Re: Muscle building/fat burning supplements : Tue Nov 06, 2012 6:24 pm  

Standee wrote: ... I just wanted to weigh more so I could ski faster, ... Just the sort of interesting assumption we should challenge! As a non-skier, I question if you've been working on the right assumption, as if you were right, and a heavier body slid down slippy surfaces faster, wouldn't I see loads of porkers winning the downhills, or extra-wide bobsleighs filled with the Golightlys cleaning up the medals? I can see how if you just want to point in a straight line and go, that would work, but I don't think in general you can do that, can you? So what you gain in straight line you perhaps lose in having to change the vector of a heavier mass when zig-zagging or, in the case of a bob, going round bends? And back to straight lines, why no 25 stone ski jumpers? If a heavy jumper could achieve a higher take-off speed, it's all surely down to gravity after that, and wouldn't a huge bloke jump further due to being better able to overcome forward air resistance? Yet my all time ski jump hero (well, after Eddie the Eagle) Adam Małysz is only about 5'7" and looks like he'd be 9 stone wet through, yet he seems in his career to have been able to achieve a faster takeoff speed than most? One article about the physics of it.

Standee wrote: ... I just wanted to weigh more so I could ski faster, ... Just the sort of interesting assumption we should challenge! As a non-skier, I question if you've been working on the right assumption, as if you were right, and a heavier body slid down slippy surfaces faster, wouldn't I see loads of porkers winning the downhills, or extra-wide bobsleighs filled with the Golightlys cleaning up the medals? I can see how if you just want to point in a straight line and go, that would work, but I don't think in general you can do that, can you? So what you gain in straight line you perhaps lose in having to change the vector of a heavier mass when zig-zagging or, in the case of a bob, going round bends? And back to straight lines, why no 25 stone ski jumpers? If a heavy jumper could achieve a higher take-off speed, it's all surely down to gravity after that, and wouldn't a huge bloke jump further due to being better able to overcome forward air resistance? Yet my all time ski jump hero (well, after Eddie the Eagle) Adam Małysz is only about 5'7" and looks like he'd be 9 stone wet through, yet he seems in his career to have been able to achieve a faster takeoff speed than most? One article about the physics of it.

Re: Muscle building/fat burning supplements : Tue Nov 06, 2012 6:57 pm  

Standee wrote:

I've no problem with core strength, 14 years teaching combat, body attack etc. and having free weights at home saw to that, I just wanted to weigh more so I could ski faster, although I am not sure I could handle te crashes anymore, maybe 77mph is my upper limit without breaking a leg!!

For what it's worth, I'd have you and take this as only the opinions someone who's a rugby coach (well, IT services salesman, RL coaching is just a hobby) and trains himself, rather than a qualified personal trainer: Your weights work to gain weight should only be 3-4 sessions a week, 45 mins per session, containing one workout that contains only squats, deadlifts and pull up, and the other containing bench presses and overhead presses. No long aerobic sessions, but perhaps a couple of 30 minute interval session if you want to maintain fitness, and just keep upping the calories and spread them out over the day.

I don't think being heavier will help you ski faster though. Downhill skiers can tend to be heftier than the slalom racers, but I think that's from the need for strong legs rather than a need to carry weight. Otherwise they'd load their kit with lead weights

Re: Muscle building/fat burning supplements : Tue Nov 06, 2012 7:03 pm  

for gaining muscle ive had alot of the proteins.. promax, progain, creatine etc

they do work, help but weight on and lean muscle but you need to take them 3/4 times a day and they taste gastly! and only last a month and you buy another for £35 ..not cheap

you cant stay on them every month, not good for you body, it needs a break , so you have a break and your back to square one again, ive become bored with the cycle and just eat decent meals now

plus im sure creatine messed my bladder up as i pee alot more than i used to do!

creatine was the best one for muscle but it just retains water so you pee alot and have to drink alot of water too

you cant try them but it aint cheap and becomes a chore

Re: Muscle building/fat burning supplements : Tue Nov 06, 2012 7:56 pm  

I'd just like to point out that my lifestyle has so far, thankfully, precluded me from this sort of discussion.

