PDA

View Full Version : Powerlifting Bench Press


James
September 16th 06, 01:02 AM
I've read replies on this board where people say that powerlifting
bench press is done with the shoulder blades pinched.

I've read other sources, like Wikipedia, that say powerlifters to not
pinch their shoulder blades together at all.

Which is correct?

Is there a good reference for this?

Thanks in advance

James
September 16th 06, 01:04 AM
sorry for the typo:

I've read other sources, like Wikipedia, that say powerlifters DO not
pinch their shoulder blades together at all.

James wrote:
> I've read replies on this board where people say that powerlifting
> bench press is done with the shoulder blades pinched.
>
> I've read other sources, like Wikipedia, that say powerlifters to not
> pinch their shoulder blades together at all.
>
> Which is correct?
>
> Is there a good reference for this?
>
> Thanks in advance

jimmy
September 16th 06, 02:39 AM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bench_press

"It is properly performed while lying on one's back with one's
shoulder blades pinched together
on a specially designed bench with a weighted barbell suspended on a
rack.

Not pinching one's shoulder blades together causes the anterior
deltoids (frontal shoulders) to take over. The feet are kept flat on
the ground at all times.

Use your feet placement to reduce the slight arch in one's lower back
as much as possible. Don't let one's buttocks lift off the bench."


Powerlifter people on this board: IS THIS WRONG? You guys should
know, so I'm asking. Admittedly, I don't know much about powerlifting
competition, mostly because I could care less.

The purpose of bench press is to develop the chest with a full
contraction of the pectorals, right?

I've gotten responses on this board from powerlifters who say that
correct powerlifting form involves having the "shoulders retracted"
with "as much arch in the back as possible."

The purpose of bench press is not to just push the weight up. What
good is that, anyway?

I would like another opinion, please.




James wrote:
> I've read replies on this board where people say that powerlifting
> bench press is done with the shoulder blades pinched.
>
> I've read other sources, like Wikipedia, that say powerlifters to not
> pinch their shoulder blades together at all.
>
> Which is correct?
>
> Is there a good reference for this?
>
> Thanks in advance

Jason Earl
September 16th 06, 02:45 AM
"James" > writes:

> sorry for the typo:
>
> I've read other sources, like Wikipedia, that say powerlifters DO not
> pinch their shoulder blades together at all.
>
> James wrote:
>> I've read replies on this board where people say that powerlifting
>> bench press is done with the shoulder blades pinched.
>>
>> I've read other sources, like Wikipedia, that say powerlifters to not
>> pinch their shoulder blades together at all.
>>
>> Which is correct?
>>
>> Is there a good reference for this?
>>
>> Thanks in advance

This is what Dave Tate says:

http://www.t-nation.com/readTopic.do?id=459808

It's hard to argue that his answer isn't the definitive answer for
powerlifters. Here's an exerpt:


2 - Keep your shoulder blades pulled together and tight.

This is a very important and often overlooked aspect of great
bench pressing. While pressing you have to create the most stable
environment possible. This can't be done if most of your shoulder
blades are off the bench. The bench is only so wide and we can't
change this, but we can change how we position ourselves on the
bench.

When you pull your shoulder blades together you're creating a
tighter, more stable surface from which to press. This is because
more of your body is in contact with the bench. The tightness of
your upper back also contributes. These techniques also change the
distance the bar will have to travel. The key to pressing big
weight is to press the shortest distance possible.

I think everyone should be forced to read that article before
benching. I'll probably never bench even 400 lbs., but Dave's tips
made pressing a lot more comfortable for me.

Jason

jimmy
September 16th 06, 02:54 AM
Hey I'm reading through the link. thank you :)


Jason Earl wrote:
> "James" > writes:
>
> > sorry for the typo:
> >
> > I've read other sources, like Wikipedia, that say powerlifters DO not
> > pinch their shoulder blades together at all.
> >
> > James wrote:
> >> I've read replies on this board where people say that powerlifting
> >> bench press is done with the shoulder blades pinched.
> >>
> >> I've read other sources, like Wikipedia, that say powerlifters to not
> >> pinch their shoulder blades together at all.
> >>
> >> Which is correct?
> >>
> >> Is there a good reference for this?
> >>
> >> Thanks in advance
>
> This is what Dave Tate says:
>
> http://www.t-nation.com/readTopic.do?id=459808
>
> It's hard to argue that his answer isn't the definitive answer for
> powerlifters. Here's an exerpt:
>
>
> 2 - Keep your shoulder blades pulled together and tight.
>
> This is a very important and often overlooked aspect of great
> bench pressing. While pressing you have to create the most stable
> environment possible. This can't be done if most of your shoulder
> blades are off the bench. The bench is only so wide and we can't
> change this, but we can change how we position ourselves on the
> bench.
>
> When you pull your shoulder blades together you're creating a
> tighter, more stable surface from which to press. This is because
> more of your body is in contact with the bench. The tightness of
> your upper back also contributes. These techniques also change the
> distance the bar will have to travel. The key to pressing big
> weight is to press the shortest distance possible.
>
> I think everyone should be forced to read that article before
> benching. I'll probably never bench even 400 lbs., but Dave's tips
> made pressing a lot more comfortable for me.
>
> Jason

jimmy
September 16th 06, 04:16 AM
I think I need to reread what he says there.

he is....kind of long-winded

I want COOKBOOK detail, short and sweet.

