 |
Search misc.fitness.weights |
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
misc.fitness.weights -> Re: Kettlebell Class in Ridgewood, NJ, next week
There are 7 messages in this thread.
You are currently looking at messages 1 to 7.
|
|
|
On Mon, 06 Mar 2006 20:51:49 -0700, Jason Earl <jearl@xmission.com>
wrote:
>>> I don't lift kettlebells. In fact, I have never even *seen* a
>>> kettlebell in real life. However, this moron can see that for your
>>> simplistic model to be true then a workout must exist that is the
>>> "perfect" cardio workout and the "perfect" strength
workout for all
>>> people and for all goals.
<snip>
>I am not particularly concerned about what David does for a living.
>All of us have prejudices about what kind of equipment is most useful,
>what workouts are "best," etc. The fact that he may or may not sell
>strength machines isn't particularly relevant. In fact, if he is
>selling machines I should hope that he thinks that they are worth
>purchasing. I don't mind salesmen, but I *do* have problems with
>salesmen than know that their marketing spiel is complete hogwash.
>
>My problem with David's argument was that it was simplistic to the
>point of being dishonest. Following his argument then a single "best"
>way of working out must exist, and if that is the case then he should
>argue *for* that method, and not simply against kettlebells.
>To be honest, I get most of the folks here confused with each other.
>
>Jason
I like the way you think.
Since David sells machines, I'd like to hear his perspective on their
value. This is a pro-freeweights and, for the most part, an
anti-machine ng, but if he's selling machines, he should be able to
make a case for them.
Not everyone wants to be a powerlifter or a competitive bodybuilder.
Not everyone wants to strength train to get as strong as possible.
Although with rare exceptions I avoid machines, I can see
why others would prefer or want to use them.
David can provide a service to this ng by discussing the merits of
machines in general and the features one should look for in quality
machines in relation to doing specific exercises.
Doing this might touch off a minor firestorm between David and Lee
Michaels and others, but, hey, this is MFW. In between all the
sniping and bitching, there's probably a few nuggets of info worth
getting.
|
|
|
|
Author: DavidDate: 23:55 06-03-06
|
|
<damifino@oldman.org> wrote in message
news:1g1q029pbi0j7mcgjs7p4442vuu6k66s4v@4ax.com...
> On Mon, 06 Mar 2006 20:51:49 -0700, Jason Earl <jearl@xmission.com>
> wrote:
>
>>>> I don't lift kettlebells. In fact, I have never even *seen* a
>>>> kettlebell in real life. However, this moron can see that for your
>>>> simplistic model to be true then a workout must exist that is the
>>>> "perfect" cardio workout and the "perfect" strength
workout for all
>>>> people and for all goals.
>
> <snip>
>
>>I am not particularly concerned about what David does for a living.
>>All of us have prejudices about what kind of equipment is most useful,
>>what workouts are "best," etc. The fact that he may or may not sell
>>strength machines isn't particularly relevant. In fact, if he is
>>selling machines I should hope that he thinks that they are worth
>>purchasing. I don't mind salesmen, but I *do* have problems with
>>salesmen than know that their marketing spiel is complete hogwash.
>>
>>My problem with David's argument was that it was simplistic to the
>>point of being dishonest. Following his argument then a single "best"
>>way of working out must exist, and if that is the case then he should
>>argue *for* that method, and not simply against kettlebells.
>
>>To be honest, I get most of the folks here confused with each other.
>>
>>Jason
>
> I like the way you think.
>
> Since David sells machines, I'd like to hear his perspective on their
> value. This is a pro-freeweights and, for the most part, an
> anti-machine ng, but if he's selling machines, he should be able to
> make a case for them.
>
> Not everyone wants to be a powerlifter or a competitive bodybuilder.
> Not everyone wants to strength train to get as strong as possible.
> Although with rare exceptions I avoid machines, I can see
> why others would prefer or want to use them.
>
> David can provide a service to this ng by discussing the merits of
> machines in general and the features one should look for in quality
> machines in relation to doing specific exercises.
>
> Doing this might touch off a minor firestorm between David and Lee
> Michaels and others, but, hey, this is MFW. In between all the
> sniping and bitching, there's probably a few nuggets of info worth
> getting.
It's been done - lots of stuff on google about machines vs free weights
http://www.runningplanet.com/articles/article_detail.asp?article_id=330
|
|
|
|
Author: Lee MichaelsDate: 00:00 07-03-06
|
|
<damifino@oldman.org> wrote in message
news:1g1q029pbi0j7mcgjs7p4442vuu6k66s4v@4ax.com...
> On Mon, 06 Mar 2006 20:51:49 -0700, Jason Earl <jearl@xmission.com>
> wrote:
>
>>>> I don't lift kettlebells. In fact, I have never even *seen* a
>>>> kettlebell in real life. However, this moron can see that for your
>>>> simplistic model to be true then a workout must exist that is the
>>>> "perfect" cardio workout and the "perfect" strength
workout for all
>>>> people and for all goals.
>
> <snip>
>
>>I am not particularly concerned about what David does for a living.
