U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Celebrating Labor Day!
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Exercise and Fitness
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 1.5 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Jump to a detailed profile or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Business Search - 14 Million verified businesses
Search for:  near: 
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old Yesterday, 06:25 PM
 
1,266 posts, read 2,019,693 times
Reputation: 792
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fragments View Post
You can, but why do you want to?

Do you feel as if it is something necessary for you to do?

I used to squat the heaviest possible weight that I could, but as recently as two years ago, I've completely quit lifting conventional weights and my knees and my joints feel much better because of it.

Honestly, I don't believe, for optimal health, it is necessary to do anything more than a pistol squat for knee and tendon strength. You can use tension, control, angles, and speed, to make the excercise more difficult, just as you can use tension to make pull ups more difficult or any other weight bearing excercise for that matter.

From my observations, I've noticed that very few former athletes continue to squat heavy as they get older because they claim a lifetime of squatting heavy weights has been painful on their joints, such as their knees and back.

Personally, I don't feel like the risk is worth it, which is why I switched from heavy weights to calisthenics, and kettlebell based excercises.

My goal is still performance, but it's also longevity and joint health.

Everybody has different goals.
There is so much wrong with this post, I do not even know where to begin. You are incorrect on every count except your last statement "everyone has different goals", which is strange because it counters your first statement "you can, but why would you want to?"
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old Today, 07:46 AM
 
555 posts, read 122,588 times
Reputation: 621
I never said squatting 200+lbs is best for optimal health.

But I'm not going to lift 2lb weights and walk on the treadmill and call myself a fit and feminine woman. If you like that workout routine then cool. But that's not something I'm interested in, weight lifting or not.

And the squatting would be in addition to my current routine. I'm even willing to take breaks from Pilates to focus on the weight lifting for a short period of time.

If you don't like squatting then it is perfectly fine or reasonable. If you don't like women with muscle then that's perfectly fine. If you don't like weights then that's perfectly fine. If you don't find the appearance of fit women (note: I'm not talking about becoming a bodybuilder) then fine. And if you think it's a pathetic or weak # then that's fine as well.

But as I said I'm doing it for me. There is no rule saying that squatting must be done in order to be healthy. I never said that. I said it's a personal goal.

And I'm not exactly sure how that contributes to my question.

Anyway, thank you to those who responded.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Today, 08:24 AM
 
Location: Chicago, IL
2,240 posts, read 1,342,907 times
Reputation: 1762
Quote:
Originally Posted by coffeendonuts View Post
I never said squatting 200+lbs is best for optimal health.

But I'm not going to lift 2lb weights and walk on the treadmill and call myself a fit and feminine woman. If you like that workout routine then cool. But that's not something I'm interested in, weight lifting or not.

And the squatting would be in addition to my current routine. I'm even willing to take breaks from Pilates to focus on the weight lifting for a short period of time.

If you don't like squatting then it is perfectly fine or reasonable. If you don't like women with muscle then that's perfectly fine. If you don't like weights then that's perfectly fine. If you don't find the appearance of fit women (note: I'm not talking about becoming a bodybuilder) then fine. And if you think it's a pathetic or weak # then that's fine as well.

But as I said I'm doing it for me. There is no rule saying that squatting must be done in order to be healthy. I never said that. I said it's a personal goal.

And I'm not exactly sure how that contributes to my question.

Anyway, thank you to those who responded.
If you can already squat 150 then 200 isn't much of a stretch. It's good to have goals
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Today, 10:04 AM
 
20 posts, read 3,235 times
Reputation: 25
Quote:
Originally Posted by JONOV View Post
Why wouldn't you? Lifting heavy weight is a goal in and of itself.



Why do you question it? Would you question someone who said they wanted to train for a Marathon, Triathalon, or Tough Mudder?
As you get older, you acquire wisdom. You learn through various informative sources, and through trial and error. Is a marathon truly healthy? Is it a proper goal for someone who values longevity?

Those are questions a person should ask themselves before beginning that type of activity. I only wish to put the question in their head, so they can make a decision after they analyze their situation. There are things I did in life, I wish that I hadn't, but I did anyway because I never thought not to.

