Warning - "OnTopic" Post! (For Simple Simpson)

I have been using the stack on the seated Precor pec machine for some
considerable time, with no way of adding additional weight. I have
been obliged to repeatedly alter the sets and reps in order to achieve
any sort of overload.

Today I hit on the novel idea of doing one arm at a time, and to my
utter amazement, the one-arm reps were as easy (if not easier) than
doing both together.

Can anyone explain this weird conundrum, given that the weight stack
is exactly the same for both? I certainly can't, and neither could any
of the gym staff.

For all of you who know what a jolly japer I am, this is not a joke
and is absolutely true.

"Charles" <jrh@msn.com> schreef:

> Can anyone explain this weird conundrum, given that the weight stack
> is exactly the same for both? I certainly can't, and neither could any
> of the gym staff.

Because of the lever (wheel) just above the stack, the weight stack only
travels half the distance (compared to when performed with both arms) so
this means that when you only use one arm, you are also shortening the
distance that the weight stack travels by 50%

So you used the same weight ;-O

The reason it was a little easier is because with one arm instead of two,
you get a little momentum. I have the same effect when i do lateral raises.

I am VERY dissapointed that the gym staff didnt inform you about this!

----
Pete

MFW biggest idiot, EVER.

On Wed, 6 Dec 2006 16:24:39 +0100, "Pete" <phoutstra@wanadoo.nl>
wrote:

>"Charles" <jrh@msn.com> schreef:
>
>> Can anyone explain this weird conundrum, given that the weight stack
>> is exactly the same for both? I certainly can't, and neither could any
>> of the gym staff.
>
>Because of the lever (wheel) just above the stack, the weight stack only
>travels half the distance (compared to when performed with both arms) so
>this means that when you only use one arm, you are also shortening the
>distance that the weight stack travels by 50%

That makes sense given our other conversation about mechanical
advantage. I'll check it out tomorrow and come back to you.

>
>So you used the same weight ;-O
>
>The reason it was a little easier is because with one arm instead of two,
>you get a little momentum. I have the same effect when i do lateral raises.
>
>I am VERY dissapointed that the gym staff didnt inform you about this!

So am I, and if what you say is correct I shall be very pleased to
inform them so.

Thanks for that, it was really puzzling me.

>
>----
>Pete
>
>MFW biggest idiot, EVER.
>

You're not a daft as you make out to be. ;o)

Pete wrote:
> "Charles" <jrh@msn.com> schreef:
>
>> Can anyone explain this weird conundrum, given that the weight stack
>> is exactly the same for both? I certainly can't, and neither could
>> any of the gym staff.
>
> Because of the lever (wheel) just above the stack, the weight stack
> only travels half the distance (compared to when performed with both
> arms) so this means that when you only use one arm, you are also
> shortening the distance that the weight stack travels by 50%
>
> So you used the same weight ;-O
>
> The reason it was a little easier is because with one arm instead of
> two, you get a little momentum. I have the same effect when i do
> lateral raises.
> I am VERY dissapointed that the gym staff didnt inform you about this!
>
> ----
> Pete
>
> MFW biggest idiot, EVER.

There he goes again, seeking me out. He just can't live without me!!!

--
Bully
Protein bars: http://www.proteinbars.co.uk

"Be who you are and say what you feel, because those who mind don't
matter, and those who matter don't mind." - Dr. Seuss

On Wed, 6 Dec 2006 15:34:04 -0000, "Bully" <bully1@proteinbars.co.ok>
wrote:

>Pete wrote:
>> "Charles" <jrh@msn.com> schreef:
>>
>>> Can anyone explain this weird conundrum, given that the weight stack
>>> is exactly the same for both? I certainly can't, and neither could
>>> any of the gym staff.
>>
>> Because of the lever (wheel) just above the stack, the weight stack
>> only travels half the distance (compared to when performed with both
>> arms) so this means that when you only use one arm, you are also
>> shortening the distance that the weight stack travels by 50%
>>
>> So you used the same weight ;-O
>>
>> The reason it was a little easier is because with one arm instead of
>> two, you get a little momentum. I have the same effect when i do
>> lateral raises.
>> I am VERY dissapointed that the gym staff didnt inform you about this!
>>
>> ----
>> Pete
>>
>> MFW biggest idiot, EVER.
>
>There he goes again, seeking me out. He just can't live without me!!!

