Question on Isometric / Isotonic Exercises



On Mon, 20 Mar 2006 01:15:10 -0500, JMW
<[email protected]> wrote:


>
>You obviously don't read attributions to quotes, either. You were not
>responding to Lou Stein. You were responding to "Sid Bonfire" aka
>Bill Davidson. I have no reason to believe that Lou Stein is a troll,
>nor did I ever imply that he was.

On 3/19/06 (72 lines) I responded to Lou Stein. It's true I took
pains to incorporate the comment by Sid Bonfire. I thought Lou's
comments were interesting and I thought sid was making a sincere
attempt to respond to them. Both of their comments motivated me to
do a little research on isokinetics. Eventually I learned a little
something about this topic. That's all I ask for here. As a result
I'm thankful to the people involved. This includes sid bonfire, Lou
Stein, and you.
>
>>4. I don't think a troll is capable of destroying this NG. I
>> wouldn't even be mildly concerned if someone declared this to be
>> his/her intention.
>>
>> This NG was once simultaneously really annoying and very
>> educational. I decided to accept reading the asinine (and
>> occasionally funny) diatribes, ad hominem attacks, and
>> occasionally uninformed comments from the "regulars" as the cost
>> for being able to learn a lot of really useful stuff here.
>>
>> Most of these people have left and this NG is now nearly
>> dead. I hang around because it is my hope (if not quite my
>> expectation) that informed people will someday want to post here.
>> Besides, I like to lurk and post in other NGs and it's easy
>> enough to return here
>
>********. The exodus of most of the knowledgeable people can be
>traced to a few bitter bastards trolling them. That goes all the way
>back to Dan Duchaine. I've been here ten years and watched it happen.

I have no idea what you're saying "********" in response to. I said
the regulars left and you say they left because they were trolled. I
know there have been trolls here as long as I've been here and I agree
these guys and gals were trolled, but I don't know if that's the
entire answer. Perhaps they felt they could find more like-minded
folks to interact with on other (monitored) boards, even if they had
to create these boards themselves.


>>The whole effort in this NG to portray someone as a troll theme is
>>really lame and way overplayed. I could give a rat's ass who anyone
>>here thinks is a troll. I'll make up my own mind who shouldn't get
>>the time of day.
>
>You spend most of your time kissing up to Steve Friedes, so why should
>I be concerned? Carry on.

I know Steve and respect his accomplishments. We share an interest in
kettlebells and Tsatsouline's work. (The difference is that he
actually uses kettlebells and tries to apply Tsatsouline's teachings.)
When he posts, it's almost always OT. You, on the other hand,
occasionally have something interesting to say, but spend waaaaay too
much time, IMHO, on trying to identify "trolls." You are not largely
responsible for the deterioration of this NG (whatever your detractors
might say), but this whole "troll" business is really played out,
don't you think? Why not let your detractors jabber on while you
ignore them? Let the people who are reading stuff here decide who is
what and just stick to making useful and/or interesting comments.
 
On Mon, 20 Mar 2006 12:03:44 GMT, [email protected] wrote:

>On 3/19/06 (72 lines) I responded to Lou Stein. It's true I took
>pains to incorporate the comment by Sid Bonfire. I thought Lou's
>comments were interesting and I thought sid was making a sincere
>attempt to respond to them. Both of their comments motivated me to
>do a little research on isokinetics. Eventually I learned a little
>something about this topic. That's all I ask for here. As a result
>I'm thankful to the people involved. This includes sid bonfire, Lou
>Stein, and you.

The moron thinks Lou Stein is me. He's gotten so bad, that he's
"seeing Bills" at every corner.
 
On Sun, 19 Mar 2006 23:04:37 -0600, <[email protected]> wrote:



>Well thanks for the info guys. If I'm a troll then I'm a pretty lousy one
>because the question wasn't really controversial, and I didn't respond to the
>flame bait. I just knew this group had a bunch of steller knowledgable people
>on it a few years ago. I'm really sorry to hear it's declined since then.
>Maybe I'll need to find out where all the good people went.

I'm sorry if you were characterized as a troll. I enjoyed reading your
comments and questions.

If you're looking for a much better board, I'd recommend checking out
the "Good Boards" section at http://home.comcast.net/~joandbryce/

Given your interests in high tension movements and how these can be
applied to lifting, I'd recommend that you check out the kettlebells,
strength and conditioning forum at
http://forum.dragondoor.com/training/
You'll find a lot of people who use kettlebells and barbells there.
You'll also find lots of martial artists. Tsatsouline's business
partner is a Tai Chi guy named John Du Cane. You can read his
articles at
http://www.dragondoor.com/articler/mode2/Tai_Chi_AND_Qigong
and check out the Qigong and Tai Chi resources at
http://www.dragondoor.com/qigong/


>
>FYI - I think the closest thing I'm looking for so far is Tai-Chi because that
>has (can have) high tension movement. That's really my focus... any research
>or system or philosophy of movement that incorporates high tension movements
>where both a muscle and it's antagonist is contracting (regardless of whether
>it's shortening or lengthening), along with any terminology that has been used
>specifically to describe this situation.
>
>Another reference I found is that Weider would flex his muscles while lifting
>but I can't find that one right now maybe I'll dig it up later.
>
>Regards,
>Lou Stein
 
