Harvey's Wallbangers

[Jetau]

I love Michael Johnson to bits but how is it his name has not come up? I was in front of the whole thing and for whatever reason every time he had it or went near it the whole thing went pear shaped.He lost the plot.Maybe I am wrong and I haven't watched the replay yet but at the time this seemed glaring to me.

Agreed. I have been disappointed with Johnson a lot this season. Unfortunately, there are players miles worse than him getting a game at the moment, so he's safe for now.

 

[Chops_a_must]

As for the fitness coaching thing. I seem to also remember the Dockers laying the benchmark for fitness earlier this decade, over the last 2 or so seasons we've gone backwards. Didn't we sack our fitness coach at some point because it was deemed he was pushing the team too hard and it was increasing frequencies of fatigue related injury?

I'm pretty sure it is a fitness issue what we are seeing at the moment. My question is how the hell did it come up? I can think of a few reasons, Palmer in the middle is still getting used to the AFL fitness required, he has to be forgiven. Bell is getting older and his fitness has been on the decline for a few years now, he's forgiven. It is the other midfielders coming in for the injuries probably not quite up to the level, and the other youngsters. Probably not quite up to it yet.

Still, even last year I have seen the dockers look more off their feet than I have before, I guess maybe because our list is aging maybe this is what I'm seeing I don't know. I just remember a few years ago when Larcombe? was around we seemed really fit and used to run a few teams off their feet. I just hope whoever is in control of fitness improves or we sack him.

It is definitely a fitness and a training program problem. Absolutely no doubt about this!

When Adam Larcom left at the end of 2006, we were one of the fittest, fastest and strongest teams in the comp. In 2 years we have gone from one of the fastest, to probably the slowest! Big alarm bells!

And no, it was nothing to do with injuries. He had the best record for soft tissue injury in the league. Something that is also a problem now! More alarm bells!

The program that Larcom had, has pretty much been AFL best practice since a certain Eagles fitness coach used it in the early 90s. Basically... the theory is you "under run" the players. That being, say you were training for the 800m... rather than doing a 2k run, you do 6x300m sprints or something. You get effectively the same volume, at a higher intensity. And because it has lower impact on the body, you can actually do more of these sessions... and it is harder to cruise through them which I think is why the Dockers complained. But the consequences are evident now....

It has also been proven, time and time again, by many many studies, that the best way to build top aerobic capacity is to do repetitive short work, rather than less lengthier work, contrary to popular belief.

PLUS... the biggest benefit of all this shorter sprint, turning into endurance work, is that your "cruising" speed becomes much faster. As opposed to say, a pure endurance program where your cruising speed becomes very slow... and is what you revert to when you are stuffed.

So... what are the player's cruising/ stuffed speeds? Virtually zero. If they had this combination speed and endurance capability, they would still be able to manage birsts late in the game, albeit slower than the start (obviously). This is precisely what they are missing.

The fact they don't have this, the fact that there seems to be a very high rate of soft tissue injuries, the fact that they did 500s last week, rather than the week before, all says to me that they are being run into the ground by doing big volume, low intensity running sessions. Which leaves them with no zip, a very low cruising speed, and is wearing their bodies down.

I see it time and time again with work. The middle distance runners that do monumental k's are the ones that have constant tears and are constantly breaking down, compared to the ones on the repetitive, high intensity sessions.


Cheers.

 

[wehavethepassion]

Larcom was the sacrifical lamb at the end of 2004 over connoly's insistence to target only 10players for 'extra' attention.

 

[Chops_a_must]

Larcom was the sacrifical lamb at the end of 2004 over connoly's insistence to target only 10players for 'extra' attention.

You're right, it was 2004, not 2006.

But from the what I can gather, they essentially did the same program until 2006, I'm pretty sure of that.

 

[Memories]

It is definitely a fitness and a training program problem. Absolutely no doubt about this!

