New to Group

[Guest guest]

you minx. I must get some KBs next

(looks over shoulder)

Connie

>

> > Over at CST we have people doing exclusively whole-body, with

> > Clubbells as the weight and putting on mass,

> > doing the usual = Working hard enough to cause adaptation and

> > eating enough to support that adaptation.

> >

> > There's an interesting working theory about using a 4-day

sequence of

> > exertion and recovery = medium, hard, none, light exertion. In

the

> > scale of Perceived Exertion this works out to medium=5-6, hard 7-

9,

> > none 0-1, light 2-3. This seems to keep the CNS humming but

never

> > exhausted and with a really fast capacity for adaptation. We

don't go

> > to 10 or failure in training, that's kept for real life lifting-

the-

> > truck-off-the-baby situations.

>

>

> Coach Connie is a ninja. Assassination is imminent.

>

> B.

>

> p.s. hey, Connie, guess who manifested three sets of clubs?

> <looks over shoulder>

>

[Guest guest]

Connie,

Clubbells are definitely a great tool, especially for variety. Kettlebells are

as well, as are elastic tubes and traditional free weights and machines. I've

found that as long as you keep variety in your workout your body can't as easily

adapt neurologically and you can continue to improve.

I like your wording of not just beautiful physiques, " but juicy, fluid movement

too. "

Also, rotating intensity is great, but even with a regimented version your body

can adapt and will. Mixing up your intensity days is another great stimulus for

growth and improvement. Going with a high perceived exertion for a few days in

a row, then cutting down to lower exertion work well to shock the body when done

sparingly. A constant cycle of high, medium, hard, none and light will probably

start to lose its efficacy after a few rotations.

Just my opinion of course!

cbrown2008 <cbrown2008@...> wrote: ,

I don't find it boring at all.

Over at CST we have people doing exclusively whole-body, with

Clubbells as the weight and putting on mass,

doing the usual = Working hard enough to cause adaptation and

eating enough to support that adaptation.

There's an interesting working theory about using a 4-day sequence of

exertion and recovery = medium, hard, none, light exertion. In the

scale of Perceived Exertion this works out to medium=5-6, hard 7-9,

none 0-1, light 2-3. This seems to keep the CNS humming but never

exhausted and with a really fast capacity for adaptation. We don't go

to 10 or failure in training, that's kept for real life lifting-the-

truck-off-the-baby situations.

Most people seem to really respond to that with whole-body exercises

and it saves the complicated figuring out which muscles are tired on

which day which most of us don't want to bother with and don't aspire

to anyway. But it does require faith that whole body exercises mean

the physique will develop beautifully without concentrating, body-

building style, on this or that muscle. Which I find to be true. Not

just beautiful physiques but juicy, fluid movement too.

Connie

> As I also enjoy the topic, if you'd like to email me privately in

case the group is getting bored by our conversation, feel free to do

so. I'd love to hear from you. Thanks again for everything!

>

>

__________________________________________________

[Guest guest]

<slethnobotanist@...> wrote: On

12/19/06, D'Ambrosio <jcdambrosio@...> wrote:

> My goals, in the most vague sense, are to build as much muscle as possible

without >gaining lots of fat which is usually the case with traditional

" bulking " phases. At 5'8 " I'd >like to ideally be 175-180 while keeping my 32 "

waist and having a body fat % of 8-10%. >Full body workouts are very taxing on

the system without fully exhausting or working a >particular body part. I do

incorporate them in for variety on occasion but find (and have >found from past

trials) that long term full body training on one day drains me systemically

>without creating enough of a stimulus for growth. I usually end up losing size

after doing >full body training for more than a few weeks to a month.

****** That's interesting. When I was full on into Olympic lifting

every part of my body came up except my chest, which for purposes of

bodyshaping had to be isolated, but had absolutely no effect on my

ability to do the classic lifts.

Classic lifts are great but they can be eventually " learned " by the muscles, so

although your weights improve it is due to neurological learning and not due to

an increase in muscle mass. I'm sure everyone who stuck with the same routine

or moves for a long time has noted that although they improve with their lift

amounts that body mass doesn't seem to keep up.

On the other hand if maximum hypertrophy (muscular growth) is your

primary goal, then nothing beats bodybuilding. That doesn't appear to

be the goal of most folks on this list however.

> There's nothing wrong with internet speculation, and yes, it's quite

possible that the 3 >pounds of muscle I lost may have been to training to

failure while not getting enough >protein, but I could have also lost a chunk of

the 20 pounds of fat due to the training to >failure so it was a fair trade-off.

****** It seems to me that any weight bearing exercise on such a diet

would have spared muscle initially. I know when I fast it certainly

slows down any muscle loss, but over time that benefit is lost if the

diet is not up to par nutritionally.

I agree with you in that I wasn't consuming enough protein to build muscle and I

had even lost a few pounds of it, but considering the amount of fat lost I think

the muscle loss was minimal. This surprised me and that's why I tracked my bf%

regularly because I was worried about a large loss in lean mass.

