Belts

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

Quoted message said:

Steve Freides said:

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

Quoted message said:

I know I know, the belt's a crutch etc etc. I used to row in college,
and have a very slight, long term back injury as the result of a poorly
executed javelin throw. So I'd like to consider a belt all the same.
I do core stability seperately, so as to keep it low impact... ish.

Using a belt is exactly what _not_ to do. You are more, not less,
likely to hurt your back outside the weight room if you lift with a
belt, IMHO. Build a strong core while you build a strong everything
else through heavy two-handed lifting, one-handed and one-legged
lifting, and all manner of strength and strength/endurance work.

The only reason to use a belt is to lift more weight, not for increased
"safety", and most PL'ers who compete with a belt still do most of their
training without it.

-S-
http://www.kbnj.com

Steve,
There is no doubt that you are one of THE biggest morons to ever post in
MFW. You act like you are some kind of expert, yet you lift less weight
than
kids in junior high and you don't even look like you work out. You really
should be embarrassed to post here.

But . . . if your main objective is to do the splits - Steve is your man.

The Crow said:

What's the functional and purposeful difference between a sports belt and a
weight lifting belt? I've seen belts that are generally synthetic, with
velcro fasteners, saying they offer lumbar support, but calling themselves
sports belts.

Then I've seen weight lifting belts, generally half the price of a sports
belt, and made from leather, also boasting lumbar support, and fastening
with a double buckle rather than velcro.

Does anyone know the difference between these two kinds of belts, and which
is best for what? As far as I can make out, they seem to offer similar
support, but market themselves as entirely different products. Thanks.

depends on load usaully i dont use belt until i hit 5 rep max and
below, leather or synthetic
is your choice what it does is that it works like an I beam the
intra abdominal pressure stabilise your back + it make it easier to
hold the arc in lower back

On Thu, 03 Nov 2005 13:00:06 -0700, Robert Schuh <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

Steve,
There is no doubt that you are one of THE biggest morons to ever post in
MFW. You act like you are some kind of expert, yet you lift less weight than
kids in junior high and you don't even look like you work out. You really
should be embarrassed to post here.

For once I agree with "Shueless the clueless"

On Thu, 03 Nov 2005 13:01:50 -0700, Robert Schuh <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

The Crow said:

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

Quoted message said:

"The Crow" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
>I know I know, the belt's a crutch etc etc. I used to row in college, and
>have a very slight, long term back injury as the result of a poorly
>executed javelin throw. So I'd like to consider a belt all the same. I do
>core stability seperately, so as to keep it low impact... ish.

Using a belt is exactly what _not_ to do. You are more, not less, likely
to hurt your back outside the weight room if you lift with a belt, IMHO.
Build a strong core while you build a strong everything else through heavy
two-handed lifting, one-handed and one-legged lifting, and all manner of
strength and strength/endurance work.

The only reason to use a belt is to lift more weight, not for increased
"safety", and most PL'ers who compete with a belt still do most of their
training without it.

Fair enough, but I am experiencing muscle soarness at the moment, in my
lower back. I laid off the weights for a week, but it still twangs a bit.
It's not a serious thing, but it does appear to be fairly constant at the
moment, and I would have thought that, if I could use a belt to take a
little of the stress off my back, just in the short term, I could carry on
lifting, and not have to endure a long sessation. I know the importance of
not using one long term, and I do have a decent core, but have a specific
and current problem to overcome, and wonder if a belt might help.

PLEASE ignore everything that Steve Freides posts. I was able to lift more
weight than this guy can when I was 12 years old. Besides being physically weak,
he does not even look like he works out. That is a hell of a testament to his
training "philosophies."

For goodness sake Rob, why are you always so angry, aren't you getting
any these days?

The Crow said:

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

Quoted message said:

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

Quoted message said:

I know I know, the belt's a crutch etc etc. I used to row in college, and
have a very slight, long term back injury as the result of a poorly
executed javelin throw. So I'd like to consider a belt all the same. I do
core stability seperately, so as to keep it low impact... ish.

Using a belt is exactly what _not_ to do. You are more, not less, likely
to hurt your back outside the weight room if you lift with a belt, IMHO.
Build a strong core while you build a strong everything else through heavy
two-handed lifting, one-handed and one-legged lifting, and all manner of
strength and strength/endurance work.