On Mon, 20 Mar 2006 08:53:42 +0000, JRH <[email protected]> wrote in
misc.fitness.weights:

>On Mon, 20 Mar 2006 01:15:10 -0500, JMW
><[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>[email protected] wrote:
>>
>>>On Sun, 19 Mar 2006 22:25:26 -0500, JMW
>>><[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>>How very magnanimous of you. And you were hoping for a useful answer
>>>>from someone whose stated goal is the destruction of this newsgroup?
>>>>Perhaps we should call you Pollyanna.
>>>
>>>1. I really don't try to track trolls or the people you call trolls.
>>>2. Before this thread I don't think I've read anything by "Lou Stein"
>>>3. I don't compare headers to try to figure out which mask a troll
>>> is wearing now.
>>
>>You obviously don't read attributions to quotes, either. You were not
>>responding to Lou Stein. You were responding to "Sid Bonfire" aka
>>Bill Davidson. I have no reason to believe that Lou Stein is a troll,
>>nor did I ever imply that he was.
>>
>>>4. I don't think a troll is capable of destroying this NG. I
>>> wouldn't even be mildly concerned if someone declared this to be
>>> his/her intention.
>>>
>>> This NG was once simultaneously really annoying and very
>>> educational. I decided to accept reading the asinine (and
>>> occasionally funny) diatribes, ad hominem attacks, and
>>> occasionally uninformed comments from the "regulars" as the cost
>>> for being able to learn a lot of really useful stuff here.
>>>
>>> Most of these people have left and this NG is now nearly
>>> dead. I hang around because it is my hope (if not quite my
>>> expectation) that informed people will someday want to post here.
>>> Besides, I like to lurk and post in other NGs and it's easy
>>> enough to return here
>>
>>********. The exodus of most of the knowledgeable people can be
>>traced to a few bitter bastards trolling them. That goes all the way
>>back to Dan Duchaine. I've been here ten years and watched it happen.
>
>You were the root cause of all the upset here John Williams, with your
>"trolling" and "stalking" against those whom you considered
>interlopers here.
>
>Those that weren't involved with your "trolling" simply got fed up
>with all the flak you attracted to the NG, and buggered off. this
>group will never recover all the while you are here policing it and
>"prosecuting" people...

No, it was you, the Oz, Curt and Davidson that drove everyone away. It
was really you and the Oz for the most part as most people left long
before Curt and Davidson ever showed up here.
 
John Hanson <[email protected]> wrote:

>On Mon, 20 Mar 2006 08:53:42 +0000, JRH <[email protected]> wrote in
>misc.fitness.weights:
>
>>On Mon, 20 Mar 2006 01:15:10 -0500, JMW
>><[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>>[email protected] wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Sun, 19 Mar 2006 22:25:26 -0500, JMW
>>>><[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>How very magnanimous of you. And you were hoping for a useful answer
>>>>>from someone whose stated goal is the destruction of this newsgroup?
>>>>>Perhaps we should call you Pollyanna.
>>>>
>>>>1. I really don't try to track trolls or the people you call trolls.
>>>>2. Before this thread I don't think I've read anything by "Lou Stein"
>>>>3. I don't compare headers to try to figure out which mask a troll
>>>> is wearing now.
>>>
>>>You obviously don't read attributions to quotes, either. You were not
>>>responding to Lou Stein. You were responding to "Sid Bonfire" aka
>>>Bill Davidson. I have no reason to believe that Lou Stein is a troll,
>>>nor did I ever imply that he was.
>>>
>>>>4. I don't think a troll is capable of destroying this NG. I
>>>> wouldn't even be mildly concerned if someone declared this to be
>>>> his/her intention.
>>>>
>>>> This NG was once simultaneously really annoying and very
>>>> educational. I decided to accept reading the asinine (and
>>>> occasionally funny) diatribes, ad hominem attacks, and
>>>> occasionally uninformed comments from the "regulars" as the cost
>>>> for being able to learn a lot of really useful stuff here.
>>>>
>>>> Most of these people have left and this NG is now nearly
>>>> dead. I hang around because it is my hope (if not quite my
>>>> expectation) that informed people will someday want to post here.
>>>> Besides, I like to lurk and post in other NGs and it's easy
>>>> enough to return here
>>>
>>>********. The exodus of most of the knowledgeable people can be
>>>traced to a few bitter bastards trolling them. That goes all the way
>>>back to Dan Duchaine. I've been here ten years and watched it happen.
>>
>>You were the root cause of all the upset here John Williams, with your
>>"trolling" and "stalking" against those whom you considered
>>interlopers here.
>>
>>Those that weren't involved with your "trolling" simply got fed up
>>with all the flak you attracted to the NG, and buggered off. this
>>group will never recover all the while you are here policing it and
>>"prosecuting" people...
>
>No, it was you, the Oz, Curt and Davidson that drove everyone away. It
>was really you and the Oz for the most part as most people left long
>before Curt and Davidson ever showed up here.

And several have specifically stated as much.
 
