BGB - Intensity for Squats, Deadlifts, Bench Press?

[T_man]

Gotcha. Well I don't see how I'm using my back to squat. My trunk angle is about the same as my shank, which is pretty good for someone of my height. What criteria are you basing this on? I'd love to hear, as the squat is a great evaluation tool on a lot of levels, including mobility in a multitude of joints.

Furthermore, looking up means nothing as far as the positioning of your thoracic and lumbar spine. In fact, you don't want to be looking up. Hyperextension of the cervical spine is not appropriate lifting posture; a neutral cervical spine is.

i think he's like me; I have a short upper body compared to my lower body. When I go to the depths you do, it forces me to push my torso forward to balance it out so I don't fall backwards. This means that I have to use my back when coming up to straighten my torso which is not ideal squat form

 

[vader]

No, then you're putting too much weight on it.

If you put your hands further you're utilising your chest rather than your triceps.
This is for TRICEPS only, so putting it that close rules out all the other muscles. You shouldnt be able to CGBP anywhere near your bench.
It works the forearms as well, but should not STRAIN it. If it is you're probably using too much weight and trying to utilise your chest in the movement, therefore forcing your forearms into an awkward position.
It's just like a diamond push-up. Hits the triceps THE MOST, yet you can do the least reps on them(use least weight).

Tman, take a look at Largepkg's pictures and then tell me you know more than him.

Large ,I am with you man. When doing close grips I make sure that my hands are only shoulder with part and that my elbows touch my sides on the down stroke.

 

[largepkg]

Tman, take a look at Largepkg's pictures and then tell me you know more than him.

Large ,I am with you man. When doing close grips I make sure that my hands are only shoulder with part and that my elbows touch my sides on the down stroke.

He means well. Unfortunately he's wrong. Isolating the triceps has nothing to do with placing your hands 1'' apart. Form during the lift is the most important.

Also, at 1'' apart they should be prepared for possible injury. Some will learn the hard way.

 

[CowPimp]

i think he's like me; I have a short upper body compared to my lower body. When I go to the depths you do, it forces me to push my torso forward to balance it out so I don't fall backwards. This means that I have to use my back when coming up to straighten my torso which is not ideal squat form

You HAVE to lean forward during a back squat, period. I don't care how tall you are.

 

[Built]

largepkg, that's how I do them too. Honestly, I just go by feel on those. If it feels like my tris are getting a hit, my hands are in the right spots. I think the grip ends up being just where the outside of my fist is in line with my delt.

 

[C6zo6]

i think he's like me; I have a short upper body compared to my lower body. When I go to the depths you do, it forces me to push my torso forward to balance it out so I don't fall backwards. This means that I have to use my back when coming up to straighten my torso which is not ideal squat form

Exactly, he doesn't get it. If he had the same frame, he would know how it feels. I could care a less about all these technicalities, but this is how i feel when performing the squat, period. Everyone is different.

Cowpimp, if you feel you don't use your lower back, fine. I don't care, it just reminded me of how i look when i start to use my back. (which isn't comfortable)

 

[Built]

Your lower back is indeed involved in the squat, as are abs and the whole area generally spoken of in conjunction with the importance of the bosu ball as the "core".

But if you're good-morning it up you might find you do better with a) front squats or b) a lower positioning of the barbell on your back squat.

You can try holding the barbell lower down and kinda flaring your elbows out to form a ledge for the barbell that's lower down. I've recently incorporated this technique (former "good morning" squatter here) and I'm delighted to say they're finally FEELING like squats.

Anybody want to come in and do a better job explaining what I would have preferred to demonstrate, please be my guest.

 

[C6zo6]

I meant to write deadlift in my post.

I know your lower back is involved in the squat, but not much. I was referring to deadlifting and using my lower back. I know it's involved, but i tend to do a good morning technique when i try to use too much weight and alter form to the point where it's not a good idea...Although, i can lift the weight 8-10 times.

 

[T_man]

You HAVE to lean forward during a back squat, period. I don't care how tall you are.

