Calling all OL'ers......:)

[huntito]

^^ dat feel...








I'm seriously going to try and get a 1 on 1 interview with the head strength and conditioning coach. I hate getting redirected here, transferred over there just to be told "nah bro that's for athletes"

[DaTruth1]

Holy ****. Those gyms exist?!? This is my lil dungeon



just three platforms and some bars n plates...

[dbk1]

Holy ****. Those gyms exist?!? This is my lil dungeon



just three platforms and some bars n plates...

honestly that is like the perfect setup...you even have your iPad ready for recording lol
my gym back in philly is awesome but right now I'm stuck with crap bumpers and poorly rotating bars. and when football ends the student gym doesn't even have bumpers...
thus the need for a storage space gym or a car. jb you lift @ the CalTech gym so that isn't an option for me but huntito where do you lift?

[ftwrestler]

yeah my uni's gym is nice like those first two

they wont let me in either. my junior college has bumper plates for the average person, but my large uni that costs 2x as much says it is too expensive

lol wut

in other news my low back was so tired today i would not pull for ****. all of my (squat) jerks were off because i would not maintain balance and snatches were getting caught in front because my second pull was so off.

weak sauce

[jb4476]

srsly **** all of you and your goddamn gym porn. Wherever I go for grad school better have a setup like that srs.

[huntito]

huntito where do you lift?

local Crossfit gym, I'll take pictures of it tonight. Gonna be heading out at around 5pm

srsly **** all of you and your goddamn gym porn. Wherever I go for grad school better have a setup like that srs.

yeah but will they let you use it??

[jb4476]

local Crossfit gym, I'll take pictures of it tonight. Gonna be heading out at around 5pm



yeah but will they let you use it??

Could depend where I go. All of the universities I want to go to, both in the US and Canada, are big schools with football teams, but none are football-centric schools. For example, University of Toronto has an Oly lifting team, I think if I wanted to do Oly lifting there is no way I wouldn't be able to access their facilities whenever I wanted.

Fun fact, Caltech hasn't had a football team since 1944. In 1944 our football team was totally undefeated because the only athletic young men who weren't being riddled with bullets in ****holes like Peleliu and Monte Cassino were the ones at Caltech, they were valuable towards the US' huge R&D effort. So we have our little joke that our football team is not only undefeated, but unscored upon. This is true.

[huntito]

Could depend where I go. All of the universities I want to go to, both in the US and Canada, are big schools with football teams, but none are football-centric schools. For example, University of Toronto has an Oly lifting team, I think if I wanted to do Oly lifting there is no way I wouldn't be able to access their facilities whenever I wanted.

Fun fact, Caltech hasn't had a football team since 1944. In 1944 our football team was totally undefeated because the only athletic young men who weren't being riddled with bullets in ****holes like Pelilu and Monte Cassino were the ones at Caltech, they were valuable towards the US' huge R&D effort. So we have our little joke that our football team is not only undefeated, but unscored upon. This is true.

holy **** dude im applying to Toronto too, future bff's lolwut?

[ftwrestler]

someone should apply to UC

come hang out with me at the gym, and we could "bro-down"

[schabowy90]

It's funny. The most abstract and difficult math can often have the most immediate, important and real world concern. Like this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/P_vs_NP

This problem is crazy hard, among the six biggest open problems in the world (along with the other Millenium problems). If P=NP we would probably be so ****ed. Anyone could break RSA encryption if they wanted, which means nothing, nowhere would be safe. Anyone could read your email if they wanted. Anyone could break your bank account if they wanted. Everything, anywhere that is conducted by secure internet transaction would be broken. Fortunately, it's almost certainly false (reality would not make sense if P=NP).

I think there's a movie being made about this. A group of scientists discover that P=NP but they have to keep it secret because if they didn't everyone would be ****ed. Or something like that. Oh yeah, here it is

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Travell...an_(2012_film)

wutt....i want a million dollars

I **** you not, the other day a hot crossfit trainer asked me if I could help her with her Snatch. They all be mirin our ability to put weights over our heads that the dudes they are used to seeing struggle to do 50% of.

i had more chicks come up and talk to me about oly lifting in two weeks at school than bodybuilding for 3 years lmao.

ive been talking to one of those chicks non stop too recently....i wanna marry her lol

honestly that is like the perfect setup...you even have your iPad ready for recording lol
my gym back in philly is awesome but right now I'm stuck with crap bumpers and poorly rotating bars. and when football ends the student gym doesn't even have bumpers...
thus the need for a storage space gym or a car. jb you lift @ the CalTech gym so that isn't an option for me but huntito where do you lift?

yo im going to philly this weekend for a hockey tournament. should i get pats or genos?