The only reason to use a belt is to lift more weight, not for increased
"safety", and most PL'ers who compete with a belt still do most of their
training without it.

Fair enough, but I am experiencing muscle soarness at the moment, in my
lower back. I laid off the weights for a week, but it still twangs a bit.
It's not a serious thing, but it does appear to be fairly constant at the
moment, and I would have thought that, if I could use a belt to take a
little of the stress off my back, just in the short term, I could carry on
lifting, and not have to endure a long sessation. I know the importance of
not using one long term, and I do have a decent core, but have a specific
and current problem to overcome, and wonder if a belt might help.

if the sorness is from muscles then its ok if its from vertebrae its
not

lars said:

lars said:

The Crow said:

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

> "The Crow" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
> news:[email hidden]...
>
>
>> I know I know, the belt's a crutch etc etc. I used to row in
>> college, and have a very slight, long term back injury as the
>> result of a poorly executed javelin throw. So I'd like to
>> consider a belt all the same. I do core stability seperately, so
>> as to keep it low impact... ish.
>>
>
>
> Using a belt is exactly what _not_ to do. You are more, not less,
> likely to hurt your back outside the weight room if you lift with a
> belt, IMHO. Build a strong core while you build a strong everything
> else through heavy two-handed lifting, one-handed and one-legged
> lifting, and all manner of strength and strength/endurance work.
>
> The only reason to use a belt is to lift more weight, not for
> increased "safety", and most PL'ers who compete with a belt still
> do most of their training without it.
>
>

Fair enough, but I am experiencing muscle soarness at the moment, in
my lower back. I laid off the weights for a week, but it still
twangs a bit. It's not a serious thing, but it does appear to be
fairly constant at the moment, and I would have thought that, if I
could use a belt to take a little of the stress off my back, just in
the short term, I could carry on lifting, and not have to endure a
long sessation. I know the importance of not using one long term,
and I do have a decent core, but have a specific and current problem
to overcome, and wonder if a belt might help.

if the sorness is from muscles then its ok if its from vertebrae
its not

well i get sore with belt to so it doesnt help much sorewise, what
it does its that it enable you to use more which leads to sorness

if you still like to work out legs without the back sorness i would
suggest one legged squats they are really great they make you
more stable to when going back to ordinary squats, when you begin
dont use much weight it also depends of your strenght to weight ratio

Charles said:

For goodness sake Rob, why are you always so angry, aren't you getting
any these days?

He's getting TOO MUCH (roids).

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

Quoted message said:

On Thu, 03 Nov 2005 13:01:50 -0700, Robert Schuh <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

The Crow said:

"Steve Freides" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
> "The Crow" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
> news:[email hidden]...
>>I know I know, the belt's a crutch etc etc. I used to row in

college, and

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

>>have a very slight, long term back injury as the result of a poorly
>>executed javelin throw. So I'd like to consider a belt all the same.

I do

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

>>core stability seperately, so as to keep it low impact... ish.
>
> Using a belt is exactly what _not_ to do. You are more, not less,

likely

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> to hurt your back outside the weight room if you lift with a belt,

IMHO.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> Build a strong core while you build a strong everything else through

heavy

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> two-handed lifting, one-handed and one-legged lifting, and all manner

of

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> strength and strength/endurance work.
>
> The only reason to use a belt is to lift more weight, not for

increased

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> "safety", and most PL'ers who compete with a belt still do most of

their

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> training without it.
>
Fair enough, but I am experiencing muscle soarness at the moment, in my
lower back. I laid off the weights for a week, but it still twangs a

bit.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

It's not a serious thing, but it does appear to be fairly constant at

the

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

moment, and I would have thought that, if I could use a belt to take a
little of the stress off my back, just in the short term, I could carry

on

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

lifting, and not have to endure a long sessation. I know the

importance of

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

not using one long term, and I do have a decent core, but have a

specific

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

and current problem to overcome, and wonder if a belt might help.

PLEASE ignore everything that Steve Freides posts. I was able to lift

more

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

weight than this guy can when I was 12 years old. Besides being

physically weak,

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

he does not even look like he works out. That is a hell of a testament to

his

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

training "philosophies."

For goodness sake Rob, why are you always so angry, aren't you getting
any these days?

It's roid rage, Charles.

