Staring you in the face

This past weekend, Dan Green went over to the land down under and broke his own world record in the 242 class, by going 2171 with knee wraps.

As you can see, even Animal made notation of the fact that it was with wraps.  Jon Cole still has the raw record with no knee wraps at 242 with 2135.  Cole was a hell of a fucking lifter wasn't he?

I make a notation to point this out not to disparage Dan at all.  I think Dan is currently the best powerlifter walking around at the moment, and I hope he doesn't end up injured and can sustain what he's been doing the last year or so, for a very long time.

I make a notation of this because numbers in context DO matter.

Just so I don't have to type "beltless" "belted" "belt and knee wraps" etc over and over again for this article, here's how I define "raw".

Rare = no belt, no wraps.
Raw = Belt only
Medium raw = Belt and knee wraps

Then of course, you have single ply, and multiply.

I find it odd, that powerliftingwatch.com keeps tracks of rankings and numbers and records in appropriate fashion, yet some gym owners or lifters like to throw out numbers without adding in the context or manner in which they were done.

Don't think a walk out matters?  I promise you it does.

Getting a hand off in benching matters.  If you don't think so, unrack your own shit and see if you can press as much, and get back with me on that.

A belt matters, a belt and knee wraps matter, and of course single ply and multiply matter.

CONDITIONS MATTER.

If you didn't listen to my interview with Capt. Kirk, he was very aware of what his belted and beltless squat PR's were, and did whole cycles based around building that beltless squat.  His best beltless work was 655x8 (fuck my life) and 800x1 (fuck my life!!!).  With a walk out of course.

Kirk told me that after 6 weeks beltless, he'd simply throw a belt on the next week, add 20 pounds to the bar (675) and do that for 5 reps easily (so the next phase of his training would start).  Kirk said he got roughly 50 pounds out of adding the belt on squats.  Maybe more.  He squatted 800x5 with a belt only.

Throwing out numbers without the context in which those numbers were done is disingenuous.

Jon Cole was fucking decent

When I was in Chicago with Brandon Lilly he told me at 19 he walked out 660 with belt and knee wraps and dunked it at 219.  He did 600 without the knee wraps.

Years later, after being in gear for an extended period of time he decided to do some raw training.  Now weighing over 300 pounds, he took 650 out and went down with it and his words (more or less) got his face pushed into his crotch.  Let's put this into context.  Brandon was squatting over 1,000 pounds in gear at the time.

Put that in your pipe and smoke it for a while.

To add a little more context to this, Brandon's best geared total around that time was 2,500.

His best medium raw total is 2,204.  Without training in gear Brandon went back and did an equipped meet and hit 2,612.

Ask him of all his totals which one he feels the most proud of.  Not only that, but we've had a discussion about him going rare and hitting a certain number there (I won't say, that's all up to Brandon).  Brandon is a smart guy.  He knows he can't go 2,200-anything sans belt and knee wraps.

Jamie Lewis went 1,618 rare at 181.  1,705 with a belt.  Give or take, 75 pounds difference.

When I was at the nationals Scott Smith was pretty upset because he was going to end up taking second place to Chris Pappillion, who can't bench 425 raw, but can bench right with Scott in gear.  And Scott is a 500+ bencher.  It's because Chris knows how to work his shirt, and Scott hates it.  But raw, Scott would walk all over Chris, and Chris knows this.  But they weren't raw that day, and Chris won under a level playing field.

And this is why context matters in numbers.

See, I don't have anything against any particular style of lifting.  Rare, raw, medium raw, equipped, whatever.  I don't care.  Do what makes you happy.  What I do have a particular issue with, is for someone to throw around numbers and claiming superiority without making apple to apple comparisons.  A multiply squat of 900 isn't the same animal as a belt only 900 squat, which very very few people have ever been capable of.

Yet 900 pound squats are pretty common at multiply meets now.

How many raw-anything guys can squat 900 right now?  Very few.

So just because you're strong in gear, doesn't mean you're strong out of it.  This has to be proven.  It has to be done.  No different than Brandon getting face planted by 650 even though he was squatting 1,005 in gear.

Powerlifting, I thought, was supposed to be a representation of strength.  Not just numbers.