[jb4476]

This is not sometihng I will have to worry about for a while, but I'm curious about the format of meets for those who have competed:

1. How do you accurately time your warm ups, so that you have some ideal amount of time, say 2 minutes, between your last warm up and your first platform lift? Also, say there are many lifters going between your first and second or second and third attempts, say you have to wait like 5-10 minutes? Do you go back to the warm up room and do a couple more reps fairly close to what you will do on the platform so you don't get cold in the intervening time?

2. How much time is there typically between the final snatch and the first C+J?

[ftwrestler]

aware me on P=NP

[forcefedfreak]

This is not sometihng I will have to worry about for a while, but I'm curious about the format of meets for those who have competed:

1. How do you accurately time your warm ups, so that you have some ideal amount of time, say 2 minutes, between your last warm up and your first platform lift? Also, say there are many lifters going between your first and second or second and third attempts, say you have to wait like 5-10 minutes? Do you go back to the warm up room and do a couple more reps fairly close to what you will do on the platform so you don't get cold in the intervening time?

2. How much time is there typically between the final snatch and the first C+J?

Begin your warm-up when there are 15 attempts prior to you. Low ball your openers at weigh-ins that way when it's time for you to lift, you can call for a higher weight and then get a more precise time before your first lift.

If you have a long wait in between attempts you should DEFINITELY hit some lifts on the warm-up platform. We usually drop way down for a double before we hit a max. For example if I'm going to go to 110 on the platform I'll go to 70x2 right quick.

Time between the final snatch and the first clean and jerk depends on how big the sessions are. I've seen it take upwards of 1.5 hours.

[jb4476]

aware me on P=NP

P vs. NP is a curious problem. It's one of the seven "Mellenium problems", considered the biggest open conjectures in major areas of mathematics. The others are the Riemann hypothesis, Birch Swinnerton-Dyer conjecture, Yang-Mills problem, the Navier-Stokes global existence and smoothness problem, the Hodge conjecture and the Poincare conjecture. Only one of them (the Poincare conjecture) has been solved. The others are open. P vs. NP is probably the easiest to understand, although there are some variants of the Riemann hypothesis that can be explained easily.

P vs. NP is a question about complexity classes. Complexity classes describe, roughly speaking, how quickly computers can solve problems. Here's a simple example, let's say you have a set of integers, and you want to determine whether some finite subset of that sets sums to zero. For example, if you had the set {2,4,-7,11,-3,-1} then you do have a subset which sums to zero because (-1)+(-3)+(-7)+11=0. Let's say you had a set with N numbers in it, and you wanted to check whether or not this is true. Well, the easiest thing you could do is just check every possible subset and add all the elements in that set together. Since there are 2^N subsets, and in each subset you have at most N numbers, you have at most N*(2^N) computations you have to perform. So this is your "absolute worst case algorithm". This is the slowest possible speed a computer could determine the answer. "Speed" in comp sci is not physical time, but "number of computations". But here's the thing: as N gets bigger, the number N*(2^N) gets REALLY big REALLY quickly. It grows exponentially with N. So this is an "exponential time algorithm". That's bad, because it means that if we want to solve this problem for a big number, the number of computations you need is ****ing huge.

But lets say you didn't want to solve he problem. Lets say you just guessed and you wanted the computer to check your guess. Like you gave it some subset of the N numbers and asked it to determine whether or not they added to 0. Well that's easy. It takes at most N steps. So even though you can't compute the answer quickly with your algorithm above, you can verify a guess quickly. "Quickly" in computer science means "in polynomial time" because the number of steps you need is a polynomial in N. So it only grows as fast as N^k, much much slower than 2^N. Because a guess can be verified in polynomial time, we call the problem an "NP problem". NP stands for "non-deterministic polynomial".