On Mon, 20 Mar 2006 05:16:37 GMT, "David Cohen"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>
>"JMW" <[email protected]> wrote
>> [email protected] wrote:
>>>JMW <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>>>You're asking that question of The Troll. Are you expecting an
>>>>informed answer?
>
>>>Sometimes a subject is interesting regardless of who's asking or
>>>commenting. In such cases, I might get involved. I try not to forget
>>>there's a bunch of lurkers out there as well as active posters who
>>>have something interesting to contribute. I try to avoid pointless
>>>name-calling for its own sake.
>>
>> How very magnanimous of you. And you were hoping for a useful answer
>> from someone whose stated goal is the destruction of this newsgroup?
>> Perhaps we should call you Pollyanna.
>
>I would probably dislike The Troll more, but he DOES have that Pinky
>sidekick. I really like Pinky.
>
>David

And someday they might take over this NG and The World!

Have you seen an episode of the new series Minoriteam (Cartoon
Network's late-night "Adult Swim" block)? I haven't, but it sounds
kinda funny.


New York Times
March 18, 2006
Satirical Superheroes for the Rude Set
By LOLA OGUNNAIKE

They don't leap tall buildings in a single bound or scale skyscrapers.
They don't transform into not-so-jolly green giants or zoom around in
tricked-out sportsmobiles. Instead, Minoriteam - a motley band of
minority superheroes - uses stereotypes to fight their archenemy:
racism.

Created by Adam de la Peña, Todd James and Peter Girardi - all alumni
of the ribald Comedy Central puppet series "Crank Yankers" -
"Minoriteam" is a provocative animated show that sends up bigotry. It
makes its debut tomorrow night on Cartoon Network's late-night "Adult
Swim" block of animated shows for viewers who have outgrown the Disney
Channel.

Having found success with "The Boondocks," the animated series based
on Aaron McGruder's comic strip that takes a satirical look at race
and class in America, Mike Lazzo, the network's senior vice president
for "Adult Swim," said he was more than willing to invest in another
show with a distinctive voice on issues. "I think television is well
served by social commentary, especially if you can make it feel like
it's not a lesson that's being slammed over someone's head."

Metropolis had Superman. Gotham City had Batman. And Corporate City
has Minoriteam:

The team's leader, Dr. ****, is an Asian, wheelchair-bound
mathematical genius with a freakishly large brain. He speaks with a
heavy Chinese accent and is in the laundry business.

Non-Stop is the alter ego of Dave Raj, an Indian, former professional
skateboarder turned convenience store clerk who is incapable of being
killed by firearms. After having been shot 235 times during various
attempted robberies, his skin is saturated with lead, which serves as
a bulletproof armor of sorts; when necessary, his skateboard morphs
into a flying carpet.

Landon K. Dutton, a black man awkwardly teaching women's studies at
Male University, turns into Fasto, the world's fastest man. His
extreme rage propels him to travel at breakneck speeds. When not
fighting crime he spends his time "studying" the opposite sex; during
one episode, it takes him only seconds to satisfy a roomful of Thai
prostitutes.

Richard Escartin, a Mexican oil baron, trades his tailored suits and
silk ties for a giant sombrero and a leaf blower when he becomes El
Jefe, Minoriteam's hardest working member. El Jefe's blower is no
ordinary garden tool. It can suck and blow with deadly force and rip
holes through time and space. His kryptonite? Tequila. "I think a lot
of people can relate to that," Mr. de la Peña said.

Neil Horvitz may be a wimpy mail clerk in his early 20's, but his
alter ego, Jewcano, is a muscle-bound 62-year-old who sports an XXXL
yarmulke and has all the power of the Jewish faith and a raging
volcano. Watch him shoot molten lava from his wrists (move over,
Spider-Man).

The multiethnic crew battles a gang of villains including the
sniveling Corporate Ladder (an anthropomorphized ladder with a cape
and a pipe), Racist Frankenstein (a bigoted monster) and Standardized
Test, whose head is shaped like a No. 2 pencil and whose body
resembles a Scantron test. White Shadow, the bad guys' bumbling
leader, has a head that looks eerily like the pyramid found on the
back of a dollar bill. He spews nonsensical corporate-speak, using
words like "synergy" and phrases like "Let's all get on the same
page."

"He's an amalgam of a thousand morons that we've all dealt with in our
lives, starting with the lackey at the D.M.V. and all the way up to
**** Cheney," Mr. Girardi said. "Shooting your friend in the face is
totally something White Shadow would do and Corporate Ladder would be
like, 'Boss, I'm sorry my face got in the way of your gun.' " For
recreation, the villains enjoy a nice relaxing game of Oligarchy or a
racist version of Scrabble.

In one episode White Shadow and his minions travel back in time to
destroy the accomplishments of minorities throughout history. Another
episode finds Minoriteam on trial in a parallel universe. Their crime?
Not being racist. And during the season opener, White Shadow, bothered
by the rising power of black-owned business, kidnaps Sebastian
Jefferson, a prominent African-American mogul. Grape-soda factories
and soul food restaurants immediately close.

But it will take more than playing the race card for this show to
succeed, Mr. Lazzo acknowledged. "You have to empathize with the
characters," he said. "If the characters aren't interesting, then it
will be a one-trick pony and it won't last because our audience will
suss that out in a few weeks."

The creators have braced themselves for negative feedback. Surely
someone will be uncomfortable watching a Jewish superhero get aroused
while chasing a giant glowing nickel, they said. "But who exactly will
it offend?" Mr. de la Peña asked. "I have no idea. We're really
targeting Eskimos."

Unlike "The Boondocks," which is drawn in a sophisticated anime style,
"Minoriteam" is crudely drawn and the show's color palette is limited
to those available for comic-book printing in the 1960's, Mr. Girardi
said.

