Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 300
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

14/5/12

SQ

Bar x 10

40kg x 10

70kg x 10

90kg x 10

120kg x 10

140kg x 8

160kg x 1 - went for a double but wasn't to be tonight

160kg x 1

175kg x 0 - pants split at the bottom, aah

BP

bar x 20

40kg x 20

60kg x 22

80kg x 6

RGBP

60kg x 13

23/5/12

BP

bar x 20

40kg x 20

60kg x 10

80kg x 5

100kg x 2

RGBP

80kg x 8

80kg x 7

80kg x 9

60kg x 21

Single Arm KB Rows

32kg x 10

32kg x 10

32kg x 10

DL - decided to see where my strength is at on these, despite having not trained them in almost a year because of bulging discs, so I kept the reps low. Previous PB was a hard 170kg in comp..

75kg x 6

125kg x 6

155kg x 2

175kg x 2 (New PB)

Progress pic, goal is 16" arms @ 10% (currently 14" @ 18%), still have a fair bit of muscle to build..

ghosty_23-5-12_75kg.jpg

What's your bodyweight Mike?

Is it a good idea to go that hard and heavy into deadlifts when you haven't done the exercise for a year due to injury?! Ease back into it man...

What's your bodyweight Mike?

Is it a good idea to go that hard and heavy into deadlifts when you haven't done the exercise for a year due to injury?! Ease back into it man...

Hovering around 75-76kg with slack eating. A few weeks ago when I was eating solid I got up to 78.5kg. The last few weeks have been stressful and busy trying to get the car going again (SR blew, then bought a forged motor from a private seller in "good working order" turned out to be completely f**ked and had to get my money back, then bought another SR from an import shop and that one turned out to have a hole in piston 3, they rebuilt it free of charge and it's all sweet, still, ended up putting the engine in/out two more times than I should have had to do lol) but that's settling down so I should be able to focus on training and eating again from next week onwards.

The deadlifts felt pretty good. The 125 and 155 didn't cause much strain at all, the first rep on 175 was hard but solid, the second rep was slow and not great, but I didn't break, good sign, lol. Sometimes you just have to test the waters. It's a starting point, haven't decided if I'll start training deadlift again, but what I do know is if I do, it should be ok as long as I keep the rep range low so that my form doesn't break down and get me in strife.

Another thing I might add that helps tremondously with rest and recovery is by deadlifting on a lifting platform with bumper plates, I don't have to waste energy controlling the down portion of the lift, I can just 'drop' while holding the bar. (Obviously this isn't really an option if you train at a commercial gym because they'll shoot you for dropping the weights + they're not bumpers and will get damaged)

Edited by GHOSTrun

I tested DL singles last night too coming back from back injury.

I'm still 30kg off my best but only 10kg off my best at home - shit bar and shit plates compared to comp stuff.

I've decided to do Nationals.

I'll pack the voltaren, heat pack and ice pack for the drive home :rofl:

what's your DL PB?

get someone to drive you or it could be trouble lol

On Tue night if anyone was watching my try and get out of the carpark after gym they would've wondered WTF was wrong with me... bloody GTR clutch was making my calf cramp something shocking... had to make a few moves to get out at the right angle, stopping every few seconds to stretch it as it cramped up... funny but painful

Been deadlifting on platforms with bumper plates at the new gym, it's good, but I honestly don't see what all the fuss is about.

I'm more excited about the bar they have to jack the barbell up off the ground to load the plates on...

Lol yeah it's sick, makes it so much easier/quicker

I see your point, the bumpers would help out a lot with those lifts, I just don't do any of em lol

DL 140x6 just then without too much trouble so 150 shouldn't be a problem next week

I've done it before but tweaked a glute, and used to do it when I was doing the 5x5 strength program but I wore a belt back then

28/5/12

BP

bar x 20

40kg x 20

60kg x 10

80kg x 11

80kg x 10

80kg x 8

90kg x 3 (reverse grip)

100kg x 2

DL

(warmup: squat 70kg x 10)

70kg x 5

120kg x 5

150kg x 2

200kg x 0

180kg x 0

Too confident from last session, rookie mistake. Gassed after the 200 attempt. Disappointing but I should have known better.

SQ

90kg x 3

120kg x 5

140kg x 5

150kg x 2

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • Hi all,   long time listener, first time caller   i was wondering if anyone can help me identify a transistor on the climate control unit board that decided to fry itself   I've circled it in the attached photo   any help would be appreciated
    • I mean, I got two VASS engineers to refuse to cert my own coilovers stating those very laws. Appendix B makes it pretty clear what it considers 'Variable Suspension' to be. In my lived experience they can't certify something that isn't actually in the list as something that requires certification. In the VASS engineering checklist they have to complete (LS3/NCOP11) and sign on there is nothing there. All the references inside NCOP11 state that if it's variable by the driver that height needs to maintain 100mm while the car is in motion. It states the car is lowered lowering blocks and other types of things are acceptable. Dialling out a shock is about as 'user adjustable' as changing any other suspension component lol. I wanted to have it signed off to dissuade HWP and RWC testers to state the suspension is legal to avoid having this discussion with them. The real problem is that Police and RWC/Pink/Blue slip people will say it needs engineering, and the engineers will state it doesn't need engineering. It is hugely irritating when aforementioned people get all "i know the rules mate feck off" when they don't, and the actual engineers are pleasant as all hell and do know the rules. Cars failing RWC for things that aren't listed in the RWC requirements is another thing here entirely!
    • I don't. I mean, mine's not a GTR, but it is a 32 with a lot of GTR stuff on it. But regardless, I typically buy from local suppliers. Getting stuff from Japan is seldom worth the pain. Buying from RHDJapan usually ends up in the final total of your basket being about double what you thought it would be, after all the bullshit fees and such are added on.
    • The hydrocarbon component of E10 can be shittier, and is in fact, shittier, than that used in normal 91RON fuel. That's because the octane boost provided by the ethanol allows them to use stuff that doesn't make the grade without the help. The 1c/L saving typically available on E10 is going to be massively overridden by the increased consumption caused by the ethanol and the crappier HC (ie the HCs will be less dense, meaning that there will definitely be less energy per unit volume than for more dense HCs). That is one of the reasons why P98 will return better fuel consumption than 91 does, even with the ignition timing completely fixed. There is more energy per unit volume because the HCs used in 98 are higher density than in the lawnmower fuel.
    • No, I'd suggest that that is the checklist for pneumatic/hydraulic adjustable systems. I would say, based on my years of reading and complying with Australian Standards and similar regulations, that the narrow interpretation of Clause 3.2 b would be the preferred/expected/intended one, by the author, and those using the standard. Wishful thinking need not apply.
×
×
  • Create New...