This is DOGGCRAPP!!!
- Thread starter Karky
- Start date
DoggCrapp is a method of weight training created by Dante Trudel. BBers have had a lot of success with it
Damn, my right knee is hurting
The pain is on the medial side of the knee joint, I think I've had something similar before, but it went away by itself in a day or so. This is the third day I'm having it. I've tried to wiggle my leg to see if it is unstable, but it doesn't appear to be so, it just feels that way. It could have something to do with me having a slightly stretched ligament on the lateral side from getting hit by a car. I felt it during (but it appeared before I started training) my last leg workout but figured it was nothing.
I think the cause might be that I ran on the treadmil with chucks the other day.. I sure hope this passes by itself, as I hate going to the doctor for small things like that.
The pain is on the medial side of the knee joint, I think I've had something similar before, but it went away by itself in a day or so. This is the third day I'm having it. I've tried to wiggle my leg to see if it is unstable, but it doesn't appear to be so, it just feels that way. It could have something to do with me having a slightly stretched ligament on the lateral side from getting hit by a car. I felt it during (but it appeared before I started training) my last leg workout but figured it was nothing.
I think the cause might be that I ran on the treadmil with chucks the other day.. I sure hope this passes by itself, as I hate going to the doctor for small things like that.
I think I'm a supinator, actually. but now that I'm "testing" I'm a but unsure... It might change when I run also.. I hope that's it and that I just need to rest.
I do pistols off a box (stand on the box and do them) it helps because the hardest part is keeping the non working leg up. Doing them off a box takes away that problem. so just stand on a box and have something to hold onto for help. Eventually I want to step down from the box and do them properly, but it's a progression tool.
I do pistols off a box (stand on the box and do them) it helps because the hardest part is keeping the non working leg up. Doing them off a box takes away that problem. so just stand on a box and have something to hold onto for help. Eventually I want to step down from the box and do them properly, but it's a progression tool.
Maybe I'll do that the next time I'm at the gym.
Pistols were so much easier once I did them that way. Also, just go all the way down into the hole, let yourself drop down and just keep balance by supporting yourself. You need to learn how to get out of the hole, it takes a lot of glute and both adductor and abductor support.
Pistols were so much easier once I did them that way. Also, just go all the way down into the hole, let yourself drop down and just keep balance by supporting yourself. You need to learn how to get out of the hole, it takes a lot of glute and both adductor and abductor support.
I haven't been arsed with logging lately.. dunno why, it just seems like a hasse. I would like to use this thread to maybe discuss some of the things I come across in my schooling, though.
I was reading up on GLUT4 transporter. It is "activated" by insulin, and it facilitates diffusion of glucose. Diffusion means that a cell with less glucose in it will be filled faster, since there would be a very low concentration gradient inside it. Am I right? In other words, right after exercise.
This gets me thinking: is there usually a lot of glucose floating around in muscle? Isn't most of it converted to glycogen (if stores aren't full).
Also, glycogen synthesis is a process that takes some time, correct? So if you get a lot of carbs in you right after exercise, your blood sugar will rise a lot and you will get an insulin spike. This activates the GLUT4 transporter (there are others aswell) and glucose will rush into the muscle. However, if the muscle can't convert glucose to glycogen quickly enough, glucose would accumilate in the muscle, increasing the concentration gradient, making diffusion into the muscle slow down or stop completely if equilibrium is reached. So isn't it very possible that it is actually the rate of glycogen synthesis that is the limitation when it comes to filling glycogen stores, and not necissarily the carbs you eat? What I'm saying is, more carbs PWO does not necessarily equal better, you just need enough, if you get more your muscles won't be able to suck it all up and the glucose will have to be taken elsewhere for storage (adipocytes).
Now, does anyone know anything about the rate of glycogen synthesis? can it be improved? Would it perhaps be better to eat moderate amounts of carbs over a longer period PWO than taking it all in in one or two meals. Is there any way to calculate how many glucose moles the muscles can actually handle in one go, and then calculate how much you actually need to eat? That would be very theoretical, of course, and might not have the biggest practical application, but it would be very fun!
I was reading up on GLUT4 transporter. It is "activated" by insulin, and it facilitates diffusion of glucose. Diffusion means that a cell with less glucose in it will be filled faster, since there would be a very low concentration gradient inside it. Am I right? In other words, right after exercise.
This gets me thinking: is there usually a lot of glucose floating around in muscle? Isn't most of it converted to glycogen (if stores aren't full).