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

Quoted message said:

The Crow said:

I know I know, the belt's a crutch etc etc. I used to row in college,

and

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

have a very slight, long term back injury as the result of a poorly

executed

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

javelin throw. So I'd like to consider a belt all the same. I do core
stability seperately, so as to keep it low impact... ish.

I suggest you ignore that moron who told you not to use a belt. It is

painfully

Quoted message said:

obvious that [censored] has never lifted any heavy weights.

I've never used a belt, or any gear for that matter. I know a DL of 465#
isn't monstrous, but it's more than most can lift. I do that without chalk,
belt, wraps, etc....

Just take a "belt" of 12YO scotch, and STFU.

John said:

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

Quoted message said:

The Crow said:

I know I know, the belt's a crutch etc etc. I used to row in college,

and

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

have a very slight, long term back injury as the result of a poorly

executed

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

javelin throw. So I'd like to consider a belt all the same. I do core
stability seperately, so as to keep it low impact... ish.

I suggest you ignore that moron who told you not to use a belt. It is

painfully

Quoted message said:

obvious that [censored] has never lifted any heavy weights.

I've never used a belt, or any gear for that matter. I know a DL of 465#
isn't monstrous, but it's more than most can lift. I do that without chalk,
belt, wraps, etc....

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

Quoted message said:

On Thu, 03 Nov 2005 13:01:50 -0700, Robert Schuh <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

The Crow said:

"Steve Freides" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
> "The Crow" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
> news:[email hidden]...
>>I know I know, the belt's a crutch etc etc. I used to row in college,
>>and
>>have a very slight, long term back injury as the result of a poorly
>>executed javelin throw. So I'd like to consider a belt all the same.
>>I do
>>core stability seperately, so as to keep it low impact... ish.
>
> Using a belt is exactly what _not_ to do. You are more, not less,
> likely
> to hurt your back outside the weight room if you lift with a belt,
> IMHO.
> Build a strong core while you build a strong everything else through
> heavy
> two-handed lifting, one-handed and one-legged lifting, and all manner
> of
> strength and strength/endurance work.
>
> The only reason to use a belt is to lift more weight, not for
> increased
> "safety", and most PL'ers who compete with a belt still do most of
> their
> training without it.
>
Fair enough, but I am experiencing muscle soarness at the moment, in my
lower back. I laid off the weights for a week, but it still twangs a
bit.
It's not a serious thing, but it does appear to be fairly constant at
the
moment, and I would have thought that, if I could use a belt to take a
little of the stress off my back, just in the short term, I could carry
on
lifting, and not have to endure a long sessation. I know the importance
of
not using one long term, and I do have a decent core, but have a
specific
and current problem to overcome, and wonder if a belt might help.

PLEASE ignore everything that Steve Freides posts. I was able to lift more
weight than this guy can when I was 12 years old. Besides being physically
weak,
he does not even look like he works out. That is a hell of a testament to
his
training "philosophies."

For goodness sake Rob, why are you always so angry, aren't you getting
any these days?

But, Rob seems to have a point, right?

"I do admit I'm not infallible - at least not all of the time"

On Fri, 4 Nov 2005 21:24:18 +1000, "David" <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

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

Quoted message said:

On Thu, 03 Nov 2005 13:01:50 -0700, Robert Schuh <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

The Crow wrote:

> "Steve Freides" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
> news:[email hidden]...
> > "The Crow" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
> > news:[email hidden]...
> >>I know I know, the belt's a crutch etc etc. I used to row in college,
> >>and
> >>have a very slight, long term back injury as the result of a poorly
> >>executed javelin throw. So I'd like to consider a belt all the same.
> >>I do
> >>core stability seperately, so as to keep it low impact... ish.
> >
> > Using a belt is exactly what _not_ to do. You are more, not less,
> > likely
> > to hurt your back outside the weight room if you lift with a belt,
> > IMHO.
> > Build a strong core while you build a strong everything else through
> > heavy
> > two-handed lifting, one-handed and one-legged lifting, and all manner
> > of
> > strength and strength/endurance work.
> >
> > The only reason to use a belt is to lift more weight, not for
> > increased
> > "safety", and most PL'ers who compete with a belt still do most of
> > their
> > training without it.
> >
> Fair enough, but I am experiencing muscle soarness at the moment, in my
> lower back. I laid off the weights for a week, but it still twangs a
> bit.
> It's not a serious thing, but it does appear to be fairly constant at
> the
> moment, and I would have thought that, if I could use a belt to take a
> little of the stress off my back, just in the short term, I could carry
> on
> lifting, and not have to endure a long sessation. I know the importance
> of
> not using one long term, and I do have a decent core, but have a
> specific
> and current problem to overcome, and wonder if a belt might help.