"It's not a true animated show," he said, "it's more like a moving
comic book, moving very little actually, which is on purpose. Using
that style of animation is part of the humor. But we're not parodying
those cartoons or cheap animation. We actually really love cheap
animation."

The three self-professed comic-book junkies happily recall many an
afternoon spent at their favorite local comic-book stores. "Mine was
named Comic Book Castle and it was not a castle," Mr. de la Peña said.
"It was run by a lunatic man who had a parrot on his shoulder that
didn't talk, so it might as well have been a pigeon."

Based in Hollywood, their headquarters is a veritable shrine to Jack
Kirby, the comic artist whose résumé included such iconic characters
as Captain America, the Fantastic Four, the X-Men, and the Incredible
Hulk. Kirby's work fills the cramped office the animators share, and
each can discuss the legendary illustrator's contributions to the
world of comics in exhaustive detail. "I think that's why we get along
so much, because we don't have hierarchal distinctions between fine
art and vernacular art," Mr. Girardi said. "To us good is good and
Kirby is right up there with Picasso."

Mr. Girardi and Mr. James have known each other since they were
adolescent graffiti artists, altering subway trains and abandoned
buildings around New York City. "We expressed our youthful rage
through urban artistry," Mr. Girardi joked.

Mr. de la Peña, a fourth-generation Mexican-American, was raised in a
racially diverse community in Orange County, Calif. He has been a
staff writer for "The Man Show" and "Jimmy Kimmel Live" and he
co-starred in the 2003 Comedy Central series, "I'm With Busey," a
reality show involving the actor Gary Busey.

Mr. Girardi's background is in digital media design. In addition to
his "Minoriteam" work, he still runs Funny Garbage, the design company
he started more than a decade ago. Mr. James has created logos for
rappers like Eminem, Red Man and the Beastie Boys, and he was the
puppet designer for "Crank Yankers."

Coming episodes of "Minoriteam" will poke fun at the Internal Revenue
Service, illegal aliens and an assortment of conspiracy theories. But
Mr. James said, "We're not sitting around and saying, 'Man, we've got
to talk about this 'cause it's heavy.' That's not our m.o. It's about
justice and condemnation of everyone for everyone."
 
<[email protected]> wrote
> "David Cohen" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>"JMW" <[email protected]> wrote
>>> [email protected] wrote:
>>>>JMW <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>>>>You're asking that question of The Troll. Are you expecting an
>>>>>informed answer?
>>
>>>>Sometimes a subject is interesting regardless of who's asking or
>>>>commenting. In such cases, I might get involved. I try not to forget
>>>>there's a bunch of lurkers out there as well as active posters who
>>>>have something interesting to contribute. I try to avoid pointless
>>>>name-calling for its own sake.
>>>
>>> How very magnanimous of you. And you were hoping for a useful answer
>>> from someone whose stated goal is the destruction of this newsgroup?
>>> Perhaps we should call you Pollyanna.
>>
>>I would probably dislike The Troll more, but he DOES have that Pinky
>>sidekick. I really like Pinky.
>
> And someday they might take over this NG and The World!
>
> Have you seen an episode of the new series Minoriteam (Cartoon
> Network's late-night "Adult Swim" block)? I haven't, but it sounds
> kinda funny.

I haven't. There are a few of CN's "Alult Swim" that are pretty funny, in an
adult "I can't believe they're doing and saying that" way. The Ambiguously
Gay Superhereos are pretty hysterical.

But none is as well written, or just plain as brilliant, as Animaniacs and
all the associated 'toons, like Goodfeathers, or Pinky and the Brain.

David
 
On Mon, 20 Mar 2006 12:03:44 GMT, [email protected] wrote:

>On Mon, 20 Mar 2006 01:15:10 -0500, JMW
><[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>>
>>You obviously don't read attributions to quotes, either. You were not
>>responding to Lou Stein. You were responding to "Sid Bonfire" aka
>>Bill Davidson. I have no reason to believe that Lou Stein is a troll,
>>nor did I ever imply that he was.
>
>On 3/19/06 (72 lines) I responded to Lou Stein. It's true I took
>pains to incorporate the comment by Sid Bonfire. I thought Lou's
>comments were interesting and I thought sid was making a sincere
>attempt to respond to them. Both of their comments motivated me to
>do a little research on isokinetics. Eventually I learned a little
>something about this topic. That's all I ask for here. As a result
>I'm thankful to the people involved. This includes sid bonfire, Lou
>Stein, and you.
>>
>>>4. I don't think a troll is capable of destroying this NG. I
>>> wouldn't even be mildly concerned if someone declared this to be
>>> his/her intention.
>>>
>>> This NG was once simultaneously really annoying and very
>>> educational. I decided to accept reading the asinine (and
>>> occasionally funny) diatribes, ad hominem attacks, and
>>> occasionally uninformed comments from the "regulars" as the cost
>>> for being able to learn a lot of really useful stuff here.
>>>
>>> Most of these people have left and this NG is now nearly
>>> dead. I hang around because it is my hope (if not quite my
>>> expectation) that informed people will someday want to post here.
>>> Besides, I like to lurk and post in other NGs and it's easy
>>> enough to return here
>>
>>********. The exodus of most of the knowledgeable people can be
>>traced to a few bitter bastards trolling them. That goes all the way
>>back to Dan Duchaine. I've been here ten years and watched it happen.
>
>I have no idea what you're saying "********" in response to. I said
>the regulars left and you say they left because they were trolled. I
>know there have been trolls here as long as I've been here and I agree
>these guys and gals were trolled, but I don't know if that's the
>entire answer. Perhaps they felt they could find more like-minded
>folks to interact with on other (monitored) boards, even if they had
>to create these boards themselves.
>
>
>>>The whole effort in this NG to portray someone as a troll theme is
>>>really lame and way overplayed. I could give a rat's ass who anyone
>>>here thinks is a troll. I'll make up my own mind who shouldn't get
>>>the time of day.
>>
>>You spend most of your time kissing up to Steve Friedes, so why should
>>I be concerned? Carry on.
>
>I know Steve and respect his accomplishments. We share an interest in
>kettlebells and Tsatsouline's work. (The difference is that he
>actually uses kettlebells and tries to apply Tsatsouline's teachings.)
>When he posts, it's almost always OT. You, on the other hand,
>occasionally have something interesting to say, but spend waaaaay too
>much time, IMHO, on trying to identify "trolls." You are not largely
>responsible for the deterioration of this NG (whatever your detractors
>might say), but this whole "troll" business is really played out,
>don't you think? Why not let your detractors jabber on while you
>ignore them? Let the people who are reading stuff here decide who is
>what and just stick to making useful and/or interesting comments.

