Ripptoe censors people?

[SumDumGoi]

In another thread I was posting in here someone pointed out an article from T-Nation where Mark Rippetoe spouted off a lot of nonsense.

http://www.t-nation.com/free_online_...till_beginners

To tell everyone the truth I have had my fill of dealing with the idiots on here who just parrot what Rippetoe says without having any idea what they are talking about. I noticed the same article ws posted on the starting strength forums, so instead of dealing with the average BB.com parrot, I chose to go directly to Rippetoe's own forums where he routinely answers questions people give him. This would be great and all as it allows people to get information directly from him without much of it being lost in translation as I suspect happens many times on this board. However, he won't seem to post messages from people who disagree with him.

Here is a link to the exchange and in my next post I will present the response I had given which Rippetoe seemingly refused to post.

http://startingstrength.com/resource...ad.php?t=19179


Please let me know if you feel my tone was in any way out of line giving merit to Rippetoe not posting the response.

Edit: I also attached a copy of the article in question if anyone cares to review it. It is a quick read and is only 3 pages.

[SumDumGoi]

There is a section tittled "squat depth and muscle activation". It mentions 4 groups of muscle activation and the biceps femoris was one of them. Unless anatomy has changed since I last had an anatomy class, the biceps femoris is part of the hamstrings, is it not?


None of the studies that were cited mentioned "no" hamstring activity during the squat. What was mentioned was "minimal". You seem to be confusing the terms and implying that "no" and "minimal" are one and the same. However, the word minimal does need to be defined. I will refer you to "McCaw & Melrose (1999). Med Sci Sports Exer, 31; 228-236 which was directly cited in the mentioned article in reference to the "minimal" hamstring activity. The article also contains a detailed description of the squat as well. Here is what was said in reference to hamstring activation:

As opposed to the uniarticular gluteus maximus, the hamstring muscles, including the biceps femoris, are biarticular, located posteriorly over both the hip and knee joints. Although not quantified in this study, the concurrent patterns of hip and knee flexion during descent, and hip and knee extension during ascent, may result in the biceps femoris maintaining a relatively constant length during the lift. Instead of being active concentrically during hip extension and eccentrically during hip flexion, the muscle may in fact be active in a quasi-isometric fashion through both the descent and ascent phases. Mean IEMG values indicate the biceps femoris was most active during the ascent phase, similar to the findings of De Looze et al. (4) and Isear et al. (8). The indication that significant hamstring activation was present during the squat is in contrast to what Tesch and Dudley (19,20) reported during an MRI investigation of the squat, which suggested the hamstring muscles are inactive during the squat. Although popular exercise manuals (7,15-17) do not strongly emphasize the role of the hamstring muscles during the squat, they do not suggest inactivity. The biceps femoris may activate to a greater degree during the ascent phase to contribute to the large hip extensor torque required to return to the upright position and to help stabilize the knee joint (4).

From the above quote you can clearly see that the authors never mentioned that there was "no activity". Because the hamstrings are a biarticulate muscle crossing both the hip and knee joints their actions regarding hip extension become minimized when the knee is in a flexed position as well. The authors suggested that 1) the hamstrings were indeed activated during the squat and 2) that because of the simultaneous hip flexion/extension and knee flexion/extension during the squat their overall contribution to the exercise is minimized as they contract "semi-isometrically". Although the authors did also suggest that they do increase activation during the ascent phase as the hips are extending. So yes, the squat does indeed activate the hamstrings during hip extension. The problem is that its overall contribution to the movement is minimized as it is placed in an unfavorable position as a result of the flexed position of the knee.

A very similar scenario also occurs with the gastroc muscle as it crosses both the ankle and knee joint. If you want to minimize the action of the gastroc and isolate the soleus muscle all you need to do is bend your knee. Your understanding of anatomy, although excellent for teaching proper for and giving instruction, appears to be limited if you do not understand this concept. Joint positions can and do influence muscular activity.