However, and unfortunately, in powerlifting numbers are not always a representation of strength at face value.  The manner in which those numbers are obtained DO MATTER.  I've read where some people bitch that I always label my videos or lifts "no belt/no wraps" or "close grip bench".  Well, I do because it fucking matters.  A 455 bench and a 455 close grip bench well, they aren't the same thing.  I'm very aware that I don't get style points for benching close grip in meets, however I promise you I get the respect of my peers for it.  Plus well, it looks far more bad ass.  And KK does it too, so that has to count for something.

Most of this shit is really just great big dick measuring contests.  And dick measuring contests are fine.  That's what sports are really about isn't it?  I'm more "bad ass" than you are?  Sure, let's roll with it.  But if we're going to measure dicks then make sure that when we break our rulers I want to make sure you're not using centimeters for inches, and  then claim that your 18" dong is so much longer than my measly 7" one.

"We get so much deeper inside our women because we've got 18 inches and all those guys are packing a fraction of that."

Too bad she can't tell the difference.

Eventually the wool (lambskin?) gets removed and people can see this shit for what it's worth.  At least, I hope they can.  That way, respect can be given across the board to anyone who trains, competes, and puts their dick on the measuring block.  If not, and you want to talk shit and break out the ruler, then go meet those people at doing what they do and outperform them in their arena.  Don't sing it, bring it.

Strong is strong, is strong.  If you're only strong under specific conditions then how strong are you really?

To quote Nino Brown, "money talks, and bullshit runs the marathon."

Doesn't powerlift.  Sells crack.

Edit:  Pacifico has the no wraps total at 242 @ 2080.  I must have glanced at that this morning while looking at the record.

Meet training week 2 - pressing - Incline with 2 PR's

Bodyweight - 260

Incline -
barx20,20
135x10,10
185x5
225x4
275x3
315x2
365x1
405x1
425x1 PR

315x13 PR

PBN -
225x5
275x5

Rope Pushdowns -
75x5x20

Flat Flyes -
30's x 20
50's x 15

Notes - Solid session.

New tanks and t-shirt pre-order and a donation to our troops!

I am now taking pre-orders for the new "Acta Non Verba - warrior the fuck up" shirts and tanks later tonight.

If you didn't read my last meet write up, the "warrior the fuck up" came from something Brandon Lilly told me after I tore my groin in warm ups. While I didn't finish with the total I wanted, I still finished that day, pulled a PR, learned a lot of lessons and made new friends.

However, the REAL warriors are our men and women that serve this nation and protect our freedoms.

So I am going to donate 10 shirts and 10 tanks. 10 soldiers will get 1 of each (so I'll be shipping a shirt and a tank to a soldier).

After you pre-order a shirt or tank, go "like" the lift-run-bang Facebook page if you haven't already. Tell me who your soldier is, what he/she means to you, what branch they are serving in, etc. The FIRST 10 IN THAT THREAD WILL BE CHOSEN.

PLEASE WAIT AND USE THE THREAD I DESIGNATE FOR IT.

It's not much, but it's my very small way of saying thank you to all the men and women who continue to serve.

Also, it'd be cool if you didn't tell them, so that way it could be a surprise.

Thanks errbody!

Thoughts about life, crap, training, and stuff - Post Father's day edition

Happy belated Father's Day to all the dads out there.

For the dads that are involved and immersed in their kids lives, I think all would agree with me when I write that being a dad is the most awesome and rewarding thing that's ever happened to us in our life.  I cannot comprehend how a man could have a child and not want to be everything in that kids life.  That's your blood, your legacy.  Yet there's an epidemic going on with single mother homes now, and I am not sure why.

I'm not sure why men are freeing themselves from the responsibility of being a part of their own flesh and bloods live's.  I don't think there's a single cultural or social answer, regardless of what the media tells you, or what some study tells you.

If I had to take a shot in the dark, I would say that economic stress, family history, and education all play a part.  I think that some basic "values" also play a role.  When someone comes from a single mother home and never sees a responsible father or doesn't know what that looks like, they may be more inclined to not play that role.  Of course, this isn't the case across the board, I'm not painting with broad strokes here.

I wanted to look at two things.  Some stats on single mothers, and how fatherless homes affects the kids that came from them.

This is what I found.......