>>All of us have prejudices about what kind of equipment is most useful,
>>what workouts are "best," etc. The fact that he may or may not sell
>>strength machines isn't particularly relevant. In fact, if he is
>>selling machines I should hope that he thinks that they are worth
>>purchasing. I don't mind salesmen, but I *do* have problems with
>>salesmen than know that their marketing spiel is complete hogwash.
>>
>>My problem with David's argument was that it was simplistic to the
>>point of being dishonest. Following his argument then a single "best"
>>way of working out must exist, and if that is the case then he should
>>argue *for* that method, and not simply against kettlebells.
>
>>To be honest, I get most of the folks here confused with each other.
>>
>>Jason
>
> I like the way you think.
>
> Since David sells machines, I'd like to hear his perspective on their
> value. This is a pro-freeweights and, for the most part, an
> anti-machine ng, but if he's selling machines, he should be able to
> make a case for them.
>
> Not everyone wants to be a powerlifter or a competitive bodybuilder.
> Not everyone wants to strength train to get as strong as possible.
> Although with rare exceptions I avoid machines, I can see
> why others would prefer or want to use them.
>
> David can provide a service to this ng by discussing the merits of
> machines in general and the features one should look for in quality
> machines in relation to doing specific exercises.
>
> Doing this might touch off a minor firestorm between David and Lee
> Michaels and others, but, hey, this is MFW. In between all the
> sniping and bitching, there's probably a few nuggets of info worth
> getting.
Not really.
David rarely says anything remotely helpful or insightful.
I won't be paying too much attention.
|
|
|
|
Author: JRHDate: 03:30 07-03-06
|
|
On Mon, 06 Mar 2006 20:51:49 -0700, Jason Earl <jearl@xmission.com>
wrote:
>"Lee Michaels" <leemichaels*nadaspam*@comcast.net> writes:
>
>> "Jason Earl" wrote
>>>
>>> I don't lift kettlebells. In fact, I have never even *seen* a
>>> kettlebell in real life. However, this moron can see that for your
>>> simplistic model to be true then a workout must exist that is the
>>> "perfect" cardio workout and the "perfect" strength
workout for all
>>> people and for all goals.
>>>
>> Remember Jason, that David works in an industry where every crap
>> peice of gym equipment is sold to accomplish tasks that a full time
>> gym could not accomplish. Or NASA. Or a full time coach.
>
>I am not particularly concerned about what David does for a living.
>All of us have prejudices about what kind of equipment is most useful,
>what workouts are "best," etc. The fact that he may or may not sell
>strength machines isn't particularly relevant. In fact, if he is
>selling machines I should hope that he thinks that they are worth
>purchasing. I don't mind salesmen, but I *do* have problems with
>salesmen than know that their marketing spiel is complete hogwash.
>
>My problem with David's argument was that it was simplistic to the
>point of being dishonest. Following his argument then a single "best"
>way of working out must exist, and if that is the case then he should
>argue *for* that method, and not simply against kettlebells.
>
>> Besides, his trolling pattern to to challenge anybody who has any
>> knowledge or meaningful experiences to share. A trait he shares
>> with Hudson.
>
>To be honest, I get most of the folks here confused with each other.
>
Whereas Michaels is just "confused" permanently, silly old bastard.
|
|
|
|
Author: DavidDate: 03:53 07-03-06
|
|
"JRH" <chas@aol.com> wrote in message
news:53hq021dckh82ao2pj9sq5tigkkts3cq0l@4ax.com...
> On Mon, 06 Mar 2006 20:51:49 -0700, Jason Earl <jearl@xmission.com>
> wrote:
>
>>"Lee Michaels" <leemichaels*nadaspam*@comcast.net> writes:
>>
>>> "Jason Earl" wrote
>>>>
>>>> I don't lift kettlebells. In fact, I have never even *seen* a
>>>> kettlebell in real life. However, this moron can see that for your
>>>> simplistic model to be true then a workout must exist that is the
>>>> "perfect" cardio workout and the "perfect" strength
workout for all
>>>> people and for all goals.
>>>>
>>> Remember Jason, that David works in an industry where every crap
>>> peice of gym equipment is sold to accomplish tasks that a full time
>>> gym could not accomplish. Or NASA. Or a full time coach.
>>
>>I am not particularly concerned about what David does for a living.
>>All of us have prejudices about what kind of equipment is most useful,
>>what workouts are "best," etc. The fact that he may or may not sell
>>strength machines isn't particularly relevant. In fact, if he is
>>selling machines I should hope that he thinks that they are worth
>>purchasing. I don't mind salesmen, but I *do* have problems with
>>salesmen than know that their marketing spiel is complete hogwash.
>>
>>My problem with David's argument was that it was simplistic to the
>>point of being dishonest. Following his argument then a single "best"
>>way of working out must exist, and if that is the case then he should
>>argue *for* that method, and not simply against kettlebells.
>>
>>> Besides, his trolling pattern to to challenge anybody who has any
>>> knowledge or meaningful experiences to share. A trait he shares
>>> with Hudson.
>>
>>To be honest, I get most of the folks here confused with each other.
>>
>
> Whereas Michaels is just "confused" permanently, silly old bastard.