But take another problem. Let's say you were given two integers, and you wanted to find their greatest common divisor. Well that can be done really quickly, with the Euclidean algorithm. And the number of steps the Euclidean algorithm takes is a polynomial in the number of digits of your two numbers. In other words, the difficulty of the problem grows slowly. This is an example of a "P problem" because you can give the computer the question and it will spit out the answer FAST.

And all P vs. NP asks is whether or not P=NP. P is obviously a subset of NP, because P are those problems where "the answer can be found quickly" whereas NP are those problems where "a guess at the answer can be checked quickly". Intuitively, P=NP should be totally false. And it probably is. It's just really really hard to prove.

The reason this is important is because all secure electronic commutation relies on RSA, and RSA relies on the assumption that it will take thousands of years to factor very large numbers into primes. Prime factorization is an NP problem. If you are given a number and ask a computer "find the prime factors" it will take a very long time. There is no "fast" way to do this. But if you give the computer some number N and some prime p and ask "check for me if p is a factor of N" it can do that quickly, using the Euclidean algorithm. So this is an NP problem. There is no known way to find the answer fast, but a guess to the answer can be checked fast. But if P=NP then suddenly that would imply that you could factor big numbers fast. That would break open every kind of secure communication system on the planet. There would be no more secrets, no more anything. We would all be so ****ed.

[DaTruth1]

P vs. NP is a curious problem. It's one of the seven "Mellenium problems", considered the biggest open conjectures in major areas of mathematics. The others are the Riemann hypothesis, Birch Swinnerton-Dyer conjecture, Yang-Mills problem, the Navier-Stokes global existence and smoothness problem, the Hodge conjecture and the Poincare conjecture. Only one of them (the Poincare conjecture) has been solved. The others are open. P vs. NP is probably the easiest to understand, although there are some variants of the Riemann hypothesis that can be explained easily.

P vs. NP is a question about complexity classes. Complexity classes describe, roughly speaking, how quickly computers can solve problems. Here's a simple example, let's say you have a set of integers, and you want to determine whether some finite subset of that sets sums to zero. For example, if you had the set {2,4,-7,11,-3,-1} then you do have a subset which sums to zero because (-1)+(-3)+(-7)+11=0. Let's say you had a set with N numbers in it, and you wanted to check whether or not this is true. Well, the easiest thing you could do is just check every possible subset and add all the elements in that set together. Since there are 2^N subsets, and in each subset you have at most N numbers, you have at most N*(2^N) computations you have to perform. So this is your "absolute worst case algorithm". This is the slowest possible speed a computer could determine the answer. "Speed" in comp sci is not physical time, but "number of computations". But here's the thing: as N gets bigger, the number N*(2^N) gets REALLY big REALLY quickly. It grows exponentially with N. So this is an "exponential time algorithm". That's bad, because it means that if we want to solve this problem for a big number, the number of computations you need is ****ing huge.

But lets say you didn't want to solve he problem. Lets say you just guessed and you wanted the computer to check your guess. Like you gave it some subset of the N numbers and asked it to determine whether or not they added to 0. Well that's easy. It takes at most N steps. So even though you can't compute the answer quickly with your algorithm above, you can verify a guess quickly. "Quickly" in computer science means "in polynomial time" because the number of steps you need is a polynomial in N. So it only grows as fast as N^k, much much slower than 2^N. Because a guess can be verified in polynomial time, we call the problem an "NP problem". NP stands for "non-deterministic polynomial".

But take another problem. Let's say you were given two integers, and you wanted to find their greatest common divisor. Well that can be done really quickly, with the Euclidean algorithm. And the number of steps the Euclidean algorithm takes is a polynomial in the number of digits of your two numbers. In other words, the difficulty of the problem grows slowly. This is an example of a "P problem" because you can give the computer the question and it will spit out the answer FAST.

And all P vs. NP asks is whether or not P=NP. P is obviously a subset of NP, because P are those problems where "the answer can be found quickly" whereas NP are those problems where "a guess at the answer can be checked quickly". Intuitively, P=NP should be totally false. And it probably is. It's just really really hard to prove.