PLEASE ignore everything that Steve Freides posts. I was able to lift more
weight than this guy can when I was 12 years old. Besides being physically
weak,
he does not even look like he works out. That is a hell of a testament to
his
training "philosophies."

For goodness sake Rob, why are you always so angry, aren't you getting
any these days?

But, Rob seems to have a point, right?

"I do admit I'm not infallible - at least not all of the time"

So do I, which still makes him a miserable old [censored]!

Have a great weekend mate - you know I intend to! ;o)

TFIF!

On Thu, 03 Nov 2005 13:00:06 -0700, Robert Schuh <[email hidden]>
wrote in misc.fitness.weights:

Quoted message said:

Steve Freides said:

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

Quoted message said:

I know I know, the belt's a crutch etc etc. I used to row in college,
and have a very slight, long term back injury as the result of a poorly
executed javelin throw. So I'd like to consider a belt all the same.
I do core stability seperately, so as to keep it low impact... ish.

Using a belt is exactly what _not_ to do. You are more, not less,
likely to hurt your back outside the weight room if you lift with a
belt, IMHO. Build a strong core while you build a strong everything
else through heavy two-handed lifting, one-handed and one-legged
lifting, and all manner of strength and strength/endurance work.

The only reason to use a belt is to lift more weight, not for increased
"safety", and most PL'ers who compete with a belt still do most of their
training without it.

-S-
http://www.kbnj.com

Steve,
There is no doubt that you are one of THE biggest morons to ever post in
MFW. You act like you are some kind of expert, yet you lift less weight than
kids in junior high and you don't even look like you work out. You really
should be embarrassed to post here.

Bob, I agree wholeheartedly with you. Perhaps I should get some tests
done:-)

John Hanson said:

Perhaps I should get some tests
done:-)

Get checked for female hormones. I suspect you're really a woman.

In article <[email hidden]>,

Robert Schuh said:

PLEASE ignore everything that Steve Freides posts. I was able to lift more
weight than this guy can when I was 12 years old.

You weighed more than him, too, right?

Quoted message said:

Besides being physically weak,
he does not even look like he works out. That is a hell of a testament to his
training "philosophies."

You're twice his weight, and lift twice as much. So who's stronger?

Seth
--
this is called missing the forest for the trees.
Or just 'being a moron', your call. -- Lyle McDonald

On Tue, 8 Nov 2005 22:06:35 +0000 (UTC), [email hidden] (Seth

Breidbart) said:

You weighed more than him, too, right?

C'mon now, I lift more than the ballerina weighs.

In article <[email hidden]>,

TheBillRodgers no said:

On Tue, 8 Nov 2005 22:06:35 +0000 (UTC), [email hidden] (Seth

Breidbart) said:

You weighed more than him, too, right?

C'mon now, I lift more than the ballerina weighs.

You really are an idiot.

Most of us lift more than we weigh. Many manage 2-3 times our weight
for the squat and/or deadlift.

Seth
--
this is called missing the forest for the trees.
Or just 'being a moron', your call. -- Lyle McDonald

On Wed, 9 Nov 2005 18:25:11 +0000 (UTC), [email hidden] (Seth

Breidbart) said:

You really are an idiot.

Indeed.

Quoted message said:

Most of us lift more than we weigh. Many manage 2-3 times our weight
for the squat and/or deadlift.

No stupid, I don't lift MY weight, but I do lift HIS weight.

MrRobottow said:

On Wed, 9 Nov 2005 18:25:11 +0000 (UTC), [email hidden] (Seth

Breidbart) said:

You really are an idiot.

Indeed.

Quoted message said:

Most of us lift more than we weigh. Many manage 2-3 times our weight
for the squat and/or deadlift.

No stupid, I don't lift MY weight, but I do lift HIS weight.

Which simply indicates that you're a weak puss.

JMW said:

Which simply indicates that you're a weak puss.

No, it indicates I have severe back problems that prevent me from
lifting heavy weights.