When Adam Larcom left at the end of 2006, we were one of the fittest, fastest and strongest teams in the comp. In 2 years we have gone from one of the fastest, to probably the slowest! Big alarm bells!

And no, it was nothing to do with injuries. He had the best record for soft tissue injury in the league. Something that is also a problem now! More alarm bells!

The program that Larcom had, has pretty much been AFL best practice since a certain Eagles fitness coach used it in the early 90s. Basically... the theory is you "under run" the players. That being, say you were training for the 800m... rather than doing a 2k run, you do 6x300m sprints or something. You get effectively the same volume, at a higher intensity. And because it has lower impact on the body, you can actually do more of these sessions... and it is harder to cruise through them which I think is why the Dockers complained. But the consequences are evident now....

It has also been proven, time and time again, by many many studies, that the best way to build top aerobic capacity is to do repetitive short work, rather than less lengthier work, contrary to popular belief.

PLUS... the biggest benefit of all this shorter sprint, turning into endurance work, is that your "cruising" speed becomes much faster. As opposed to say, a pure endurance program where your cruising speed becomes very slow... and is what you revert to when you are stuffed.

So... what are the player's cruising/ stuffed speeds? Virtually zero. If they had this combination speed and endurance capability, they would still be able to manage birsts late in the game, albeit slower than the start (obviously). This is precisely what they are missing.

The fact they don't have this, the fact that there seems to be a very high rate of soft tissue injuries, the fact that they did 500s last week, rather than the week before, all says to me that they are being run into the ground by doing big volume, low intensity running sessions. Which leaves them with no zip, a very low cruising speed, and is wearing their bodies down.

I see it time and time again with work. The middle distance runners that do monumental k's are the ones that have constant tears and are constantly breaking down, compared to the ones on the repetitive, high intensity sessions.


Cheers.

HIIT (high intensity interval training) is a steadfast of many aerobics programs these days. I myself do it on occasion but I have no real need to be extremely fit like a footballer does. It certainly is..... how do you put it.... more intense, feeling like you want to vomit, etc. I couldn't really imagine doing it all the time, but hey if I was a footballer I'd probably do it just because it works wonders.

I infer from your post you think a lot of Freo players are a bit precious when it comes to training. Were the players really complaining a lot about it? I never really heard anything official about it, just the vibe was he (larcombe) was a bit "hard" on them.

 

[Polly]

^^Interesting post Chops! Cheers

 

[Chops_a_must]

I infer from your post you think a lot of Freo players are a bit precious when it comes to training. Were the players really complaining a lot about it? I never really heard anything official about it, just the vibe was he (larcombe) was a bit "hard" on them.

Yep, definitely seem to be precious.

A lot of players wanted their workload taken down. A number of articles say that.

The best example I can think of to reflect our slack wortk ethic is Ryley Dunn. 4 years of leg injuries, and still doesn't look like he's ever done a bicep curl in his life. And it's not as if he doesn't have a really strong frame. I mean geez... if you were a professional footballer, and you had a leg injury, you would just be doing upper body work every day. Any extra work the weights coach can think of. I mean sure, you can be unlucky with injuries, but if you are getting paid, you can just turn yourself into a professional weight lifter. There is no excuse for that sort of stuff. Macca had the strongest uppr body in the club when he did his knees. That's the sort of thing Hase and Dunn should have/ and should be aiming for now.

There is really no excuse. I had two major shoulder ops, and even though my upper body is not massive, unlike Dunn you can at least tell I've been doing work through there.

Tarrants arms are another example of what you can do when you spend a long time out with buggered legs. But this application is so few and far between at the club, it isn't funny. Dunn is no orphan though. There are 10 guys there, in the top 22, at least that just by looking at them, you would have to say do not work anywhere near hard enough in the gym.

And most embarrassingly, it's our first year players that really look as though they are some of only few, that look as though they've been serious in the gym.

 

[Memories]

Yep, definitely seem to be precious.