Cowpimp. I've seen your videos of squatting. It's good form. BUT you are blessed with an even torso: legs ratio.
When I do squats and go that low (I usually go below parallel but not too much) My torso is more than 45 degrees bent over. Nearly parallel to the floor to balance out the weight. Further more I don't have a squat rack at my gym so I have to do it to ensure I don't fall over and hurt someone with the barbell. I then end up doing a good morning up like Built mentioned, and that is not good squatting form. Therefore we cannot go as low. The only times I've felt squats effective on my quads and going that low is when I used to do them on a slanted smith machine that had the perfect line if I had my legs out forward.

And my bad about the cgbp i didn't know it could injure you. I dont feel like it would but i'll take you guys words for it. Hold the bar almost like a skullcrusher except you're pressing rather than extending right?

 

[largepkg]

Cowpimp. I've seen your videos of squatting. It's good form. BUT you are blessed with an even torso: legs ratio.
When I do squats and go that low (I usually go below parallel but not too much) My torso is more than 45 degrees bent over. Nearly parallel to the floor to balance out the weight. Further more I don't have a squat rack at my gym so I have to do it to ensure I don't fall over and hurt someone with the barbell. I then end up doing a good morning up like Built mentioned, and that is not good squatting form. Therefore we cannot go as low. The only times I've felt squats effective on my quads and going that low is when I used to do them on a slanted smith machine that had the perfect line if I had my legs out forward.

And my bad about the cgbp i didn't know it could injure you. I dont feel like it would but i'll take you guys words for it. Hold the bar almost like a skullcrusher except you're pressing rather than extending right?

The main difference is most use a bent bar to do skulls. This positions your wrists in a more favorable position. Also, the skull is a true ISO movement for the tri's. Whereas the CG is still a compound movement that isolates the tri's more than a standard bench. Similar to dips.

 

[T_man]

how about using an EZ bar for cgbp?

I saw someone do deadlifts with it.. I wonder if he tried squats

 

[C6zo6]

Cowpimp. I've seen your videos of squatting. It's good form. BUT you are blessed with an even torso: legs ratio.
When I do squats and go that low (I usually go below parallel but not too much) My torso is more than 45 degrees bent over. Nearly parallel to the floor to balance out the weight. Further more I don't have a squat rack at my gym so I have to do it to ensure I don't fall over and hurt someone with the barbell. I then end up doing a good morning up like Built mentioned, and that is not good squatting form. Therefore we cannot go as low. The only times I've felt squats effective on my quads and going that low is when I used to do them on a slanted smith machine that had the perfect line if I had my legs out forward.

And my bad about the cgbp i didn't know it could injure you. I dont feel like it would but i'll take you guys words for it. Hold the bar almost like a skullcrusher except you're pressing rather than extending right?

Yeah, same problem.

This is why i look up when i squat. My friend taped me on his phone and whenever i was looking up, my back was straight and form looked much better for some reason. Also, i felt it a lot more in my quads and the next day i was sore. I had not been getting sore for a while, but ever since i started using that technique I've been feeling it a bit more. It's been a nice change.

 

[sakbar]

......
Whereas the CG is still a compound movement that isolates the tri's more than a standard bench. Similar to dips.

Well largepkg, I have travelled the full circle now.

In that case why is CG-Bench any better than Weighted Dips or Dips Behind the Back both of which are incorporated in my program? (And which seem to be working too!)

 

[someguy1984]

Well largepkg, I have travelled the full circle now.

In that case why is CG-Bench any better than Weighted Dips or Dips Behind the Back both of which are incorporated in my program? (And which seem to be working too!)

If your going to keep arguing with everybody and keep saying your routine is working and you don't need to do more triceps, etc...Then why make the thread?

Your not taking advice, so what's the point of people giving their input?

If your routine is working, then keep doing it. Your not listening to anyone anyways.

 

[largepkg]

Not sure he was arguing so I'll answer the question.

Variation!

Personally, I love dips but you have to change your routine to see maximum results.