In regards to the economic (poorer families) and education part (poorer families)....here is what studies find in regards to unwed mothers having kids....

Nonmarital births have increased precipitously in the past forty years, especially among minorities and the poor, the groups of greatest concern. Today more than 70 percent of black children, 50 percent of Hispanic children, nearly 30 percent of white children, and 40 percent of all children are born outside marriage, assuring the persistence of poverty, wasting human potential, and raising government spending. Reducing nonmarital births and mitigating their consequences should be a top priority of the nation’s social policy. 

To add..........

A long-term study by researchers from Princeton and Columbia universities who've followed the lives of 5,000 children, born to married and never-married mothers in 20 urban centers, is the latest to reach that conclusion, and it sheds light on the reasons.

A large majority of the never-married mothers had close relationships with a partner when their child was born. But by the time the child was 5, most of the fathers were gone and the child had little contact with him. As many of the mothers went on to new relationships, the children were hampered by repeated transitions that did more harm to their development.

My thoughts on this?

Five years?  Suddenly the guy just jets after 5 or less years?

That didn't make a lot of sense to me.  So I found this piece of evidence......

In both Promises I Can Keep, and Doing the Best I Can, Edin’s forthcoming book on low-income fathers co-written with Tim Nelson, most parents-to-be had been together for only a few months, or even weeks. Those relationships also tended to be emotionally distant. Expectant couples have rarely spent much time doing things together or hanging out with friends and family. Men described themselves as "associating with" the woman who would become their child’s mother, not "dating" or "seeing" her. Still, Edin and Nelson find that men are generally happy, even thrilled, when a sexual partner announces that she is expecting, and the pregnancy tends to intensify the association into a recognizable relationship—at least temporarily. Unsurprisingly, many men and women quickly find they have nothing in common and don’t even like each other.

Most couples break up within a few years.

So basically, in the poorer communities, people hook up, the chic gets preggo and then ol boy is actually pretty receptive to it.  Never mind that they don't really know each other at all.  But the bond of having a child together seems to at least hold for a little while.  However eventually, as with most things, wanes and he jets. Thus the stat for why so many of the single mothers in the poor communities had the father around the kid for 5 years or less.  

But to be fair, there appears to be three types of single moms.

First are women who were married or in committed partnerships when they had their kids, but who divorced or separated later on. They run the socio-economic gamut, from rich to poor. Second are "choice mothers," single women who planned to become mothers despite being unmarried. Choice mothers tend to be educated, in their 30s or early 40s, and financially stable. Their children are usually born via anonymous or known sperm donor, though hook ups with ex-boyfriends are not unheard of. As the term suggests, "choice mothers" distinguish themselves from the far larger third category: low-income or working-class, young, never-married mothers.

So basically, only one of the three types are a single mother by choice.  The third kind I don't get either.  You would purposely not want a father in your kids life?  This makes no sense to me.  So without getting into a fucking moral debate about it, let's deal with some stats again......

From the website thefatherlessgeneration...........

• 63% of youth suicides are from fatherless homes (US Dept. Of Health/Census) – 5 times the average.
• 90% of all homeless and runaway children are from fatherless homes – 32 times the average.
• 85% of all children who show behavior disorders come from fatherless homes – 20 times the average. (Center for Disease Control)
• 80% of rapists with anger problems come from fatherless homes –14 times the average. (Justice & Behavior, Vol 14, p. 403-26)
• 71% of all high school dropouts come from fatherless homes – 9 times the average. (National Principals Association Report)

Father Factor in Education - 

• Fatherless children are twice as likely to drop out of school.
• Children with Fathers who are involved are 40% less likely to repeat a grade in school.
• Children with Fathers who are involved are 70% less likely to drop out of school.
• Children with Fathers who are involved are more likely to get A’s in school.
• Children with Fathers who are involved are more likely to enjoy school and engage in extracurricular activities.
• 75% of all adolescent patients in chemical abuse centers come from fatherless homes – 10 times the average.