The reason this is important is because all secure electronic commutation relies on RSA, and RSA relies on the assumption that it will take thousands of years to factor very large numbers into primes. Prime factorization is an NP problem. If you are given a number and ask a computer "find the prime factors" it will take a very long time. There is no "fast" way to do this. But if you give the computer some number N and some prime p and ask "check for me if p is a factor of N" it can do that quickly, using the Euclidean algorithm. So this is an NP problem. There is no known way to find the answer fast, but a guess to the answer can be checked fast. But if P=NP then suddenly that would imply that you could factor big numbers fast. That would break open every kind of secure communication system on the planet. There would be no more secrets, no more anything. We would all be so ****ed.

Do I even read?

[DaTruth1]

Begin your warm-up when there are 15 attempts prior to you. Low ball your openers at weigh-ins that way when it's time for you to lift, you can call for a higher weight and then get a more precise time before your first lift.

If you have a long wait in between attempts you should DEFINITELY hit some lifts on the warm-up platform. We usually drop way down for a double before we hit a max. For example if I'm going to go to 110 on the platform I'll go to 70x2 right quick.

Time between the final snatch and the first clean and jerk depends on how big the sessions are. I've seen it take upwards of 1.5 hours.

Am I the only one that barely needs to warm up on cleans if I do snatch first? I usually go 70x2, 90x2, 100, then start at 110.

[forcefedfreak]

Am I the only one that barely needs to warm up on cleans if I do snatch first? I usually go 70x2, 90x2, 100, then start at 110.

I always do a set with the bar, but yeah I usually jump in some where around 65-70ish.

[jb4476]

Do I even read?

Sorry about that. I have hypergraphia. Subjects that I know well I can write a huge amount about really quickly. I wrote that in under three minutes. But it means I get carried away. I do all my college essays drunk as **** because I need some handicap, otherwise it's almost unfair how easy it is.

[DaTruth1]

I am so glad that I never have to write a paper ever again.

[ftwrestler]

P vs. NP is a curious problem. It's one of the seven "Mellenium problems", considered the biggest open conjectures in major areas of mathematics. The others are the Riemann hypothesis, Birch Swinnerton-Dyer conjecture, Yang-Mills problem, the Navier-Stokes global existence and smoothness problem, the Hodge conjecture and the Poincare conjecture. Only one of them (the Poincare conjecture) has been solved. The others are open. P vs. NP is probably the easiest to understand, although there are some variants of the Riemann hypothesis that can be explained easily.

P vs. NP is a question about complexity classes. Complexity classes describe, roughly speaking, how quickly computers can solve problems. Here's a simple example, let's say you have a set of integers, and you want to determine whether some finite subset of that sets sums to zero. For example, if you had the set {2,4,-7,11,-3,-1} then you do have a subset which sums to zero because (-1)+(-3)+(-7)+11=0. Let's say you had a set with N numbers in it, and you wanted to check whether or not this is true. Well, the easiest thing you could do is just check every possible subset and add all the elements in that set together. Since there are 2^N subsets, and in each subset you have at most N numbers, you have at most N*(2^N) computations you have to perform. So this is your "absolute worst case algorithm". This is the slowest possible speed a computer could determine the answer. "Speed" in comp sci is not physical time, but "number of computations". But here's the thing: as N gets bigger, the number N*(2^N) gets REALLY big REALLY quickly. It grows exponentially with N. So this is an "exponential time algorithm". That's bad, because it means that if we want to solve this problem for a big number, the number of computations you need is ****ing huge.

But lets say you didn't want to solve he problem. Lets say you just guessed and you wanted the computer to check your guess. Like you gave it some subset of the N numbers and asked it to determine whether or not they added to 0. Well that's easy. It takes at most N steps. So even though you can't compute the answer quickly with your algorithm above, you can verify a guess quickly. "Quickly" in computer science means "in polynomial time" because the number of steps you need is a polynomial in N. So it only grows as fast as N^k, much much slower than 2^N. Because a guess can be verified in polynomial time, we call the problem an "NP problem". NP stands for "non-deterministic polynomial".

But take another problem. Let's say you were given two integers, and you wanted to find their greatest common divisor. Well that can be done really quickly, with the Euclidean algorithm. And the number of steps the Euclidean algorithm takes is a polynomial in the number of digits of your two numbers. In other words, the difficulty of the problem grows slowly. This is an example of a "P problem" because you can give the computer the question and it will spit out the answer FAST.

