Phr4nk0's forum posts

#1 Posted by Phr4nk0 (349 posts) -

You should give yourself some clear goals and work towards them. You said you did legs and abs today, with some cardio afterwards. Depending on what you classify as cardio you could already be shooting yourself in the foot. You should think of training as evolving your body, you're trying to go in both directions here, it's not going to work. It's very hard to get good in all aspects of performance even when training optimally, messing around usually just leads to burning out and discouragement. Training is just as much about doing it smart as doing it with intensity.

1. Separate the type of training you are doing. This is counter to what most people will say but it is the quickest and best way to get results. Think about it, when you try to hurry and fumble about trying to learn or do 5 different things at once, you end up taking shortcuts and messing things up. Take it step by step and everything will be done to the best of your ability and properly. This is key, when training I don't train just to train, I train to get better. If I'm not going to the best of my ability then I'm not making progress, and I'm wasting time. When you train, focus on one thing at a time, be it technique, speed, stamina, strength, flexibility or whatever. Making proper progress in one will help out the others without the need for mixing yourself up.

This means that if you're doing weights, do weights and don't do cardio straight after. Say you pushed yourself with some squats, great! You're sending stimulus to your muscles to get bigger and stronger, you need to be able to exert more energy! Now not 30 minutes later your huffing on a treadmill, uh oh... now you're telling them to streamline and be more energy efficient. You're sending mixed messages and getting nowhere. You need to give your body time to act on these messages before cancelling them out with another.

Do weights one day, eat, sleep, recover... Now cardio the next day, eat sleep recover. Repeat. Now you are giving your body time to recover and react to the stimuli your sending it, then sending it another which it can react to in turn. Instead of doing both and getting nowhere. If you've got nothing going on you could split your workout into weight or running in the early morning, eat and have a nap, wake up and later on in the day you could do the other. You're still giving your body the building blocks it needs and some time to follow the instructions your exercise has given it, instead of just sending two sets of contradictory instructions at once.

2. What type of cardio are you doing? There is no way you can train with any kind of intensity for 8 hours. Cardio is cardio, as in cardiovascular endurance. You push your heart hard for 8 hours and just about anyone is liable to suffer a heart attack. If you're saying cardio but really mean walking or slow jog on the treadmill then you're really just burning calories, which is fine, but why not take an easier and more effective approach and just cut some of the calories you still in and save yourself from wearing out your knee joints unnecessarily. Energy is at a premium, especially if you're trying to excel in multiple opposing areas of fitness. The hours of unnecessary cardio just serve to wear out your body so come tomorrow or later in the day when you hit the weights you're not at your peak and can't push yourself to make those gains in the strength department.

One of the hardest things to realise is that you have to be as efficient in your training as possible. Which seems to fly in the face of what most people think of when they think exercise. It's all about wasting as much energy as possible right? This can get you to a decent level, but if your the type of person that wants to do cardio for 8 hours, you're probably not the kind of person that wants average results.

3. Use the 90/10 rule. 90% or your results come from 10% of your training. Focus on the main thing you are training, and get rid of the mess. If you train legs, do your squats and deadlifts. These two moves will give you 90% of your leg development, now you could waste another hour hitting the leg press, calf raises, hack squats, glute ham raise and whatever else for the last 10%. Or you could save all that effort go home, recover and put it towards your cardio later, giving you a better cardio workout. Again, efficiency leaves you with better results, quicker.

Go home, eat your steak and vegies. Maybe a protein shake, get enough rest. Thats 90% of your recovery, you could waste your time and money getting preworkouts, intra-workouts, post workout recoverys, bcaa's, this and that new product that boosts your gains! etc etc. It's not lies, but so many people waste their time and money on that, the stuff that gives you 10% without nailing the easier 90%.

These are the 3 main principles I've been trying to follow with my training ever since I started researching and taking my training more serious. It's the best advice I've ever been given so I'm just taking the time to pass it on. Most people probably already know a lot of this but it's always good to be reminded that it is the simple things that get the best results. Ever since taking this advice seriously I've gone from 116kg barely being about to squat 70kg to what was surely above parallel, bench press 80ish badly and deadlift 90kg (who knows what I could run, I didn't run back then) to 92kg. Yesterday I hit a PB of 122.5 kg squat ass to grass for 3 sets of 5. Deadlift 175kg for 5 reps and bench (properly) pause reps touching sternum 110 kg 3x5. I'm still nowhere near great at running, never have been, but I can now run 5km in under 25 min. It's good for me, but I'm still improving and will be for a long while hopefully. I hit the weights mon/wed/fri for full body workouts and run tue/thurs after training muay thai. I'm not trying to brag, I don't think any of the figures are anything really that impressive, just trying to lend some more credence to the ramblings I just spent half an hour typing into an random internet forum I guess. Take it or leave it?