Also, glycogen synthesis is a process that takes some time, correct? So if you get a lot of carbs in you right after exercise, your blood sugar will rise a lot and you will get an insulin spike. This activates the GLUT4 transporter (there are others aswell) and glucose will rush into the muscle. However, if the muscle can't convert glucose to glycogen quickly enough, glucose would accumilate in the muscle, increasing the concentration gradient, making diffusion into the muscle slow down or stop completely if equilibrium is reached. So isn't it very possible that it is actually the rate of glycogen synthesis that is the limitation when it comes to filling glycogen stores, and not necissarily the carbs you eat? What I'm saying is, more carbs PWO does not necessarily equal better, you just need enough, if you get more your muscles won't be able to suck it all up and the glucose will have to be taken elsewhere for storage (adipocytes).
Now, does anyone know anything about the rate of glycogen synthesis? can it be improved? Would it perhaps be better to eat moderate amounts of carbs over a longer period PWO than taking it all in in one or two meals. Is there any way to calculate how many glucose moles the muscles can actually handle in one go, and then calculate how much you actually need to eat? That would be very theoretical, of course, and might not have the biggest practical application, but it would be very fun!
I know that insulin sensitivity is really important in glycogen synthesis.
Are any of these papers relevant to what you are looking for?
(that book looks kinda good)
Are any of these papers relevant to what you are looking for?
(that book looks kinda good)
That book was interesting, I would love to have seen if glycogen synthesis would have increased if they had another group with more than 1.2g/kg carbs. It explained well how there seems to be a "roof" for where more insulin doesn't equal greater synthesis of glycogen. But it makes me wonder even more if there is a "roof" where more glucose in the blood won't make the synthesis faster.
The book does seem very interesting.. too bad you can't view the entire thing from that preview
The book does seem very interesting.. too bad you can't view the entire thing from that preview
Sometimes the academic stuff isn't really relevant because they aren't using humans ... or the experiment is just so ultra-specific, it's hard to apply it to the rest of the biochemical process.
I know! I wanted to read the whole thing. I kept wondering what other little gems were contained in there
That book was interesting, I would love to have seen if glycogen synthesis would have increased if they had another group with more than 1.2g/kg carbs. It explained well how there seems to be a "roof" for where more insulin doesn't equal greater synthesis of glycogen. But it makes me wonder even more if there is a "roof" where more glucose in the blood won't make the synthesis faster.
The book does seem very interesting.. too bad you can't view the entire thing from that preview
I know! I wanted to read the whole thing. I kept wondering what other little gems were contained in there
yeah, there was something there about long term high fat diets and if the body adapts to using fat for fuel after a while. I've read elsewhere that the body adapts after a while and that the exercise intensities that can be maintained are the same for the same duration, as long as it is aerobic (as very low glycogen would obviously reduce anaerobic capacity) and I really wanted to see this books view, but it cut me off just before the answer! Damn tease!
Are there more books like this out there? My parents keep wanting me to tell them what I want for xmas and my birthday.. so a good book on nutrition could be on there.. But I'd want something explaining the physiology/chemistry that happens when you eat, not just "eat this because it's good for you" etc.
Are there more books like this out there? My parents keep wanting me to tell them what I want for xmas and my birthday.. so a good book on nutrition could be on there.. But I'd want something explaining the physiology/chemistry that happens when you eat, not just "eat this because it's good for you" etc.
Well, Human Kinetics is the publisher of that book, so here's their website:
Here is their sport and exercise science -- nutrition and weight management (professional resources) page:
I really don't know if they are super reputable ... maybe somebody else doing a biochem degree knows better?
Here is their sport and exercise science -- nutrition and weight management (professional resources) page:
I really don't know if they are super reputable ... maybe somebody else doing a biochem degree knows better?
Today I tried pistol squats off a box again and I had very little kne pain.. just felt it a bit. I tried leg press too (which hurt last time) and they were ok.
13 reps on the pistol squats with supporting myself (though not much) on the eccentric and no support on the concentric. I notice that as I shift from eccentric to concentric muscle action my heel comes a bit up and my weight shifts a bit forward on my foot. I think this is because in order to not fall back I need to get my knee more forward, and I don't have the ankle mobility.
Next time I'm gonna try not supporting myself on the eccentric
I have had some thoughts on the subject of muscle length lately.
First of all, what is the proximal attachment? I tried googling it, but didn't really find a definition.
Anyways I was thinking something. And please be open minded, I'm going out on a very huge limb here, but I think it's fun to think about this stuff.
If you work your muscles in a short ROM, then you won't be strong in a big ROM, even though the same muscles are being used. So why hasn't the short ROM training helped you much in the big ROM (the part of the ROM you don't reach doing short ROM training).