 

[Built]

It also varies your potential for overuse injury - I'm probably not saying that properly. I'm meaning to say it spreads the risk around, so it minimizes the likelihood of it happening. I'm a firm believer in minimizing the risk through minor variations. Works for diet, works for training. Complexity theory in action.

 

[Perdido]

I'm not sure if this is off topic or not but instead of doing CGBP with a barbell, a friend has shown me a version of it using dumbells. The dumbells touch the full range of motion top to bottom.
Also not sure what target muscles this would hit specifically and I only do them on rare occasion for variation on a routine but thought I'd throw it out there for opinions.

 

[Built]

Interesting! I'ma try that - thanks!

 

[vader]

I'm not sure if this is off topic or not but instead of doing CGBP with a barbell, a friend has shown me a version of it using dumbells. The dumbells touch the full range of motion top to bottom.
Also not sure what target muscles this would hit specifically and I only do them on rare occasion for variation on a routine but thought I'd throw it out there for opinions.

I do that only it starts as a flye, at the top come down and so the CGB move then back up and flye again. Does that make sense? We call them chest busters but they blast my triceps pretty good too.

 

[largepkg]

I'm not sure if this is off topic or not but instead of doing CGBP with a barbell, a friend has shown me a version of it using dumbells. The dumbells touch the full range of motion top to bottom.
Also not sure what target muscles this would hit specifically and I only do them on rare occasion for variation on a routine but thought I'd throw it out there for opinions.

How are you articulating the wrists? Is the motion the same as a standard CG? ex. elbows tightly in?

I never thought about this. Thanks for the idea. I suppose you could do them as single arms as well. Cool idea.

 

[Perdido]

How are you articulating the wrists? Is the motion the same as a standard CG? ex. elbows tightly in?

I never thought about this. Thanks for the idea. I suppose you could do them as single arms as well. Cool idea.

Wrist would be facing each other (both dumbell plates touching each other - not end to end) and elbows in same position as DB BP.
I would think it would be tough to do them single arm unless the weight was kept down or you are an animal (I'm gonna try it this week just for shits n giggles).

 

[DIVINITUS]

If it helps the OP, I squat about the same as I deadlift although never push for a 1 rep max with those two. My bench is about 275 1rep max and my highest squat and deads for reps are 285 and 295 respectively. i also try to keep good solid form and don't push myself too hard for fear of getting hurt, I mean I work it, but don't push like I do on some other excersizes.

 

[Built]

Heavy without injuries = good.

 

[sakbar]

Thank you, largepkg and Built!

If your going to keep arguing with everybody and keep saying your routine is working and you don't need to do more triceps, etc...Then why make the thread?

someguy, the thread was started for a specific purpose which got answered in the first few interactions. Please re-read the thread heading, and then the initial discussions on the first page of this thread.

Tricep isolation and squat postures were offshoots, but thought-provoking interactions not too far from where I stand.

Your not taking advice, so what's the point of people giving their input?
......
Your not listening to anyone anyways.

Thanks, Mr. Judge, Jury and Verdict.

someguy, I must say your inputs have been not only the most relevant but also amazingly profound.

 

[CowPimp]

Your lower back is indeed involved in the squat, as are abs and the whole area generally spoken of in conjunction with the importance of the bosu ball as the "core".

But if you're good-morning it up you might find you do better with a) front squats or b) a lower positioning of the barbell on your back squat.

That's not entirely true. If you put the bar lower on your back, your have to lean forward more in order to keep your center of mass within your base of support. It causes you to use the posterior chain more, hence why powerlifters squat "low bar." It is true, however, that front squats allow for a more upright posture; the Zercher squat should be the same deal as well.

 

[someguy1984]

Thank you, largepkg and Built!




someguy, the thread was started for a specific purpose which got answered in the first few interactions. Please re-read the thread heading, and then the initial discussions on the first page of this thread.

Tricep isolation and squat postures were offshoots, but thought-provoking interactions not too far from where I stand.