<snip>

> There is so much information, a lot backed by research, that tout different

amounts of >protein for someone who is training. They vary from the 1 gram per

kilogram you stated, >.6 grams per pound of body weight to 1.5-2 grams per

pound. It was part of this confusion >that attracted me to trying to go with the

minimum protein amounts. I figured the best way >to determine my needs would be

to start at the bottom, and since the amino acid >recycling seemed to make

sense, I gave it a shot.

****** That also is very interesting. From my research amino acid

recycling is usually associated with fasting, not eating.

I've read that it is a constant process and it made sense to me. It still does

but I don't believe it occurs to the degree I thought it would.

> As I also enjoy the topic, if you'd like to email me privately in case the

group is getting >bored by our conversation, feel free to do so. I'd love to

hear from you. Thanks again for >everything!

****** I think the rest of the list would enjoy that conversation as

well. Exercise certainly is not off-topic. By the way, is this you?

http://www.exercisecertification.com/success/Dambrosio/Dambrosio.html

So, yes, that was me almost 4 years ago. It was good for what it was but that

was about it. Since then my training has changed even moreso, building on the

principles I had learned back then. My diet also has obviously changed and is

continuing to evolve. It seems that it's uncommon to find both a diet that is

optimal for health and also for building lean muscle while losing or at least

maintaining body fat levels. I'd rather be healthy than super lean, but if I

can find a balance I'll jump on that! I'm still fine-tuning and this group is

helping with that and I appreciate it!

__________________________________________________

[Guest guest]

Oh, it's Coach Connie the Ninja, is it? Now you tell me!

downwardog7 <illneverbecool@...> wrote:

> Over at CST we have people doing exclusively whole-body, with

> Clubbells as the weight and putting on mass,

> doing the usual = Working hard enough to cause adaptation and

> eating enough to support that adaptation.

>

> There's an interesting working theory about using a 4-day sequence of

> exertion and recovery = medium, hard, none, light exertion. In the

> scale of Perceived Exertion this works out to medium=5-6, hard 7-9,

> none 0-1, light 2-3. This seems to keep the CNS humming but never

> exhausted and with a really fast capacity for adaptation. We don't go

> to 10 or failure in training, that's kept for real life lifting-the-

> truck-off-the-baby situations.

Coach Connie is a ninja. Assassination is imminent.

B.

p.s. hey, Connie, guess who manifested three sets of clubs?

<looks over shoulder>

__________________________________________________

[Guest guest]

And is a minx??? I'm learning more and more every day!

cbrown2008 <cbrown2008@...> wrote:

you minx. I must get some KBs next

(looks over shoulder)

Connie

>

> > Over at CST we have people doing exclusively whole-body, with

> > Clubbells as the weight and putting on mass,

> > doing the usual = Working hard enough to cause adaptation and

> > eating enough to support that adaptation.

> >

> > There's an interesting working theory about using a 4-day

sequence of

> > exertion and recovery = medium, hard, none, light exertion. In

the

> > scale of Perceived Exertion this works out to medium=5-6, hard 7-

9,

> > none 0-1, light 2-3. This seems to keep the CNS humming but

never

> > exhausted and with a really fast capacity for adaptation. We

don't go

> > to 10 or failure in training, that's kept for real life lifting-

the-

> > truck-off-the-baby situations.

>

>

> Coach Connie is a ninja. Assassination is imminent.

>

> B.

>

> p.s. hey, Connie, guess who manifested three sets of clubs?

> <looks over shoulder>

>

__________________________________________________

[Guest guest]

>

>

> My workout program varies, but it's usually between 3-5 times a week,

> 25-45 minutes a session. Each body part is worked once a week with

> multiple sets and exercises to failure. I've been training for 25

> years now so I have that aspect down. I'm also a personal trainer as

> well as a chiropractor (among other things) so I have a good grasp on

> anatomy and the physiological processes of the body.

>

,

So are you strictly working each muscle as an isolated entity?

I personally find I have a much better fat burning metabolism when I do

flowing exercises such as yoga. Lots of other flowing stuff though, forms

of dance, martial arts, etc.

-Lana

[Guest guest]

Hi Lana,

Aside from the occasional heavy bag training I do work each part as a separate

entity, but that's kind of limited as our muscular and skeletal systems don't

allow for pure isolation most of the time. When pectorals are worked, deltoids

and triceps come into play, as well as any stabilizing muscles as well, the

forearms to hold the weights or handles, etc. Back is the same way, bringing

biceps and rear deltoids into play along with forearms. Even the smaller

muscles, such as biceps or triceps end up getting stabilizer muscles to help out

along with antagonists.

That all being said, I do see the place for flowing, whole body exercise. The

body functions as a unit so it makes sense to train that way, at least on

occasion. My main goal is to build muscle, which will in turn increase my

metabolism and burn more fat. That along with my diet should (hopefully) be

enough to keep me fairly lean. I'm just trying to tweak the diet part now after

throwing everything into a tizzy with the raw/vegan diet followed by the WAPF

guidelines.