This from the buffoon who only recently said:

**
> Nice of you to take charles' side bullster.

"Eh, how the fuck did that happen? You know, I don't see the old twats
post any longer. I think that I thought, oh never mind !"

> Have you kissed and made up now?

"Like fuck. He's still an odorous old troll."

**

I only ever respond to your gratuitous and unprovoked rudeness Neil
"Simple" Simpson, and I don't make out I'm using "killfiles" so I see
all your third party snide comments.

You have to be very clever to pretend to use the *alleged*
"killfiles", and you are anything but clever you dopey fat bugger.

The best thing you could do is *really* "killfile" me and stop trying
to be such a clever arse!

Ode to a fat arsed Bully Boy:

Simple Simpson sat on a wall
Simple Simpson had a great fall,
All the King's horses and all the King's men
Said:
Fuck the little fat cunt!

;o)

"Charles" <jrh@msn.com> schreef:

>>Because of the lever (wheel) just above the stack, the weight stack only
>>travels half the distance (compared to when performed with both arms) so
>>this means that when you only use one arm, you are also shortening the
>>distance that the weight stack travels by 50%

> That makes sense given our other conversation about mechanical
> advantage. I'll check it out tomorrow and come back to you.

You dont even need the help of others.

If you stand in front of the machine, facing it, of course, you pull the
left lever with your right arm towards you. Just use 5 or 10 kg for this. Or
full stack, its not relevant how much weight you use.

Depending on the levers, the weight will go up anything between 6 and 12
inches.

Hold it there.

Than, pull the right lever with the left arm. And you will see that it will
travel another 6-12 inches.

Riddle solved.

>>So you used the same weight ;-O

>>The reason it was a little easier is because with one arm instead of two,
>>you get a little momentum. I have the same effect when i do lateral
>>raises.

>>I am VERY dissapointed that the gym staff didnt inform you about this!

> So am I, and if what you say is correct I shall be very pleased to
> inform them so.

They ignored the mechanics of the machine, which is BAD.

They also ignored that when you switch from 2 hands to 1, you change the
dynamics of the exercise.
With 2 hands, the torso has to be completely motionless. With one hand, the
obliques are willing to rotate the torso a bit, which helps to get the
weight up.

> Thanks for that, it was really puzzling me.

>>MFW biggest idiot, EVER.

> You're not a daft as you make out to be. ;o)

I like to keep a low profile

In my former gym, we had a VERY cool Fly machine, with a weight stack all
the way up to 330 pounds, and a "releaser" which had to released with the
feet.

It also came with various handles, from 1 1/2 feet, 2 feet and 2/12 feet. My
arms are not that long, so i used the shortest. Worked my way up to 130
kilos. We had this annoying Ectomorph (No offense Curt!) who came up to me
several times, claiming he had stronger pecs than me!

He was about 6 feet 3, and, being an Ectomorph, had Gibbon-like arms. He DID
use the entire stack, but eh...
also used the longest handles.

No matter WHAT kinda handle you use, the distance of the stack travelled,
remained the same.
But using 1 1/2 feet handles instead of 2/ 1/2 makes it almost twice as
hard!

As i speak, he still doesnt get it...

----
Pete

"Charles" <jrh@msn.com> wrote in message
news:24idn2d1hn0roepu70sablsvtue254i03s@4ax.com...
>
> I have been using the stack on the seated Precor pec machine for some
> considerable time, with no way of adding additional weight. I have
> been obliged to repeatedly alter the sets and reps in order to achieve
> any sort of overload.
>
> Today I hit on the novel idea of doing one arm at a time, and to my
> utter amazement, the one-arm reps were as easy (if not easier) than
> doing both together.
>
> Can anyone explain this weird conundrum, given that the weight stack
> is exactly the same for both? I certainly can't, and neither could any
> of the gym staff.
>
> For all of you who know what a jolly japer I am, this is not a joke
> and is absolutely true.