Suggesting that the authors of the study don't know what they are doing because their results do not agree with your hypothesis is nothing more than a co-out on your part. This is nothing more than an unsubstantiated attack on your part which allows you to run your mouth without ever having to produce factual backing to your arguments. Are you claiming that you have better measurements in regards to how the hamstrings contract and how active they are during a squat because you can teach people how to squat? I have no doubts regarding your expertise and experience helping people to understand the fundamentals behind lifting mechanics, but at some point you are going to need a valid measurement.

The authors of the studies have provided clear and detailed explanations regarding their measurement techniques in the cited research articles. If you would like to comment on the squats being performed incorrectly I suggest that you read over the methodologies and specifically state what is wrong. If you could please provide a brief outline regarding how their methodologies were wrong and propose how to fix them I will be more than happy to perform a study in reference to your parameters. If you would like a better study, here is your chance to help create one. But in order for me to do this there must be a clearly defined reason why as I will nt waste my own time or my students time chasing your tail in a circle.

I disagree that the burden of proof lies with me and none is on you. Who has this burden is not dependent on someone's title. Rather, it lies with the person who is making the accusation. In this case it is you who is making the accusation, therefore it is up to you to provide the evidence. As the "scientist" I have extended the olive branch to you, affording you the opportunity to make your case. At this time all you have done is run. Perhaps instead of "denouncing" organizations like the NSCA, perhaps you should spend your time and experience helping them to correct their mistakes. This is not something that can be done through conjecture alone.

"How much do you bench?" Those words are spoken like a true meat head. How much someone benches does not have any relation to any discussion in reference to anatomy and physiology. Also, The term "heavy" is a relative concept. What you should be referencing is is the relative intensity of which someone "benches" not their absolute strength. This is a flawed argument.

As for my "emotional response" towards the swiss ball article, I can assure you that nothing I have said is "emotional". Your calling it so is nothing more than a deflection in order to distract away from the point. From reading the abstract, all the article stated was that 1RM force did not differ if it was performed on a swiss ball or if it were performed on a standard bench "after a familiarization period". It then concluded that there was no reason to include bench pressing on a swiss ball in your routine as it offered no additional benefits. If anything, I would suggest that your response to this article was nothing more than an emotional temper tantrum where you did nothing more than shout from the hilltops as you denounced the NSCA, without ever once taking the time to fully read the article as the mere mention of a swiss ball conflicts with your own world view.

[SumDumGoi]

Kyle Aaron,

since I am certain that Rippetoe will not post my response to you let me assure you that I have heard of this thing called a "library". I do not need to pay for any of the articles that I read. Perhaps if you would learn how to use the library on your own you will find out that you do have access to the same articles as well. Even though my library does not personally subscribe to the journals of the mentioned articles, I have sent out a request for them using interlibrary loan and I will be receiving an electronic copy of them shortly. I am guessing on Monday. I have sent in the request for them last night and don't expect to get an immediate response over the weekend. Just because you don't read does not mean that no one else does.

If you would like me to forward any of them to you please let me know and I can easily send you along a copy as well.

[SumDumGoi]

The point of all of this by the way is that if you do decide to go to startingstrength.com for information, or you choose to quote Rippetoe believing he is infallible, you might want to reconsider your position. How much of the full picture can you get if his typical response is to filter opposing viewpoints.

[sushi362]

The one thing i disagree with Rippetoe is...his GOMAD theory.

1. Its disgusting.

2. He himself posted pics of a kid he trained, with GOMAD. The kid went from skinny to fat and weak. 170 to 242, he cant bench BW for reps, he squats 335 for sets of 5 and i deadlift more than him.

3. He does censor other training methods, but maybe because he jsut wants money..

[SumDumGoi]

Actually, he just posted it. I am surprised.

[Farley1324]

The one thing i disagree with Rippetoe is...his GOMAD theory.

1. Its disgusting

Milk is good, mmmkay?

If you don't like milk then, well, GOMAD obviously is not for you. It isn't for everybody.

[sushi362]

Milk is good, mmmkay?

If you don't like milk then, well, GOMAD obviously is not for you. It isn't for everybody.

Dont get me wrong, i like milk, but too much of it fuks up your insulin levels. Once i got off of gomad and back on a healthy diet, i felt extremely lazy.