I'd love to take up a martial art or even dance but my schedule only allows so

much. As it is I get up at 5:30 to be out the door by 6:30 to be at the gym at

the university by 7:30 to finish and be at work by 8:30. Then a full day of

work and after that is usually patients at the office. Ah life!

Lana Gibbons <lana.m.gibbons@...> wrote:

>

>

> My workout program varies, but it's usually between 3-5 times a week,

> 25-45 minutes a session. Each body part is worked once a week with

> multiple sets and exercises to failure. I've been training for 25

> years now so I have that aspect down. I'm also a personal trainer as

> well as a chiropractor (among other things) so I have a good grasp on

> anatomy and the physiological processes of the body.

>

,

So are you strictly working each muscle as an isolated entity?

I personally find I have a much better fat burning metabolism when I do

flowing exercises such as yoga. Lots of other flowing stuff though, forms

of dance, martial arts, etc.

-Lana

[Guest guest]

See, that's where I differ. The body functions as a unit all the time - so

why only train it that way occasionally? While I understand your primary

goal is to muscle build - I don't think you're going to get the same quality

of fat burning by building alone. As for time constraints - Why not replace

your current warmup/cooldown with a (well suited) short yoga routine?

You'll be surprised how much just a little regular flowing exercise can do

for your metabolism.

-Lana

That all being said, I do see the place for flowing, whole body

exercise. The body functions as a unit so it makes sense to train that way,

at least on occasion.

My main goal is to build muscle, which will in turn increase my metabolism

> and burn more fat.

I'd love to take up a martial art or even dance but my schedule only

> allows so much. As it is I get up at 5:30 to be out the door by 6:30 to be

> at the gym at the university by 7:30 to finish and be at work by 8:30. Then

> a full day of work and after that is usually patients at the office. Ah

> life!

>

[Guest guest]

I think you're right on that . 7 cycles and I get bored.

Back to your original question? how to gain the muscle without also

gaining fat?

You know most people I see being successful, move away

from " macronutrient percentages " and move to x grams protein, y grams

carbs, and fill in the rest with fat. Taking a hint from 's

feedback, it sounds like you haven't tried the less than 70 g carb

routine while overeating for mass gain?

Another thought - have you read Berardi's articles on mass gain? I

found it interesting that the single thing he sees most often - and

he comes from a bodybuilding background - is that people way

underestimate how much you have to really eat.

Personally I have one of those brick s***house builds and any kind of

mass gain has not been a problem so no personal stories for you there.

Ha ha on me being a ninja - I took the name " laughing warrior "

because my subtitle really is, " you've got to be kidding. " but I do

like fooling around with training.

Connie

>

> Connie,

>

> Clubbells are definitely a great tool, especially for variety.

Kettlebells are as well, as are elastic tubes and traditional free

weights and machines. I've found that as long as you keep variety in

your workout your body can't as easily adapt neurologically and you

can continue to improve.

>

> I like your wording of not just beautiful physiques, " but juicy,

fluid movement too. "

>

[Guest guest]

> So, yes, that was me almost 4 years ago. It was good for what it

was but that was about it. Since then my training has changed even

moreso, building on the principles I had learned back then. My diet

also has obviously changed and is continuing to evolve. It seems that

it's uncommon to find both a diet that is optimal for health and also

for building lean muscle while losing or at least maintaining body fat

levels. I'd rather be healthy than super lean, but if I can find a

balance I'll jump on that! I'm still fine-tuning and this group is

helping with that and I appreciate it!

,

Can you evaluate your weight/measurement numbers every two weeks then

tweak your calories/nutrients for the next two weeks until you find

your way? One can't get too far off track in two weeks and it seems a

good way to individualize an eating plan.

I, for one, would be interested in what you discover afa the optimal

macronutrient and calorie amounts for yourself.

Seems like you enjoy the calculating aspect of the game.

I believe is very lean although that's just internet

speculation. He's been doing WAP food for more than twenty

years--longer than any of us afaik. gets lean when he applies

himself. has lost a good amount of fat eating enormous calories

and dietary fat with negligible carbs. My trainer has one of the

fiercest physiques in the business and hasn't eaten carbs in more than

ten years, but he also undereats often and only recently to wapf

standards, with no increase in bf. Pavel eats only real food, no

powders, shakes or bars, but he isn't a bb. I wonder what Coach Sonnon

eats--Connie?

I'm definitely losing fat while putting on muscle and eating immodest

portions of meat with adequate fat--to my taste, anyway. I've lost two

inches from the waist since the WAPF conf. My dietary fat hovers

around 35-40% when I get on Fitday, but I haven't checked in there

lately and my diet is more carnivorous now than even before. I've been

periodically undereating, however, as does on a regular basis.