That's very good advice Old Man, but he will ignore it as he is
deranged enough to think he is providing a service to the group.

The next thing that will happen is that you will find yourself on his
ridiculous "troll" list for disagreeing with him. ;o)
 
[email protected] wrote:
>On Sun, 19 Mar 2006 23:04:37 -0600, <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>
>>Well thanks for the info guys. If I'm a troll then I'm a pretty lousy one
>>because the question wasn't really controversial, and I didn't respond to the
>>flame bait. I just knew this group had a bunch of steller knowledgable
>>people
>>on it a few years ago. I'm really sorry to hear it's declined since then.
>>Maybe I'll need to find out where all the good people went.
>
>I'm sorry if you were characterized as a troll. I enjoyed reading your
>comments and questions.
>
>If you're looking for a much better board, I'd recommend checking out
>the "Good Boards" section at http://home.comcast.net/~joandbryce/

No problems mate! Appreciate the feedback!

>Given your interests in high tension movements and how these can be
>applied to lifting, I'd recommend that you check out the kettlebells,
>strength and conditioning forum at
>http://forum.dragondoor.com/training/
>You'll find a lot of people who use kettlebells and barbells there.
>You'll also find lots of martial artists. Tsatsouline's business
>partner is a Tai Chi guy named John Du Cane. You can read his
>articles at
>http://www.dragondoor.com/articler/mode2/Tai_Chi_AND_Qigong
>and check out the Qigong and Tai Chi resources at
>http://www.dragondoor.com/qigong/

Very good - funny you mentioned it because I'm reading a lot of Tsatousline
stuff now.
 
JMW <[email protected]> wrote:
><[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>Well thanks for the info guys. If I'm a troll then I'm a pretty lousy one
>>because the question wasn't really controversial, and I didn't respond to the
>>flame bait.
>
>I didn't call you a troll. I was referring to the dimwit who defined
>your description as "isokinetic." He hasn't a clue and was just
>making a stupid statement to draw fire.
>
>>I just knew this group had a bunch of steller knowledgable people
>>on it a few years ago. I'm really sorry to hear it's declined since then.
>>Maybe I'll need to find out where all the good people went.
>>
>>FYI - I think the closest thing I'm looking for so far is Tai-Chi because
>>that
>>has (can have) high tension movement. That's really my focus... any research
>>or system or philosophy of movement that incorporates high tension movements
>>where both a muscle and it's antagonist is contracting (regardless of whether
>>it's shortening or lengthening), along with any terminology that has been
>>used
>>specifically to describe this situation.
>
>Perhaps you could say what you didn't like about my answer?
>
>>Another reference I found is that Weider would flex his muscles while lifting
>>but I can't find that one right now maybe I'll dig it up later.
>
>The classic is the concentration curl where one would "squeeze" at the
>top of the movement. I have not read any research that indicates such
>an action signficantly increases strength or hypertrophy, although
>some folks swear by it. If you're desperate for a term, try
>"isometric hold." I've used it occasionally, and I think you'll find
>many in MFW have used the same term. Google is your friend.

Thanks man. Yah Google is my bestest buddy.
 
On Mon, 20 Mar 2006 13:47:05 GMT, "David Cohen"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>
><[email protected]> wrote

>> Have you seen an episode of the new series Minoriteam (Cartoon
>> Network's late-night "Adult Swim" block)? I haven't, but it sounds
>> kinda funny.
>
>I haven't. There are a few of CN's "Alult Swim" that are pretty funny, in an
>adult "I can't believe they're doing and saying that" way. The Ambiguously
>Gay Superhereos are pretty hysterical.
>
>But none is as well written, or just plain as brilliant, as Animaniacs and
>all the associated 'toons, like Goodfeathers, or Pinky and the Brain.
>
>David

Southpark is the epitome of "I can't believe they're doing and saying
that". Ya hear the cook (Isaac Hayes) left because SP mocked
scientology? Hayes said mocking religion offends him. Oh yeah, it
must've been hard to collect paychecks when SP was slicing and dicing
other religions. And Tom Cruise has gone to the network brass because
of SP's digs at scientology. Apparently, he's not going to promote
his new movie if a certain episode airs or if it appears on a DVD. (I
forget what the episode is called In the Closet or Out of the Closet"
or something like that.
 