#2 Edited by Phr4nk0 (349 posts) -

I'm sure I can't add anything near the level of detail and intellectual discussion that's already been going on in here. That's not really the way I roll, I dislike specifics and usually just like to find a way of thinking that makes things make sense, so I'll share mine on your two questions. I try to simplify things as much as possible so obviously I'm making generalizations.

Evolution: The main mistake people make is thinking something evolves a certain way to ensure an animals survival. This is thinking about it the wrong way. The way evolution really works is that the other things die off. Thus things don't necessarily evolve in the way people think of it it's more last man standing wins.

Giraffe example (easiest to think of): People think that the giraffe has a long neck because they evolved them to get at the food higher up. This is the wrong way to think of it. What happened is that food was scarce at low levels (due to competition with other animals, overpopulation, certain plant became extinct, whatever), the shorter giraffes didn't get as much food as the slightly taller giraffes. This made them die out, lose mating potential (starvation, weaker than the taller ones so lost fights for mates, shorter females can't eat as much as taller ones so more shorter females babies died before birth, died from lack of nutrition from milk, not as much nutrition so more at risk for disease, etc) leaving the longer neck giraffes to thrive.

It's not as glamorous as people think, and it's not an a to b thing. It's lots of factors combining together to get to a random advantageous outcome. It's also important to not think of evolution as "right". Just because something evolved a certain way doesn't mean that way was the way it was supposed to happen. Think of it like a tree, the tree grows branches, leaves at certain points, not because the tree is meant to grow that way, just because whatever confluence of soil nutrition, water, oxygen, wind and countless other factors meant it sprouted a branch at that spot and not 2 cms further up the trunk.

Gender role: This is a combination of a few things. 1) It takes a lot of energy to gestate and then feed and raise a child, you don't want to waste that energy on raising a child that doesn't have as much of a chance at survival. Thus females get to be choosy, and they want to pick the father that will have the highest chance of producing healthy offspring that with in turn thrive and produce. Females can also only produce a set number of offspring in a lifetime, due to the time it takes to birth and raise them, males on the other hand get the benefit of fire and forget so to speak. 2) The ratio of males and females in the population. Usually there is more females than males, due to males fighting or whatever. But in animals where the population is more evenly split or even flipped the other way then the females thrown themselves at the males. 3) The type of breeding competition that animal employs. Your thinking of the classic, male fights male, male shows display of dominance, male proves he can provide better than other male. But there are other competition some species use, such as sperm competition, where females go in heat for a short specific time, and gets with as many males as possible in as short a time as possible, thus the males themselves don't compete for the female, the sperm competes for the egg. There are some others I read about too but I forget. Anyway hopefully I added something to the conversation and didn't just blab all glib like for 10 minutes.

#3 Posted by Phr4nk0 (349 posts) -


I once asked a shocking, yet existential question as to why I, as myself and myself alone, look into a "first-person view" whereas every other human being surrounding, all 7 billion that stand upon this Earth and exist in this godly void that carries an astronomical size beyond our very comprehension, I see other human beings in a third-person view?

Why me? Why am I the only creature in the universe that looks into just these eyes and these eyes alone? I feel so fucking weird and small just thinking about it. I just hope I'm not the only one who ponders this, because if not then I am really a fucking weirdo.

I'm the exact opposite, I pretty much never look through my own eyes in the way most people seem to. I wonder why people don't realize that everyone else is looking through their own eyes, and that everyone's viewpoint on anything is as valid as anyone else's. Which leads to the discovery that every opinion is just as valid or invalid as anyone else's. Which means that nothing is wrong or right in an empirical point of view. I always find myself thinking how pathetic and petty everything is, which has lead me to lack empathy for practically anything, including myself. I've been this way ever since I was around 12 years old. I found myself laying in bed awake at night most nights until 4 or 5 am thinking all kinds of thoughts I couldn't process and scared the shit out of me at that age. Eventually I managed to just accept it after 3 years of sleepless emotional darkness, sometimes just laying awake crying for hours. Now I pretty much don't care about anything or anyone, because of how small and nonsensical anyone's problems seem to be when looking at it as a whole from a more universal view. I'm pretty much an asshole, but I'm an asshole to myself as well, which is my only cold comfort... at least I'm not a hypocrite. I can't remember the last time I really truly was emotionally invested in anything, related to myself or others. I've gone off the existential deep end and unlike other people who seem to get paralyzed by abyss of nothingness I seem to have wallowed in it long enough to have had it wash over me and come to the realization that life is exactly... nothing. I'm going to live and die, and it's going to be nothing but a blip... and that's just the way it is.