Of course, I don't ever intend to be very lean, but I do want some

visual definition.

okay, here's what I ate today which was larger-than-usual of late:

Calories Eaten Today

grams cals %total

Total: 1691

Fat: 77 696 42%

Sat: 29 262 16%

Poly: 4 33 2%

Mono: 32 286 17%

Carbs: 55 180 11%

Fiber: 10 0 0%

Protein: 191 765 47%

Alcohol: 0 0 0%

so that was a pre-workout espresso with coconut cream,

later a post-workout shake with a raw egg and some egg white protein,

wheat germ, coconut cream, green powder, nutritional yeast,

blueberries...and clo--comes to about 320 cal with 30 g protein and I

drink it every.single.day. unless I skip breakfast.

11 oz. shredded beef for lunch with some kimchi and 8 oz. kombucha.

about an ounce of raw liver, too.

another 8 oz shredded beef for dinner with some kimchi.

an apple before bed.

workout was similar to what Sanjay described: 100 hindu squats, 25

hindu push-ups, 4 negative chins, 100 armpit casts and pendulums with

a 10lb club and one-minute of sit-ups to finish. A bridge would have

been an intelligent addition.

Tomorrow'll be some sort of punishing resistance work exploiting the

kb clean and press among other cruelties.

B.

[Guest guest]

--- In , <slethnobotanist@...>

wrote:

> Franco Columbu?? Now there is a blast from the past! ... Hmmm...you

might be

> dating yourself here. Are you currently reading his material or do you

> remember him from days past? :-)

,

His office is down the street from me. I don't see him, but several

of my clients do. His comment on dietary protein I just happened to

read a few minutes before responding to 's post, in an e-book I'm

proofreading.

B.

[Guest guest]

--- In , " cbrown2008 " <cbrown2008@...>

wrote:

>

> you minx.

Connie,

Well, I...never!

<lying>

B.

[Guest guest]

Hi Sanjay,

Do you have a web site that describes the Indian style pushups and

squats and the backbridge?

Namaste,

Pamela

>

> Connie,

>

> Thanks for posting this. I myself subscribe to this view though I

> don't work out very often. When I do I mostly do sets of pull ups,

> dips, Indian style pushups in a sequence and then finish with Indian

> style squats and a backbridge. My focus is not on becoming big -

> rather on staying lean and have a decent to good power/bodyweight ratio.

>

> I have noticed that I do start gaining muscle mass even with the above

> regiment done thrice a week.

>

> Thanks

> Sanjay

[Guest guest]

On 12/19/06, Lynn Siprelle <lynn@...> wrote:

> > I don't know how familiar you are with WAP, but there really isn't

> > just one kind of diet.

>

> aaaa-men! It's the most frustrating thing; I would love it if someone

> could just say, " Here, eat like this! " but it don't work that way,

> alas. We all seem to have different body chemistries and tolerances.

Well you know us browncoats, gotta throw a wrench in the works.

> Lynn S.

> who seems to do better on a modified " Radiant Recovery " system--at

> least, the eating breakfast within an hour of rising really works for

> me...

Hey that is pretty cool. I had never heard of this before. One of my

all time favorite books is _Sugar Blues_, so anyone talking about

sugar sensitivity certainly warrants my attention.

--

" All [gov't] can see in an original idea is potential change, and

hence an invasion of its prerogatives. The most dangerous man, to any

gov't, is the man who is able to think things out for himself, without

regard to the prevailing superstitions and taboos. Almost inevitably

he comes to the conclusion that the gov't he lives under is dishonest,

insane, and intolerable, and so, if he is a romantic, he tries to

change it. And even if he is not...he is very apt to spread discontent

among those who are. "

H.L. Mencken

How sweet it is! The GOP, RIP

http://snipurl.com/w7d6

[Guest guest]

On 12/20/06, D'Ambrosio <jcdambrosio@...> wrote:

> Haha, that was me a few years ago! I'll respond to the rest later, thanks for

the embarrassment!

>

>

Sorry about that. I thought I recognized your name from another forum

but when I googled it that was all I could find. Looking pretty good.

I assume like fine wine you have gotten better with age :-)

--

" All [gov't] can see in an original idea is potential change, and

hence an invasion of its prerogatives. The most dangerous man, to any

gov't, is the man who is able to think things out for himself, without

regard to the prevailing superstitions and taboos. Almost inevitably

he comes to the conclusion that the gov't he lives under is dishonest,

insane, and intolerable, and so, if he is a romantic, he tries to

change it. And even if he is not...he is very apt to spread discontent

among those who are. "

H.L. Mencken

How sweet it is! The GOP, RIP

http://snipurl.com/w7d6

[Guest guest]

Pamela

Some inputs:

1. When I say " Indian Style " I do not mean the " Red Indian natives " .

Rather I mean India as in the country India in Asia.

2. I learnt these when I was a child from my uncle who used to some

old Indian style wrestling. Then lost touch with these as I grew up

and got into more westernized training rituals. But during the past

year or so I have come back full circle to these originals that have

been the staple of Indian Wrestlers for hundreds of years.

3. You can get some details regarding these training methods at

www.mattfurey.com but please do not get carried away by all the

promises he makes. Everything has its place but I feel Furey is too

bombastic in his claims.