Sir Charles, have you ever tried a "crush curl" for those magnificent
pecs of yours? It's typical of exercises I recommend - odd.

-S-
http://www.kbnj.com

On Wed, 6 Dec 2006 17:03:21 +0100, "Pete" <phoutstra@wanadoo.nl>
wrote:

>"Charles" <jrh@msn.com> schreef:
>
>>>Because of the lever (wheel) just above the stack, the weight stack only
>>>travels half the distance (compared to when performed with both arms) so
>>>this means that when you only use one arm, you are also shortening the
>>>distance that the weight stack travels by 50%
>
>> That makes sense given our other conversation about mechanical
>> advantage. I'll check it out tomorrow and come back to you.
>
>You dont even need the help of others.
>
>If you stand in front of the machine, facing it, of course, you pull the
>left lever with your right arm towards you. Just use 5 or 10 kg for this. Or
>full stack, its not relevant how much weight you use.
>
>Depending on the levers, the weight will go up anything between 6 and 12
>inches.
>
>Hold it there.
>
>Than, pull the right lever with the left arm. And you will see that it will
>travel another 6-12 inches.
>
>Riddle solved.

Yes, I understand exactly what you mean. Thank you again.

>
>>>So you used the same weight ;-O
>
>>>The reason it was a little easier is because with one arm instead of two,
>>>you get a little momentum. I have the same effect when i do lateral
>>>raises.
>
>>>I am VERY dissapointed that the gym staff didnt inform you about this!
>
>> So am I, and if what you say is correct I shall be very pleased to
>> inform them so.
>
>They ignored the mechanics of the machine, which is BAD.
>
>They also ignored that when you switch from 2 hands to 1, you change the
>dynamics of the exercise.
>With 2 hands, the torso has to be completely motionless. With one hand, the
>obliques are willing to rotate the torso a bit, which helps to get the
>weight up.
>
>> Thanks for that, it was really puzzling me.
>
>>>MFW biggest idiot, EVER.
>
> > You're not a daft as you make out to be. ;o)
>
>I like to keep a low profile
>
>In my former gym, we had a VERY cool Fly machine, with a weight stack all
>the way up to 330 pounds, and a "releaser" which had to released with the
>feet.
>
>It also came with various handles, from 1 1/2 feet, 2 feet and 2/12 feet. My
>arms are not that long, so i used the shortest. Worked my way up to 130
>kilos. We had this annoying Ectomorph (No offense Curt!) who came up to me
>several times, claiming he had stronger pecs than me!
>
>He was about 6 feet 3, and, being an Ectomorph, had Gibbon-like arms. He DID
>use the entire stack, but eh...
>also used the longest handles.
>
>No matter WHAT kinda handle you use, the distance of the stack travelled,
>remained the same.
>But using 1 1/2 feet handles instead of 2/ 1/2 makes it almost twice as
>hard!
>
>As i speak, he still doesnt get it...
>

And you are not about to enlighten him any time soon. That is a great
story and I may attempt to emulate such a feat if the opportunity ever
arises. ;o)

Dnia 2006-12-06 Charles napisa³(a):
>
> I have been using the stack on the seated Precor pec machine for some
> considerable time, with no way of adding additional weight. I have
> been obliged to repeatedly alter the sets and reps in order to achieve
> any sort of overload.
>
> Today I hit on the novel idea of doing one arm at a time, and to my
> utter amazement, the one-arm reps were as easy (if not easier) than
> doing both together.
>
> Can anyone explain this weird conundrum,

Yes, and it's not weird.

> given that the weight stack
> is exactly the same for both? I certainly can't, and neither could any
> of the gym staff.

He he he.

> For all of you who know what a jolly japer I am, this is not a joke
> and is absolutely true.