A lot of players wanted their workload taken down. A number of articles say that.

The best example I can think of to reflect our slack wortk ethic is Ryley Dunn. 4 years of leg injuries, and still doesn't look like he's ever done a bicep curl in his life. And it's not as if he doesn't have a really strong frame. I mean geez... if you were a professional footballer, and you had a leg injury, you would just be doing upper body work every day. Any extra work the weights coach can think of. I mean sure, you can be unlucky with injuries, but if you are getting paid, you can just turn yourself into a professional weight lifter. There is no excuse for that sort of stuff. Macca had the strongest uppr body in the club when he did his knees. That's the sort of thing Hase and Dunn should have/ and should be aiming for now.

There is really no excuse. I had two major shoulder ops, and even though my upper body is not massive, unlike Dunn you can at least tell I've been doing work through there.

Tarrants arms are another example of what you can do when you spend a long time out with buggered legs. But this application is so few and far between at the club, it isn't funny. Dunn is no orphan though. There are 10 guys there, in the top 22, at least that just by looking at them, you would have to say do not work anywhere near hard enough in the gym.

And most embarrassingly, it's our first year players that really look as though they are some of only few, that look as though they've been serious in the gym.

Well that is what I've wondered a while now with Freo in regards to the fat percentages a lot of our players have. To me it seemed like an area we could improve upon, even Pav is slightly fatty for a footballer but I don't really want to criticise him so much because whatever he is doing seems to be working but hey... it's something he could improve upon. Lower body fat gives the impression of more muscle.

I would prefer if all of our players were at 8% BF rather than the "league" standard of 12%. Would give us that extra edge. A lot of our players give me the impression of being lazy, which is why I blasted Haselby last year about it (a month before his 'I'm going to change article'). He used to joke on the channel 10 footy show.... I forget the name but it was on Saturdays, he used to joke about eating too many chops like it was a funny thing. Yeah maybe if you weren't injured all the time from carrying around all that fat Hase, jeeze.

I really think there is something wrong with a lot of the players attitudes when it comes to fitness, boozing during the week, etc....... just annoying. I hope Headland stays off the stuff all year rather than go back on it because he's injured. I really wonder how many of our players have issues like Headland, Farmer and Hase had/did have, it's probably only the surface.

 

[Chops_a_must]

Well that is what I've wondered a while now with Freo in regards to the fat percentages a lot of our players have. To me it seemed like an area we could improve upon, even Pav is slightly fatty for a footballer but I don't really want to criticise him so much because whatever he is doing seems to be working but hey... it's something he could improve upon. Lower body fat gives the impression of more muscle.

I would prefer if all of our players were at 8% BF rather than the "league" standard of 12%. Would give us that extra edge. A lot of our players give me the impression of being lazy, which is why I blasted Haselby last year about it (a month before his 'I'm going to change article'). He used to joke on the channel 10 footy show.... I forget the name but it was on Saturdays, he used to joke about eating too many chops like it was a funny thing. Yeah maybe if you weren't injured all the time from carrying around all that fat Hase, jeeze.

I really think there is something wrong with a lot of the players attitudes when it comes to fitness, boozing during the week, etc....... just annoying. I hope Headland stays off the stuff all year rather than go back on it because he's injured. I really wonder how many of our players have issues like Headland, Farmer and Hase had/did have, it's probably only the surface.

8% is not sustainable unfortunately (this is why amphetamines or any stimulant ARE a performancing enhancing drug without doubt). Most athletes will aim for 8% for competition, but they are vulnerable then. During heavy training, they need to be between 10-13%.

Ideally you want your midfielders down about 10%, with the key position players a bit higher. I don't think there is anything wrong with Pavs body shape or weight. It is perfect for the role he plays.

At the level the AFL players train, moderate alcohol use wont do much to their weight. If they drink everyday, that is another matter. I don't think there is really too much wrong with their weight this year though. It's more a strength and speed issue that I see as the main problem. You can lose as much weight as you want there, but it isn't going to do much for that.

