be 60-90 minutes long. Why? Because ff it disagrees with experiment it is wrong. In that simple statement is the key to science. It does not make any difference how beautiful your guess is.
What the fuck are you talking about? It's retarded to say that a powerlifting workout SHOULD be under 90 minutes. Because PLENTY of people have great success with doing a lot, lot more. You cannot refute this. Just shut the fuck up already
Plenty of people can thrive on a lot, lot less. Refuted. Can you feel me yet?
Plenty of people can thrive on a lot, lot less. Refuted. Can you feel me yet?
How many times do I need to point out that it doesn't matter? 10? 12?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?