What is the purpose of bench press? To make the pecs really big or to
push up a certain amount of weight?

It's one of the great mysteries of the ages, in all seriousness.


jimmy wrote:
> Hey I'm reading through the link. thank you :)
>
>
> Jason Earl wrote:
> > "James" > writes:
> >
> > > sorry for the typo:
> > >
> > > I've read other sources, like Wikipedia, that say powerlifters DO not
> > > pinch their shoulder blades together at all.
> > >
> > > James wrote:
> > >> I've read replies on this board where people say that powerlifting
> > >> bench press is done with the shoulder blades pinched.
> > >>
> > >> I've read other sources, like Wikipedia, that say powerlifters to not
> > >> pinch their shoulder blades together at all.
> > >>
> > >> Which is correct?
> > >>
> > >> Is there a good reference for this?
> > >>
> > >> Thanks in advance
> >
> > This is what Dave Tate says:
> >
> > http://www.t-nation.com/readTopic.do?id=459808
> >
> > It's hard to argue that his answer isn't the definitive answer for
> > powerlifters. Here's an exerpt:
> >
> >
> > 2 - Keep your shoulder blades pulled together and tight.
> >
> > This is a very important and often overlooked aspect of great
> > bench pressing. While pressing you have to create the most stable
> > environment possible. This can't be done if most of your shoulder
> > blades are off the bench. The bench is only so wide and we can't
> > change this, but we can change how we position ourselves on the
> > bench.
> >
> > When you pull your shoulder blades together you're creating a
> > tighter, more stable surface from which to press. This is because
> > more of your body is in contact with the bench. The tightness of
> > your upper back also contributes. These techniques also change the
> > distance the bar will have to travel. The key to pressing big
> > weight is to press the shortest distance possible.
> >
> > I think everyone should be forced to read that article before
> > benching. I'll probably never bench even 400 lbs., but Dave's tips
> > made pressing a lot more comfortable for me.
> >
> > Jason

Curt James
September 16th 06, 06:01 AM
jimmy wrote:
[...]

> Powerlifter people on this board: IS THIS WRONG? You guys should
> know, so I'm asking. Admittedly, I don't know much about powerlifting
> competition, mostly because I could care less.

1) MFW is a newsgroup which is not the same thing as a board. 2) Why
are you asking questions about something you "could care less" about?
(Although many say "I could care less!" it probably makes more sense to
say "I couldN'T care less.")

> The purpose of bench press is to develop the chest

For some trainers.

> with a full contraction of the pectorals, right?

For some trainers.

> I've gotten responses on this board

I'm bored... with your post. HAW! Uh, never mind.

[...]

> The purpose of bench press is not to just push the
> weight up.

For some trainers... it is.

> What good is that, anyway?

Oh, perhaps in a bench press contest? And when I was in the service, a
member of the armed forces died after being pinned under a soda
machine. Had he been able to bench press... what DOES a pop machine
weigh? Anyway, he'd at least have had a better chance of moving the
demon machine off his sternum.

> I would like another opinion, please.

And there you have it! Worth every penny you paid for it.

--
Curt

JMW
September 16th 06, 06:38 AM
"jimmy" > wrote:

>I think I need to reread what he says there.
>
>he is....kind of long-winded
>
>I want COOKBOOK detail, short and sweet.
>
>What is the purpose of bench press? To make the pecs really big or to
>push up a certain amount of weight?
>
>It's one of the great mysteries of the ages, in all seriousness.

It's a pretty moronic question. The purpose for a powerlifter is to
push as much weight a possible. The purpose for a bodybuilder is
pectoral development, as well as tricep development.

Pete
September 16th 06, 10:16 AM
"jimmy" > schreef:

> What is the purpose of bench press? To make the pecs really big or to
> push up a certain amount of weight?

To make the pecs really big.

Getting stronger is considered a "side effect."

----
Pete

Pete
September 16th 06, 10:21 AM
"jimmy" > schreef:

> The purpose of bench press is to develop the chest with a full
> contraction of the pectorals, right?