Father Factor in Drug and Alcohol Abuse - 

• Researchers at Columbia University found that children living in two-parent household with a poor relationship with their father are 68% more likely to smoke, drink, or use drugs compared to all teens in two-parent households. Teens in single mother households are at a 30% higher risk than those in two-parent households.
• 70% of youths in state-operated institutions come from fatherless homes – 9 times the average. (U.S. Dept. of Justice, Sept. 1988)
• 85% of all youths in prison come from fatherless homes – 20 times the average. (Fulton Co. Georgia, Texas Dept. of Correction)

Now, the largest amount of kids who come from fatherless homes tend to fall from economically challenged group, so I don't know how skewed these stats are regarding that.  However, I still wanted to show these stats because I think dads are fucking important.  And the above stats say why.

But you know what, fuck all that.  Fuck all the stats and research.  Let's get back to reality.  

Rich or poor, social status be damned, dads matter.  If you're a guy who got a woman pregnant and then failed to be a father to that kid, and that kid grows up to be a statistic you played a part in that by being estranged in that kids life.  

No blog post is going to fix any social issue we have going on in America.  Hell, I can barely fix my own problems half the time.  I think that probably goes for most of us.  However, the one thing I don't have a problem with, is sacrificing for my kids and making them priority number one in my life.  

This is the message I'd like to write, in case it even reaches a single father that has not been involved in his kids life.

It's never too late.  Ever.  

You're broke, or don't have a job.  That kid doesn't care.  He or she just wants to know dad.  They still want to have a relationship with you.  Your social or economic status or standing doesn't factor into how they will feel about you.  They won't ever judge you on what your paycheck reads.  They care more about what is written on your heart about them.    

They will love you unconditionally.  They will forgive you for not being there the years before because they will want this relationship with you so badly.  But you need to make up for that too.  Even in cases where that kid is older, that may take some time, but it will eventually happen.  Kids want to know their dad.  They want to be close with him and know that dad loves them, cares, will protect and provide the best he can for them.  

No matter what you think of yourself, they will always want you to be someone that is proud of them.  Someone that is at all the games, at all the graduations, at their wedding(s).  

Your kid won't remember the jobs you had or didn't have, they will remember the time you gave them and the love you showed them.  They will remember how you made them feel.  

If you're a dad out there and you've been estranged for a while from your blood, man up.  Seek them out, and ask for forgiveness.  Put aside the differences you may have with the mother and make all the sacrifices you need to make in your life to show them how important they are.  Pass on something better than what you had given to you.  That way next year, when Father's Day rolls around, you get a little something extra that maybe you haven't had before.  You'll never want to be without it after that.  

In closing, thanks to my dad and I hope you had a great fathers day, pops.  

-10% sessions and "who you are"

I'm writing this fresh off the worst session I've had in months.

I've had a few -10% sessions here and there over the past 6 months but this one was brutally awful.

I usually judge the rating of a session by how I feel and by how the weights move.  On this particular session, well, everything felt as off and as bad as it could feel.  I mean, squats felt atrocious.  Worse than being on the receiving end of some prison sex by inmates who chose to wear sandpaper condoms.

My legs hurt, they wouldn't cooperate, I got on my toes too much during squats even though I tried fighting that to stay on my heels.  Deadlifting felt even worse.  Everything was a grinder.  I couldn't get into a tight and strong position at the bottom.  My hernia hurt.  My right shoulder hurt like hell.  I could go on and on and on, but you get the idea.  It was just a total cluster fuck of a session.

This got me to thinking.  Not only about the dipshit trolls that took my comment about "not a 650 squatter" out of context (on purpose of course, because that's what dipshit trolls do), but about my interview with Eric Lilliebridge from a few years ago, to setting a training max.

Eric said in that interview.....

People will write to me online and be like "well what happened to your lifts? you look weaker." And I'm like no shit. There is no way you can stay at that top level forever, there is no way you can. I can't pull 800 any day of the week. I only hit that number a couple of weeks before a meet or at the meet.

I feel like this concept is lost on so many people.  People take numbers and phrases and use them at face value without any understanding of the ebb and flow of training life, and the ups and downs of training cycles and where you are at at any given time.  

So someone could show up at the gym Eric trains at, some arbitrary day, and ask him to pull 800 and he would/could fail to pull it.  Hell, I know for a fact he missed a 675 no belt deadlift, but of course the video never made it to the internet because you've never seen a video of Eric having a miss.  I know this because his dad pulled it no belt, and taunted him about said miss on the video.  