On Mon, 20 Mar 2006 14:54:16 +0000, JRH <[email protected]> wrote:

>On Mon, 20 Mar 2006 12:03:44 GMT, [email protected] wrote:
>> <snip> this whole "troll" business is really played out,
>>don't you think? Why not let your detractors jabber on while you
>>ignore them? Let the people who are reading stuff here decide who is
>>what and just stick to making useful and/or interesting comments.


>
>That's very good advice Old Man, but he will ignore it as he is
>deranged enough to think he is providing a service to the group.
>
>The next thing that will happen is that you will find yourself on his
>ridiculous "troll" list for disagreeing with him. ;o)

My comments apply to you as well. You think you are providing a
service to this NG by claiming to be holding up a mirror to John
Williams?

Williams at least posts on-topic some of the time. I appreciated his
recent clarification of isokinetics.

I don't give a **** what list I'm on or off. I'm content to allow
people to read what I write and make up their own minds.

Most of the folks who gave you a hard time aren't here anymore.
Why not use this opportunity to post useful, interesting material
instead of trying to even some kind of childish score? I couldn't
give a rat's ass as to who the hell is "the bigger troll" or the
primary culprit behind the deterioration of this NG.

Post interesting material. Ask interesting questions.
Provide helpful replies. Say funny things.

At least in the "good/bad old days" ad hominem attacks were typically
accompanied by some of the above.
 
<[email protected]> wrote:
>[email protected] wrote:
>>On Sun, 19 Mar 2006 22:25:26 -0500, JMW
>><[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>>How very magnanimous of you. And you were hoping for a useful answer
>>>from someone whose stated goal is the destruction of this newsgroup?
>>>Perhaps we should call you Pollyanna.
>>
>>1. I really don't try to track trolls or the people you call trolls.
>>2. Before this thread I don't think I've read anything by "Lou Stein"
>>3. I don't compare headers to try to figure out which mask a troll
>> is wearing now.
>>4. I don't think a troll is capable of destroying this NG. I
>> wouldn't even be mildly concerned if someone declared this to be
>> his/her intention.
>>
>> This NG was once simultaneously really annoying and very
>> educational. I decided to accept reading the asinine (and
>> occasionally funny) diatribes, ad hominem attacks, and
>> occasionally uninformed comments from the "regulars" as the cost
>> for being able to learn a lot of really useful stuff here.
>>
>> Most of these people have left and this NG is now nearly
>> dead. I hang around because it is my hope (if not quite my
>> expectation) that informed people will someday want to post here.
>> Besides, I like to lurk and post in other NGs and it's easy
>> enough to return here
>>
>> According to Wikipedia, through the success of the 1913 book
>>Pollyanna by Eleanor Porter, "the term 'pollyanna' entered the
>>language to describe someone who is cheerfully optimistic. It then
>>became by extension (and contrary to the spirit of the book) a
>>somewhat derogatory term for a naïve person who always expects people
>>to act decently, despite strong evidence to the contrary."
>>
>>If I knew that "Lou Stein" was a troll, I wouldn't expect him
>>to act decently. I might respond anyway because this might
>>get informed non-trolls involved. If not, I'd quickly figure it out
>>and stop posting to that thread.
>>
>>The whole effort in this NG to portray someone as a troll theme is
>>really lame and way overplayed. I could give a rat's ass who anyone
>>here thinks is a troll. I'll make up my own mind who shouldn't get
>>the time of day.
>
>Well thanks for the info guys. If I'm a troll then I'm a pretty lousy one
>because the question wasn't really controversial, and I didn't respond to the
>flame bait. I just knew this group had a bunch of steller knowledgable people
>on it a few years ago. I'm really sorry to hear it's declined since then.
>Maybe I'll need to find out where all the good people went.
>
>FYI - I think the closest thing I'm looking for so far is Tai-Chi because that
>has (can have) high tension movement. That's really my focus... any research
>or system or philosophy of movement that incorporates high tension movements
>where both a muscle and it's antagonist is contracting (regardless of whether
>it's shortening or lengthening), along with any terminology that has been used
>specifically to describe this situation.
>
>Another reference I found is that Weider would flex his muscles while lifting
>but I can't find that one right now maybe I'll dig it up later.
>
>Regards,
>Lou Stein
>

FYI I found another reference "tension kata" explains what I'm after, except
without the breath
tension because that causes increased cranial pressure.
 