I know. But to think that gym staff couldn't solve it! What a puzzle.
;-)

--
Andrzej Rosa 1127R

"Charles" <jrh@msn.com> wrote in message
news:24idn2d1hn0roepu70sablsvtue254i03s@4ax.com...
>
> I have been using the stack on the seated Precor pec machine for some
> considerable time, with no way of adding additional weight. I have
> been obliged to repeatedly alter the sets and reps in order to achieve
> any sort of overload.

When this happens to me, I just pickup the entire machine. If, nay when, I
outgrow that, I'll also get someone to sit in it.

<snip unimportant dribble>

On Thu, 7 Dec 2006 03:42:08 +1100, "Stephan Carydakis"
<steph777@netspace.net.au> wrote:

>
>"Charles" <jrh@msn.com> wrote in message
>news:24idn2d1hn0roepu70sablsvtue254i03s@4ax.com.. .
>>
>> I have been using the stack on the seated Precor pec machine for some
>> considerable time, with no way of adding additional weight. I have
>> been obliged to repeatedly alter the sets and reps in order to achieve
>> any sort of overload.
>
>When this happens to me, I just pickup the entire machine. If, nay when, I
>outgrow that, I'll also get someone to sit in it.

Fuck me, you must be strong Stephan (could this be Bully morphing?)!

>
><snip unimportant dribble>
>

Sorry you consider it "unimportant" but it was central to my request
for assistance, to which you failed miserably to respond.

I think you may have meant drivel, but I have been known to "dribble"
also! ;o)

"Charles" <jrh@msn.com> wrote in message
news:f6tdn2lqf580ldo49holc6t8lghhnppagn@4ax.com...
> On Thu, 7 Dec 2006 03:42:08 +1100, "Stephan Carydakis"
> <steph777@netspace.net.au> wrote:
>
> >
> >"Charles" <jrh@msn.com> wrote in message
> >news:24idn2d1hn0roepu70sablsvtue254i03s@4ax.com.. .
> >>
> >> I have been using the stack on the seated Precor pec machine for some
> >> considerable time, with no way of adding additional weight. I have
> >> been obliged to repeatedly alter the sets and reps in order to achieve
> >> any sort of overload.
> >
> >When this happens to me, I just pickup the entire machine. If, nay when,
I
> >outgrow that, I'll also get someone to sit in it.
>
> Fuck me, you must be strong Stephan (could this be Bully morphing?)!
>
> >
> ><snip unimportant dribble>
> >
>
> Sorry you consider it "unimportant" but it was central to my request
> for assistance, to which you failed miserably to respond.
>

I was in no position to offer you assistance as I didn't really have a clue
about what you where saying. Therefore your observation that I failed
miserably is astute.

> I think you may have meant drivel, but I have been known to "dribble"
> also! ;o)

No I meant dribble. As in wipe your chin and change your pillow case. That
reminds me. I forgot to change mine after last nights flood.

On Thu, 7 Dec 2006 04:05:22 +1100, "Stephan Carydakis"
<steph777@netspace.net.au> wrote:

>
>"Charles" <jrh@msn.com> wrote in message
>news:f6tdn2lqf580ldo49holc6t8lghhnppagn@4ax.com.. .
>> On Thu, 7 Dec 2006 03:42:08 +1100, "Stephan Carydakis"
>> <steph777@netspace.net.au> wrote:
>>
>> >
>> >"Charles" <jrh@msn.com> wrote in message
>> >news:24idn2d1hn0roepu70sablsvtue254i03s@4ax.com.. .
>> >>
>> >> I have been using the stack on the seated Precor pec machine for some
>> >> considerable time, with no way of adding additional weight. I have
>> >> been obliged to repeatedly alter the sets and reps in order to achieve
>> >> any sort of overload.
>> >
>> >When this happens to me, I just pickup the entire machine. If, nay when,
>I
>> >outgrow that, I'll also get someone to sit in it.
>>
>> Fuck me, you must be strong Stephan (could this be Bully morphing?)!
>>
>> >
>> ><snip unimportant dribble>
>> >
>>
>> Sorry you consider it "unimportant" but it was central to my request
>> for assistance, to which you failed miserably to respond.
>>
>
>I was in no position to offer you assistance as I didn't really have a clue
>about what you where saying. Therefore your observation that I failed
>miserably is astute.

