Mael

wow. i have been put in my place. my place being showing you how you are either wrong or not entirely right. and yeah, i may be a pain in the ass, but that's cause it's fun. plus, if you've been studying exercise and muscle growth for 8 years and never heard that the hamstrings are a group of 3 muscles with their own names, you lose a hell of a lot of credibility if you ask me.

oh, and if i don't understand what your talking about, it's because you're not making sense or are wrong. i don't post things as "fact" if i can't back them up.

n1) The point I was making about biking being better than running as a means to lose weight and trim your waist was 1) because the things are in fact the most important muscle group in your body to keep in shape for overall circulation, whether you want to believe it or not; and 2) since it's lower impact, less people are likely to do damage to their joints (suchs as their ankles, kness and hips) and therefore be able to stick with the workout regimine. Do some more research on running (other than Runner's World magazine), and you'll see it's actually one of the most stressful exercises you can put your body through. 3) The point wasn't even to compare running or biking as which was better, but to give a suggestion as to what sort of cardivascular exercsies they could do.

i agree your less likely to injure your joints biking then running, but that doesn't make biking better. you burn more calories running. one isn't going to be better than the other. it's gonna be the person's preference as to which they like more, so if your gonna give the disadvantages of one, give them of both, and throw in the advantages as well.

What I said to Anon about his own ability to build muscle had nothing to do with my own or the majority of Americans. Most people are endomorphs (look it up) and therefore, like myself, respond better to higher reps and lower weights
and yet you gave this advice before even knowing anything other than his weight. so you really couldnt' know for sure. he gave very little info to be able to give good advice to. not only that, but it doesn't really matter too much what his "body type" is. i haven't read about body type in a while, but from what i remember, he's just as likely to be a mix as one or the other, although i could be wrong. and furthermore, until he tries various lifting strategies, he won't know how high weight/low rep, high rep/low weight, 10-12 reps, 4-6 reps, etc. will work, until he does it and sees how he responds. his body type may allow some generalization, but that still doesn't mean that everything will work in a set way.

Therefore, keeping them toned is more important than concentrating on any other muscle group in your body.
I understand exactly what you mean, but you're still not really right. The calfs are actually more important, because they recirculate blood that is pooled in the lower leg. The quads don't have anything to do with that area.

now with muscle tone, building up a muscle won't really increase it. i think your referring to muscle tone as in "wow, look at her, she's got some toned legs." which is really more a reflection of how the legs look and how much fat covers teh muscle. muscle tone, as i mean it, is the definition of it: the relatively constant tension produced by a muscle for long periods of time as a result of ansynchronous contraction of motor units. It's responsible for keeping the back and legs straight, the head upright, and the abdomen flat. It has nothing to do with blood return.

And, yes, toning is a form of building muscle
No, it's not. See above. Unless you mean it as in doing low weight, high reps which doesn't really build mass so much as increase muscular endurance. Which really isn't "toning."

The fact that the psoas "flexes the vertical column" is the problem. This is what causes back problems in people who over-stress that muscle group
Hate to break it to you, but anything that makes the trunk flex forward flexes the vertebral column. I guess this makes sitting up in bed bad for your back.

You want a reference? Go do a Google search and swim in the reference pool that you'll find. I'm not even going to comment on your last statement of back problems due to flexing the hip. That's the stupidest comment I think you made throughout your enitre argument.
sorry, that's sorta my bad. the sarcasm i meant was sorta lost in the internet. and just a hint, something to think about, any idiot can post on the internet, that doesn't mean they know jack about what they're saying. hmm... it looks like... on to the next point...

Yes, let's devide our abs into two sections....FOR CONVERSTION SAKE!!!
Then freaking say that! If you're gonna go around saying your right, acting as an authority, then freaking make sure you don't say anything that can be construed as wrong. Or can make peopel think "hey, he said this, he must be right!" because it isn't clear.

I'm skipping number 6. I don't like your description, but I can see your point.

Arched = backwards, rounded = hunched forward. That's all the elaboration I'm giving. If you need more help with it, then head back to school.
Have you ever seen the curve of the spine? there is an "S" shape to it. so which area of the spine should be rounded? which arched? i think you should learn to be more descriptive, cause this is unclear.

If the point of reducing waist size is why you're working out, then over-working the obliques is not something you want to do. They will in fact make your waist thicker which most people don't want.
Unless you're doing major body building, the obliques aren't gonna grow enough to be a big difference. and not strengthening them would be dumb, since they help with breathing and stabilization of the trunk.

I'm sticking by what I said. You're simply trying to be argumentative. '
I assume this is in response to the lateral/medialis comment. Yeah, your right, I am being argumentative. but that's because i'm right.

Fuck, you're right about the hamstrings. Pat yourself on the back
i will, thanks. now the reason i pointed shit like that out is because, if you've been studying muscles for so long and not known this, you obviously have missed something, and who knows what else? plus, if you make a statement stating that there is no specific name, you lose a lot of credibility in my book. that's like a lawyer telling someone that killing another person is not illegal. you're not got gonna trust that that lawyer really knows what he's doing.

