Re: Cross Training Sucks

Dot wrote:

dizzy wrote:
Dot wrote:

dizzy wrote:

Regarding Dot's comment, I can't think of why a stiff bar would
detract from the exercise.

Try lifting a 50-lb bag of sand (or 100 lb or whatever) vs 50 lb on a
stiff bar. Or lifting a box of soil samples in front of you.

Like from off the ground, in both cases? No difference, to speak of.

Send me a video of you doing both.

No.

(I may have misestimated volume of 50
lb of sand and why I added it might take 100 lb. That's loose sand -
not sand embedded in cement.) I should have added that the weight then
has to be carried up the stairs (lab) or bushwack down hill (although
it's usually on my back by then).

Whatever. Weight is weight, unless you want to be silly and compare
to something that is substantially large and ungainly and/or difficult
to grasp, and I don't think a bag of sand is either. Then you'd still
have to demonstrate why that is better exercise. Give it up.

Real life doesn't come in nice neat little packages.

Actually, bags of sand ARE kind of "neat little packages", Dot.

Does "better" refer
to how much weight you can lift, race times, how much you bulk, helps
hill endurance, helps power up hills, ....?

What is this, the "Clinton" defense?

Gee, I think think "better", when it comes to weight-training, means
"better at building strength". Why you think that lifting a bag of
sand is better than lifting a chunk of iron is beyond me.

A few examples:

From a vet and ultrarunner:
"I carry 50lb bags of pigeon food, one in each hand. Good for the
grip and I can impress the employees by also throwing a 3rd bag on my
shoulder. :>)
If you want a good workout, lift 50-120 lb squirmy dogs from the
floor (pick ones that go limp a la Gandhi) to an exam table, then
make sure they don't bite the person sticking variously sized objects
into their nether regions. Remember to catch them if they try to
bail off the table and you will also have to curl them if they try to
lie down up there. If you are really dedicated, you can actually get
a job doing this all day. :>)"

LOL The "squirmy dog lifting" plan.

Does that really apply to sand bags, Dot?

(similarly parents have squirming kids over their shoulder - they just
don't sit still like a barbell)

See above.

From another ultrarunner:
"Just as some sports guys like using free
weights rather than machines for working balancing muscles or
supporting muscles, I think the sandbag and kettlebell type workouts
would help jumping over downed trees, squooshing and sliding through
mud, etc."

Oh, some guy "thinks" that, eh? Nice "evidence".

And yet another ultrarunner:
" It's incredibly effective
too, actually far better than exercise machines at the gym because
the sand "wriggles" and fires off muscles you didn't know you had.

A bag of sand doesn't "wriggle" any more than any "free" weight.

What's really sweet is if you drop the sandbag on your foot it won't
hurt :-) (unlike the beer kegs I do similar exercises with)"

The "wriggling" of sand and it's potential awkwardness is one of the
benefits for functional training - when life isn't neatly packaged.

LOL! Yeah, that "wriggling" is something that really happens, while
you're lifting bags of sand. Do "boxes of soil samples" wriggle too,
Dot?

I can't find the link I'm looking for comparing (loosely, not science
study) functional strength with gym strength (that is, someone who
trained with sandbags or something similar vs traditional weights).

You certainly found it in you to try to bull*** everyone. There's NO
DIFFERENCE worth talking-about, assuming an apples-to-apples range of
motion while lifting and moving X mass.

Outside of some pathological, ridiculous situations (like living
creatures "squirming" and struggling in your grasp), weight is weight.

The power to lift it is the SAME. Give it up!

.

Loading