 

[Lach72]

8% is not sustainable unfortunately

Bugger.
Now you've done it

 

[The Night Shift]

The title of the article..
Harvey's Wallbangers...

sounds like some dodgy gloryhole movie

 

[Lach72]

8% is not sustainable unfortunately (this is why amphetamines or any stimulant ARE a performancing enhancing drug without doubt). Most athletes will aim for 8% for competition, but they are vulnerable then. During heavy training, they need to be between 10-13%.

Ideally you want your midfielders down about 10%, with the key position players a bit higher. I don't think there is anything wrong with Pavs body shape or weight. It is perfect for the role he plays.

At the level the AFL players train, moderate alcohol use wont do much to their weight. If they drink everyday, that is another matter. I don't think there is really too much wrong with their weight this year though. It's more a strength and speed issue that I see as the main problem. You can lose as much weight as you want there, but it isn't going to do much for that.

God knows, if anyones actually seen me (Cameronk now's not the time to pipe up ) they'd know I prefer the chops and beers regime...and I'm very good at it.

In light of this, Chops, what would be your opinion on something like this?

http://www.bigfooty.com/forum/showpost.php?p=8834030&postcount=1

We've had enough of him being nicknamed "chops" because he eats too much. Sure it was funny and all when we were no hope of winning a flag but he needs to take his fitness seriously. Drop that extra 5kg of fat he is carrying and become an elite midfielder.

****s sake, even I'm at 8% body fat and it's not like I have to be (besides vain reasons). Going from the 12% I used to be to 8%, you can notice a big difference in areas like acceleration, jumping, stamina, etc. The exact things Hasleby needs.

Does anyone else want to get on Hasleby's case to start taking this game and more importantly FREMANTLE, more seriously?

 

[Memories]

8% is not sustainable unfortunately (this is why amphetamines or any stimulant ARE a performancing enhancing drug without doubt). Most athletes will aim for 8% for competition, but they are vulnerable then. During heavy training, they need to be between 10-13%.

8% is sustainable.... not sure where you are getting that from? Well any single body fat number isn't "easily" sustainable, you'd say something like between 7-9%, when you get to 9% cut back to 7% over a few days (PSMF diet). That makes it easy to sustain around the range of 8% without tightening their diet down to each gram.

Any pound of fat over a certain amount is just extra weight you need to carry each step you run, wears you down over the course of the game. ie The less fat you have the less fatigue you get.

 

[Avid_Avenger]

8% is not sustainable unfortunately (this is why amphetamines or any stimulant ARE a performancing enhancing drug without doubt). Most athletes will aim for 8% for competition, but they are vulnerable then. During heavy training, they need to be between 10-13%.

Ideally you want your midfielders down about 10%, with the key position players a bit higher. I don't think there is anything wrong with Pavs body shape or weight. It is perfect for the role he plays.

At the level the AFL players train, moderate alcohol use wont do much to their weight. If they drink everyday, that is another matter. I don't think there is really too much wrong with their weight this year though. It's more a strength and speed issue that I see as the main problem. You can lose as much weight as you want there, but it isn't going to do much for that.

Really interesting reads Chops, cheers

The fitness thing has been an issue all year tho I couldn't understand it. By all reports, and from what I personally saw, we had one of our hardest preseasons ever this year so come the season I expected to see this in action, esp. late in games...

Obviously this hasn't been the case and as you've said we've had a high amount of injuries and some players have looked much slower than they used to esp. as the games worn on with more holding the ball decisions and less run etc.

Really hope the coaches look into this over the season and moving into next year. You can't help to compete with the best unless you are doing the same amount of work as they are...

 

[Chops_a_must]

God knows, if anyones actually seen me (Cameronk now's not the time to pipe up ) they'd know I prefer the chops and beers regime...and I'm very good at it.