If someone would have put the question in my head, I may not have done those things.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Today, 11:36 AM
 
851 posts, read 1,614,963 times
Reputation: 574
I am a male and trying to get back in form in my 40's. I can barely squat 90 lbs with good form and decent reps. This thread makes me feel bad but I will keep at it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Today, 02:01 PM
 
555 posts, read 122,588 times
Reputation: 621
Quote:
Originally Posted by 00molavi View Post
I am a male and trying to get back in form in my 40's. I can barely squat 90 lbs with good form and decent reps. This thread makes me feel bad but I will keep at it.
Don't feel bad!

Everyone has to start somewhere. It will get easier and soon you'll be lifting more than 90 lbs. But I don't think most people could even lift 90 lbs if they tried.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Today, 02:35 PM
 
20 posts, read 3,235 times
Reputation: 25
Quote:
Originally Posted by coffeendonuts View Post
I never said squatting 200+lbs is best for optimal health.

But I'm not going to lift 2lb weights and walk on the treadmill and call myself a fit and feminine woman. If you like that workout routine then cool. But that's not something I'm interested in, weight lifting or not.

And the squatting would be in addition to my current routine. I'm even willing to take breaks from Pilates to focus on the weight lifting for a short period of time.

If you don't like squatting then it is perfectly fine or reasonable. If you don't like women with muscle then that's perfectly fine. If you don't like weights then that's perfectly fine. If you don't find the appearance of fit women (note: I'm not talking about becoming a bodybuilder) then fine. And if you think it's a pathetic or weak # then that's fine as well.

But as I said I'm doing it for me. There is no rule saying that squatting must be done in order to be healthy. I never said that. I said it's a personal goal.

And I'm not exactly sure how that contributes to my question.

Anyway, thank you to those who responded.
I think there was a miscommunication.

I understand the importance of strength training, but you may find that doing a strict, tension controlled pistol squat, especially with your hands interlocked behind your back, is more difficult than squatting 200 lbs.

Additionally, I didn't say that I didn't lift weights, just that I didn't lift them in a conventional fashion, IE, bench press, back squat, deadlift.

However, I do use kettlebells, and you may find, depending on your goals, that a kettlebell swing will accomplish more for you than the back squat, especially when you also do pistol squats.

This is especially true if your main concern is your glutes. I believe you'll find that kettlebell swings are great for glute development and overall athleticism.

I think you may be underestimating calisthenics. You can build a tremendous amount of strength with calisthenics, as well as an aesthetically pleasing body. Just think about the amount of effort it takes to accomplish a one arm push up or headstand/handstand push ups.

Strength is a CNS response, so you have to learn to use tension to activate your muscle fibers. You'll find that with practice and dedication, you can become incredibly strong without the use of external weights.

Personally, I like to add certain kettlebell movements to my work out for conditioning and to develop hip power, but calisthenics alone are capable of building an athletic body.

I prefer that combination to conventional weights because I believe it's safer, and better for your joints.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Today, 03:47 PM
 
Location: West of Louisiana, East of New Mexico
559 posts, read 185,764 times
Reputation: 1028
I've always felt that it's easier for a woman to squat heavy as opposed to benching heavy (when compared to a similarly sized man).

As for the squats, I have never seen a woman squat more than 115 lbs for reps and haven't seen anyone "max out" on the squats since high school. Most of the women that lift seriously at my gym are short, gymnast looking ladies and the medium/stocky softball player types.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Today, 04:47 PM
 
Location: Chicago, IL
2,240 posts, read 1,342,907 times
Reputation: 1762
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fragments View Post
I think there was a miscommunication.

I understand the importance of strength training, but you may find that doing a strict, tension controlled pistol squat, especially with your hands interlocked behind your back, is more difficult than squatting 200 lbs.

Additionally, I didn't say that I didn't lift weights, just that I didn't lift them in a conventional fashion, IE, bench press, back squat, deadlift.