How very honest! ;o)

>
>> I think you may have meant drivel, but I have been known to "dribble"
>> also! ;o)
>
>No I meant dribble. As in wipe your chin and change your pillow case. That
>reminds me. I forgot to change mine after last nights flood.
>

HEH!

Dnia 2006-12-06 Pete napisa³(a):
> "Charles" <jrh@msn.com> schreef:
>
>>>Because of the lever (wheel) just above the stack, the weight stack only
>>>travels half the distance (compared to when performed with both arms) so
>>>this means that when you only use one arm, you are also shortening the
>>>distance that the weight stack travels by 50%
>
>> That makes sense given our other conversation about mechanical
>> advantage. I'll check it out tomorrow and come back to you.
>
> You dont even need the help of others.
>
> If you stand in front of the machine, facing it, of course, you pull the
> left lever

....the right one stays motionless. So we have a moving pulley, which
has a mechanical advantage of 2:1.

--
Andrzej Rosa 1127R

Steve Freides wrote:
> "Charles" <jrh@msn.com> wrote in message
> news:24idn2d1hn0roepu70sablsvtue254i03s@4ax.com...
>>
>> I have been using the stack on the seated Precor pec machine for some
>> considerable time, with no way of adding additional weight. I have
>> been obliged to repeatedly alter the sets and reps in order to
>> achieve any sort of overload.
>>
>> Today I hit on the novel idea of doing one arm at a time, and to my
>> utter amazement, the one-arm reps were as easy (if not easier) than
>> doing both together.
>>
>> Can anyone explain this weird conundrum, given that the weight stack
>> is exactly the same for both? I certainly can't, and neither could
>> any of the gym staff.
>>
>> For all of you who know what a jolly japer I am, this is not a joke
>> and is absolutely true.
>
> Sir Charles, have you ever tried a "crush curl" for those magnificent
> pecs of yours? It's typical of exercises I recommend - odd.
>
> -S-
> http://www.kbnj.com

There's always the bench press. No need for any new-fangled machines for the
one.

--
Bully
Protein bars: http://www.proteinbars.co.uk

"Be who you are and say what you feel, because those who mind don't
matter, and those who matter don't mind." - Dr. Seuss

"Bully" <bully1@proteinbars.co.ok> wrote in message
news:4toe61F14pev6U1@mid.individual.net...
> Steve Freides wrote:
>> "Charles" <jrh@msn.com> wrote in message
>> news:24idn2d1hn0roepu70sablsvtue254i03s@4ax.com...
>>>
>>> I have been using the stack on the seated Precor pec machine for
>>> some
>>> considerable time, with no way of adding additional weight. I have
>>> been obliged to repeatedly alter the sets and reps in order to
>>> achieve any sort of overload.
>>>
>>> Today I hit on the novel idea of doing one arm at a time, and to my
>>> utter amazement, the one-arm reps were as easy (if not easier) than
>>> doing both together.
>>>
>>> Can anyone explain this weird conundrum, given that the weight stack
>>> is exactly the same for both? I certainly can't, and neither could
>>> any of the gym staff.
>>>
>>> For all of you who know what a jolly japer I am, this is not a joke
>>> and is absolutely true.
>>
>> Sir Charles, have you ever tried a "crush curl" for those magnificent
>> pecs of yours? It's typical of exercises I recommend - odd.
>>
>> -S-
>> http://www.kbnj.com
>
> There's always the bench press. No need for any new-fangled machines
> for the one.

Agreed, but always good to have something new in hand, and the crush
curl needs only a couple of plates, no rack or spotters.