In light of this, Chops, what would be your opinion on something like this?

http://www.bigfooty.com/forum/showpost.php?p=8834030&postcount=1

Ahahaha... I'm with you there. After years of injuries, I'm finally able to run again (sometimes). So I know what that diet does with little exercise.

Mem:
Yeah, I'm not sure where I'm getting that from. Just from dealing with elite athletes I spose. What would I know?

You can maintain it. But it doesn't mean it is sustainable. Just about every immuno problem I've seen comes from that area. Not saying that that will happen to you. But if you were an elite athlete, in full training, that lean for an extended period of time, I would be worried. The fact is, being that lean for long periods, during big workloads is seriously punishing for the body.

You will notice all those things that Memories mentioned at that fat level. That's why athletes aim to be at that level for a few months a year. The thing that seperates athletes from footballers is the contact. You need the extra buffer. It's not worth the tradeoff for footballers to get that low.

Hase is a special case. Because of his back fusion, he needs to be as light as possible. That is something they are going to have to work out with him over the off season, i.e. what is the lowst body fat level he can maintain without being completely rooted energy wise.

A_A, I have no doubt they worked hard over the off season on the track. Whether they worked hard enough... or more importantly, were being told to do the right things is more of the point I think.

That other thread is great. Thanks Lachy.

What Cousins would have been doing in the gym there is probably 10 sets of 10s. Usually done in a circuit between the squat rack, benchpress and deadlift pulls. I've seen an olympian do this, and a number of international level athletes. It really is a sight.

80kg's for the squat would be pretty damn good for that. The best I have seen is 90.

It's pretty much a basing strength routine. A lot of power put in the muscles in a short space of time. Most people would bulk up a heap from that, but it is mainly to build the muscle up to allow for more strength to be able to be put through the groups. You would imagine he would be squatting well over 300kg's a month or two later for his max, from that effort.

 

[Lach72]

http://www.givemefootball.com/display.cfm?article=5127&area=&type=1&page=2

Training and Fat


Footballers tend to have lower than average levels of body fat because the more lean tissue (muscle) a body has, the lower the body fat percentage. A lower level of body fat is, to a certain point, beneficial to performance as the energy cost of activity will be lower and the ability to maintain core temperature during prolonged exercise will be enhanced. Body fat is often sports specific - it isn't uncommon for elite male distance runners to have just 3.5% body fat and out-field games players are generally between 8% and 12%.

 

[PapaJ]

I infer from your post you think a lot of Freo players are a bit precious when it comes to training. Were the players really complaining a lot about it? I never really heard anything official about it, just the vibe was he (larcombe) was a bit "hard" on them.

I, like Chops, certainly remember media reports to the effect that the players were the ones pushing Larcombe out. I also vaguely remember something to effect that they were too fatigued by the seasons end ... I also thought it was something about injury concerns, but Chops has put me right on that.

It really s___s me because, not only has the game become faster, but we've gotten slower and less fit at the same time (it would seem) - its a double wammie.

BTW, thanks Chops for filling in the the detail.

 

[Memories]

You can maintain it. But it doesn't mean it is sustainable. Just about every immuno problem I've seen comes from that area. Not saying that that will happen to you. But if you were an elite athlete, in full training, that lean for an extended period of time, I would be worried. The fact is, being that lean for long periods, during big workloads is seriously punishing for the body.

You will notice all those things that Memories mentioned at that fat level. That's why athletes aim to be at that level for a few months a year. The thing that seperates athletes from footballers is the contact. You need the extra buffer. It's not worth the tradeoff for footballers to get that low.

I have no issue with sickness and I stay close to 8% year round, that said I don't do a heap of aerobics but I fail to see how fat level being at 8% would make you more susceptible to viruses and whatnot, my immune system certainly isn't impaired due to my fat level, I get sick if I am lucky once a year. I think it must be an aspect of diet and/or clothing (easier to get cold without the blubber) which makes people seem to be more susceptible at a low BF%. There just seems to be some anecdotal evidence on this, you seen any studies on it?

