This is the point. If everyine was like this, as if it was just another way to working out, and not what invented workout. It would have a total different view from the outside looking in. But for people to defend it as if it's a religion only asserts the idea that its more of a cult with greater physiological benefits than physical.

This post was edited on 3/24/15 at 7:13 pm

2 ...

Report Post

Posted by Lester Earl

Member since Nov 2003

279352 posts

Posted on 3/24/15 at 7:15 pm to goatman1419

quote:
This is the point. If everyine was like this, as if it was just another way to working out, and not what invented workout. It would have a total different view from the outside looking in. But for people to defend it as if it's a religion only asserts the idea that its more of a cult with greater physiological benefits than physica

So your insecurities are why you hate crossfit. Basically.

2 ...

Report Post

Posted by fnchdrms87

Fairfax Station, VA

Member since Jun 2010

893 posts

Posted on 3/24/15 at 7:50 pm to goatman1419

quote:
What I don't get is somebody capable of a 285 clean and jerk only squatting 405. At my best I could squat 435 and there is absolutely no way in hell I could clean and jerk 285. I couldnt even clean it, much less press it. shite, I worked out with some currently prominent NFL football players who couldn't do that and they were squatting well into 500.

Well, for someone who squats 405 (assuming it is a full high bar Olympic style squat), they should actually be able to Cl & j more. Typically with the top lifters, you'll see a back squat that is 130% of your best Cl & j, with your front squat being around 110% of your best Cl & j and the snatch being around 80% of your best Cl and jerk. Assuming technique is solid, someone with a 405 high bar Olympic style back squat should be capable of around a 315 Cl and jerk.

relation of snatch and clean and jerk ratios

3 ...

Report Post

O-T Lounge - Replies to Post

Return To Board

Page 1

Return To Board