Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
HELP PLEASE!!!!
Ok, I’m sure there must be some kind of mistake on the translation of this chapter to Spanish.
I’m currently reading through the anterior/posterior pelvic tilt, and it says something like: “… Posterior pelvic tilt, is the proper kind of tilt when squating or lifting weights to a hip high. On the other hand… Anterior pelvic tilt is the right way to get in a crouch, or lift heavy weights from the ground” But right after that it contradicts itself by saying: “It’s particularly dangerous to start lifting or squating movements with a posterior pelvic tilt, as it generates a lumbar flexion and risks lumbar disks to possible damages.”
Could anyone please clarify this to me???
-
Well… I guess the most similar will be the one called “Relation between strength and body levers” and “Strenght variations with the change of body levers”
-
Men… This may be among the top 10 worst videos ever… But I’ll say in my defense, that swapping between languages almost fried my brain… Anyway, here it goes…
-
Another good option on this regard may be using one of the many AppS there are currently out there.
I think the cheapest option may be iMuscle which is the one I usually use and that may be found at the AppStore for 6$ or something like that.
(I wanted to add a screenshot of it but I’m afraid I don’t know how to upload pictures yet…)
-
I’ll side with @denny and state strength has to be considered a unit of measure, and because of that it has to be perfectly defined as any other physical magnitude is.
As @tonyfu and @carlcase did, I’ll choose Siff and Verkhoshansky’s definition “…the ability of a muscle or muscle group to generate a muscle force under specific conditions” as the one with a more objective approach.
However, I’d like to say that definition could be splitted in two different parts from my point of view, one being “the ability of a muscle to generate force” which can be directly associated with Hatfield’s Anatomical/Physiological Factors, and a second “the specific conditions” which would be in line with what Hatfield names Psychoneural/Learned response factors and External/Env. Factors.
I understand @benkuch, @menacedolan and @chobbs have a wider “holistic” perception of strength but my concern with that is it takes us further from the objectivity I think the strength definition needs.
Actually, that scope reminds me the CrossFit definition of strength, with which I’ve never fully agreed, which is “the productive capacity to apply force” always followed by the muscle up example: If we get a guy (who is already able to do pull ups and dips but not muscle ups) to do his first muscle up after just 15 minutes of skill practice, could we say that guy is stronger after those 15 minutes? My answer would be NO, as it’s impossible there has been any anatomical or physiological modification on his body. What we could say however is we have modified some of the other factors (mostly Psychoneural/learned response).
-
From StudyMode:
<span style=”color: #555555; font-family: ‘Open Sans’, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; -webkit-tap-highlight-color: rgba(0, 0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-size-adjust: 100%;”>1. What is the basic difference between anatomy and physiology? (p. 2) ANSWER:</span><br style=”box-sizing: border-box; color: #555555; font-family: ‘Open Sans’, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; -webkit-tap-highlight-color: rgba(0, 0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-size-adjust: 100%;” /><br style=”box-sizing: border-box; color: #555555; font-family: ‘Open Sans’, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; -webkit-tap-highlight-color: rgba(0, 0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-size-adjust: 100%;” /><span style=”color: #555555; font-family: ‘Open Sans’, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; -webkit-tap-highlight-color: rgba(0, 0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-size-adjust: 100%;”>Anatomy (a-NAT-ō-mē; ana- = up; -tomy = process of cutting) is the science of structure and the relationships among structures. Physiology (fiz′-ē-OL-ō-jē; physio- = nature, -logy = study of) is the science of body functions, that is, how the body parts work. </span>
So I’d consider the following as some of the anatomical factor:
– Muscle Fiber Arrangement
– Musculoskeletal leverage.
– Tissue Leverage.
– Fast vs Slow Twitch Fibers Ratio.
– Miofibrillar density
-…….
-
First one will be enough. Thx!!!
-
@conorwlynch Thanks buddy! Really appreciated!!
-
-
Short Term Goals:
1. As some of the other guys previously said: successfully complete the Power Athlete Academy I. However, being my first experience dealing with a graduate level curriculum in another language (not in Spanish), this is something I do not take for granted. With that said, I guess a more realistic shorter term would be to hold on to the group as long as possible. (Yeah I know, we haven’t started yet and I’m already making excuses…)
2. Successfully complete the Precission Nutrition course which I’m also currently involved with.
3. WARNING: Successfully complete the internship process I’ve been involved during almost the last two years at CrossFit HQ and become one of their Level1 Seminar Staff.
Long Term Goals:
1. Finish Power Athlete Academy, (Or at least develop my S&C knowledge to unexpected levels, even though It may be thanks to osmosis by being “surrounded” by the most knowledgeable people in the industry)
2. Develop my personal nutritional consultancy business.
3. Continuing education on nutrition.
-
-
Ok guys, this may sound a bit dumb but I just realized I might have some issues regarding languaje in activities like this one.
I guess I have to do this in English if I want you guys to understand what I’m saying basically, right?. Problem is, it might be a bit hard for me (if not impossible) to find a group of people who speak enough English for them to understand a word of what I’m saying…
So question is, how would be the best way to do it? Shall I do it in Spanish while simultaneously translating to english? Or I could use Nat as my Guinea pig, but that would be a just one person group, which might be a bit weird…
I dunno… I’m a bit confused. Any recommendation in this regard?