Regards

Sanjay

> >

> > Connie,

> >

> > Thanks for posting this. I myself subscribe to this view though I

> > don't work out very often. When I do I mostly do sets of pull ups,

> > dips, Indian style pushups in a sequence and then finish with Indian

> > style squats and a backbridge. My focus is not on becoming big -

> > rather on staying lean and have a decent to good power/bodyweight

ratio.

> >

> > I have noticed that I do start gaining muscle mass even with the above

> > regiment done thrice a week.

> >

> > Thanks

> > Sanjay

>

[Guest guest]

I can see your point. My warmup is actually incorporated into my workout and

not a warmup per se, but I can replace my cooldown with a short yoga routine and

see what happens.

Thanks!

Lana Gibbons <lana.m.gibbons@...> wrote:

See, that's where I differ. The body functions as a unit all the time - so

why only train it that way occasionally? While I understand your primary

goal is to muscle build - I don't think you're going to get the same quality

of fat burning by building alone. As for time constraints - Why not replace

your current warmup/cooldown with a (well suited) short yoga routine?

You'll be surprised how much just a little regular flowing exercise can do

for your metabolism.

-Lana

That all being said, I do see the place for flowing, whole body

exercise. The body functions as a unit so it makes sense to train that way,

at least on occasion.

My main goal is to build muscle, which will in turn increase my metabolism

> and burn more fat.

I'd love to take up a martial art or even dance but my schedule only

> allows so much. As it is I get up at 5:30 to be out the door by 6:30 to be

> at the gym at the university by 7:30 to finish and be at work by 8:30. Then

> a full day of work and after that is usually patients at the office. Ah

> life!

>

[Guest guest]

I'd love to try the less than 70g carb and overeating to see what happens, but

I'm at a loss to figure out what to eat. I can literally only eat so much meat

and eggs and keeping carbs low probably will eliminate dairy to a large extent.

I'm going to look up Berardi's articles right after this!

Oh, and it's definitely easier to fool around with training than to fool around

while training!

cbrown2008 <cbrown2008@...> wrote: I

think you're right on that . 7 cycles and I get bored.

Back to your original question? how to gain the muscle without also

gaining fat?

You know most people I see being successful, move away

from " macronutrient percentages " and move to x grams protein, y grams

carbs, and fill in the rest with fat. Taking a hint from 's

feedback, it sounds like you haven't tried the less than 70 g carb

routine while overeating for mass gain?

Another thought - have you read Berardi's articles on mass gain? I

found it interesting that the single thing he sees most often - and

he comes from a bodybuilding background - is that people way

underestimate how much you have to really eat.

Personally I have one of those brick s***house builds and any kind of

mass gain has not been a problem so no personal stories for you there.

Ha ha on me being a ninja - I took the name " laughing warrior "

because my subtitle really is, " you've got to be kidding. " but I do

like fooling around with training.

Connie

>

> Connie,

>

> Clubbells are definitely a great tool, especially for variety.

Kettlebells are as well, as are elastic tubes and traditional free

weights and machines. I've found that as long as you keep variety in

your workout your body can't as easily adapt neurologically and you

can continue to improve.

>

> I like your wording of not just beautiful physiques, " but juicy,

fluid movement too. "

>

__________________________________________________

[Guest guest]

That was me from the other forum. Thanks for the compliment and hopefully I'm

aging like a fine wine as opposed to pasteurized milk!

<slethnobotanist@...> wrote: On

12/20/06, D'Ambrosio <jcdambrosio@...> wrote:

> Haha, that was me a few years ago! I'll respond to the rest later, thanks

for the embarrassment!

>

>

Sorry about that. I thought I recognized your name from another forum

but when I googled it that was all I could find. Looking pretty good.

I assume like fine wine you have gotten better with age :-)

--

" All [gov't] can see in an original idea is potential change, and

hence an invasion of its prerogatives. The most dangerous man, to any

gov't, is the man who is able to think things out for himself, without

regard to the prevailing superstitions and taboos. Almost inevitably

he comes to the conclusion that the gov't he lives under is dishonest,

insane, and intolerable, and so, if he is a romantic, he tries to

change it. And even if he is not...he is very apt to spread discontent

among those who are. "

H.L. Mencken

How sweet it is! The GOP, RIP

http://snipurl.com/w7d6

__________________________________________________

[Guest guest]

>

> I'd love to try the less than 70g carb and overeating to see what

happens, but I'm at a loss to figure out what to eat. I can literally

only eat so much meat and eggs and keeping carbs low probably will

eliminate dairy to a large extent.

>

> I'm going to look up Berardi's articles right after this!

>

> Oh, and it's definitely easier to fool around with training than to

fool around while training!

>

,

I've been reading a lot of Berardi's articles lately and I like him

even if " The Velocity Diet " frightensme. For hypertrophy, it's like,

eat some protein and fat with low-glycemic carbs every two hours and

don't ever miss a meal. Six meals a day. Save significant carbs for

during and post-workout. Cheat meal once/week on date night. He

overrates the vegetable foods imo.