Right.

> I've gotten responses on this board from powerlifters who say that
> correct powerlifting form involves having the "shoulders retracted"
> with "as much arch in the back as possible."

So you got your answer, yet you are contradicting them anyway? Sounds
familiar...

> The purpose of bench press is not to just push the weight up. What
> good is that, anyway?

It is no good. Do NOT bench press!

> I would like another opinion, please.

And you got one.

----
Pete

Hobbes
September 16th 06, 03:48 PM
In article om>,
"jimmy" > wrote:

> I think I need to reread what he says there.
>
> he is....kind of long-winded
>
> I want COOKBOOK detail, short and sweet.
>
> What is the purpose of bench press? To make the pecs really big or to
> push up a certain amount of weight?
>
> It's one of the great mysteries of the ages, in all seriousness.
>
>
> jimmy wrote:
> > Hey I'm reading through the link. thank you :)
> >
> >
> > Jason Earl wrote:
> > > "James" > writes:
> > >
> > > > sorry for the typo:
> > > >
> > > > I've read other sources, like Wikipedia, that say powerlifters DO not
> > > > pinch their shoulder blades together at all.
> > > >
> > > > James wrote:
> > > >> I've read replies on this board where people say that powerlifting
> > > >> bench press is done with the shoulder blades pinched.
> > > >>
> > > >> I've read other sources, like Wikipedia, that say powerlifters to not
> > > >> pinch their shoulder blades together at all.
> > > >>
> > > >> Which is correct?
> > > >>
> > > >> Is there a good reference for this?
> > > >>
> > > >> Thanks in advance
> > >
> > > This is what Dave Tate says:
> > >
> > > http://www.t-nation.com/readTopic.do?id=459808
> > >
> > > It's hard to argue that his answer isn't the definitive answer for
> > > powerlifters. Here's an exerpt:
> > >
> > >
> > > 2 - Keep your shoulder blades pulled together and tight.
> > >
> > > This is a very important and often overlooked aspect of great
> > > bench pressing. While pressing you have to create the most stable
> > > environment possible. This can't be done if most of your shoulder
> > > blades are off the bench. The bench is only so wide and we can't
> > > change this, but we can change how we position ourselves on the
> > > bench.
> > >
> > > When you pull your shoulder blades together you're creating a
> > > tighter, more stable surface from which to press. This is because
> > > more of your body is in contact with the bench. The tightness of
> > > your upper back also contributes. These techniques also change the
> > > distance the bar will have to travel. The key to pressing big
> > > weight is to press the shortest distance possible.
> > >
> > > I think everyone should be forced to read that article before
> > > benching. I'll probably never bench even 400 lbs., but Dave's tips
> > > made pressing a lot more comfortable for me.
> > >
> > > Jason
>

Not to a powerlifter. The idea is to push as much weight up as possible.

--
Keith

jimmy
September 16th 06, 10:36 PM
You think that the purpose of bench press is to lift heavy things off
yourself...

if you happen to land on your back with your hands conveniently under
the soda machine?

Maybe deadlift will prepare a person to lift a car off their loved one
(sure, that happens a lot)...but bench press?

So powerlifting is just about numbers?

When do you get to be "successful?"

Afterall, numbers get really large, infinity and stuff.


Curt James wrote:
> jimmy wrote:
> [...]
>
> > Powerlifter people on this board: IS THIS WRONG? You guys should
> > know, so I'm asking. Admittedly, I don't know much about powerlifting
> > competition, mostly because I could care less.
>
> 1) MFW is a newsgroup which is not the same thing as a board. 2) Why
> are you asking questions about something you "could care less" about?
> (Although many say "I could care less!" it probably makes more sense to
> say "I couldN'T care less.")
>
> > The purpose of bench press is to develop the chest
>
> For some trainers.
>
> > with a full contraction of the pectorals, right?
>
> For some trainers.
>
> > I've gotten responses on this board
>
> I'm bored... with your post. HAW! Uh, never mind.
>
> [...]
>
> > The purpose of bench press is not to just push the
> > weight up.
>
> For some trainers... it is.
>
> > What good is that, anyway?
>
> Oh, perhaps in a bench press contest? And when I was in the service, a
> member of the armed forces died after being pinned under a soda
> machine. Had he been able to bench press... what DOES a pop machine
> weigh? Anyway, he'd at least have had a better chance of moving the
> demon machine off his sternum.
>
> > I would like another opinion, please.
>
> And there you have it! Worth every penny you paid for it.
>
> --
> Curt

jimmy
September 16th 06, 10:38 PM
I don't think it's a moronic question. I think people lose sight of
the entire POINT of lifting weights.

Strength is priority number one for a select few powerlifters who care
about that sort of thing because that's what they learned to love.

