Kobe Bryant/Sprite/WSB commercial

[Dirty Workout]

Yeah I saw that commercial tonite they show him with 315 on his back and then they show his face coming up from a squat

I dont think he was really squatting that. B ball players dont want big bulky legs it is just extra weight slowing them down.

 

[collegiateLifter]

Yeah I saw that commercial tonite they show him with 315 on his back and then they show his face coming up from a squat

I dont think he was really squatting that. B ball players dont want big bulky legs it is just extra weight slowing them down.

yea dude and ben johnson didn't squat at all because he didn't want bulky legs slowing him down on his 9.79!!!

 

[little chris]

Yeah it looked like 405lb to me and There's no way that was real weight. Kobe's sticks could never squat 405LBS!!!

 

[Baoh]

Yeah it looked like 405lb to me and There's no way that was real weight. Kobe's sticks could never squat 405LBS!!!

lol

 

[guldukat]

i see a lot of the BBaller's (big ballers) doing 1/3 and 1/4 squats

the coaches tell me they should just use the same ROM they use for they're jumpshots and doing deepsquats doesn't carry over to well. since you never go down that deep onthe court.

who am i to argue?

You're R Crusher, that's who!

Man, NEVER put your own thinking down simply because someone else is an "expert." Experts make MISTAKES, bro...and I hate to be nasty, but most of the coaches I've met aren't the brightest guys in the world anyway.

Arguments have nothing to do with who is saying them. In philosophy, that's considered a major fallacy. Arguments stand on their own; if someone's really an expert, they can back their shit up with plenty of reasoning. Relying simply on their titles to impress is the sign of a has-been.

Whoever these coaches are, the truth is they're flat-out stupid to say deep squats don't "carry over well" for BB players. That's probably some myth they heard and just believed because they're gullible.

In jumping, by FAR the most important muscle is the strongest one, and that's the gluteus maximus. Concentrating on quads (which are all short ROM squats really do) to try and improve jumping power is like doing close-grips with your thumbs 2" apart to improve your pec size and strength as fast as possible. It's great for the tris, but FAR from what's best for the pecs.

 

[collegiateLifter]

Arguments have nothing to do with who is saying them. In philosophy, that's considered a major fallacy. Arguments stand on their own; if someone's really an expert, they can back their shit up with plenty of reasoning. Relying simply on their titles to impress is the sign of a has-been.

Whoever these coaches are, the truth is they're flat-out stupid to say deep squats don't "carry over well" for BB players. That's probably some myth they heard and just believed because they're gullible.

whoa there buddy. While your point about the Halo effect is pretty on, there is perhaps some truth in the the idea that full ROM squats aren't neccessary. In Science and Practice, Zatsiorsky recomends a combination of leg work for beggining (strength training) volleyball players including half & full squats and leg presses. For more advanced strength training, he recomends most soley a combo of half squats and full squats. As usual the truth generally lies in between the two extremes. Although the book is back home, I recall that he notes the benefits of full squats and the similar ROM of half squats and jumping.

OF course on another tangent in basketball, low (and wide) squatting is beneficial for boxing out posting up, etc when you do need a low power position.....

 

[Dirty Workout]

yea dude and ben johnson didn't squat at all because he didn't want bulky legs slowing him down on his 9.79!!!

Assuming you were being sarcastic here, there is big difference between sprinter and basketball player. Sprinter relies solely on acceleration and power for a short distance and needs huge powerful legs for quick speed.

While a basketball player needs this for sprinting on fast breaks or accelerating down lane, he also has important endurance factor to account for- running almost nonstop for 40+ minutes a few times a week. This is where I think huge legs have a negative effect.

And also a negative effect on jumping....I mean look at the highest flyers over the years- never huge legs

 

[louden_swain]

Yeah it looked like 405lb to me and There's no way that was real weight. Kobe's sticks could never squat 405LBS!!!

pathetic . . . response. Kobe is a superior athlete no need to trash him like this.

 

[bignate73]

pathetic . . . response. Kobe is a superior athlete no need to trash him like this.

but there is something to be said about exaggerating for the sake of a commercial. its nice to have respect for him, but a director wont let him look like a chump by squatting 185 or so, since he's talking about how "serious" he is through the whole commercial. they're gonna load him up with "plates".

 

[guldukat]

whoa there buddy. While your point about the Halo effect is pretty on, there is perhaps some truth in the the idea that full ROM squats aren't neccessary.

Necessary? I don't think I said that. I said it'd be dumb to just exclude full squats, not that they're absolutely necessary.

In Science and Practice, Zatsiorsky recomends a combination of leg work for beggining (strength training) volleyball players including half & full squats and leg presses. For more advanced strength training, he recomends most soley a combo of half squats and full squats. As usual the truth generally lies in between the two extremes. Although the book is back home, I recall that he notes the benefits of full squats and the similar ROM of half squats and jumping.

I'd take that to mean Zatsiorsky favors full squats for complete development (hips, glutes, lower back, and hamstrings in addition to quads), but half squats are used to nail the quads even harder (by removing the weak links).

But still, he has them doing full squats...not just half squats, which for jumping power, I do think is a little lopsided.

And I do agree that the truth is usually somewhere in the middle There's a saying, "en via medias," that's a pretty good rule of thumb.

Just don't tell that to a logic professor if you have one...there's a fallacy of weak induction called "the Golden Mean" they're quick to harp on. I should know, since I'm going to be one of those old guys with a beard and pipe one day LOL.