Just because I haven’t mentioned it in a few days doesn’t mean we aren’t busy kicking cancer in the BALLS. THIS ISN’T A GAME. The 70’s Big Movember team has 37 members and has raised $1,720 so far. That’s under $50 a member, so we’re gonna need a better effort out of our current and future members. If we all aim to get at least $100 each, then we’ll plant a much more firm kick to cancer’s balls.
70’s Big Contest Don’t forget that I’m giving the team member that has raised the most doll hairs cash and money prizes. Currently Jacob Tspykin is dominating this contest so far, but we’re only 9 days into November. Here is the top ten thus far:
Anyone can join the 70’s Big Movember Team.
Both guys and girls can join it. And no, you don’t have to grow a mustache (although it helps). Guys are encouraged to grow facial hair or celebrate their beards, yet you don’t HAVE to. If you’re not joining the team and raising money on the account of having to grow facial hair, then it sounds like you like cancer. This is my formal invitation for all girls and guys that read this site to join the fundraising team — even if you only raise a few doll hairs, ever doll hair counts.
Steps:
Go to movember.com
Select country
Search 70’s Big
Select the real official team and not the thieving impostor team
Post a social media message that says
I’m raising money with one of my favorite lifting sites, 70’s Big. Help us kick cancer in the BALLS by donating: (post link to your profile here)
Jacob Cloud interviewed his friend Steve, a prostate cancer survivor and self proclaimed dirty old man. He explains how to prevent cancer, what to do when diagnosed, and sprinkles in profane comments throughout. Congrats to Steve for setting the example on how to kick cancer in the BALLS.
Watch until the end.
Edit: So what do you guys want to talk about in the comments?
I have a Bachelor’s of Science in Kinesiology with an emphasis in Exercise Science. It’s okay I guess. I knew that I didn’t want to pursue graduate work in this area of study because I wanted to coach, but I wasn’t impressed with the field itself. It’s just so BAD. The exercise prescriptions are ineffective, nobody understands mechanics, and the research is a joke. A lot of people have mentioned how they would like to hear my thoughts on the problems in Exercise Science, and I think it starts with the research.
I’ve had to look at a lot of shitty studies in school, and I can dismantle them all. The articles in various journals, including the NSCA, are usually not very good. Rippetoe and I used to look at several articles and point out how badly they were done. However most studies shouldn’t even be done in the first place because the researchers are asking either an irrelevant question or the wrong question. The majority of studies that are published are irrelevant or easily dismissed because of crappy methodology.
Why am I not doing anything to change this? Because I don’t care. Why would I aim to change the governing boards of organizations that allow bad research on things that don’t matter? I’m busy getting people to perform better and teaching them how to do it. I mean no disrespect to researchers — especially the good ones — but most of them…don’t quite get it. Let’s look at this example.
The title of this news article is, “Squat lifts likely cause of stress fractures in young athletes, study finds”. We’ll soon find why this news article is just as bad as the study itself since this conclusion can’t be drawn. Here is the “press release study abstract” that the shitty journalist used to write the article. I will be directly referencing this piece of information in the rest of the post since the actual article is not made available (this, by the way, is another flaw in the system: let’s charge money to see the shitty research we’re doing so that nobody can debunk it unless they want to spend $30 to see our boring journals).
Abstract TL;DR — The researchers had patients (who were kids) that said that they hurt their backs while squats, so they performed a study to see if squats caused the “lumbar fractures of the pars interarticularis” that they found. The study itself observed the “pelvic incidence and tilt, sacral
slope, and lumbar lordosis while in normal standing posture and then during a front and back squat” in 20 volunteers. Here is a picture of the author, John McClellan.
Monday’s are dedicated to displaying or helping female lifters and trainees. Today’s feature is a couple more regular women who are pretty damn strong. Jen Higgins of CrossFit Works sent me the e-mail but was mostly talking about how great of a lifter Liz Cameron is.
This is Liz pulling 286.5 lbs (130kg) weighing 114 (52kg weight class).
That’s pretty solid technique for a max rep, especially for a female (round backs are the norm). Jen told me how Liz is about half her age, but was a great training partner as they readied for the 100% RAW Single Lift Worlds in Las Vegas. Liz’s best competition bench is 150lbs and her best competition squat is 220 (weighing 110). Liz has won the Best Female Lifter in the two meets that she’s competed in! She also teaches salsa dancing and apparently is “frequently sighted in short dresses and high heels”. Jen conveniently didn’t send pics of this claim.
All of this is high praise from Jen Higgins as she is also pretty damn strong. Here’s a video of her pulling a really clean looking 292.1 lbs (132.5 kg) in the 123 lbs/56kg weight class.
Happy PR Friday! Post your training PRs and updates to the comments. What kind of progress have you made this year?
Don’t forget that this is Movember and we’re raising money to kick cancer in the BALLS. Don’t shave, show off your beard, or grow a mustache. Whatever, just join the team and raise funds.
bohdi asks:
I have a question that doesn’t really apply to the podcast though, but rather dead lifting.