Most people exercise and join gyms to get bigger and buff; look and
feel better.


JMW wrote:
> "jimmy" > wrote:
>
> >I think I need to reread what he says there.
> >
> >he is....kind of long-winded
> >
> >I want COOKBOOK detail, short and sweet.
> >
> >What is the purpose of bench press? To make the pecs really big or to
> >push up a certain amount of weight?
> >
> >It's one of the great mysteries of the ages, in all seriousness.
>
> It's a pretty moronic question. The purpose for a powerlifter is to
> push as much weight a possible. The purpose for a bodybuilder is
> pectoral development, as well as tricep development.

jimmy
September 16th 06, 10:40 PM
for some trainers?

I don't use a trainer. do you? i don't need my hand held, thank you.

Are you a trainer?

Are you saying that personal trainers determine everything? I think
you are.



Curt James wrote:

> > The purpose of bench press is to develop the chest
>
> For some trainers.
>
> > with a full contraction of the pectorals, right?
>
> For some trainers.
>
> > I've gotten responses on this board
>
> I'm bored... with your post. HAW! Uh, never mind.
>
> [...]
>

jimmy
September 16th 06, 10:43 PM
Pete wrote:

> > with "as much arch in the back as possible."
>
> So you got your answer, yet you are contradicting them anyway? Sounds
> familiar...
>

I was saying that putting as much arch in the back as possible is NOT
CORRECT.

So I did not get a satisfactory answer, anyway.

So it's not contradiction, it's argument.

Jason Earl
September 16th 06, 10:49 PM
"jimmy" > writes:

> I don't think it's a moronic question. I think people lose sight of
> the entire POINT of lifting weights.

Yes, but then again you haven't learned how to avoid top posting
either. Which lowers the value of your opinion by a very great deal.

> Strength is priority number one for a select few powerlifters who
> care about that sort of thing because that's what they learned to
> love.

I know quite a few folks that are into the weight training game for
athletic performance. The fact that lifting weights makes them look
good is a benefit, of course, but they are "in it to win it."

> Most people exercise and join gyms to get bigger and buff; look and
> feel better.

Most *guys* don't mind getting "bigger and buff," but getting bigger
and/or buff doesn't appeal to most women.

The bottom line is that there are as many reasons for getting strong
as there are people lifting weights.

Jason

lifterwench
September 16th 06, 11:34 PM
"jimmy" > wrote in message
ups.com...
> You think that the purpose of bench press is to lift heavy things off
> yourself...
>

Yes. Or to push things away from you, like a date who trys to get
friendlier than you want. Being much stronger than I looked has come in
quite handy at times.

> if you happen to land on your back with your hands conveniently under
> the soda machine?

There are probably many other applications for the strength gained through
bench pressing.

>
> Maybe deadlift will prepare a person to lift a car off their loved one
> (sure, that happens a lot)...but bench press?
>
> So powerlifting is just about numbers?

Not really, reaching goals, improving overall strength to name a few
reasons.

>
> When do you get to be "successful?"

The minute you step on the platform. The dedication and training make you
successful no matter where you place in the meet.

>
> Afterall, numbers get really large, infinity and stuff.

It's all relative to your size and how much you improve as an individual.
Although winning is fun.

>
>
> Curt James wrote:
> > jimmy wrote:
> > [...]
> >
> > > Powerlifter people on this board: IS THIS WRONG? You guys should
> > > know, so I'm asking. Admittedly, I don't know much about powerlifting
> > > competition, mostly because I could care less.
> >
> > 1) MFW is a newsgroup which is not the same thing as a board. 2) Why
> > are you asking questions about something you "could care less" about?
> > (Although many say "I could care less!" it probably makes more sense to
> > say "I couldN'T care less.")
> >
> > > The purpose of bench press is to develop the chest

My pecs never showed. They were covered by breasts. My triceps on the
other developed nicely.

> >
> > For some trainers.
> >
> > > with a full contraction of the pectorals, right?
> >
> > For some trainers.
> >
> > > I've gotten responses on this board
> >
> > I'm bored... with your post. HAW! Uh, never mind.
> >
> > [...]
> >
> > > The purpose of bench press is not to just push the
> > > weight up.
> >
> > For some trainers... it is.
> >
> > > What good is that, anyway?
> >
> > Oh, perhaps in a bench press contest? And when I was in the service, a
> > member of the armed forces died after being pinned under a soda
> > machine. Had he been able to bench press... what DOES a pop machine
> > weigh? Anyway, he'd at least have had a better chance of moving the
> > demon machine off his sternum.
> >
> > > I would like another opinion, please.
> >
> > And there you have it! Worth every penny you paid for it.
> >
> > --
> > Curt

Just to let you know the shoulder blades should be tight, back arched as
much as possible keeping the shoulders and butt in contact with the bench.
Giving you a tight and stable possition on the bench and shortening your
bench stroke. The bench was plenty wide enough for me as I am small.