On Mon, 20 Mar 2006 17:11:12 GMT, [email protected] wrote:

>On Mon, 20 Mar 2006 14:54:16 +0000, JRH <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>On Mon, 20 Mar 2006 12:03:44 GMT, [email protected] wrote:
>>> <snip> this whole "troll" business is really played out,
>>>don't you think? Why not let your detractors jabber on while you
>>>ignore them? Let the people who are reading stuff here decide who is
>>>what and just stick to making useful and/or interesting comments.
>
>
>>
>>That's very good advice Old Man, but he will ignore it as he is
>>deranged enough to think he is providing a service to the group.
>>
>>The next thing that will happen is that you will find yourself on his
>>ridiculous "troll" list for disagreeing with him. ;o)
>
>My comments apply to you as well. You think you are providing a
>service to this NG by claiming to be holding up a mirror to John
>Williams?
>
>Williams at least posts on-topic some of the time. I appreciated his
>recent clarification of isokinetics.
>
>I don't give a **** what list I'm on or off. I'm content to allow
>people to read what I write and make up their own minds.
>
>Most of the folks who gave you a hard time aren't here anymore.
>Why not use this opportunity to post useful, interesting material
>instead of trying to even some kind of childish score? I couldn't
>give a rat's ass as to who the hell is "the bigger troll" or the
>primary culprit behind the deterioration of this NG.
>
>Post interesting material. Ask interesting questions.
>Provide helpful replies. Say funny things.
>
>At least in the "good/bad old days" ad hominem attacks were typically
>accompanied by some of the above.
>

The points you raise are very valid, and I am aware of my own
shortcomings which largely revolve around obstinacy and tenacity, to
the point of excluding all else, if I feel I have been treated badly.

Unfortunately, I tend to be bored with what little 'on-topic' posts
arrive here now, given that it is almost always old ground being
covered, and if they do arrive Williams leaps on them and either gives
the OP a kick in the bollocks, or starts airing his knowledge in
un-necessary lengthy and complicated manner.

As far as humour is concerned, the life has gone out of this group and
I need something or someone to bounce off. David the Oz doesn't appear
often these days, and Cohen seems to be suffering the same way I am.

If the few 'long-termers' that are left don't like each other very
much, then the motive and opportunity to entertain are very limited.

It is a great shame, as I have laughed until my sides have been aching
with some of the posts to this Group over the years.
 
On Mon, 20 Mar 2006 13:47:05 GMT, "David Cohen"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>I haven't. There are a few of CN's "Alult Swim" that are pretty funny, in an
>adult "I can't believe they're doing and saying that" way. The Ambiguously
>Gay Superhereos are pretty hysterical.
>

They came from the best comedy series to ever NOT run on network TV.
It was called "TV Funhouse" with Doug and his pals. There has never
been, and never will be, such a funny TV show on ever again. If you've
seen it you'll say "I agree" or "I just don't get it".
 
"JRH" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Sun, 19 Mar 2006 19:31:35 -0500, JMW
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>[email protected] wrote:
>>
>>>On Sun, 19 Mar 2006 10:11:49 -0600, Lou Stein <[email protected]>
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>>I have a question on what this particular exercise is called:
>>>>
>>>>Like when you tense up opposing muscles so your arm doesn't move so you
>>>>can
>>>>show off your biceps. It's like isometrics, but you aren't pushing
>>>>against an
>>>>object and you aren't pushing against your own hands. You are using
>>>>your own
>>>>muscles to do isometrics. Is there a special name for this? Other than
>>>>"flexing" ; )
>>>>
>>>>Ok now take that same concept of flexing, except you move through your
>>>>entire
>>>>range of motion. How would one categorize this specifically?
>>>>Isometric?
>>>>Isotonic? Isokinetic?
>>>>
>>>>Another form of this exercise is flexing while lifting. That is, to
>>>>flex your
>>>>muscles while lifting in order to gain more conscious control of the
>>>>muscle
>>>>contraction.
>>>>
>>>>Are there any books/videos/research that discuss this?
>>>>
>>>>Thanks,
>>>>Lou Stein
>>>
>>>On Sun, 19 Mar 2006 10:11:49 -0600, Lou Stein <[email protected]>
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>>I have a question on what this particular exercise is called:
>>>>
>>>>Like when you tense up opposing muscles so your arm doesn't move so you
>>>>can
>>>>show off your biceps. It's like isometrics, but you aren't pushing
>>>>against an
>>>>object and you aren't pushing against your own hands. You are using
>>>>your own
>>>>muscles to do isometrics. Is there a special name for this? Other than
>>>>"flexing" ; )
>>>>
>>>>Ok now take that same concept of flexing, except you move through your
>>>>entire
>>>>range of motion. How would one categorize this specifically?
>>>>Isometric?
>>>>Isotonic? Isokinetic?
>>>>
>>>>Another form of this exercise is flexing while lifting. That is, to
>>>>flex your
>>>>muscles while lifting in order to gain more conscious control of the
>>>>muscle
>>>>contraction.
>>>>
>>>>Are there any books/videos/research that discuss this?
>>>>
>>>>Thanks,
>>>>Lou Stein
>>>
>>>"Sid Bonfire" replied:
>>>"It's called isokinetic exercise.It's like isometric but with
>>>movement."
>>>
>>>Maybe I'll learn something here.
>>>
>>>I Googled this very briefly and came across two different descriptions
>>>of isokinetic. One involves contracting and shortening the muscle at
>>>constant speed. The other is sometimes called "accommodating
>>>resistance exercise" and entails maximum muscle contraction throughout
>>>the full range of joint movement. "Resistance is variable in
>>>proportion to the change in muscular capability at every point in the
>>>range of motion. The variation is controlled so that at all times it
>>>equals the product of the muscular strength." In either case, it
>>>seems that machines (Norm, Cybex) are needed to do it.
>>>
>>>I'm not exactly sure why this has been touted as
>>>"the fastest way to increase muscle strength".
>>> http://www.brianmac.demon.co.uk/mustrain.htm
>>>
>>>Isn't "flexing while lifting" another way to describe getting and
>>>staying "tight" while lifting? So why is moving a free weight through
>>>a full range of motion while staying tight a less efficient method of
>>>gaining strength than using machines to do isokinetic exercises?
>>
>>You're asking that question of The Troll. Are you expecting an
>>informed answer?
>
> Everyone is a "troll" except those who the "Trollmeister" likes to
> exclude, which is precious few! ;o)
>
> Ugh! It's Monday! ;o(