This isn't to say that Eric gets 100+ pounds out of his belt.  Not at all.  It's to say that on THAT DAY, Eric was not a 675 beltless deadlifter.  He couldn't do it. 

On his best day, his did pull 850 with a belt.

So which one is he?  

He's both.  

That's the whole point of training.  Building a base level of strength, and then understanding the ups and downs of training.  Good days and bad days, rain or shine, sometimes who you are isn't as good or as bad as you'd like him or her to be, but that's what you are, on that given day.  It might be who you are tomorrow, or next week.  But that's why we keep training.  In order to be something more.  In that quest to be something more, sometimes we falter, or lose footing, and training progress declines. 

Is that who we are at that moments?  Yes, it indubitably is.  We can only be what we show on any given day, in any given moment.  It doesn't mean that's our best, or even our worst.  It just means in that moment, this is what our body can do.  We train to be more than that.  That's the whole purpose of training isn't it?  Because we aren't happy with what we can currently "show"....we're trying to become something more.  

My comment about "you're not a 650 squatter" got me to thinking about this a lot.  The context of that quote was pretty clear. It meant, "you're not a 650 EVERYDAY squatter" so don't program like one.  Which was the point.  If you once did something, but can't do it everyday, are you that thing? 

I think that's a great question.  

What if you had done it before, but couldn't do it on that day?  Does it still stand?  No?  Yes?  Are you what you were, or are you what you are in that present form?  I've had a million war stories told to me from guys who "used to bench...." whatever.  Even if it's true, can they do that while they are telling this war story?  Probably not, otherwise they aren't telling me what they used to could do.  

People have taken great liberties to take shots at me about saying I've claimed to have pulled 700.  I never said that I HAVE pulled 700.  

Not once.  

I said that I can.  That I will.  These are examples of me being prophetic.  Not telling a war story or belaboring that I've done something.  I haven't.....yet.  I will.  I don't care if people like me using "I can" or "I will."  It' phrases people need to learn if they are ever to believe they will accomplish that thing.  If you're using phrases like "I might" or "I will try" then you have no real belief or confidence in yourself about accomplishing that "thing".  Brandon Lilly used these same phrases to me.  "I can..." "I will..."  It's pretty common.  I'm not sure why people get up in arms about it.  Pete Rubish made the same type of quotes.  We all did.  None of us blinked an eye about it.  Self belief is a critical factor in success. 

So as I write this, I doubt I could have squatted 600 tonight.  A weight I've squatted on more than a dozen occasions in my training life.  But who was I during this training session?  Probably not a 600 beltless squatter, I can tell you that.  

Understanding who you are and where you are at in your baseline of strength, is a great way to come to grips with how to program and get better.  It may be humbling, but it's smart, and it's rewarding.  Combine this with the belief that you CAN and WILL reach your goals and that's a proper recipe for success.  

Meet training week 1 - Squats and tugs

Bodyweight - 257

Squats -
barx10,10
135x10
225x5
315x4
405x3
455x2
500x1

455x3,3,3,3

Deficit Deadlifts  -

315x3
405x3
500x3
585x3

Notes - Worst session I've had in months.  I mean a TRUE -10% session.  Hernia was hurting, legs felt awful and dead, and the 585x3 was a grinder.  I mean fuck, I just smoked 635 from a 4" deficit last Saturday.  This was an epically bad session.  A great way to start the meet cycle!  Fucking not.

Part 1 of 5 - Discussion between Brandon Lillly and myself

Link to the Juggernaut site with it is here.

Just a disclaimer, context matters.............

Obviously the trolls are out in full force over my "you're not a 650 squatter comment" on the video.

Perhaps I should have said "you're not going to program with 650" or something to that affect, or "you don't program with your best day lifts."

Either way, I really don't think that anyone who watched the video and was trying to learn something didn't understand the context of that comment.

90% of the discussion in this video was about programming, how to program, what to pick, etc. The example of the running back was even given as a parallel.

People who want to learn will listen, read, and absorb content will do so and understand context.

People who want to argue will find a reason to do so.

I made that comment sitting in the room with two world class level lifters, and they understood perfectly at what I was getting at. 

If you didn't, I just explained it.