Now what if this is the case: For different parts of the ROM, different parts of the myofibrils will have their contractile proteins in good positions to create cross bridges. That basically means different parts of the muscle will work more at different ROMs, however, we have no idea of knowing what part, that will depend how the proteins are aligned, and I bet it could be at different lengths for different myofilaments too, what I'm saying is that I'm not getting at a way to train the lower part of the biceps or anything like that (although I don't know the extent to this, so it could be so, but it's not my point)
Let's use the RDL as an example and going above and below knee as the depts. If my premisses are correct, then going below the knee will put stress on a different part of the individual myofibrils than going above the knee. To make it simple to talk about, let's talk about just one individual myofibril with a series of sarcomeres, each sarcomere is one letter:
ABCDEFG - that's the entire length of the muscle (of course there should be more, but this is just to illustrate). Maybe going below the knee will cause the proteins in the A, B and C position to be in a good arrangement, but the rest not so good arrangement, thus the myofibril will rely mainly on the ABC part to cause the contraction of that myofibril in that position, of course, this would change as you lifted the weight and went through the entire ROM, but the point is that if you stopped before the knee, the ABC parts wouldn't be in a good position in any part of the ROM. Now, if you're just training above the knee, the ABC parts aren't doing much, could they then be cut away (making the muscle "shorter"), or be made weaker? Would putting the stress on the DEFG part make the DEFG part grow more proteins while the ABC part didn't?
I know I think too much, so I must apologize, but there is no off position on the genius switch.
13 reps on the pistol squats with supporting myself (though not much) on the eccentric and no support on the concentric. I notice that as I shift from eccentric to concentric muscle action my heel comes a bit up and my weight shifts a bit forward on my foot. I think this is because in order to not fall back I need to get my knee more forward, and I don't have the ankle mobility.
Next time I'm gonna try not supporting myself on the eccentric
I have had some thoughts on the subject of muscle length lately.
First of all, what is the proximal attachment? I tried googling it, but didn't really find a definition.
Anyways I was thinking something. And please be open minded, I'm going out on a very huge limb here, but I think it's fun to think about this stuff.
If you work your muscles in a short ROM, then you won't be strong in a big ROM, even though the same muscles are being used. So why hasn't the short ROM training helped you much in the big ROM (the part of the ROM you don't reach doing short ROM training).
Now what if this is the case: For different parts of the ROM, different parts of the myofibrils will have their contractile proteins in good positions to create cross bridges. That basically means different parts of the muscle will work more at different ROMs, however, we have no idea of knowing what part, that will depend how the proteins are aligned, and I bet it could be at different lengths for different myofilaments too, what I'm saying is that I'm not getting at a way to train the lower part of the biceps or anything like that (although I don't know the extent to this, so it could be so, but it's not my point)
Let's use the RDL as an example and going above and below knee as the depts. If my premisses are correct, then going below the knee will put stress on a different part of the individual myofibrils than going above the knee. To make it simple to talk about, let's talk about just one individual myofibril with a series of sarcomeres, each sarcomere is one letter:
ABCDEFG - that's the entire length of the muscle (of course there should be more, but this is just to illustrate). Maybe going below the knee will cause the proteins in the A, B and C position to be in a good arrangement, but the rest not so good arrangement, thus the myofibril will rely mainly on the ABC part to cause the contraction of that myofibril in that position, of course, this would change as you lifted the weight and went through the entire ROM, but the point is that if you stopped before the knee, the ABC parts wouldn't be in a good position in any part of the ROM. Now, if you're just training above the knee, the ABC parts aren't doing much, could they then be cut away (making the muscle "shorter"), or be made weaker? Would putting the stress on the DEFG part make the DEFG part grow more proteins while the ABC part didn't?
I know I think too much, so I must apologize, but there is no off position on the genius switch.
Last edited:
what do you guys mean when you said "if you are a pronator during running"
and supinator?
is your knee feeling better karks?
and supinator?
is your knee feeling better karks?
you havent posted in a while man. cmonnnnn :]
hows the knee and such?
do you squat?
hows the knee and such?
do you squat?
knee is better, not 100% though, but I'm doing lunges and single leg squats without any problems.
Got an elbow problem (probably ulnar nerve inflammation) but that's subsiding by itself now. I've been really unlucky lately with injuries and stuff
I got 10 short stride forward lunges with 36kg DBs in each hand the other day, which is cool since those are the heaviest DBs in the gym (which is kinda sad) Form wasn't perfect, but OK.
Maybe I'll start logging my workouts again when my elbow is back and I can start training seriously again, lately has been kind of on and off due to injuries
Got an elbow problem (probably ulnar nerve inflammation) but that's subsiding by itself now. I've been really unlucky lately with injuries and stuff
I got 10 short stride forward lunges with 36kg DBs in each hand the other day, which is cool since those are the heaviest DBs in the gym (which is kinda sad) Form wasn't perfect, but OK.
Maybe I'll start logging my workouts again when my elbow is back and I can start training seriously again, lately has been kind of on and off due to injuries