This has been the most exciting thread to come out of this group in weeks.
(Sad)
 
On Mon, 20 Mar 2006 14:54:16 +0000, JRH <[email protected]> wrote:

> but he will ignore it as he is
>deranged enough to think he is providing a service to the group.

Well he is, to me at least. His troll faq keeps me up on just what it
is I'm doing wrong.
 
On Mon, 20 Mar 2006 11:18:52 -0600, Lou Stein <[email protected]>
wrote:


>FYI I found another reference "tension kata" explains what I'm after, except
>without the breath
> tension because that causes increased cranial pressure.

Where did you find the reference?
 
On Tue, 21 Mar 2006 03:47:29 +1000, "David" <[email protected]>
wrote:

>
>"JRH" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]...
>> On Sun, 19 Mar 2006 19:31:35 -0500, JMW
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>>[email protected] wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Sun, 19 Mar 2006 10:11:49 -0600, Lou Stein <[email protected]>
>>>>wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>I have a question on what this particular exercise is called:
>>>>>
>>>>>Like when you tense up opposing muscles so your arm doesn't move so you
>>>>>can
>>>>>show off your biceps. It's like isometrics, but you aren't pushing
>>>>>against an
>>>>>object and you aren't pushing against your own hands. You are using
>>>>>your own
>>>>>muscles to do isometrics. Is there a special name for this? Other than
>>>>>"flexing" ; )
>>>>>
>>>>>Ok now take that same concept of flexing, except you move through your
>>>>>entire
>>>>>range of motion. How would one categorize this specifically?
>>>>>Isometric?
>>>>>Isotonic? Isokinetic?
>>>>>
>>>>>Another form of this exercise is flexing while lifting. That is, to
>>>>>flex your
>>>>>muscles while lifting in order to gain more conscious control of the
>>>>>muscle
>>>>>contraction.
>>>>>
>>>>>Are there any books/videos/research that discuss this?
>>>>>
>>>>>Thanks,
>>>>>Lou Stein
>>>>
>>>>On Sun, 19 Mar 2006 10:11:49 -0600, Lou Stein <[email protected]>
>>>>wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>I have a question on what this particular exercise is called:
>>>>>
>>>>>Like when you tense up opposing muscles so your arm doesn't move so you
>>>>>can
>>>>>show off your biceps. It's like isometrics, but you aren't pushing
>>>>>against an
>>>>>object and you aren't pushing against your own hands. You are using
>>>>>your own
>>>>>muscles to do isometrics. Is there a special name for this? Other than
>>>>>"flexing" ; )
>>>>>
>>>>>Ok now take that same concept of flexing, except you move through your
>>>>>entire
>>>>>range of motion. How would one categorize this specifically?
>>>>>Isometric?
>>>>>Isotonic? Isokinetic?
>>>>>
>>>>>Another form of this exercise is flexing while lifting. That is, to
>>>>>flex your
>>>>>muscles while lifting in order to gain more conscious control of the
>>>>>muscle
>>>>>contraction.
>>>>>
>>>>>Are there any books/videos/research that discuss this?
>>>>>
>>>>>Thanks,
>>>>>Lou Stein
>>>>
>>>>"Sid Bonfire" replied:
>>>>"It's called isokinetic exercise.It's like isometric but with
>>>>movement."
>>>>
>>>>Maybe I'll learn something here.
>>>>
>>>>I Googled this very briefly and came across two different descriptions
>>>>of isokinetic. One involves contracting and shortening the muscle at
>>>>constant speed. The other is sometimes called "accommodating
>>>>resistance exercise" and entails maximum muscle contraction throughout
>>>>the full range of joint movement. "Resistance is variable in
>>>>proportion to the change in muscular capability at every point in the
>>>>range of motion. The variation is controlled so that at all times it
>>>>equals the product of the muscular strength." In either case, it
>>>>seems that machines (Norm, Cybex) are needed to do it.
>>>>
>>>>I'm not exactly sure why this has been touted as
>>>>"the fastest way to increase muscle strength".
>>>> http://www.brianmac.demon.co.uk/mustrain.htm
>>>>
>>>>Isn't "flexing while lifting" another way to describe getting and
>>>>staying "tight" while lifting? So why is moving a free weight through
>>>>a full range of motion while staying tight a less efficient method of
>>>>gaining strength than using machines to do isokinetic exercises?
>>>
>>>You're asking that question of The Troll. Are you expecting an
>>>informed answer?
>>
>> Everyone is a "troll" except those who the "Trollmeister" likes to
>> exclude, which is precious few! ;o)
>>
>> Ugh! It's Monday! ;o(
>
>This has been the most exciting thread to come out of this group in weeks.
>(Sad)
>

But it's our fault according to the "Trollmeister". Are you suitably
chastened you bloody trouble-maker?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom Back