Maybe if you're talking the sub 5%ers then yeah, I could see that as it's hard to get down that low and you do seem to get a bit more edgier or something at the extremes (that I have personally noticed).

The bumping and contact does make sense to have some protection, but I don't really see that much difference between 8 and 12% for contact... there may be some difference between say 8 and 20+% but I think 4% is too low to make much if any.

It's pretty much a basing strength routine. A lot of power put in the muscles in a short space of time. Most people would bulk up a heap from that, but it is mainly to build the muscle up to allow for more strength to be able to be put through the groups. You would imagine he would be squatting well over 300kg's a month or two later for his max, from that effort.

300kg squat on cousins? You've got to be kidding. He'd be lucky to get near 400lb, I'd say he'd be around 180kg if he is lucky, for a one rep max. Maybe you meant 300lb?

 

[Lach72]

http://www.brianmac.co.uk/fatcent.htm

Typical % Body Fat
The average man has 15 to 17% body fat, while the average woman is between 18 and 22%. Typical values for elite athletes are 6% to 12% for men and 12% to 20% for women.

The following table details the percentage body fat for male and female athletes for a variety of sports.

Sport Male Female
Baseball 12-15% 12-18%
Basketball 6-12% 20-27%
Canoe/Kayak 6-12% 10-16%
Cycling 5-15% 15-20%
Field & Ice Hockey 8-15% 12-18%
Gymnastics 5-12% 10-16%
Rowing 6-14% 12-18%
Swimming 9-12% 14-24%
Tennis 12-16% 16-24%
Track - Runners 8-10% 12-20%
Track - Jumpers 7-12% 10-18%
Track - Throwers 14-20% 20-28%
Triathlon 5-12% 10-15%
Volleyball 11-14% 16-25%

http://www.bupa.co.uk/health_inform.../lifestyle/exercise/diet_exercise/weight.html

So what is the ideal body fat percentage for an athlete?
Your body must have some stored fat as it is needed for certain essential physiological functions. From a performance point of view, the ideal body fat percentage for male athletes lies between 6 percent and 15 percent and, for female athletes, between 12 percent and 18 percent.1 Experts believe that, for men, 5 percent and, for women, 10 percent is the absolute minimum

interesting...

 

[Chops_a_must]

I have no issue with sickness and I stay close to 8% year round, that said I don't do a heap of aerobics but I fail to see how fat level being at 8% would make you more susceptible to viruses and whatnot, my immune system certainly isn't impaired due to my fat level, I get sick if I am lucky once a year. I think it must be an aspect of diet and/or clothing (easier to get cold without the blubber) which makes people seem to be more susceptible at a low BF%. There just seems to be some anecdotal evidence on this, you seen any studies on it?

Maybe if you're talking the sub 5%ers then yeah, I could see that as it's hard to get down that low and you do seem to get a bit more edgier or something at the extremes (that I have personally noticed).

No studies, but it definitely does seem to be a factor with injuries towards the end of competition travels. Had more problems with leaner athletes returning with injuries than those carrying a bit more.

In terms of illness, it just reduces the margin for error in your body. For most people, 8% is really the lowest they can actually really go. So you essentailly have no available energy store if something goes wrong. If you get a cold, a flu, can't eat for a day, whatever, these small problems become big ones, because your body has nothing.

The bumping and contact does make sense to have some protection, but I don't really see that much difference between 8 and 12% for contact... there may be some difference between say 8 and 20+% but I think 4% is too low to make much if any.

I'm not proposing any footballers get down to 8. Soccer players as referenced above at 8% are a whole different kettle of fish. They are purely built for speed and acceleration, so they strip them right down, just like athletes.