Will never do it again/10

[zephed56]

Dont get me wrong, i like milk, but too much of it fuks up your insulin levels. Once i got off of gomad and back on a healthy diet, i felt extremely lazy.

Will never do it again/10

lol wtffacepalm is this **** gtfo.

sumdumgoi,
lol.

[sushi362]

lol wtffacepalm is this **** gtfo.

sumdumgoi,
lol.

you must be one of rippletoad's nuthuggers, i presume?

[zephed56]

you must be one of rippletoad's nuthuggers, i presume?

Yes obviously, it has nothing to do with your brilliant logic and evidence.

[jb4476]

Dont get me wrong, i like milk, but too much of it fuks up your insulin levels. Once i got off of gomad and back on a healthy diet, i felt extremely lazy.

Will never do it again/10

...

That's a good thing, right?

[GuyJin]

I guess all of this means Rip ain't buyin' the beer for SDG...

[SumDumGoi]

I guess all of this means Rip ain't buyin' the beer for SDG...

I'm not sure if I could drink with Ripp anyway. I mean, how many white russians would I have to drink until I reached a gallon of milk?

[GuyJin]

I'm not sure if I could drink with Ripp anyway. I mean, how many white russians would I have to drink until I reached a gallon of milk?

------------

'Bout tree-fiddy...

(Don't be mad; you KNEW someone was going to post that answer).

[zephed56]

Oddly enough I don't think Rip embraces the drinking of white russians. Not very dude-like.

[zephed56]

and btw sdg, I was lolling at you because obviously yes rip screens posts and deletes **** that's stupid or is anything he doesn't want to be bothered with. His forum would look like the workout programs section if he didn't.

[SumDumGoi]

and btw sdg, I was lolling at you because obviously yes rip screens posts and deletes **** that's stupid or is anything he doesn't want to be bothered with. His forum would look like the workout programs section if he didn't.

If he doesn't want to be bothered by facts or confronted with evidence that says a lot. However, he finally did post it so all is good. Carry on.

[zephed56]

If he doesn't want to bother continuing an argument, he will usually just let the person have the last word and let it go through. I don't think he blocked any posts from lyle during the whole fiasco IIRC.

[nick.v]

Those are some really good points.

i guess he won't be taking you up on that research offer.

[AllDayGravy]

So what does he recommend for people who are lactose intolerant?

[whitneymmm]

So what does he recommend for people who are lactose intolerant?

Eat more.

Lol at this whole thread. I would just like to point out that you don't have to agree with everything someone says to acknowledge that their program works.

[Orlando1234977]

In another thread I was posting in here someone pointed out an article from T-Nation where Mark Rippetoe spouted off a lot of nonsense.

http://www.t-nation.com/free_online_...till_beginners

[ptwa9]

and btw sdg, I was lolling at you because obviously yes rip screens posts and deletes **** that's stupid or is anything he doesn't want to be bothered with. His forum would look like the workout programs section if he didn't.

He doesn't just get rid of trolling... he gets rid of anything that makes him look stupid. So he always wins every argument. Been there, done that. His forums are just to pretend he knows more than doctors, strength coaches, and exercise scientists. Cause he runs a gym.

[ptwa9]

I don't think he blocked any posts from lyle during the whole fiasco IIRC.

cliffs?

[Koaia]

The internet is supposed to be for porn. Wtf is this ****?

[Mode7]

The one thing i disagree with Rippetoe is...his GOMAD theory.

1. Its disgusting.

2. He himself posted pics of a kid he trained, with GOMAD. The kid went from skinny to fat and weak. 170 to 242, he cant bench BW for reps, he squats 335 for sets of 5 and i deadlift more than him.

3. He does censor other training methods, but maybe because he jsut wants money..

Worked for me, as did SS.

[AllDayGravy]

So does he still recommend starting strength for those of us who are older and are coming into it as obese. Cause if so the whole eating more thing wouldn't be happening.

Translation for certain types of beginners his program isn't best.

[AllDayGravy]

Just reading that article one thing is for sure

Rip is to strength training as Gironda was to bodybuilding

Two non pc mofos that know their ****.

[rdferguson]

So what does he recommend for people who are lactose intolerant?

Supplement with lactase.