[spoiler show=”Show the wall o’ text” hide=”Hide the wall o’ text”]A lot of what I’ve read seems to make the case for a relatively narrow stance for the conventional dead lift due to mechanical advantages and so on. Due to some mobility issues I began dead lifting with a narrower stance (roughly 6 inches in between feet) because it felt more comfortable to get down and also because my own research seemed to advocate for the narrower stance. Thanks to you, Justin, my mobility is greatly improving and I feel almost back to normal with my previous wider stance (feet approx. just outside shoulder width). I pulled an easy 445# yesterday with the wider stance and 480# is my current PR before the stance/mobility issues. I’m curious, since I seem to be going against what most consider an ideal stance, is this just a product of my specific body type leverages and I don’t need to worry, or is there something else going on that I’m doing wrong and I’m trying to counteract other inefficiencies. My short term goal is to get over 500# in the 181 class so I have a little ways to go but I want to make sure the basic efficacy of the lift is solid. The only other noteworthy aspect is that my weak point has always been off the floor, and the wider stance seems to help. Lockout has never seemed to be an issue. Thanks.[/spoiler]
TL;DR — He wants to know how a narrow stance would be more beneficial in the deadlift.
Dear bohdi,
A narrow stance on the deadlift is more efficient and important, and is usually the one thing that most people can correct to improve their deadlift. The ideal stance is best summarized as “hip width”, which is quite obviously more narrow than “shoulder width” (a typical squat stance, which is also usually too wide in most people). This will be no more than ten inches for most people. I measured my stance, and it’s nine inches from heel to heel. Don’t worry about the specific measurement; just use a hip-width stance.
First, the narrow stance can improve the set up. If the stance is more narrow, then the knees can be shoved out more compared to a wider stance. Shoving the knees out more is external rotation, and that means there is more external rotation at the hip with the narrow stance when your knees are touching the arms. More external rotation will do two things: 1) it will contract the external rotators more and subsequently use them to maintain tightness around the hip and to apply force and 2) externally rotating will bring the femur away from the ASIS, or hip bone, so that there is no, or less, hip impingement. Less hip impingment will allow you to put the lumbar spine into extension more effectively. See Mark Rippetoe’s “Active Hip” article if you’re confused. This externally rotated position with a narrow stance utilizes the muscluature of the quadriceps and hamstrings much better than a wider stance, improving the overall efficiency of the lift.
Secondly, the narrow stance will allow for a more narrow grip. The grip should be close enough so that at lockout, the hands are on each side of the legs. A more narrow grip will shorten the distance that the bar has to be pulled. If you’re confused, then consider deadlifting with a snatch grip; the bar will have to travel a greater distance due to the wide grip. Having a narrow grip will shorten this distance, yet it will also allow the chest to be squeezed up more than if there was a wider grip. If you’re confused, observe back angle changes when placing your hands on the inside of the collar of the bar compared to putting your hands on the inside rings (where the knurling starts). The back angle will be more vertical, and thus more efficient, with the narrow grip.
These are two compelling points for using a hip-width stance on the deadlift, and these are two corrections I have to make in every workshop I’ve ever done. Along with these corrections, the lifter just needs to drag the bar up their legs and they will achieve a B grade deadlift. An A is awarded to sub-maximal lifts when the back is not unlocked and the hamstrings do their job of maintaining the angle off the floor and extending the hips for the lockout.
November is a magical month. Men across the world will forgo the confusing art of shaving and develop impressive and intense facial hair. Some may call it “No Shave November”. We have called it Novemburly. Many know it as Movember. Either way, you’re participating.
Movember started in 1999 and has developed into a month-long fundraiser for men’s health, particularly cancer. Cancer is a pestilent adversary and 70’s Big is joining the fight to kick it in the BALLS. Combine fighting and facial hair, and we’re there. However, this time it’s to raise money.
There are two ways you can participate: either create a profile and join the 70’s Big Fundraising team on us.movember.com, or donate to the team or one of our members. Either way, click here and get started (the team is on the right). Edit: Even if you only donate one doll-hair, that will help. Various team members will be doing amusing things for donations, so keep an eye out.
Contest Prizes
Whoever raises the most money on the 70’s Big Movember Team will receive $50 bucks, a 70’s Big t-shirt, and their choice of one of my e-books or FIT. That’s right — raise the most money for a badass cause, grow some facial hair, AND get cash and 70’s Big gear. I’M GOING TO PAY YOU TO GROW FACIAL HAIR, SO GET STARTED.
Do I need to grow a mustache?
Movember emphasizes shaving at the beginning of the month and growing a mustache. Since Jacob Cloud and I already have sweet facial hair, we’re certainly not going to SHAVE it. Instead, grow whatever you want. If you have a beard, show it off. If you don’t, then either grow a ‘stache or don’t shave all month. Pick one, join the fundraising team, and LET’S FUCKING KILL CANCER.
And now a word from co-captain Jacob Cloud and his cat Weezer:
