2011 Sheru Classic! - Official thread

[COACH]

[The King Of Lurkers]

Damn he looks like Kahn in that shot

[pakiman]

^ Couple of idiots in the crowd thought his name was Jay!!!

[Natzo]

man he needs to stop those ass crack poses up in the air... wtf..

the moonlanding pose is not allowed in the stage and that **** is? WTF!

[dilatedmuscle]

Yeah, idk why paki likes that kind of ****.

[pakiman]

Yeah, idk why paki likes that kind of ****.

I know Dilated was kidding but let me re--re-re-expose the two loves of his life, again
I hated when Ronnies jiggled his ass and did poledance routines and I hate it when Kai finds excuses to show off his gigantic ass to his ass-worshippers... I have been repeatedly pointing out that Ms Kai Greene finds excuses to face away from camera and crowd ALL THE TIME and also find excuses to bend over too... wears thick as hell fleec hoodies while wearing tight as spandex even wehn he is NOT training leggs....true, ture, true! I dont buy he took co*k up his a*s only because he needed money... no way, no way Jose (Dilated), no way!
I am so glad Phil dialled in and Kai didnt and now hopefully because of admiration that rigning Mr Olympia commands and the fact that Phil is a great bodybuilder, the "Butt-flashing Sasquach" will never ever be the top represetetive of our sport!

[Natzo]

^^^^

Great post Paki lol


Now that you mentined that Ronnie's posing when he did that "I'm a male stripper jiggle with his ass" was ****in embarrassing.

[dilatedmuscle]

You guys are just jealous that your morals wont let you take a **** up your *** for high profit.

[Ruhlforever]

Totally agree about age, that I still consider not a problem but havent you see the improvements Jay brought onstange just for changing several types of workouts for others on 2009 Mr. Olympia and the guy with +30 years with Hany Rambod guide. For those who think that a position on a squat or a slow pace movement or volume on sets cannot make a difference just look an article from Hany Rambod on Bill Wilmore Narrow stance squats. Or what about Hany Rambod article on flex on Jay Cutler training and prep for Mr. Olympia 2009 this sport does not respect age or theories is just experimenting and testing, age is a great factor but is not an issue as in other sports.

[COACH]

[COACH]

[pakiman]

With 10 years of top 2 spots in Pro contest and the way his run his BBing career in general, he must be loaded... has to be number in making most money off of pro BBing career!
I remember almost 16/17 years back Eddie Robinson saying that top three or four pros were easily making over 500Ks a year from guest posing, endorsments and prize money... BBing was no way near as lucerative back then as it is now a days... Jay must be rolling in it!

[tim290280]

Totally agree about age, that I still consider not a problem but havent you see the improvements Jay brought onstange just for changing several types of workouts for others on 2009 Mr. Olympia and the guy with +30 years with Hany Rambod guide. For those who think that a position on a squat or a slow pace movement or volume on sets cannot make a difference just look an article from Hany Rambod on Bill Wilmore Narrow stance squats. Or what about Hany Rambod article on flex on Jay Cutler training and prep for Mr. Olympia 2009 this sport does not respect age or theories is just experimenting and testing, age is a great factor but is not an issue as in other sports.

I said I'd like you to explain the physiology behind your statement. Because the "squat stance" is a myth. Doesn't change anything. There are countless numbers of studies that have been done proving that stance width does not affect muscle recruitment of the quads.

All due respect to Hany, but he clearly has no idea about muscle activation patterns due to stance width in the squat. Please read my thread in the training section which has the relevant scientific references and explanations.

[oldez]

I said I'd like you to explain the physiology behind your statement. Because the "squat stance" is a myth. Doesn't change anything. There are countless numbers of studies that have been done proving that stance width does not affect muscle recruitment of the quads.

All due respect to Hany, but he clearly has no idea about muscle activation patterns due to stance width in the squat. Please read my thread in the training section which has the relevant scientific references and explanations.

You have a too narrow view on this. Over simplifying thing often makes people draw the wrong conclusions. I have read the book Target Bodybuilding which you state as your source and I have read the scientific studies, but they only look at one thing. The human body is far more complex than you/they make it out to be. The data in Target Bodybuilding was gathered by magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) after doing exercises by watching how pumped the muscles got. It didn't measure the force production of a certain part of the muscle during an exercise (mainly because it is impossible). That is why this data although comprehensive it isn't conclusive. Just measuring how pumped the muscles got isn't a good indicator when comparing one execise to another.