And all P vs. NP asks is whether or not P=NP. P is obviously a subset of NP, because P are those problems where "the answer can be found quickly" whereas NP are those problems where "a guess at the answer can be checked quickly". Intuitively, P=NP should be totally false. And it probably is. It's just really really hard to prove.

The reason this is important is because all secure electronic commutation relies on RSA, and RSA relies on the assumption that it will take thousands of years to factor very large numbers into primes. Prime factorization is an NP problem. If you are given a number and ask a computer "find the prime factors" it will take a very long time. There is no "fast" way to do this. But if you give the computer some number N and some prime p and ask "check for me if p is a factor of N" it can do that quickly, using the Euclidean algorithm. So this is an NP problem. There is no known way to find the answer fast, but a guess to the answer can be checked fast. But if P=NP then suddenly that would imply that you could factor big numbers fast. That would break open every kind of secure communication system on the planet. There would be no more secrets, no more anything. We would all be so ****ed.

excellent explanation. im not horrible at math, i just never needed to take higher than algebra for my major lol. That is pretty crazy. But wouldn't no secrets be a good thing? however i see the flips side, there is away around anything or into anything so there could be nothing.

creepy. i am 80% sure i get the concept and implications

[WHT_LIGHTNING]

I always do a set with the bar, but yeah I usually jump in some where around 65-70ish.

Depending on the snatch variation, I usually end at anywhere between 105-115

And how I usually load my bar (Yellow, Blue, Green if I go 110 or Higher) I usually just pull the greens/or change off and start at 90.

Like today, I worked up to 112 on snatch, well I missed it 3 times, all over my head too. Seriously, **** this sport. I hate it. Not even kidding. It's like an addiction to meth (well I have never smoked meth, but I am guessing). You train for that 1 high feeling that you get every month or so. I wish I could just quit.

I stripped off the big greens and then little greens, and started cleans at 90. Then I usually will go 90, 105, 120, 130, 135, 140




edit: Obviously I stripped off the little greens and then the big greens................

[WHT_LIGHTNING]

8am class in the morning, and I've had 5 Delirium Tremens (8.5% beers) at World of Beer and am now working on a 32oz Corona..........



Uhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh

[forcefedfreak]

I feel the same way bro. Every day I think about how I have to train, and how it's going to be miserable, and then when I miss a day of training I go out of my ****ing mind, and I feel like I'd be lost without it.

[DaTruth1]

The only clip from today's lifting. We're all just tapering for the meet coming up.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VuUCGzV8-jI


that's me in the back setting up my straps lol

[WHT_LIGHTNING]

I feel the same way bro. Every day I think about how I have to train, and how it's going to be miserable, and then when I miss a day of training I go out of my ****ing mind, and I feel like I'd be lost without it.

exactly, it's like a strange addiction, lol. Nobody understands us, and the best (well maybe the worst) is we are basically a bowling league. None of us(hell anybody in the USA or Canada, no matter how good they are) are ever really going to make any money at this, yet we bust our asses to get better. We are sick individuals........

[WHT_LIGHTNING]

The only clip from today's lifting. We're all just tapering for the meet coming up.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VuUCGzV8-jI


that's me in the back setting up my straps lol

homie has quick feet

Am I the only one who hates snatching in straps? One of the big things I like to think of is to turn my knuckles down to help keep the bar close, and I just can't do that with straps, I wish I could because it would save my hands some.

[forcefedfreak]

homie has quick feet

Am I the only one who hates snatching in straps? One of the big things I like to think of is to turn my knuckles down to help keep the bar close, and I just can't do that with straps, I wish I could because it would save my hands some.

The only thing I use straps for is my snatch pulls. But I have the same problem.

[DaTruth1]

I use straps on any rep work I do with snatches. It just takes too long for me to re-hook grip between reps - straps are just there for convenience (and so the wraps don't slide off my thumbs... I hate re-taping in the middle of a training session).

[feces99]

does anyone here know an accurate way to weight plates and bars? i swear to God my loads are heavier than i think they are

[forcefedfreak]

does anyone here know an accurate way to weight plates and bars? i swear to God my loads are heavier than i think they are

Weigh yourself
weight yourself holding a plate

calculate the difference