L
>

Curt James
September 16th 06, 11:48 PM
jimmy wrote:
> Curt James wrote:
>
> > > The purpose of bench press is to develop the chest
> >
> > For some trainers.
> >
> > > with a full contraction of the pectorals, right?
> >
> > For some trainers. <snip>
> >
> for some trainers?

Yes.

> I don't use a trainer.

And?

> do you?

No.

> i don't need my hand held,

Okay.

> thank you.
>
> Are you a trainer?

Trainer as in someone who trains with weights, not trainer as in a
person who gets paid to train others.

> Are you saying that personal trainers determine everything?

Far from it.

> I think you are.

What we have here is, apparently, a failure to communicate. Or, iow, I
am not a personal trainer. I train myself. I am not saying that
personal trainers determine everything. I am, however, saying that the
bench press (as well as a multitude of other exercises) has a variety
of purposes, all dependent on a person's specific goals.

Hth.

--
Curt

ATP*
September 17th 06, 12:12 AM
"lifterwench" > wrote in message
...
>
>> > > The purpose of bench press is to develop the chest
>
> My pecs never showed. They were covered by breasts. My triceps on the
> other developed nicely.
>
other?

Curt James
September 17th 06, 12:35 AM
Jason Earl wrote:
[...]

re jimmy

> <snip> you haven't learned how to avoid top posting either.

Well, that whole concept of the word TOP in combination with that very
technical word POSTING seems slightly beyond the reach of mister jimmy,
unfortunately. I did, however, post a few links as well as a
clarification of my previous "whining" comments on that particular
subject elsewhere in this ng.

Never know...

--
Curt

jimmy
September 17th 06, 12:41 AM
I call people who lift weight, LIFTERS

NOT "trainers"

Does anyone else IN THE ENTIRE WORLD besides you, Curt, use that term
in that context?



Curt James wrote:
> jimmy wrote:
> > Curt James wrote:
> >
> > > > The purpose of bench press is to develop the chest
> > >
> > > For some trainers.
> > >
> > > > with a full contraction of the pectorals, right?
> > >
> > > For some trainers. <snip>
> > >
> > for some trainers?
>
> Yes.
>
> > I don't use a trainer.
>
> And?
>
> > do you?
>
> No.
>
> > i don't need my hand held,
>
> Okay.
>
> > thank you.
> >
> > Are you a trainer?
>
> Trainer as in someone who trains with weights, not trainer as in a
> person who gets paid to train others.
>
> > Are you saying that personal trainers determine everything?
>
> Far from it.
>
> > I think you are.
>
> What we have here is, apparently, a failure to communicate. Or, iow, I
> am not a personal trainer. I train myself. I am not saying that
> personal trainers determine everything. I am, however, saying that the
> bench press (as well as a multitude of other exercises) has a variety
> of purposes, all dependent on a person's specific goals.
>
> Hth.
>
> --
> Curt

Curt James
September 17th 06, 01:08 AM
ATP* wrote:
> "lifterwench" wrote
[...]

> > My pecs never showed. They were covered by breasts.

Why does Will Brink come to mind? Hmm.

Okay, Brink doesn't come to mind at all, actually. Just needed an
excuse to post this link.

http://i8.photobucket.com/albums/a36/imnoone/MFW/wb.jpg

Man booooobs!

> > My triceps on the other developed nicely.
> >
> other?

OTHER, ATP*! Damn it, man! She just used the word BREASTS! Shouldn't
the word HAND come immediately to mind???

"My triceps on the other... HAND developed nicely."

Good Lord, man, get it together! ;o)

--
Curt

Curt James
September 17th 06, 01:16 AM
jimmy wrote:

> I call people who lift weight, LIFTERS
>
> NOT "trainers"
>
> Does anyone else IN THE ENTIRE WORLD besides you,
> Curt, use that term in that context?

Yes.

These same people typically are quite familiar with the term
top-posting in the context of newsgroups. :o)

And it's a terrible shame that there were absolutely no context clues
to help you comprehend the mystical meaning behind my use of such a
puzzling term.

I do apologize.

