to be fair i think functional is acceptable in this context. i know theres no such thing as unfunctional strength, but obviously holds involving your core have carry over to the big lifts, and so planks etc are actually useful for SS progression.

i'm pretty sure thremp was just trollin'

No. I think using the word functional is ******ed. Planks only semi-******ed.

I'll be sure to run my posts through the H&F acceptable word spell checkah next time. As long as an exercise comes ab/smiley/kyle (was one of those guys) approved, I dunt kare.

Also you can feel a sick burn in ur abs while doing planks.

Planks are just low intensity unless you're obese or untrained. Better options unless you're doing them while doing something else ******ed, like watching TV, or watching the dog, or something.

Ok, suggestions for better anterior core (as much as I loathe the word....) exercises, aimed primarily as assistance for DLs/squats? I could almost swear they/back extensions help...but that might all be in mai head.

They do, but loading for back extension is simple. You hold more weight. At some point of doing planks your TUT will become exceedingly long and the intensity will drop off. You can do some gymnastic progressions which are similar movements (holding the body rigid in space), but offer greater intensity.

Alan Aragon's only article for t-nation

http://www.tmuscle.com/free_online_a...e_to_alcohol_1

Turkish Get-Ups, L-Sit Holds, Reverse Crunches, Weighted Decline Sit-Ups.

As much as I hate "functional," planks are decidedly more functional than crunches.

While planks suffer from a "progression ceiling" (i.e. once you can hold a proper plank for 2 minutes, you're not really helping yourself by going to 3 minutes) they are pretty useful movement for core development and stability and will help with spinal stability during squats and DLs.

Thremp points to them being useful the untrained and overweight, but those aren't the only populations who can benefit from planks IMO. Most people often butcher planks anyway and compensate for poor core stability (lumbar spine extension, hip-hiking, etc). Anaerobically, it seems like even experienced athletes are prone to significant compensation patterns for planks and side bridges.

Once time progressions have been taken care of, perturbations can be added: single leg, wider base, wall-wipers, etc

Good posts guys (thremp/kyle/ab).

The weighted decline sit-ups look good, easy to load progressively. Turkish get-ups too.

Since I'm probably around 1 min on the planks right now (I haven't timed them, so for all I know it's 20 secs), sounds like it might be a good idea to keep at them for a while longer per ab's post.

I agree. Though I imagine a vast majority of trainees who are doing planks just grinding 3x1m per position and call it a day without applying any sort of progression beyond this. While useful, regular planks quickly become an outdated form of core work.

I don't understand the curl hate here. Is not having big ****ing cannons attached to your broad-ass shoulders functional? Does attracting hella cute girls make you somehow less functional?

YYYYEEEEEAAAAHHHHHH BUUUDDDDDDDAAAAAAYYYY

I don't understand what you're getting at. Would you mind explaining rather than just typing in all capital letters?

yyyyeeeeeaaaahhhhhh buuudddddddaaaaaayyyy

A+ lolz

Axel FTW IMO


Curls aren't the most effective way of getting larger biceps or arms in general. That is why I scorn them.

I can see you plebs are unsuited for a legitimate fitness discussion.

I'm going to be doing some box squat today (as per recommendation of smiley) to help with my squats, and Rip says they carry a significant risk for injury if done by someone new or unprepared. I've read as much as I can about them, and feel fairly confident about how to do them.

Here is my question:
My work set is currently at 225x3x5 for squat, how should I do the box squats? Do warm up sets with box squats? Do higher/lower weight for higher/lower reps? Do the regular squats, and add them in at the end?

the risk is in plopping down on the box and relaxing when on the box. don't do either of those and you should be good.

it is recommended that a beginner to box squats to keep everything tight, as you get more advanced you can do the more advanced version that is often seen in WSB and other powerlifting vids of rocking the box slightly and releasing hip strength. (note: you only release hip tension, keep your arch and don't relax your back)

btw i think your max box squat is like 10% below your free squat generally.

question that i'm sure has been asked in some shape or form 1000 times:


time to get in shape! i am only really interested in cutting fat off my body. i'm not against getting stronger or anything as i'm sure that would help me, but i don't care about gaining muscle and i'm pretty strong already. however i hear that the best way to lose fat is with weights.

currently i work out 3-4 times per week at a boxing gym doing muay thai, with some racquetball occasionally thrown in. i'm also a member at a gym that has a ton of weights and a pool which i would like to start swimming in.

as far as food intake, i'm keeping myself under 2000 calories/day, cooking a lot of meals with chicken + greens.

i'm about 5'10" and about 280 lbs.

o health and fitness gurus, what should i be doing here? is starting strength the way to go on my off kickboxing days? keep in mind my goals.. to lose as much body fat as possible. i was told you're supposed to "eat like a pig" on starting strength, but i feel like that would work against me.

You're likely absurdly fat. How long have you been on this program? How much weight have you lost?

Do you care what you look like or just to lose fat mass? Or do you want to retain LBM?

Look at my log for a good way to start with them (sets of 45, adding 10-20 pounds per workout).

Ahhhh, ty ty, I'll have to start on this on fri, because I tried today but really sucked.