B.

[Guest guest]

>

> I'd love to try the less than 70g carb and overeating to see what

happens, but I'm at a loss to figure out what to eat. I can literally

only eat so much meat and eggs and keeping carbs low probably will

eliminate dairy to a large extent.

>

> I'm going to look up Berardi's articles right after this!

,

Oh, and I like that Berardi says no more than one scoop protein powder

per day unless traveling, when you can have up to six for convenience.

He also gives recipes for making your own bars and stuff, which still

need to be tweaked because of the sucralose, but better than

commercial stuff for sure.

B.

[Guest guest]

There is also some discussion of traditional Indian conditioning that

is (sorry) critical of Furey at RMAX. Sanjay, I apologize for this as

it's critical of the person you recommend. I offer it in the spirit

of education.

(you can become a member and search the RMAX forums for " Dangers

Royal Court. " PS, the Indian tradition of lifelong health combining

yoga and weighted clubs is a major influence in Sonnon's reviving the

ancient club with modern materials. )

Sonnon's premise is that Furey's instructions - dangerously bad form,

as one can see in Furey's photos at bodybuilding.com, and then done

for high volume - can be safely converted to the thousand-year-old

traditions of yoga.

Some excerpts, pictures not included:

" The jack-knife pushup, or the so-called " Hindu pushup "

This photo from Bodybuilding.com of the so-called " Hindu pushup "

featuring our favorite less than athletic representative. ...

Look at the first frame of this awful structure. No lower back

release, total absence of pelvic tilt and lift, no hamstring

lengthening, no dorsal shoulder extension. With the legs spread so

widely, no hip piriformis opening which was the intended point of the

complementary balancing of moving between downward and upward facing

dog poses in the sun salutation. The elbows are unlocked transferring

strain into the soft tissue.

Then the man moves into what can only be described as an orthopedic

surgeon's nightmare. Look how the weight is transferred forward with

elbows splaying outwards like chicken wings. The strain goes directly

to the weakest structural points: the elbows and shoulders which are

unpacked. Since the head isn't in alignment with the spine, with

splayed elbows, this severely restricts how active the core can

become.

In the final frame, observe the total absence of spinal flexion, due

to inactive glutes and thighs which must contract to fully extend the

psoas to open. The lower back is in obvious severe strain and the

eventuality of an injury is a guarantee unless quitting the movement

altogether. The hips cannot even touch the ground as a result of the

lack of muscular action. The glute/thigh activation is what protects

the lower back, which is why this photo is so irresponsibly hazardous

to those would innocently try to reproduce it in the futile attempts

to become health and fit. Observe how the shoulders are lifted and

traps contracted: the unpacked shoulders transfers the strain up the

locked elbows into the soft tissues, and as a result potentially into

the cervical verterbrae which are being strained in the attempt to

force the head back. The head cannot allow the chin to lift because

the unpacked shoulders though in this photo it may be misunderstood

because of the excess adipose tissue on the back.

In contradistinction, consider it's polar opposite which has proven

itself over millennia and millions of practitioners:

Hatha yoga Surya Namaskar or " Sun Salutation "

Now compare this with yoga's surya namaskar:

Now, although this model could definitely use a sandwich or three,

his structural integrity is ideal.

In the first frame, observe the perfect structural integrity held for

only short duration to facilitate shoulder, lower back and hamstring

health in perfect alignment. The lower back is completely aligned

with the spine, the coccyx pointed at the sky to protect and

strengthen the hamstrings, quads and open the piriformis, calves and

achilles. The shoulders are packed securely and extended beyond the

ears for extreme range strength and opening the chest from the

restrictions to overhead extension. The elbows are locked and

inwardly rotated to protect the soft tissue.

In the second frame, the elbows are packed in tightly to protect

them, not projecting outward causing strain in both the elbows and

transferring the force into the small rotator cuff evenutally leading

to impingment and tears. The crown is in alignment with the spine all

the way to the tailbone, allowing full core activation to strengthen

the corset of muscle surrounding the trunk, as the goal of all

bodweight exercise for health and fitness is to activate from the

core to periphery.

In the final frame, observe how the hips can extend all the way to

the ground with proper glute clench which releases the psoas due to

reciprocal inhibition. The shoulders are rolled backwards and packed

down tightly onto the rib cage to anchor the pose and strengthen the

entire structure. The spine is allowed to fully open and elastically

load in preparation for the next movement.

Observe how a beginner can look this good with sound structure and

only weigh $1.40 soaking wet! Now imagine being three times that

weight with poor structure, performed at high volume at high

intensity. It's a recipe for surgery.

This potentially dangerous " Royal Court " must be publicly addressed.

There are alternatives in any style of yoga which can make you

strong, healthy and fit without pain or injury for the rest of your

long life.