> Curt James wrote:
> > jimmy wrote:
> > > Curt James wrote:
> > >
> > > > > The purpose of bench press is to develop the chest
> > > >
> > > > For some trainers.
> > > >
> > > > > with a full contraction of the pectorals, right?
> > > >
> > > > For some trainers. <snip>
> > > >
> > > for some trainers?
> >
> > Yes.
> >
> > > I don't use a trainer.
> >
> > And?
> >
> > > do you?
> >
> > No.
> >
> > > i don't need my hand held,
> >
> > Okay.
> >
> > > thank you.
> > >
> > > Are you a trainer?
> >
> > Trainer as in someone who trains with weights, not trainer as in a
> > person who gets paid to train others.
> >
> > > Are you saying that personal trainers determine everything?
> >
> > Far from it.
> >
> > > I think you are.
> >
> > What we have here is, apparently, a failure to communicate. Or, iow, I
> > am not a personal trainer. I train myself. I am not saying that
> > personal trainers determine everything. I am, however, saying that the
> > bench press (as well as a multitude of other exercises) has a variety
> > of purposes, all dependent on a person's specific goals.
> >
> > Hth.

--
Curt

JMW
September 17th 06, 02:49 AM
"jimmy" > wrote:

>I don't think it's a moronic question. I think people lose sight of
>the entire POINT of lifting weights.
>
>Strength is priority number one for a select few powerlifters who care
>about that sort of thing because that's what they learned to love.
>
>Most people exercise and join gyms to get bigger and buff; look and
>feel better.

<sigh> OK. I guess it's time ...

Since you're such a bodybuilding expert, jimmy, why don't you pics,
huh? You've your own little blogspot, so you can't very well claim
you don't have a place to post them.

Where's the beef, jimmy?

James
September 17th 06, 02:50 AM
>(Although many say "I could care less!" it probably makes more sense to
>say "I couldN'T care less.")

If you could not care less, that means that you care the most, doesn't
it?

James
September 17th 06, 02:50 AM
>(Although many say "I could care less!" it probably makes more sense to
>say "I couldN'T care less.")

If you could not care less, that means that you care the most, doesn't
it?

JMW
September 17th 06, 02:52 AM
"lifterwench" > wrote:
>
>"jimmy" > wrote:
>> You think that the purpose of bench press is to lift heavy things off
>> yourself...
>>
>
>Yes. Or to push things away from you, like a date who trys to get
>friendlier than you want. Being much stronger than I looked has come in
>quite handy at times.

I've got a feeling that jimmy would be one of those.

James
September 17th 06, 02:52 AM
> Yes, but then again you haven't learned how to avoid top posting
> either. Which lowers the value of your opinion by a very great deal.

....it's a matter of style, which does not change the argument in
anyway. Just say "top-posting...boo! Bad!"

James
September 17th 06, 02:55 AM
> And it's a terrible shame that there were absolutely no context clues
> to help you comprehend the mystical meaning behind my use of such a
> puzzling term.

So then, because you train with weights,

you are a "trainer!" Hahaha!

That makes lots of sense...in your "speshul" world.

JMW
September 17th 06, 03:07 AM
"James" > wrote:

>>(Although many say "I could care less!" it probably makes more sense to
>>say "I couldN'T care less.")
>
>If you could not care less, that means that you care the most, doesn't
>it?

No. But logic is obviously not your forté.

James
September 17th 06, 03:17 AM
> No. But logic is obviously not your forté.

Logic, huh?

I could not care less == an exaggeration that says, "I care so little,
that it is not possible for me to care less about _____(whatever)____."

It's a figure of speech, not an argument.

Your problem is that you fall for stupid distractions like misspellings
and grammatical errors because Curt James cannot create a cogent
argument himself.

And YOU are not much better with your damn self-righteousness, Mr.
Mathematical Logic

Curt James
September 17th 06, 03:19 AM
James wrote after I scribbled:

> >(Although many say "I could care less!" it probably
> >makes more sense to say "I couldN'T care less.")
>
> If you could not care less, that means that you care
> the most, doesn't it?

(blink)

Oh, you glass half full son of a...

Seriously, let me roll that one around a bit.

A person cares. Some people care a little. Others don't care at all.

Or...

A person doesn't care at all. Some care a little. Others care a lot.
- not at all | somewhat | a lot - or...
Zero - Less - More

If you could care less then you'd have to be on what side of the scale?

If you could not care less then where on that same scale would you be?

Zero - Less - More (I could care less)

Zero (I could not care less) - Less - More

But, yes, I'm a fan of semantics and so I can see how "I could NOT care
less" could just as easily be interpreted as "It's not possible for me
to care less as I am a naturally caring person. It would be out of
character for me to care less."

And, not for you, James, but for "jimmy"...

HEY, JIMMY, IS THAT PSEUDO-INTELLECTUAL ENUFF FOR YA??!!!

Anyway, like I've said before, there's no limit to what I don't know.
Thanks for the question and the different perspective, James.