#4 Edited by Phr4nk0 (349 posts) -

1. Yeah no storylines except the rarely real same old pre-fight "I'm gonna kill him" stuff that doesn't even mean anything anymore. As much as a lot of the O.G. MMA guys hate the new "TUF-ers" maybe watch some of the earlier seasons of The Ultimate Fighter. There's some good stuff on there and it will satisfy your want of a narrative and give you a foot in the door on finding some fighters you like. Most of the later seasons have been pretty bland, I stopped watching until the last one where they introduced women, they really showed up the men in every way and made the show fresh again.

I found my way into watching a lot of MMA by starting at the beginning. Watch UFC 1 and just bathe in the brutality for a while, follow it along as it evolves. By the time it gets to the late teens it's very close to how it is now so you don't have to watch too many. Some fights run extremely long though and can be boring.

2. This is incredibly subjective, and there's a huge list. Do you find the grappling more interesting, the striking? Someone who just comes to throw down, or the real calculated pro? Do you know enough about the MMA game to recognize and appreciate the subtle skills that someone with real talent brings to the fight or maybe you're all about the intensity and grit someone can bring to the ring.

3. To be honest it's pretty much just the UFC, though I really liked Pride. Once you've gotten into it maybe spend some time watching the old Pride FC shows, the rule differences make the two very different and interesting to think about how they play into the fighters game plans and how they would fare in the other organisation.

4. UFC just launched their sub thingy, no idea if it's worth it.

#5 Posted by Phr4nk0 (349 posts) -

Jeeze, sometimes the most random things make me take a step back and wonder about other people and then myself.

It's 5 dollars man, if you're curious - give it a shot. I buy games I know I won't like for 5 dollars just to see if there's anything interesting in them - any redeeming features or a cool idea others might have missed. I'd buy pretty much any game for 5 dollars. I know some people are strapped for cash, and want to stretch their money, but damn, 5 dollars? Gaming is a luxury, if 5 dollars is really that big of a deal you probably should be spending it on something else.

Not being judgmental or anything, just as I said sometimes the most random things give you pause and reflect on your values, and how they relate to others.

#6 Posted by Phr4nk0 (349 posts) -

1 Fight Club
2 Sin City
3 The Good, the Bad and the Ugly
4 First Blood
5 Way of the Gun
6 Heat
7 Die Hard
8 Scarface
9 Training Day
10 Snatch

Never wrote out a list before, so many more that could easily be switched in but I think this would be my top 10.

#7 Posted by Phr4nk0 (349 posts) -

Squats first, every workout. Gotta get me dem legs!

#8 Edited by Phr4nk0 (349 posts) -

Whenever the question of doing something dumb or not comes up, as a rule my answer is always "Hell yeah, do it!"

This situation hasn't changed that reply, and maybe it says more about me than I want to share but this idea doesn't even seem dumb. I nearly had every TMNT action figure released while the original series was running, I was a huge fan. My mum made me sell them because I wasn't playing with them anymore when I got older, she's an organisation freak and didn't like the space the trunk took up. She took advantage of my teenage years and want of money, I will never forgive her.

On a tangent, I was seriously considering buying every Skeleton Warrior action figure from an ebay auction I saw a couple months ago. That's a dumb idea...

@pr1mus said:

Buy them and then play with them complete with making noises of kicks and punches.

Fuck adulthood.

This man knows what's up.

#9 Edited by Phr4nk0 (349 posts) -

@l4wd0g: Maybe you or some people you know have some serious talent but the last thing I expect is clear, crisp and un-garbled chatting from someone sucking dick.

While it could be seen as derogatory, the analogy is actually pretty 'sound' lol.

#10 Posted by Phr4nk0 (349 posts) -

As everyone has said Forza will be the highest rated for sure, they've hit it out of the park every time and I doubt this will be the exception.

I voted Ryse though, as I'm thinking this will be a dark horse and surprise a lot of people. All the negativity around it may actually work to its favour (review wise, sales will probably still suffer) as I think once the actual game is in the hands of some people they'll see a lot of the negativity was due to bad showings and pre-conceived notions. It looks real pretty and if what I've been thinking is true could be one of the best launch titles.