hundredpushups.com - Page 8

Tck, read post #60 in this very thread, linked below:
http://www.styleforum.net/showpost.p...3&postcount=60




All of these exercises are either drastically harder or just train differ muscle groups than bodyweight pushups. Thus bring up them when discussing BW pushups is a red herring.

Yeah, I saw that. I was just trying to clarify if this internet toughguy has ever done much of what he /she's talking about. This fat college kid doesn't mention anything about bodyweight excercises. I think it does because the poster seems to be saying that bodyweight excercises (including pushups) are worthless and don't do anything when that's not the case at all. As I said before, this person's probably never done them and their strange arrogant posts show their lack of knoweledge of fitness. Plus, doing bench presses isn't going to improve your push ups (high rep / endurance / body stabilizing) unless maybe you can't do ANY pushups. Bodyweight excercises can be MORE beneficial in functional, real world applications like fighting, grappling, combat, and just everyday applications. Weight lifting is great as well for certain apps.

To everything that Tck just said, +1.

I think one-armed pushups and pullups are some pretty good exercises, and I tend to trust the advice of those who can do them.

I've done plenty of plyo work, and I've done Crossfit programs with body weight work (which is why I'm familiar with the community and why I know to dislike them because of their cult mentality), and I've had people do body weight work before who had no access to weights because of locale or financial issues. I'm not sure what you're looking for here, as if I had no personal experience with just doing body weight work it would make me wrong and you right. Plenty of people have personal experience putting on pants, it doesn't mean they're denim experts. I know it's a tried and true internet tactic to try and directly assault someone instead of actually arguing the topic at hand, but if that's the way you want to go I'll be sure to leave you to it. Do you want stories about me going to strength conventions and having dinner with Dan John and Mike Boyle (who knows more about mobility and injury prevention than you or I ever will) or working with Alwyn Cosgrove or trading e-mails with Charles Poliquin or one of my better friends having a background as an assistant strength trainer for the Houston Texans who now works at a facility that focuses heavily on preparing college kids for the NFL combine? You're not the only one that's trained for years in BJJ, but I'm sure that doesn't matter, and whoever my instructors have been you could kick their asses. This is all worthless, dick-measuring stuff. It serves no purpose other than to deflect from the issue. I don't care what your bench press is or how long you last in the sack or how cool you are or whatever else. I have a problem with people recommending shit that is not as good as a multitude of other options (including, as I have mentioned previously, other body weight exercises like pulls/chins, dips, squat jumps, etc) to people who are already struggling with their physical fitness, who probably have families that rely on them and who as a result of all the obfuscation in this industry end up becoming frustrated and giving up rather than finding the answers they need. I have always (tried) avoided going "well, you don't have a background <training people/doing this/working for him/whatever>" or "well you're only 135 pounds and weak so what do you know about strength training" because it's bullshit, and you don't have to have worked in X industry for years to be able to talk intelligently about X. But people who just pull shit out of nowhere, based on nothing but personal experience or things they've "heard" from sources they can't identify absolutely drive me nuts. I've participated, either passively or actively, in plenty of internet arguments (which is why I avoid fitness forums now, and is why this thread has reminded me that I have made a mistake by ever replying to it) with people who have trained athletes for years and run their own gyms and do consulting work with athletes of all levels and teams when they are arguing with some random guy who says that they've been lifting for years and they know everything even though they do no active research on the topic and they've never worked with other people. And inevitably it's the guy who has 20 years of experience, who is respected by people throughout the industry, who just gives up on the conversation because he knows it's going nowhere. I'm not that guy, but I'm starting to understand where they're coming from. When you are let with nothing to say because you are staring at a wall that is effectively impervious to logic. And now that I've written an essay on this, I'd like to say that you are absolutely right, everything you have said is correct, push-ups are great and they develop every aspect of the human body and they turn you into a machine and they fight cancer. They're great for beginners, they're great for advanced lifters, they're great for the elderly. I'd like to apologize to the people that have PMed me, who I've given dietary and lifting tips to, who I've linked to comprehensive programs and given advice to about everything from gyms to trainers, because I am completely wrong and I will withdraw from this argument all together as soon as I am done replying to this post and your post on the next page. Because push-ups, you see, they increase bone density unlike lifting, they improve CNS efficiency (which almost improves every aspect of your life, including neuromuscular aspects, which... you know, involves everyday applications like walking and moving arms and flipping people the bird), they are better bang for your buck exercises, they burn more calories, they add more lean mass. Really, all those famous people 16 year old kids want to grow up to be like Bruce Lee never lifted weights. Body weight exercises, nothing else. Nothing is better. (I also like how my being a college student, and you having completed college, somehow relates to a conversation about the efficiency of push-ups vs. other exercises. ) ... Are you serious? Do you honestly read that paragraph as "you are completely wrong about everything"? Are you lawyerdad now, where you start injecting words into my posts that never existed? Keep doing push-ups and you'll be able to do more push-ups. Where did I ever refute that, and who in their right mind ever would? I was arguing that there is, in fact, an easier way to do it, not that what he said is not at all true. I'm going to tell you a training secret you were never told during your years as a spectacular and exceptional hockey player who was lauded by the masses: skill activities != exercises. You get better at throwing discus by throwing discus. You get better at playing soccer by playing soccer. You don't necessarily get better at doing bench presses by doing bench presses alone, and the only way to get better at doing push-ups is not just by doing push-ups. Of course I'm wrong about this, push-ups are the only way to get better at doing push-ups. But what I used to believe, when I was blind to the truths you have espoused, is that you get better at benching by doing incline benches, decline benches, db benches, shoulder presses, rows, more rows, even more rows, and even deadlifts. It's not about skill, it's not about muscle memory, it's about auxiliary support for the lifts, it's about addressing stabilizer weaknesses and muscle imbalances, it's about doing antagonist work. Not having antagonist work to complement what people always think about (benching, curls, beach muscles in general) is the hallmark of horrible programs, it is the #1 thing that separates good programs from bad programs, because if you develop asymmetries you open yourself up to injuries over time, especially when going heavy. This was all wrong though, absolutely. Yes, why, especially when combat athletes are huge proponents of speed work, Westside and kettlebells? When what are considered the best programs for mixed martial arts involve tons of explosive lifts? When gymnasts that perform less explosive, longer duration activities (rings especially) do a ton of strongman work? Someone should tell Olympic teams around the world to do more push-ups He took a paragraph to describe the recruitment of stabilizer muscles, which happens when you lift weights whether or not you have "body awareness." The greater the load and the more areas recruited from the greater the more efficient your cns becomes, the greater the efficiency of neuromuscular junctions, the faster muscle recruitment happens. In theory, of course. All wrong, I now know. ... When you "think" about doing handstand push-ups, you "think" about keeping most of your body still (which, of course, leads to the recruitment of stabilizers) and focus on pushing off the ground. When you "think" about doing deadlifts, you "think" about keeping your back straight/with a small arch, you "think" about keeping your legs planted, which, of course, leads to the recruitment of stabilizers, and you focus on picking the weight off the fucking ground. What the fuck? You focus on performing the action, you think about form. There's no difference between any exercise when it comes to this, and the exercises that require greater muscle recruitment (handstand push-ups, sure, and deadlifts, and push jerks, and plenty of other body weight exercises) are better for all forms of development than the exercises that do not greater require muscle recruitment (stuff on smith machines, sitting on a seat and doing curls, working out on a recumbent bike). You know what else helps? Load, which the stabilizers have to handle, which makes them stronger because the lift is more difficult with load than without. <--- This is what I would have said, before you convinced me with your... nothing. You are adorable.