--
Curt

John Hanson
September 17th 06, 03:34 AM
On 16 Sep 2006 16:41:59 -0700, "jimmy" > wrote in
misc.fitness.weights:

>I call people who lift weight, LIFTERS

I certainly would never defend that piece of **** loser, Curt James,
but lifters are the folks that compete in either olympic weightlifting
or powerlifting.

>
>NOT "trainers"
>
>Does anyone else IN THE ENTIRE WORLD besides you, Curt, use that term
>in that context?
>
Weight trainers are everyone else who lifts weights.
>
>Curt James wrote:
>> jimmy wrote:
>> > Curt James wrote:
>> >
>> > > > The purpose of bench press is to develop the chest
>> > >
>> > > For some trainers.
>> > >
>> > > > with a full contraction of the pectorals, right?
>> > >
>> > > For some trainers. <snip>
>> > >
>> > for some trainers?
>>
>> Yes.
>>
>> > I don't use a trainer.
>>
>> And?
>>
>> > do you?
>>
>> No.
>>
>> > i don't need my hand held,
>>
>> Okay.
>>
>> > thank you.
>> >
>> > Are you a trainer?
>>
>> Trainer as in someone who trains with weights, not trainer as in a
>> person who gets paid to train others.
>>
>> > Are you saying that personal trainers determine everything?
>>
>> Far from it.
>>
>> > I think you are.
>>
>> What we have here is, apparently, a failure to communicate. Or, iow, I
>> am not a personal trainer. I train myself. I am not saying that
>> personal trainers determine everything. I am, however, saying that the
>> bench press (as well as a multitude of other exercises) has a variety
>> of purposes, all dependent on a person's specific goals.
>>
>> Hth.
>>
>> --
>> Curt

JMW
September 17th 06, 03:41 AM
"James" > wrote:
>
>> No. But logic is obviously not your forté.
>
>Logic, huh?
>
>I could not care less == an exaggeration that says, "I care so little,
>that it is not possible for me to care less about _____(whatever)____."
>
>It's a figure of speech, not an argument.
>
>Your problem is that you fall for stupid distractions like misspellings
>and grammatical errors because Curt James cannot create a cogent
>argument himself.

I don't fall for anything. The fact that Curt is a **** has nothing
to do with the issue at hand. You wrote (and failed to quote the same
above):

"If you could not care less, that means that you care the most,
doesn't it?"

The bottom line is that you wrote something stupid in an attempt to
debate Curt. Of course, attempting to debate Curt is a stupid act in
and of itself, which is why I have the little turd killfiled. You
would be wise to do the same.

>And YOU are not much better with your damn self-righteousness, Mr.
>Mathematical Logic

You heartfelt opinion is greatly unappreciated. **** you very much.

Curt James
September 17th 06, 03:48 AM
John Williams wrote:
> "jimmy" wrote:
>
> >I don't think it's a moronic question.

Oh, dear. You disagreed with John's assessment. He doesn't do
disagreement very well, jimmy.

> >I think people lose sight of the entire POINT of lifting weights.

And you've apparently lost sight that people have different goals or
POINTs wrt lifting weights, jimmy.

> >Strength is priority number one for a select few
> >powerlifters who care about that sort of thing
> >because that's what they learned to love.
> >
> >Most people exercise and join gyms to get bigger
> >and buff; look and feel better.
>
> <sigh> OK. I guess it's time ...

ahahHAHAH! I guess it's time for you to throw a hissy fit over being
disagreed with? Isn't it ALWAYS that time with you, Williams?

> Since you're such a bodybuilding expert, jimmy,

Where did he say he's a bodybuilding expert, Johnny? Stick to the
facts. He's a top-posting jerk, for one. He doesn't recognize the
versality of weights or the diversity of people and their goals wrt
those weights, for another.

> why don't you pics, huh?

And could you do me the favor of a frigging VERB next time, John? Wtf?

> You've your own little blogspot, so you can't very well
> claim you don't have a place to post them.

But, yeah, you posted yours, I've got mine online, even Will "Man
Boobs" Brink has a shot or two available.

> Where's the beef, jimmy?

Uh, a simple gym shot will do.

--
Curt

Curt James
September 17th 06, 03:51 AM
James wrote:
> > Yes, but then again you haven't learned how to avoid top posting
> > either. Which lowers the value of your opinion by a very great deal.
>
> ...it's a matter of style, which does not change the argument in
> anyway. Just say "top-posting...boo! Bad!"

"no attribution...boo! Bad!"

--
Curt

Curt James
September 17th 06, 03:56 AM
John Williams wrote:
> "lifterwench" wrote:
> >"jimmy" wrote:
> >> You think that the purpose of bench press is to lift
> >> heavy things off yourself...
> >
> >Yes. Or to push things away from you, like a date who
> >trys to get friendlier than you want. Being much stronger
> >than I looked has come in quite handy at times.
>
> I've got a feeling that jimmy would be one of those.