[Pemps]

Re: Muscle building/fat burning supplements : Tue Nov 06, 2012 10:21 pm  

I tried T4 or T5 fat burners for 2 weeks. Whizzing my tits off is the term I'd use.

Lost 5lb though.

Re: Muscle building/fat burning supplements : Wed Nov 07, 2012 7:28 am  

Pemps wrote:

Whizzing my tits off is the term I'd use.

Speed freak.

I'm reporting you to the relevant authorities.

Re: Muscle building/fat burning supplements : Wed Nov 07, 2012 8:23 am  

Richie wrote:

For what it's worth, I'd have you and take this as only the opinions someone who's a rugby coach (well, IT services salesman, RL coaching is just a hobby) and trains himself, rather than a qualified personal trainer: Your weights work to gain weight should only be 3-4 sessions a week, 45 mins per session, containing one workout that contains only squats, deadlifts and pull up, and the other containing bench presses and overhead presses. No long aerobic sessions, but perhaps a couple of 30 minute interval session if you want to maintain fitness, and just keep upping the calories and spread them out over the day.

I don't think being heavier will help you ski faster though. Downhill skiers can tend to be heftier than the slalom racers, but I think that's from the need for strong legs rather than a need to carry weight. Otherwise they'd load their kit with lead weights

Im not for one minute saying that I'd gain huge speed by being a porker, but I could do to weight about 2 stone more, when I ski with my pack on (with camera's etc.) then I do get faster, but the centre of gravity is unusual so I become unstable. I never train(ed) for more than 45 minutes at a time, always did stacked reps and sets, the big issue for me is calorie intake, I eat about 800 a day, and even then I force that down, if I could find a reliable (and digestable) option that packed me 1000 calories in without impacting my ability to do the rest of my day then I'd be back in the gym tomorrow.

Re: Muscle building/fat burning supplements : Wed Nov 07, 2012 9:32 am  

I know a fantastic fat burner, its easily the best out there, its called....an equation .Energy output > Energy Input.

Ignore "that bloke down the gym" who claims this magic pill will shred your bodyweight. Nothing compares to a healthy diet (your calories eaten over 5-6 small meals every 3 hours) and exercise. Period.

If, like me you dont have time to go to the gym, but do have the motivation to exercise, just ebay one of these high intensity DVDs like Insanity, P90 or George St Pierre Rush Fit. I used GSP Rush fit, 25 mins a day in the comfort of my living room and had the correct diet and I managed to shift the excess around my waist in 8 weeks leaving a nice six pack, something that running, swimming and weights failed to do over the period of a year! I did however, take the guides advice of eating the majority of my daily calories at breakfast time, something I had never done before, so maybe that was the difference, but the workouts on the DVD certainly got my heart racing and body aching, in a way my old fitness regime never did!

Re: Muscle building/fat burning supplements : Wed Nov 07, 2012 9:46 am  

Standee wrote:

Im not for one minute saying that I'd gain huge speed by being a porker, but I could do to weight about 2 stone more, when I ski with my pack on (with camera's etc.) then I do get faster, but the centre of gravity is unusual so I become unstable. I never train(ed) for more than 45 minutes at a time, always did stacked reps and sets, the big issue for me is calorie intake, I eat about 800 a day, and even then I force that down, if I could find a reliable (and digestable) option that packed me 1000 calories in without impacting my ability to do the rest of my day then I'd be back in the gym tomorrow.

Only 800 a day
In that case, it's all calories rather than any exercise plan to change. I'm sure you've tried everything usually recommended: eggs, nuts, weight gain powders, full fat milk, even booze and chocolate. If you can't get a couple of thousand calories from those, then I'm out of ideas!

Re: Muscle building/fat burning supplements : Wed Nov 07, 2012 10:17 am  

Richie wrote:

Only 800 a day
In that case, it's all calories rather than any exercise plan to change. I'm sure you've tried everything usually recommended: eggs, nuts, weight gain powders, full fat milk, even booze and chocolate. If you can't get a couple of thousand calories from those, then I'm out of ideas!

all weight gain powders make me **** through the eye of a needle, within 10 minutes of drinking them.
I am lactose intolerant, so milk is out
6+ eggs a day, really, you want me to never use a lift or public transport?

booze I can do, but 2,000 calories a day isn't going to leave me with a working liver.