However, I do use kettlebells, and you may find, depending on your goals, that a kettlebell swing will accomplish more for you than the back squat, especially when you also do pistol squats.

This is especially true if your main concern is your glutes. I believe you'll find that kettlebell swings are great for glute development and overall athleticism.

I think you may be underestimating calisthenics. You can build a tremendous amount of strength with calisthenics, as well as an aesthetically pleasing body. Just think about the amount of effort it takes to accomplish a one arm push up or headstand/handstand push ups.

Strength is a CNS response, so you have to learn to use tension to activate your muscle fibers. You'll find that with practice and dedication, you can become incredibly strong without the use of external weights.

Personally, I like to add certain kettlebell movements to my work out for conditioning and to develop hip power, but calisthenics alone are capable of building an athletic body.

I prefer that combination to conventional weights because I believe it's safer, and better for your joints.
I'm sorry but there's no way that kettleball swings rival heavy squats in terms of strength development. That's just laughable. In terms of pure strength development nothing rivals heavy free weight lifting at low reps. That's just the way it is. And how is doing a pistol squat more difficult that squatting 200 pounds? That simply doesn't make sense. No squat using just your body weight is more difficult than squatting 200 pounds.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Today, 06:17 PM
 
20 posts, read 3,235 times
Reputation: 25
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chicago South Sider View Post
I'm sorry but there's no way that kettleball swings rival heavy squats in terms of strength development. That's just laughable. In terms of pure strength development nothing rivals heavy free weight lifting at low reps. That's just the way it is. And how is doing a pistol squat more difficult that squatting 200 pounds? That simply doesn't make sense. No squat using just your body weight is more difficult than squatting 200 pounds.
If lightening strikes a line in the ground and you're holding the phone, your arm may tense so hard that in snaps the bone in half.

Strength is a CNS response. You can use tension and muscular control to make a movement much more difficult than it would be if you neglected to do so.

For example, if you grip the pull up bar and concentrate on tensing your lats, you can make a pull up much harder than if your merely flailing yourself up there as many people tend to do. That translates into a greater strength gain and you can test it by doing assisted one armed pull ups or one arm pull ups and noticing your strength has risen.

Also, while you say it's laughable, that doesn't support the research being done.

Apparently, you don't believe it's possible to use heavier weight with kettlebells. First of all, a kettlebell swing is more comparable to a deadlift rather than a squat. If you're swinging over 100 lbs, you're using a fraction of the weight you would use when you deadlift; however, you're receiving perhaps, even better athletic benefits, and it will directly translate into how much weight you can lift off the floor.

The point is, you're using a fraction of the weight you need to use for a maximal deadlift, but your gaining better athletic benefits.

Assuming you're a 200 lb man, I would easily wager to say that a one legged squat or a "pistol squat" is much more difficult than lifting 200 lbs on a bar. There are powerlifters who can lift 500 lbs that can't get one decent pistol squat.

Can you do a pistol squat? Have you tried one?

The thing with bodyweight is that there is no room for being lazy. It requires more effort because many of the movements also test your balance and your control as well as requiring degrees of tension for maximum results.

And just like you vary the weight to work through periodization, you have to also vary the tension. It's mind-body control.

Perhaps you should try some of these exercises before you discount them. I agree that back squatting is a great test of strength; however, some forward thinking strength scientists that build athletes are using different techniques such as the rear-leg elevated squat or "Belgian squat," or Accelerating Isokinetic machines developed by the Russians.

Sport Science is evolving. Not everyone believes that lifting maximal weight adequately addresses the needs of athletes, especially elite athletes.

If your goal is to squat heavyweight for the sake of squatting heavy weight, then by all means, squat heavyweight.

If you plan on becoming a better athlete, then perhaps that isn't the optimal way to achieve that goal.

And if your goal is longevity, maybe 3 to 5 or even 6 hundred lbs on your back twice a week for reps isn't the best thing you can do in the long run for your spine and your knees. I am happy that there are forward thinking trainers and sports scientists that find ways to develop athletes without wearing them down.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $79,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Exercise and Fitness
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2014, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25 - Top