> > >

> > > Connie,

> > >

> > > Thanks for posting this. I myself subscribe to this view though

I

> > > don't work out very often. When I do I mostly do sets of pull

ups,

> > > dips, Indian style pushups in a sequence and then finish with

Indian

> > > style squats and a backbridge. My focus is not on becoming big -

> > > rather on staying lean and have a decent to good

power/bodyweight

> ratio.

> > >

> > > I have noticed that I do start gaining muscle mass even with

the above

> > > regiment done thrice a week.

> > >

> > > Thanks

> > > Sanjay

> >

>

[Guest guest]

On 12/20/06, D'Ambrosio <jcdambrosio@...> wrote:

> <slethnobotanist@...> wrote:

> ****** That's interesting. When I was full on into Olympic lifting

> every part of my body came up except my chest, which for purposes of

> bodyshaping had to be isolated, but had absolutely no effect on my

> ability to do the classic lifts.

[JD] Classic lifts are great but they can be eventually " learned " by

the muscles, so although your weights improve it is due to

neurological learning and not due to an increase in muscle mass. I'm

sure everyone who stuck with the same routine or moves for a long time

has noted that although they improve with their lift amounts that body

mass doesn't seem to keep up.

[M] Yes, and this speaks to our difference in goals. I personally am

not looking to create maximum muscle mass/hypertrophy, which is a

bodybuilding goal, and is why I wrote in the next paragraph from my

previous post:

" On the other hand if maximum hypertrophy (muscular growth) is your

primary goal, then nothing beats bodybuilding. That doesn't appear to

be the goal of most folks on this list however. "

I got into Olympic Lifting because I wanted to increase functional

strength, quickness, speed, and power, all so I could be better at my

chosen sport, basketball. Now Fred Hatfield's book _Power_ was very

intriguing and suggested some fruitful possibilities (like more

effective squatting techniques and the use of jump shoes - which I was

already doing) but it wasn't until I got into Olympic Lifting that

things really took off (actually the strength/jump shoes were amazing

but that's another story). I got leaner, harder/denser, and initially

bigger although that was not my primary goal. I was quicker on the

court, stronger, faster, and jumped higher, and developed an enormous

advantage over those who just trained using bodybuilding methods. I

mean it was like night and day.

Now mind you, before that I was heavy into bodybuilding following many

of the same methods and techniques you mention in your success story,

but it was sports performance and everyday functional living I was

trying to improve, not gain maximum muscle mass. And I'm really not

sure what that means for the layman anyway.

At 6'1 220 lbs I'm no shrinking violet. I have gotten as high as 240

lbs. I don't think in today's bodybuilding world I would even get a

sniff short of 250 pounds (ugh!). That is far beyond anything I ever

want to achieve. Yet right now I'm in the midst of our church's 40 day

Nativity fast after which I should weigh in around 195 lbs, which is

my lifetime weight goal with a bodyfat percentage of about 10%. I'm

trying to make up for a lot of ground that I lost over the last three

years, so I'm pretty excited. To that end (and not really by choice

but c'est la vie) my life at the moment is dominated by what I call

the three W's (work, working out, and worship) and not necessarily in

that order

The way I was convinced about Olympic lifting was when I saw one of

the super heavyweights with a big FAT stomach do a back flip after a

successful lift, and had a vertical leap that would have been the envy

of Jordan. Well I didn't need anymore convincing after that!

And while my trainer Darin was HUGE and very very strong, most Olympic

Lifters had/have what I call a layman's builds: very well muscled, not

as big as bodybuilders, strong as heck and hard/dense as a rock. IMO,

very aesthetically pleasing to me and at least to the average...ah

hem...woman :-)

The other kicker is that they are EXTREMELY flexible. I didn't realize

how much so until I attempted my first workout. No way I was lifting

that weight until I got more flexible. Now if I stop for any length of

time I lose my flexibility and it takes me awhile to get it back such

that I can even do the lifts correctly (curiously enough when I'm

fasting/undereating my flexibility gains dramatically increase). Here

is what Fred " Dr. Squat " Hatfield (a diehard powerlifter had to say

about OL):

" But let's get into Olympic lifting, and try to discern whether

there's something there for athletes from other sports to benefit

from.

Pound for pound, Olympic weightlifters have a greater level of

speed-strength than any other class of athletes in all of sport. This

fact was made very clear during a massive scientific expedition

carried out on the athletes at the Mexico City Olympics in 1964.

Sports scientists found that Olympic lifters were able to both

vertical jump higher than any class of athletes (including the high

jumpers), and run a 25 yard dash faster than any class of athletes

(including the sprinters).

http://www.geocities.com/~slopitch/drsquat/1olympic.htm "

Having spent my life around a group of genetic freaks known as

professional basketball players, who are IMO the finest athletes in

the world, that is saying a lot!

IIRC, that same study demonstrated, next to gymnasts, Olympic athletes

were the most flexible athletes in the world.

Mind you I like bodybuilding/shaping, but I look at it now more as a

way to bring my aesthetics in line (like my chest) rather than as a

way of achieving any performance/health goals.