A lot of things such a range of motion, strength curve, resistance curve and so forth come into play. Although the muscle recruitment might be the same or similar in certain exercises the overload occurs at a different stage of the exercise. For example the oblique part of vastus medialis (VMO) at the bottom of the muscle is overloaded when the knee joint is at maximal flexion and the rest of vastus medialis is overloaded at maximal extension of the knee joint. Although VMO might be maximally contracting at maximal extension of the knee joint the force production on the patellar tendon is minimal. So by doing short ROM extensions on the knee joint might recruit the VMO it is not being overloaded which means the the muscle will not grow.

When doing wide stance squats adductors come more into play at the stage when vastus lateralis is overloaded. When doing narrow stance squats the adductors do not come in to play and the vastus lateralis takes the brunt of the exercise. Studies must look at only a few variables. Otherwise making the studies would become almost impossible. That is why you shouldn't draw too many conclusions from the studies.

[pakiman]

^ Good point. Leg being a very large & complex muscle group different stance would definately affent different muscles within the leg muscle group... taking an exaggerated example here but one can't argue that close stance squat put same workload on same muscles as the sumo squat!
I think stance or grip width might not be as much a factor when you are training smaller muscle groups (bicep for example) but for complex muscles groups the stance/grip width definately have varying affect on the muscle group.

[tim290280]

You have a too narrow view on this. Over simplifying thing often makes people draw the wrong conclusions. I have read the book Target Bodybuilding which you state as your source and I have read the scientific studies, but they only look at one thing. The human body is far more complex than you/they make it out to be. The data in Target Bodybuilding was gathered by magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) after doing exercises by watching how pumped the muscles got. It didn't measure the force production of a certain part of the muscle during an exercise (mainly because it is impossible). That is why this data although comprehensive it isn't conclusive. Just measuring how pumped the muscles got isn't a good indicator when comparing one execise to another.

A lot of things such a range of motion, strength curve, resistance curve and so forth come into play. Although the muscle recruitment might be the same or similar in certain exercises the overload occurs at a different stage of the exercise. For example the oblique part of vastus medialis (VMO) at the bottom of the muscle is overloaded when the knee joint is at maximal flexion and the rest of vastus medialis is overloaded at maximal extension of the knee joint. Although VMO might be maximally contracting at maximal extension of the knee joint the force production on the patellar tendon is minimal. So by doing short ROM extensions on the knee joint might recruit the VMO it is not being overloaded which means the the muscle will not grow.

When doing wide stance squats adductors come more into play at the stage when vastus lateralis is overloaded. When doing narrow stance squats the adductors do not come in to play and the vastus lateralis takes the brunt of the exercise. Studies must look at only a few variables. Otherwise making the studies would become almost impossible. That is why you shouldn't draw too many conclusions from the studies.

Which from memory is what I discussed in the other thread. I don't know if I included the references on ROM. VM exercises tend to focus on "lockout" so step downs and step ups from a low platform. I'm very familiar with these since me knee rehab was dominated by them. Also I wasn't talking about adductors and abductors, you are right about their involvement, as they change with a number of things. It still doesn't change the VL story which is the common myth. Also, the VM doesn't really have an oblique part, that is one of those pseudo things made up by trainers. There isn't the nerve separation present that would give a VMO.

The big lack of info I see in the science is that the studies tend to focus on the VL, VM, BF and sometimes the glutes. They tend to ignore the lower back, the other quad muscles, the other hamstring muscles, the ad and ab ductors and the good old calves (of which some parts also cross the knee joint).

Suffice to say, the studies still show that a good medium to medium wide stance, going as low as possible, is still the best squat. If I wanted more VL I'd work on my ROM on leg exercises.

[oldez]

Which from memory is what I discussed in the other thread. I don't know if I included the references on ROM. VM exercises tend to focus on "lockout" so step downs and step ups from a low platform. I'm very familiar with these since me knee rehab was dominated by them. Also, the VM doesn't really have an oblique part, that is one of those pseudo things made up by trainers. There isn't the nerve separation present that would give a VMO.

VMO isn't a separate muscle it is the same muscle. It is about functionality. Since the muscle fibers of VMO horisontal compared to the rest of the VM they come into play at a different stage of the ROM of the knee joint. It is not a pseudo thing.

The big lack of info I see in the science is that the studies tend to focus on the VL, VM, BF and sometimes the glutes. They tend to ignore the lower back, the other quad muscles, the other hamstring muscles, the ad and ab ductors and the good old calves (of which some parts also cross the knee joint).

Yeah that is the problem in most studies. They ignore too many things.

Suffice to say, the studies still show that a good medium to medium wide stance, going as low as possible, is still the best squat.

I agree.

[Natzo]

I'm starting to love oldez.