Biangularity?

The Crow said:

This is probably the wrong place to ask, because I get the impression that
if you're not talking about squating with three hundred pounds of dead
buffalo on your back, then you're not talking serious exercise.

Barbells are ideal, though 300 is a little light. ;-)

Quoted message said:

However, here goes all the same.

What do you think of these Body Solid biangular machines that boast a merger
between the different advantages of free weights and machines combined?

What are the advantages of machines again?

"T" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

The Crow said:

This is probably the wrong place to ask, because I get the impression
that if you're not talking about squating with three hundred pounds of
dead buffalo on your back, then you're not talking serious exercise.

Barbells are ideal, though 300 is a little light. ;-)

Quoted message said:

However, here goes all the same.

What do you think of these Body Solid biangular machines that boast a
merger between the different advantages of free weights and machines
combined?

What are the advantages of machines again?

If you're a sado billy no mates with no one to spot for you, like me, it's
more comforting to know that, at higher weights, you probably won't kill
yourself or snap your spine with poor form, (ill disciplined I know).

T said:

The Crow said:

This is probably the wrong place to ask, because I get the
impression that if you're not talking about squating with three
hundred pounds of dead buffalo on your back, then you're not talking
serious exercise.

Barbells are ideal, though 300 is a little light. ;-)

Quoted message said:

However, here goes all the same.

What do you think of these Body Solid biangular machines that boast
a merger between the different advantages of free weights and
machines combined?

What are the advantages of machines again?

They do have some advantages. I wouldn't want to try doing 10 squats as fast
as I can with as heavy a weight as I can, because about one time in five I'd
screw up, squat down too fast, not be able to stop myself in time, and I'd
probably get a back injury. Whereas I can do that on a horizontal leg press
and if I screw up the weights hit the stack with a huge clang but I am not
hurt.

Peter

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

This is probably the wrong place to ask, because I get the impression
that if you're not talking about squating with three hundred pounds of
dead buffalo on your back, then you're not talking serious exercise.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Barbells are ideal, though 300 is a little light. ;-)

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

What do you think of these Body Solid biangular machines that boast a
merger between the different advantages of free weights and machines
combined?

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

What are the advantages of machines again?

Quoted message said:

If you're with no one to spot for you it's
comforting to know that, at higher weights, you probably won't kill
yourself or snap your spine with poor form.

Ah; I use a power rack for that.

Peter Allen said:

T said:

The Crow said:

This is probably the wrong place to ask, because I get the
impression that if you're not talking about squating with three
hundred pounds of dead buffalo on your back, then you're not talking
serious exercise.

Barbells are ideal, though 300 is a little light. ;-)

Quoted message said:

However, here goes all the same.

What do you think of these Body Solid biangular machines that boast
a merger between the different advantages of free weights and
machines combined?

What are the advantages of machines again?

They do have some advantages. I wouldn't want to try doing 10 squats as fast
as I can with as heavy a weight as I can, because about one time in five I'd
screw up, squat down too fast, not be able to stop myself in time, and I'd
probably get a back injury.

Well, that's one reason. I wouldn't want to do 10 rep sets either. I wouldn't
squat fast either.

Quoted message said:

Whereas I can do that on a horizontal leg press
and if I screw up the weights hit the stack with a huge clang but I am not
hurt.

Avoiding injury is good; what's the point of the fast 10-rep set?

T said:

Peter Allen said:

T said:

The Crow wrote:

> This is probably the wrong place to ask, because I get the
> impression that if you're not talking about squating with three
> hundred pounds of dead buffalo on your back, then you're not
> talking serious exercise.

Barbells are ideal, though 300 is a little light. ;-)

> However, here goes all the same.
>
> What do you think of these Body Solid biangular machines that boast
> a merger between the different advantages of free weights and
> machines combined?

What are the advantages of machines again?

They do have some advantages. I wouldn't want to try doing 10 squats
as fast as I can with as heavy a weight as I can, because about one
time in five I'd screw up, squat down too fast, not be able to stop
myself in time, and I'd probably get a back injury.

Well, that's one reason. I wouldn't want to do 10 rep sets either. I
wouldn't squat fast either.

Quoted message said:

Whereas I can do that on a horizontal leg press
and if I screw up the weights hit the stack with a huge clang but I
am not hurt.

Avoiding injury is good; what's the point of the fast 10-rep set?

