|
Post by fatjake on Nov 1, 2017 11:30:49 GMT
yeah obviously a description is always going to explain something a lot better than just a name, I think that's why they call it a description A description of anything is always going to explain it better than just the name! Many names are not really very descriptive. For example, your suggestion for calling it "The Hager" wouldn't explain it at all either would it? Indeed but the name of the exercise doesn't need to describe it. Plenty of exercises have a name that doesn't describe the exercise but at least they are not usually oxymorons or suggesting the opposite of what the exercise actually is. I really don't see what the problem is with wanting to use adjectives correctly? But its not a matter of using adjectives correctly, we are talking about names for an exercise (aka nouns) here. You said the problem with "Dynamic Long Hold Isometrics" as a name was that it doesn't explain the exercise at all, so you suggested calling it the hager instead, which explains even less? So what name would you use to describe an exercise correctly that combines both isometric and moving components?
|
|
|
Post by hagerwf on Nov 1, 2017 12:08:25 GMT
Very sorry for attempting to explain another way of using the Sierra suspension belt. This is why lately I have the feeling that there are many much more productive ways to spend my time then on internet forums. Excuse me while I go and do some dynamic long hold isometrics.
|
|
|
Post by mr potatohead on Nov 1, 2017 15:08:24 GMT
When I do something similar to what hager is describing, I call the pauses for holds - well - pauses. There is no isometric involved in the exercise since, even in the pause, there is still going to be joint/muscle movement, so no way can it be an isometric even though I'm pausing to hold. They are just pauses to hold as steadily as I can during an otherwise moving exercise. what joint/muscle movement do you mean while you are pausing to hold? Surely if you pause there is no movement, as a pause actually means a temporary stop does it not, you say yourself you are "pausing to hold", so why can't that be described as isometric as we normally describe holds as isometric do we not? I mean if someone pauses in a movement and exerts force without moving, then someone just assumes that same position and exerts effort without moving, whats the difference? How can one be isometric while the other is not? How about "momentary isometric"? That might make some sense to refer to a pause/hold during an otherwise dynamic exercise. As far as descriptive terms for exercise, "sissy squat" does not describe the exercise Only can recognize that one is doing some particular type of squat.
|
|
|
Post by mr potatohead on Nov 1, 2017 15:12:23 GMT
Very sorry for attempting to explain another way of using the Sierra suspension belt. This is why lately I have the feeling that there are many much more productive ways to spend my time then on internet forums. Excuse me while I go and do some dynamic long hold isometrics. I appreciate your description of it. I understand what you're doing and it sounds good. You're being creative and responding to the feeling your body wants. I think it's great. It doesn't need a name .... although, "The Hager" would work just fine for me.
|
|
|
Post by fatjake on Nov 1, 2017 15:44:10 GMT
what joint/muscle movement do you mean while you are pausing to hold? Surely if you pause there is no movement, as a pause actually means a temporary stop does it not, you say yourself you are "pausing to hold", so why can't that be described as isometric as we normally describe holds as isometric do we not? I mean if someone pauses in a movement and exerts force without moving, then someone just assumes that same position and exerts effort without moving, whats the difference? How can one be isometric while the other is not? How about "momentary isometric"? That might make some sense to refer to a pause/hold during an otherwise dynamic exercise. momentary isometric would be fine I suppose. Cedric called it dynamic isometrics and I think that is as good a name as any, but it's just a name.
|
|
|
Post by Bruce Tackett on Nov 1, 2017 17:27:07 GMT
Does the quote, "Much ado about nothing" mean anything to anyone here?
|
|
|
Post by mr potatohead on Nov 1, 2017 17:39:36 GMT
Does the quote, "Much ado about nothing" mean anything to anyone here? No, since words themselves mean nothing here.
|
|
|
Post by Bruce Tackett on Nov 1, 2017 18:37:52 GMT
Does the quote, "Much ado about nothing" mean anything to anyone here? No, since words themselves mean nothing here. It's all six times the half of the other dozen.
|
|
|
Post by BigBruvOfEnglandUK on Nov 1, 2017 18:38:09 GMT
How about "momentary isometric"? That might make some sense to refer to a pause/hold during an otherwise dynamic exercise. momentary isometric would be fine I suppose. Cedric called it dynamic isometrics and I think that is as good a name as any, but it's just a name. Which is an oxymoron so we just end up looking like the guys at Lionquest. If you guys want to actually sound like you might know what you are talking about then use the correct adjectives.