Sub 5%ers would be 3k runners and above. I don't deal with them, and as I've spoken about recently here, AFL midfielders are effectively 800m runners... with muscle of course. There wouldn't be a player in the AFL at that extreme I wouldn't have thought (sub 5%).

To me the 10% level for midfielders is a healthy balance, considering most of the bodytypes. And the 12% for KPP so that they have the confidence to go through packs without copping massive corks.

300kg squat on cousins? You've got to be kidding. He'd be lucky to get near 400lb, I'd say he'd be around 180kg if he is lucky, for a one rep max. Maybe you meant 300lb?

Nope. Not kidding. Judd was leg pressing about 500kg, so it is about right.

Don't know what you're doing but after 4-5 months back and before my latest injury run, I'm at 175kg for my full squat (1/2 to 3/4 of a technical full squat). And I'm no Ben Cousins. The guys I've seen do anything similar to what I think he was doing, are up at and just over 300kg on the squat.

 

[Sigwald]

I agree with Chops.

As a cyclist I was at 6,5-7% and had to be very careful. Being so low in body fat does in my experience give you a greater risk of picking something up, be it an injury or a simple cold.

 

[Memories]

Nope. Not kidding. Judd was leg pressing about 500kg, so it is about right.

Don't know what you're doing but after 4-5 months back and before my latest injury run, I'm at 175kg for my full squat (1/2 to 3/4 of a technical full squat). And I'm no Ben Cousins. The guys I've seen do anything similar to what I think he was doing, are up at and just over 300kg on the squat.

Judd was leg pressing 500kg full range of motion? Even still leg press doesn't even compare to squat, I'd take a leg press and halve it and probably take some off that to get a 1RPM squat max.

You're prolly talking about bad form squats, maybe Ben could plomp 300kg on his back and move his ass down 10cm, but there is no way I could see his frame pumping out a 660lb ass to the ground squat. He is only 85kg at 6', he'd be world record setting for his weight if he could do that.

If ben was squatting 660lb he is kicking the ass of a steroid using bodybuilder/strongman by the name of Franco Columbu who is 7 inches shorter. ie It's so unlikely I'm thinking you're almost confusing lbs with kgs here.

 

[Memories]

I agree with Chops.

As a cyclist I was at 6,5-7% and had to be very careful. Being so low in body fat does in my experience give you a greater risk of picking something up, be it an injury or a simple cold.

Yeah? What kind of diet were you on? I'm always in a famine or feast state in regards to diet, I never do maintenance type diets. I've heard stories of other guys thinking they get sick more lower but yeah nothing really concrete about it.

 

[Chops_a_must]

Judd was leg pressing 500kg full range of motion? Even still leg press doesn't even compare to squat, I'd take a leg press and halve it and probably take some off that to get a 1RPM squat max.

You're prolly talking about bad form squats, maybe Ben could plomp 300kg on his back and move his ass down 10cm, but there is no way I could see his frame pumping out a 660lb ass to the ground squat. He is only 85kg at 6', he'd be world record setting for his weight if he could do that.

If ben was squatting 660lb he is kicking the ass of a steroid using bodybuilder/strongman by the name of Franco Columbu who is 7 inches shorter. ie It's so unlikely I'm thinking you're almost confusing lbs with kgs here.

Rubbish.

Currently in the squad that I train with, 3 guys have gone 300 in the last 12 months.

A full squat is not arse to the ground. You only do arse to ground squats as a variant, because there is little strength advantage in that. A full squat is measured by the femur breaking the horizontal. You set the pin the level below that, and use that as the guide to turn up.

By the way, the squatting world record is about 480kg or something...

 

[Sigwald]

Yeah? What kind of diet were you on? I'm always in a famine or feast state in regards to diet, I never do maintenance type diets. I've heard stories of other guys thinking they get sick more lower but yeah nothing really concrete about it.

No special diet concerning my weight. 4 smaller meals a day, high on energy, though. My nutrition was all about keeping me on the bike for 4-5 hours a day, rather than weight-loss.