Seems to work better for helping me get a boat moving fast. Power = force x
velocity, the higher you try to make force go the more inefficient you are
in a rowing boat, so you need to be able to move yourself quickly. But you
have to be able to provide significant forces to move quickly, in particular
you need to be able to accelerate the boat through the finish of the stroke
to minimise fluid drag on the recovery. I find that just going for strength
(steadier pace, heavier, probably less reps) doesn't get me that; I can
accelerate the boat fine through the first bit of the drive but as it speeds
up towards the finish I'm chasing it and I can't keep it accelerating.

10 strokes is about the length of a typical start, hence 10 reps. Again,
seems to work for me.

IMO, the most important weights exercises for rowing are deadlift, leg
press, bent-over dumbbell row, full squats, in that order.

Peter

Peter Allen said:

T said:

Peter Allen said:

T wrote:

>The Crow wrote:
>
>
>>This is probably the wrong place to ask, because I get the
>>impression that if you're not talking about squating with three
>>hundred pounds of dead buffalo on your back, then you're not
>>talking serious exercise.
>
>Barbells are ideal, though 300 is a little light. ;-)
>
>
>
>>However, here goes all the same.
>>
>>What do you think of these Body Solid biangular machines that boast
>>a merger between the different advantages of free weights and
>>machines combined?
>
>What are the advantages of machines again?

They do have some advantages. I wouldn't want to try doing 10 squats
as fast as I can with as heavy a weight as I can, because about one
time in five I'd screw up, squat down too fast, not be able to stop
myself in time, and I'd probably get a back injury.

Well, that's one reason. I wouldn't want to do 10 rep sets either. I
wouldn't squat fast either.

Quoted message said:

Whereas I can do that on a horizontal leg press
and if I screw up the weights hit the stack with a huge clang but I
am not hurt.

Avoiding injury is good; what's the point of the fast 10-rep set?

Seems to work better for helping me get a boat moving fast. Power = force x
velocity, the higher you try to make force go the more inefficient you are
in a rowing boat, so you need to be able to move yourself quickly. But you
have to be able to provide significant forces to move quickly, in particular
you need to be able to accelerate the boat through the finish of the stroke
to minimise fluid drag on the recovery. I find that just going for strength
(steadier pace, heavier, probably less reps) doesn't get me that; I can
accelerate the boat fine through the first bit of the drive but as it speeds
up towards the finish I'm chasing it and I can't keep it accelerating.

10 strokes is about the length of a typical start, hence 10 reps. Again,
seems to work for me.

IMO, the most important weights exercises for rowing are deadlift, leg
press, bent-over dumbbell row, full squats, in that order.

Peter

That IS interesting; another sport you can practice skill, sorta, with weights.
Neat. Ever try power cleans or high pulls?

T said:

Quoted message said:

IMO, the most important weights exercises for rowing are deadlift,
leg press, bent-over dumbbell row, full squats, in that order.

That IS interesting; another sport you can practice skill, sorta,
with weights. Neat. Ever try power cleans or high pulls?

I've tried power cleans; they're kind of OK but seem to focus on lots of
power through the last bit of extending the hips - in rowing even if you're
Canadian you don't ever lean back that far; my finish of the stroke is legs
going flat then lean back maybe 10 or 20 degrees (and I lean back more than
most people). Probably part of the reason I don't really like them is that
I'm not particularly competent at them - got taught 'this is a power clean'
by someone whose technique was to use quite a lot of lower back as well as
hip extension to get the bar going upwards, and rather than squat down at
all to catch the bar, hope that it gets to the shoulders from momentum plus
biceps, then I did that enough to ingrain it.

Rowing is a slightly odd sport in some ways - it's an endurance sport, but
the really fast guys weigh around 100kg, I at 70kg row as a lightweight.
Then there is a lot of individual technique you have to get right, unlike
running or cycling where good technique is only worth a few percent a novice
wastes maybe 75% of the work they're doing compared to a top technician, and
even someone who's been rowing for several years and is regarded as
technically good probably loses 10% or so. Most well-known example of
technique winning over power is that the current world record holder on the
rowing machine, Siejkowski, couldn't make the German national final squad,
let alone a national crew, even though he spent quite a lot of time trying
to improve his technique and even though he could put out getting on for
600W over 2km while some people who did row for Germany were only getting
about 500W. Then there is also the issue of crew technique - everyone in a
crew has to row in the same style, everyone's blades have to go in and out
of the water at the same time, and it can be tricky to improve your own
technique and the crew's overall performance.

Peter