|
|
|
Post by BigBruvOfEnglandUK on Nov 1, 2017 18:39:36 GMT
Very sorry for attempting to explain another way of using the Sierra suspension belt. This is why lately I have the feeling that there are many much more productive ways to spend my time then on internet forums. Excuse me while I go and do some dynamic long hold isometrics. The explanation was good. It seems like a pretty intense exercise. The name just doesn't make sense. That's all, m8
|
|
|
Post by fatjake on Nov 1, 2017 20:49:59 GMT
momentary isometric would be fine I suppose. Cedric called it dynamic isometrics and I think that is as good a name as any, but it's just a name. Which is an oxymoron so we just end up looking like the guys at Lionquest. If you guys want to actually sound like you might know what you are talking about then use the correct adjectives. When you call a "thing" something and give it a name, that name is not an adjective, its a noun. It's just a name, so there are no "correct" adjectives to use. It's a name not an adjective nor an oxymoron. Lots of exercise names don't really make much sense and would be impossible to figure out without more information, that's why we have descriptions with adjectives and diagrams. It's impossible to describe most exercises effectively in two words, especially in this case when they essentially combine two different modes of exercise. But two words seems to be the norm for exercise names, so which two words would you use to describe an exercise which is both moving and static? dynamic isometrics - an exercise which combines an isometric element with a dynamic movement, seems OK to me. I wouldn't know what it meant without the description, but I could say the same about many other exercise names, so I get it. In any case, even if we were to use both the words "dynamic" and "isometric" as adjectives, they would be perfectly correct, as this exercise is both.
|
|
|
Post by Bruce Tackett on Nov 1, 2017 21:35:57 GMT
Whew!
|
|
|
Post by mr potatohead on Nov 1, 2017 23:35:51 GMT
Which is an oxymoron so we just end up looking like the guys at Lionquest. If you guys want to actually sound like you might know what you are talking about then use the correct adjectives. When you call a "thing" something and give it a name, that name is not an adjective, its a noun. It's just a name, so there are no "correct" adjectives to use. It's a name not an adjective nor an oxymoron. Lots of exercise names don't really make much sense and would be impossible to figure out without more information, that's why we have descriptions with adjectives and diagrams. It's impossible to describe most exercises effectively in two words, especially in this case when they essentially combine two different modes of exercise. But two words seems to be the norm for exercise names, so which two words would you use to describe an exercise which is both moving and static? dynamic isometrics - an exercise which combines an isometric element with a dynamic movement, seems OK to me. I wouldn't know what it meant without the description, but I could say the same about many other exercise names, so I get it. In any case, even if we were to use both the words "dynamic" and "isometric" as adjectives, they would be perfectly correct, as this exercise is both. It's an oxymoronic name, then, for sure, same as the name "moving isometrics" is oxymoronic. It's still a WTF name to me. They are both performed during the exercise session, but if you're doing one, you're automatically excluding the other. By definition of the words, they never occur simultaneously. So, the complete exercise session incorporates both individual types of tensing, it isn't itself both. You're doing two very different, mutually exclusive efforts during the exercise session. I'm sticking w/ 'momentary isometric' for pauses under tension during an exercise session, whatever the exercise is, because it makes the most sense to me. I just want to do my exercise. The fitness industry labels are occasionally helpful to describe what I do, but sometimes not and, sometimes, I don't know the accepted meathead term. I've learned most, if not all, of the common fitness industry terms by hanging out on these forums. I had to in order to understand and communicate, somewhat, w/ WTF ya'll were talking about. Oxymoronic labels, anywhere I read them, are as ridiculous to me as the "Atlas I, II, III", etc, cryptic shit from JeP is. At least he used a name for the effort that didn't even try to explain what is happening, so it isn't oxymoronic like "dynamic isometrics" is.
|
|
|
Post by BigBruvOfEnglandUK on Nov 2, 2017 7:06:11 GMT
Ignore Jake. He just enjoys boring everybody, m8.
|
|
|
Post by fatjake on Nov 2, 2017 12:34:57 GMT
Ignore Jake. He just enjoys boring everybody, m8. as opposed to your incredibly interesting repetitive posts on using the right adjectives
|
|