-S-
http://www.kbnj.com


> --
> Bully
> Protein bars: http://www.proteinbars.co.uk
>
> "Be who you are and say what you feel, because those who mind don't
> matter, and those who matter don't mind." - Dr. Seuss
>
>

Steve Freides wrote:
> "Bully" <bully1@proteinbars.co.ok> wrote in message
> news:4toe61F14pev6U1@mid.individual.net...
>> Steve Freides wrote:
>>> "Charles" <jrh@msn.com> wrote in message
>>> news:24idn2d1hn0roepu70sablsvtue254i03s@4ax.com...
>>>>
>>>> I have been using the stack on the seated Precor pec machine for
>>>> some
>>>> considerable time, with no way of adding additional weight. I have
>>>> been obliged to repeatedly alter the sets and reps in order to
>>>> achieve any sort of overload.
>>>>
>>>> Today I hit on the novel idea of doing one arm at a time, and to my
>>>> utter amazement, the one-arm reps were as easy (if not easier) than
>>>> doing both together.
>>>>
>>>> Can anyone explain this weird conundrum, given that the weight
>>>> stack is exactly the same for both? I certainly can't, and neither
>>>> could any of the gym staff.
>>>>
>>>> For all of you who know what a jolly japer I am, this is not a joke
>>>> and is absolutely true.
>>>
>>> Sir Charles, have you ever tried a "crush curl" for those
>>> magnificent pecs of yours? It's typical of exercises I recommend -
>>> odd. -S-
>>> http://www.kbnj.com
>>
>> There's always the bench press. No need for any new-fangled machines
>> for the one.
>
> Agreed, but always good to have something new in hand,

It may well be new to some. You know, those that use machines....

> and the crush
> curl needs only a couple of plates, no rack or spotters.
>
> -S-
> http://www.kbnj.com
>
>
>> --
>> Bully
>> Protein bars: http://www.proteinbars.co.uk
>>
>> "Be who you are and say what you feel, because those who mind don't
>> matter, and those who matter don't mind." - Dr. Seuss



--
Bully
Protein bars: http://www.proteinbars.co.uk

"Be who you are and say what you feel, because those who mind don't
matter, and those who matter don't mind." - Dr. Seuss

Andrzej Rosa <bakters@yahoo.com> wrote:
>Dnia 2006-12-06 Charles napisa³(a):
>>
>> I have been using the stack on the seated Precor pec machine for some
>> considerable time, with no way of adding additional weight. I have
>> been obliged to repeatedly alter the sets and reps in order to achieve
>> any sort of overload.
>>
>> Today I hit on the novel idea of doing one arm at a time, and to my
>> utter amazement, the one-arm reps were as easy (if not easier) than
>> doing both together.
>>
>> Can anyone explain this weird conundrum,
>
>Yes, and it's not weird.
>
>> given that the weight stack
>> is exactly the same for both? I certainly can't, and neither could any
>> of the gym staff.
>
>He he he.
>
>> For all of you who know what a jolly japer I am, this is not a joke
>> and is absolutely true.
>
>I know. But to think that gym staff couldn't solve it! What a puzzle.
>;-)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pulley

On Wed, 06 Dec 2006 14:17:19 -0500, JMW
<jmwilliams@enforcergraphics.f2s.com> wrote:

>Andrzej Rosa <bakters@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>Dnia 2006-12-06 Charles napisa³(a):
>>>
>>> I have been using the stack on the seated Precor pec machine for some
>>> considerable time, with no way of adding additional weight. I have
>>> been obliged to repeatedly alter the sets and reps in order to achieve
>>> any sort of overload.
>>>
>>> Today I hit on the novel idea of doing one arm at a time, and to my
>>> utter amazement, the one-arm reps were as easy (if not easier) than
>>> doing both together.
>>>
>>> Can anyone explain this weird conundrum,
>>
>>Yes, and it's not weird.
>>
>>> given that the weight stack
>>> is exactly the same for both? I certainly can't, and neither could any
>>> of the gym staff.
>>
>>He he he.
>>
>>> For all of you who know what a jolly japer I am, this is not a joke
>>> and is absolutely true.
>>
>>I know. But to think that gym staff couldn't solve it! What a puzzle.
>>;-)
>
>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pulley

We are already familiar with pulleys, mechanical advantage, purchase,
Newton's Law etc, having discussed them at some length a short while
ago.