Thanks, Mr. Judge, Jury and Verdict.

someguy, I must say your inputs have been not only the most relevant but also amazingly profound.

Look at what you have replied with when people tried to offer advice...You kept giving reasons why it wouldn't be necessary, etc...

That's all I'm saying.

I work with people who do that all the time and I hate it. Let me give you an example.

John: "Mike, I'm going to get a Skyline GTR over a new BMW M3. Is this a good purchase, or should i maybe go with the M3? I want the best overall economical vehicle."

Mike: "Well, the GTR is a better car, but the M3 is more of an everyday driver. The GTR is an amazing platform with plenty to offer, but is more of a weekend car and eats gas. The M3 however, has some very nice features for everyday use and plenty of pep to get you around. Both cars will turn heads, but for the money and economy use, the M3 is the better option."

"Thanks mike, I'm still going with the Skyline GTR. It's just nicer and i don't care about the gas mileage."

WTF??? Why even ask me if you've already made up your mind?

This is how I've taken your replies to people...I don't understand why people ask questions and have already made up their mind. It's like they want reassurance for a decision they have already made...

Sorry for being an a$$, but being a regional manager at Bert's Smith will drive you nuts sometimes.

 

[sakbar]

Look at what you have replied with when people tried to offer advice...You kept giving reasons why it wouldn't be necessary, etc...

WTF??? Why even ask me if you've already made up your mind?

You are way out of line. I have no desire to waste any bandwidth in responding to your allegations. To have progressed (with the useful advice obtained here) is proof enough.

Sorry for being an a$$, but being a regional manager at Bert's Smith will drive you nuts sometimes.

Wow! Some managerial skills you have: barging head-on at people pointing out their (seemingly apparent) flaws.

Peace Be,
Sak

 

[someguy1984]

You are way out of line. I have no desire to waste any bandwidth in responding to your allegations. To have progressed (with the useful advice obtained here) is proof enough.



Wow! Some managerial skills you have: barging head-on at people pointing out their (seemingly apparent) flaws.

Peace Be,
Sak

My last response was not confrontational and i clearly apologized for being hard on you...Now your the one out of line...

This forum and my job have nothing to do with one another. I don't get payed here. This is a forum and people are open to say what they want. Sure, i tend to vent a little when i have a rough day...But, i will admit that and apologize when i do so.

You shouldn't let this kind of thing get to you...Honestly, you sound like a bellyacher...Sorry, but it's evident...

 

[sakbar]

I will gladly take "venting" from anyone who go out of their way to give helpful advice and direct others' efforts. (Whether the learned ones ever throw their frustrations on the very people they are trying to selflessly help warrants hard thinking)

For someone to barge into an ongoing discussion with no relevant, positive or meaningful inputs, and then to claim their useless intrusion as a "venting" is utterly outrageous. There is no reason for anyone to take crap just because you dish it out and then let it be when you choose to sugar-coat it with an apology.

Bellyacher? Sure - one has to digest crap occasionally.

 

[someguy1984]

I will gladly take "venting" from anyone who go out of their way to give helpful advice and direct others' efforts. (Whether the learned ones ever throw their frustrations on the very people they are trying to selflessly help warrants hard thinking)

For someone to barge into an ongoing discussion with no relevant, positive or meaningful inputs, and then to claim their useless intrusion as a "venting" is utterly outrageous. There is no reason for anyone to take crap just because you dish it out and then let it be when you choose to sugar-coat it with an apology.

Bellyacher? Sure - one has to digest crap occasionally.

I didn't just barge in. I replied on the first page and it was in a joking manner. I only said one thing to you that could have been rude and immediately apologized for it...Your just simply taking it to the heart like a little girl... Now, I'm going to laugh at you...You did this to yourself. If you would have ended it with my apology, everything would have been fine. But no, you have to be a smart a$$ and keep going with it. Have it your way.

Also, bellyacher is another way of saying your a whiner, or cry baby. Which you obviously are, because your pouting about me implying you don't take opinions well.

Wow...Let it ruin your day why don't you...Good lord...