The standing vertical jump which you often refer to as a measure of an athlete’s inherent physical ability. Much like the IQ of a person this value cannot be significantly increased but is basically the inherent physical prowess of that individual.
However, a male being tested at the age of 18 is going to have a significantly higher standing vertical jump then he will at 68. Even a superior athlete with the vertical jump of 30+ inches at the age of 18 is going to have a horrible vertical jump value at the age of 68, yet he is the same person.
So my questions are:
1. At what age range are standing vertical jump numbers valid? They are assumed to be valid for people in their early 20s.
2. Are there any curves showing the degradation of the standing vertical jump with age? Not that I know of. And who cares anyway? You know what the curve will look like. Feel free to draw your own.
3. What test can be used to determine the inherent athletic ability of a 68 year-old old? Why is this important to a 68-year-old? Vanity? Do you have an NFL Combine to attend? You know that your athletic ability has degraded from where it was in your 20s. And I can't think of a better way to need surgery than to start trying to assess an irrelevant parameter that involves loading the now-inelastic connective tissues that might be semi-successfully holding your ass together.
4. Does the reaction time of an individual mean anything to inherent strength ability? Not that I've ever been able to tell. I have very fast hands and a very shitty SVJ. Always have.
Good God man. Who the fuck cares about a SVJ for a 68 year old? This reminds me of an article I read about an older guy who started trying to compete in Masters cycling events. He quickly learned that the winners were on "Testosterone Replacement Therapy", in other words they were juicing. As Trump would say, "Sad"
Rip, if my 102 year old grandma has a vertical jump of 2 inches, do you think she will be able to compete in the USAPL?
Not terrible: The Best Way to Avoid Back Pain? Lift Heavy Things
They can't bring themselves to type the word "deadlift," the poor little things.
I think what they mean by heavy things is a kettlebell deadlift and the various other submaximal forms of posterior chain work (one legged dumbell goodmornings, deadlift with bands)
Yep. They cannot grasp the concept of Training.
Ironically, these things are more likely to hurt your back than a heavy deadlift properly executed.
"Right, because making regular lifting a part of your everyday routine means grabbing an olympic bar with 315lbs and pumping that up for reps.
That's exactly a fast express trip to fucking up your back catastrophically if you don't have 100% proper form."
What an amazing comment. Should go tell all the people at my gym deadlifting with only decent form that they better stop trying before their backs explode due to not having 100% proper form.
An amazing number of people have less than perfect deadlift form, probably most of those who deadlift. And yet - while I would not recommend it - even with poor form, back injuries from the deadlift are not common. I went to school with someone who posted a new PR deadlift on facebook which he was pretty proud of. The form was atrocious and cringe worthy with an exaggerated cat back and several desperate hitches off the knees to get to lockout, all the while surrounded by people from his gym cheering him on. I would never condone such a lift and if he asked me (which he didn't), I'd tell him to never do that again and drop weights until he can achieve better form. And yet his back is fine, as far as I know.
Yeah, "not terrible" really only applies to the title of the "article." Not sure what they mean by "heavy lifting" when the majority of the time the writers are talking about competitive rowers doing endurance work. I guess I was overwhelmed by the fact that they were acknowledging that not all municipal workers need to wear a girdle all day long and avoid lifting anything over 25 lbs to avoid back injury. They have succeeded in lowering my expectations so far that this "article" is a breath of fresh air. Sad.
If this guy continues to walk around, the deadlift is not dangerous: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mtO5VSW7Bvk
When I started SS at age 57 I was scared of deadlifting because I've had low back pain since I was a teenager. I trained with SSC Paul Horn. He walked me through it and encouraged me. I believe my form is fair to good but undoubtedly far from perfect. I later did the seminar. It took me a while to understand the mechanics from reading the book but eventually I made peace with it. It did not make my back pain better but it in no way has made it worse. Paul's response when I told him that was "You can have back pain and be weak or you can have back pain and be strong. Which do you prefer?" Easy choice.
The only time I had a problem was once when I accidentally let out my valsalva during descent. It felt like my low back exploded. I apparently proved that valsalva (even when putting the bar down) matters! I've never made that mistake again. No other inadequacy in my technique has ever exacerbated my pain.
The Power Clean - Putting it Together –Mark Rippetoe
How to Make Fried Chicken | Texas Cafe Classics –
Highlights from the StartingStrength Community. Browse archives.