See? There's the difference between John Williams and... a human being.
While I see jimmy as a top-posting jerk who's overly sensitive and
oblivious to Usenet SOP, Williams is a mind-reading mystic who has
amazing powers to detect that "feeling" that jimmy would be "one of
those."

Wonder what Elvira's comment would be wrt your behavior, Williams.

I got a feeling, too.

--
Curt

Curt James
September 17th 06, 04:12 AM
James wrote:
> > And it's a terrible shame that there were absolutely
> > no context clues to help you comprehend the mystical
> > meaning behind my use of such a puzzling term.

Holy heck. Top-posters, people who have no time to attribute the posts
they're replying to, what's next?

> So then, because you train with weights, you
> are a "trainer!" Hahaha!

Yeah, James. A weight trainer? Someone who trains with weights. What
don't you get?

Somebody mentioned the bench press and its purpose. I said something
like, "For some trainers." I guess I coulda said "For some bench
pressers." Big stretch to say trainers, eh?

> That makes lots of sense...in your "speshul" world.

I've seen "speshul" at at least one gym. The personal trainer told her
client, "Let's let him do his rep." My rep? Oh, well, thank you. I'll
just quickly do my rep and then you can provide your protege more of
your essential training.

Regardless of her idiocy, I guess in your world this link wouldn't have
a variety of definitions waiting on the other end:

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&rls=GGLG%2CGGLG%3A2005-29%2CGGLG%3Aen&q=trainer%2C+definition&btnG=Search


Newp. Trainer means personal trainer at a gym and that's it. Thanks for
clearing that up.

--
Curt

Pete
September 17th 06, 09:56 AM
"jimmy" > schreef:

>> > with "as much arch in the back as possible."

>> So you got your answer, yet you are contradicting them anyway? Sounds
>> familiar...

> I was saying that putting as much arch in the back as possible is NOT
> CORRECT.

> So I did not get a satisfactory answer, anyway.

> So it's not contradiction, it's argument.

No it isnt.

----
Pete

Pete
September 17th 06, 11:39 AM
"Curt James" > schreef:

> Wonder what Elvira's comment would be wrt your behavior, Williams.

Hmmm.

----
Pete

lifterwench
September 17th 06, 01:11 PM
"ATP*" > wrote in message
...
>
> "lifterwench" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> >> > > The purpose of bench press is to develop the chest
> >
> > My pecs never showed. They were covered by breasts. My triceps on the
> > other developed nicely.
> >
> other?
>
>

Oops, I meant on the other hand.

L

lifterwench
September 17th 06, 01:11 PM
"Curt James" > wrote in message
ps.com...
> ATP* wrote:
> > "lifterwench" wrote
> [...]
>
> > > My pecs never showed. They were covered by breasts.
>
> Why does Will Brink come to mind? Hmm.
>
> Okay, Brink doesn't come to mind at all, actually. Just needed an
> excuse to post this link.
>
> http://i8.photobucket.com/albums/a36/imnoone/MFW/wb.jpg
>
> Man booooobs!
>
> > > My triceps on the other developed nicely.
> > >
> > other?
>
> OTHER, ATP*! Damn it, man! She just used the word BREASTS! Shouldn't
> the word HAND come immediately to mind???
>
> "My triceps on the other... HAND developed nicely."
>
> Good Lord, man, get it together! ;o)
>
> --
> Curt
>

HEhehe

lifterwench
September 17th 06, 01:16 PM
"JMW" > wrote in message
...
> "lifterwench" > wrote:
> >
> >"jimmy" > wrote:
> >> You think that the purpose of bench press is to lift heavy things off
> >> yourself...
> >>
> >
> >Yes. Or to push things away from you, like a date who trys to get
> >friendlier than you want. Being much stronger than I looked has come in
> >quite handy at times.
>
> I've got a feeling that jimmy would be one of those.

I have a feeling that Jimmy would never get the opportunity to find out. ;)

L

Bully
September 19th 06, 05:48 PM
jimmy wrote:
> Pete wrote:
>
>>> with "as much arch in the back as possible."
>>
>> So you got your answer, yet you are contradicting them anyway? Sounds
>> familiar...
>>
>
> I was saying that putting as much arch in the back as possible is NOT
> CORRECT.
>
> So I did not get a satisfactory answer, anyway.
>
> So it's not contradiction, it's argument.

Is this a 5 minute argument or the full half hour?


--
Bully
Protein bars: http://www.proteinbars.co.uk

"Be who you are and say what you feel, because those who mind don't
matter, and those who matter don't mind." - Dr. Seuss