<snip>

> ****** It seems to me that any weight bearing exercise on such a diet

> would have spared muscle initially. I know when I fast it certainly

> slows down any muscle loss, but over time that benefit is lost if the

> diet is not up to par nutritionally.

[JD] I agree with you in that I wasn't consuming enough protein to

build muscle and I had even lost a few pounds of it, but considering

the amount of fat lost I think the muscle loss was minimal. This

surprised me and that's why I tracked my bf% regularly because I was

worried about a large loss in lean mass.

[M] Yes that is one of the great things about exercise, it spares

muscle even on a protein deficient diet, at least for a little while.

That is why I think people who fast or undereat w/o doing *weight

bearing* exercising are following very bad advice, which largely comes

from some corners of the Natural Hygiene school of thought from the

19th and 20th centuries.

<snip>

> ****** That also is very interesting. From my research amino acid

> recycling is usually associated with fasting, not eating.

[JD] I've read that it is a constant process and it made sense to me.

It still does but I don't believe it occurs to the degree I thought

it would.

[M] Actually the more I think about it the more sense it makes. The

mechanism would prima facie seem dependent not on a lack of food (like

some forms of fasting) but rather on a lack of protein. Some research

(clinical) suggests that the body can get by for certain periods of

time with as little as 15 grams of protein a day because of the

recycling process.

> ****** I think the rest of the list would enjoy that conversation as

> well. Exercise certainly is not off-topic. By the way, is this you?

>

> http://www.exercisecertification.com/success/Dambrosio/Dambrosio.html

[JD] So, yes, that was me almost 4 years ago. It was good for what it

was but that was about it. Since then my training has changed even

moreso, building on the principles I had learned back then. My diet

also has obviously changed and is continuing to evolve. It seems that

it's uncommon to find both a diet that is optimal for health and also

for building lean muscle while losing or at least maintaining body fat

levels. I'd rather be healthy than super lean, but if I can find a

balance I'll jump on that! I'm still fine-tuning and this group is

helping with that and I appreciate it!

[M] I suggest systematic undereating in conjunction with whatever else

you are doing, but it is certainly not for everybody. And I'm not sure

that super lean is even a healthy goal to be shooting for. I really

don't want my bodyfat to go anywhere south of 10% and at times I think

that is even too low.

Well happy experimenting!

--

" All [gov't] can see in an original idea is potential change, and

hence an invasion of its prerogatives. The most dangerous man, to any

gov't, is the man who is able to think things out for himself, without

regard to the prevailing superstitions and taboos. Almost inevitably

he comes to the conclusion that the gov't he lives under is dishonest,

insane, and intolerable, and so, if he is a romantic, he tries to

change it. And even if he is not...he is very apt to spread discontent

among those who are. "

H.L. Mencken

How sweet it is! The GOP, RIP

http://snipurl.com/w7d6

[Guest guest]

On 12/21/06, D'Ambrosio <jcdambrosio@...> wrote:

>

> That was me from the other forum. Thanks for the compliment and hopefully I'm

aging like a fine wine as opposed to pasteurized milk!

[M] Oh from the looks of it you are doing just fine. And FYI just

about everyone so far who been involved in this thread is as old or

older than you, and some of them are doing quite fine as well.

--

" All [gov't] can see in an original idea is potential change, and

hence an invasion of its prerogatives. The most dangerous man, to any

gov't, is the man who is able to think things out for himself, without

regard to the prevailing superstitions and taboos. Almost inevitably

he comes to the conclusion that the gov't he lives under is dishonest,

insane, and intolerable, and so, if he is a romantic, he tries to

change it. And even if he is not...he is very apt to spread discontent

among those who are. "

H.L. Mencken

How sweet it is! The GOP, RIP

http://snipurl.com/w7d6

[Guest guest]

On 12/20/06, downwardog7 <illneverbecool@...> wrote:

>

>

> > Franco Columbu?? Now there is a blast from the past! ... Hmmm...you

> might be

> > dating yourself here. Are you currently reading his material or do you

> > remember him from days past? :-)

>

> ,

>

> His office is down the street from me. I don't see him, but several

> of my clients do. His comment on dietary protein I just happened to

> read a few minutes before responding to 's post, in an e-book I'm

> proofreading.

> B.

It would be interesting to see a current photo of him which I couldn't

find on his website. A couple of years back Muscle and Fitness had an

article featuring bodybuilders over 40. Some of them looked absolutely

fabulous, especially Robby and Bill Pearl, who are both LONG

past 40, LOL!

--

" All [gov't] can see in an original idea is potential change, and

hence an invasion of its prerogatives. The most dangerous man, to any

gov't, is the man who is able to think things out for himself, without

regard to the prevailing superstitions and taboos. Almost inevitably

he comes to the conclusion that the gov't he lives under is dishonest,

insane, and intolerable, and so, if he is a romantic, he tries to

change it. And even if he is not...he is very apt to spread discontent

among those who are. "

H.L. Mencken

How sweet it is! The GOP, RIP

http://snipurl.com/w7d6