The gluteus maximus is a very large muscle, and does, in fact, aid in extending your hip forward. Do more research
No, it doesn't. The leg doesn't extend forward at the hip. it extends backward behind the body. when the leg moves forward of the body, it is flexing. When in flexed position, the glut. max extends it back toward the anatomical position.

I said "knee" because I meant "knee
That's unfortunate, because that means your wrong. The glut. is located in the butt. It does not reach down to the knee, and therefore, since it has no effect on the knee, can not stabilize it. it does stabilze the upper leg, aka the thigh, at the hip joint.

Both directions just like I said. You are misinformed
Nope. I got my information from the book "Essential Clinical Anatomy, Second Edition" by Keith Moore, MSC,PhD,FIAC,FRSM, and Anne Agur, BSC(OT), MSC, Phd. Based on the manner in which muscles work, the glut medius can't inwardly and outwardly rotate the thigh. See, when a muscle contracts, it shortens it's length, thus shortening the distance between it's insertion and origin. So when it contracts, it medially rotates the thigh. When it relaxes, that allows the leg to resume it's normal place. You are misinformed.

) I wasn't even going to bother responding to you until I got to this unbelievably, mind-boggling bit of nonsensical rambling. An open-joint movement is one where the upper and lower bones in your leg begin to separate. This begins to happen past the 90° mark when your knee thigh and calf are perpendicular. I did not mention even one time anything about open/closed chain movements.
Sorry, i should have prefaced that by saying i had never heard of "open joint movements." so i was telling you the closest thing i had heard of to what you called it. I still have to disagree with you though. When you do a squat, even below 90degrees, the distal end of the femur is still sitting on top of the proximal ends of the tibia and fibula. i'm still waiting for a source. if you can't even tell me where you got it from, and "search on the internet" doesn't count. get me a source and i'll gladly consider this theory of yours. until then, it sounds like a load of bull to me.

...not gonna bother...
i'm guessing that's because you don't know much about joints and from what i've read, anatomy in general.

No, they don't disappear. The leverage isn't there because the bones aren't actually in contact with each other
i think your wrong. if the bones lost contact, any time we crouched there would be major damage to our knees because our thigh would be weighted down by the upper body, and pop out of the joint.

) I said "tendons" because I meant "tendons".
problem here is that if your putting stress on the tendons, that stress is transferred to the muscle, and when the muscle contracts, it overcomes that stress to move the body. so i got to disagree with you here.

(On a side note, I'm really glad I don't know you in person.)
On my sidenote, generally when people resort to insults and comments like this, which has nothing to do with our debate, it's usually a sign of a) they're losing and b) are unwilling to look at other options/opinions because they have to be right no matter what.

I don't do squats because I'd rather not risk a back injury. I did not tell others that they can't do them, I just said I won't. I think my 15 years of skateboarding did a good enough job teaching me how to balance, buddy.
Well good for you. But if you read your journal, you pretty much seem to say that putting heavier weight is more important than working all your muscles, including the stabilizers, which would not lead to a more all around workout.

Move the weight as slow as you want and enjoy yourself, but you're not going to be blasting your fast-twitch muscle fibers while you're pretending you're a little snail.
According to page 244 of the ACE manual, "During a typical set of strength exercise, both slow-twitch and fast-twitch fibers actively participate in force production. The more fatigue-resistant slow-twitch fibers are recruited first. As resistive forces increase, the less fatigue-resistant fast-twitch fibers are recruited." So if the weight is heavy enough, then both fast and slow twitch are recruited, the speed of the lift doesn't matter.

If you want to walk around with straight knees, then go right ahead, but I prefer to keep my knees ever so slightly bent when I put my body weight on them.
It's not a matter of how i want to walk, it's a matter of how people do walk. learn about the gait cycle of a healthy individual. generally, if you don't straighten your leg while walking, it's because there's something wrong, like contractures or spasticity, which is present in cerebral palsy. maybe you might want to look into that?

When I'm working my biceps, I'm don't give a shit about working my forearms; concentrate on one thing at a time
that's too bad. cause your bicep will still do the same amount of work, but if you're hitting your forearm at the same time, it saves some time at the gym cause you've already started on the forearm.

By keeping the wrist back, you put more leverage on the biceps, thus keeping the force of the weight on it
more leverage allows you to do the work more easily. so that would allow you to do heavier weights, but with the same amount of actual work being done by the muscle as the lower weight with good form, less chance of injury with good form.

If you bend your wrist forward, the force of the weight will nearly disappear at the top.
No, it won't. In fact, you can check with most major fitness magazines and bodybuilding magazines, and it is occasionally suggested.

I've done this for years, as have many other educated people. I would't have used the methor or suggested it if it was wrong or could cause injury; you can "think" anything you want.
well, i've never seen anyone else do it. i don't know if it could cause injury, but who knows in five years? i can type with my hands however i want, but if i were to type too much with bad form, eventually i would develop capal tunnel. hopefully, you won't find out in a few years that it has caused problems for you.
being an "educated person" doesn't really mean a whole lot. i could be educated in rocket science or old english, doesn't mean i'm gonna have a proper understanding of the human body, how it works and how exercise affects it. and i can think anything i want. i just generally try to learn from respectable sources and then make up my mind on them.

remember, any idiot can post on the internet, that doesn't make them right though.

anyone else reading this want to throw in their 2 cents?