Yes he is one of the mental giants in this ng for damn sure!
|
|
|
|
Author: DavidDate: 04:06 07-03-06
|
|
"JRH" <chas@aol.com> wrote in message
news:53hq021dckh82ao2pj9sq5tigkkts3cq0l@4ax.com...
> On Mon, 06 Mar 2006 20:51:49 -0700, Jason Earl <jearl@xmission.com>
> wrote:
>
>>"Lee Michaels" <leemichaels*nadaspam*@comcast.net> writes:
>>
>>> "Jason Earl" wrote
>>>>
>>>> I don't lift kettlebells. In fact, I have never even *seen* a
>>>> kettlebell in real life. However, this moron can see that for your
>>>> simplistic model to be true then a workout must exist that is the
>>>> "perfect" cardio workout and the "perfect" strength
workout for all
>>>> people and for all goals.
>>>>
>>> Remember Jason, that David works in an industry where every crap
>>> peice of gym equipment is sold to accomplish tasks that a full time
>>> gym could not accomplish. Or NASA. Or a full time coach.
>>
>>I am not particularly concerned about what David does for a living.
>>All of us have prejudices about what kind of equipment is most useful,
>>what workouts are "best," etc. The fact that he may or may not sell
>>strength machines isn't particularly relevant. In fact, if he is
>>selling machines I should hope that he thinks that they are worth
>>purchasing. I don't mind salesmen, but I *do* have problems with
>>salesmen than know that their marketing spiel is complete hogwash.
>>
>>My problem with David's argument was that it was simplistic to the
>>point of being dishonest. Following his argument then a single "best"
>>way of working out must exist, and if that is the case then he should
>>argue *for* that method, and not simply against kettlebells.
>>
>>> Besides, his trolling pattern to to challenge anybody who has any
>>> knowledge or meaningful experiences to share. A trait he shares
>>> with Hudson.
>>
>>To be honest, I get most of the folks here confused with each other.
>>
>
> Whereas Michaels is just "confused" permanently, silly old bastard.
Just a thought, the IOM award has not been awarded here in my memory. I
thought it could be dusted off and then it could be awarded to Lee on a
permanent basis i.e. he could 'own' the award. He could display it proudly
on his mantelpiece with his other certificates - for instance his graduation
from elementary school which he achieved while still a teenager!
|
|
|
|
Author: Steve FreidesDate: 08:46 07-03-06
|
|
"Lee Michaels" <leemichaels*nadaspam*@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:xdGdnWsBt-AhjZDZnZ2dnUVZ_tudnZ2d@comcast.com...
>
> <damifino@oldman.org> wrote in message
> news:1g1q029pbi0j7mcgjs7p4442vuu6k66s4v@4ax.com...
>> On Mon, 06 Mar 2006 20:51:49 -0700, Jason Earl <jearl@xmission.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>>> I don't lift kettlebells. In fact, I have never even *seen* a
>>>>> kettlebell in real life. However, this moron can see that for
>>>>> your
>>>>> simplistic model to be true then a workout must exist that is the
>>>>> "perfect" cardio workout and the "perfect"
strength workout for
>>>>> all
>>>>> people and for all goals.
>>
>> <snip>
>>
>>>I am not particularly concerned about what David does for a living.
>>>All of us have prejudices about what kind of equipment is most
>>>useful,
>>>what workouts are "best," etc. The fact that he may or may not
sell
>>>strength machines isn't particularly relevant. In fact, if he is
>>>selling machines I should hope that he thinks that they are worth
>>>purchasing. I don't mind salesmen, but I *do* have problems with
>>>salesmen than know that their marketing spiel is complete hogwash.
>>>
>>>My problem with David's argument was that it was simplistic to the
>>>point of being dishonest. Following his argument then a single
>>>"best"
>>>way of working out must exist, and if that is the case then he should
>>>argue *for* that method, and not simply against kettlebells.
>>
>>>To be honest, I get most of the folks here confused with each other.
>>>
>>>Jason
>>
>> I like the way you think.
>>
>> Since David sells machines, I'd like to hear his perspective on their
>> value. This is a pro-freeweights and, for the most part, an
>> anti-machine ng, but if he's selling machines, he should be able to
>> make a case for them.
>>
>> Not everyone wants to be a powerlifter or a competitive bodybuilder.
>> Not everyone wants to strength train to get as strong as possible.
>> Although with rare exceptions I avoid machines, I can see
>> why others would prefer or want to use them.
>>
>> David can provide a service to this ng by discussing the merits of
>> machines in general and the features one should look for in quality
>> machines in relation to doing specific exercises.
>>
>> Doing this might touch off a minor firestorm between David and Lee
>> Michaels and others, but, hey, this is MFW. In between all the
>> sniping and bitching, there's probably a few nuggets of info worth
>> getting.
>
> Not really.
>
> David rarely says anything remotely helpful or insightful.
>
> I won't be paying too much attention.
Me, neither. He has proven repeatedly that he enjoys nay-saying for its
own sake and, so far as I can tell, that's all he does here.
-S-
http://www.kbnj.com
|
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
Contact | Fitness
|
|
|