I can do one hundred cock pushups.

This thread is about doing push ups. There's nothing wrong with push ups which you've said were worthless (and did so again in this post).

If you were my personal trainer, I'd pay you to shut up.

Can we all just admit that no one knows what they were arguing about in the first place. Obviously working up to 100 pushups is an imbalanced fitness routine that will not be as effective as a well-designed, heavy weightlifting program. It's just a "fitness" goal, that's all. To be able to do 100 pushups isn't all that different than working toward a 300 lb. benchpress, or being able to do 20 one-legged squats, or be flexible enough to touch your toes. Some of those goals make a greater impact on overall health than others, but any one-dimensional goal will require a one-dimensional training routine which in turn will provide limited, one-dimensional results. Personally, my health routine totally has, like, at least six dimensions. That's five more dimensions than this 100-pushup challenge!!! ACT NOW AND I WILL SEND U MY NEWSLETTER AND THIS HANDY BOTTLE SHAKER THAT IS FREE FOR U TO KEEP

So anyway, I've been doing the lil hundred push ups thing for fun because i saw it going around the internet a week or two ago. I could probably do about 40 pushups before I started. I'm now halfway through week 3 and I guess maybe I could now do like 3 or 4 more pushups? I don't see how I could possibly improve my endurance or strength enough to get to 100 by week 6, unless something starts happening w/muscle memory. If you look at the jumps in reps between weeks 2 and 3, and weeks 4 and 5, I think that is a problem. They are pretty large jumps in total reps. In week 2, column 3, day 3 you do a total of 69 pushups (plus any more you can do in the last set). In week 3 column 3, day 1 you do a total of 99 pushups (plus any more you can do in the last set). In week 4, column 3, day 3, you do a total of 123 pushups (plus any more you can do in the last set). In weeks 5, column 3, day 1 you do a total of 167 pushups (plus any more you can do in the last set).

And I thought you had a great memory! (this may be a case of mistaken identity) At least 1 person (eidolon) is arguing that non-external loading exercises are less efficient than they could be and are therefore useless. That's what this means: So it is a legitimate argument. Sorry, it is a pet-peeve of mind when all these internet experts argue non-sequitor because they didn't quite understand what the other wrote (although it happens all the time - someone claims another person's statement has nothing to do with the argument at hand, yada yada).

While I know that nutrition has a great deal to do with muscular weight gain, the reason that many fighters (esp. boxers) do bodyweight exercises is that they don't want the muscle mass. Not because of the old-school notion that more mass makes you muscle bound, but because they fight in weight classes and don't want to bulk up to the next weight class. Athletes actually have to "carry" the muscle they develop in battle/competition; not just stand at a bar talking about going to the gun show.

Still: 100 push-ups in a row is serious physical feat.

As is auto-fellation.

But whatever gets you off ... so to speak.

lefty

It's funny how you would equate the ability to do 100 pushups to jacking off. It's hilarious that there are so many posts and such argument on a thread dedicated to a 100 pushup routine.

I'm imagining 90% of the posters here to look and act like this in real life:

This is pretty much the only part of your post I strongly disagree with. Discus throwers have to do a shitload of conditioning. Check out American shot putter Reese Hoffa's training progression (yes, it's shot put, but discus is very similar). http://www.athleticscoaching.ca/User...0Structure.pdf Internet forums always have such a proliferation of argumentum ad vericundiam. That's why arguing on them pretty much requires that no personal information is given...

Cliffs please.