However, the puzzle was why one arm moving the same weight was easier
than two, which Wikipedia® doesn't address at all.

Pete was able to explain it very clearly and a lot less cryptically,
and English is not his first language.

The link to Wikipedia® was not very helpful, particularly as all
normal reference to Wikipedia® here, is usually met with derision from
a couple of the resident 'gurus'.

Dnia 2006-12-06 JMW napisa³(a):
> Andrzej Rosa <bakters@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>Dnia 2006-12-06 Charles napisa³(a):
>>>
>>> I have been using the stack on the seated Precor pec machine for some
>>> considerable time, with no way of adding additional weight. I have
>>> been obliged to repeatedly alter the sets and reps in order to achieve
>>> any sort of overload.
>>>
>>> Today I hit on the novel idea of doing one arm at a time, and to my
>>> utter amazement, the one-arm reps were as easy (if not easier) than
>>> doing both together.
>>>
>>> Can anyone explain this weird conundrum,
>>
>>Yes, and it's not weird.
>>
>>> given that the weight stack
>>> is exactly the same for both? I certainly can't, and neither could any
>>> of the gym staff.
>>
>>He he he.
>>
>>> For all of you who know what a jolly japer I am, this is not a joke
>>> and is absolutely true.
>>
>>I know. But to think that gym staff couldn't solve it! What a puzzle.
>>;-)
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pulley

How dare you? Charles might not get it!

--
Andrzej Rosa 1127R

Dnia 2006-12-06 Charles napisa³(a):
> On Wed, 06 Dec 2006 14:17:19 -0500, JMW
><jmwilliams@enforcergraphics.f2s.com> wrote:
>
>>Andrzej Rosa <bakters@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>Dnia 2006-12-06 Charles napisa³(a):
>>>>
>>>> I have been using the stack on the seated Precor pec machine for some
>>>> considerable time, with no way of adding additional weight. I have
>>>> been obliged to repeatedly alter the sets and reps in order to achieve
>>>> any sort of overload.
>>>>
>>>> Today I hit on the novel idea of doing one arm at a time, and to my
>>>> utter amazement, the one-arm reps were as easy (if not easier) than
>>>> doing both together.
>>>>
>>>> Can anyone explain this weird conundrum,
>>>
>>>Yes, and it's not weird.
>>>
>>>> given that the weight stack
>>>> is exactly the same for both? I certainly can't, and neither could any
>>>> of the gym staff.
>>>
>>>He he he.
>>>
>>>> For all of you who know what a jolly japer I am, this is not a joke
>>>> and is absolutely true.
>>>
>>>I know. But to think that gym staff couldn't solve it! What a puzzle.
>>>;-)
>>
>>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pulley
>
> We are already familiar with pulleys, mechanical advantage, purchase,
> Newton's Law etc, having discussed them at some length a short while
> ago.
>
> However, the puzzle was why one arm moving the same weight was easier
> than two, which Wikipedia® doesn't address at all.
>
> Pete was able to explain it very clearly and a lot less cryptically,
> and English is not his first language.
>
> The link to Wikipedia® was not very helpful, particularly as all
> normal reference to Wikipedia® here, is usually met with derision from
> a couple of the resident 'gurus'.

I told you so, JMW. Didn't I?

--
Andrzej Rosa 1127R

On Wed, 6 Dec 2006 20:05:39 +0000 (UTC), Andrzej Rosa
<bakters@yahoo.com> wrote:

>Dnia 2006-12-06 JMW napisa³(a):
>> Andrzej Rosa <bakters@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>Dnia 2006-12-06 Charles napisa³(a):
>>>>
>>>> I have been using the stack on the seated Precor pec machine for some
>>>> considerable time, with no way of adding additional weight. I have
>>>> been obliged to repeatedly alter the sets and reps in order to achieve
>>>> any sort of overload.
>>>>
>>>> Today I hit on the novel idea of doing one arm at a time, and to my
>>>> utter amazement, the one-arm reps were as easy (if not easier) than
>>>> doing both together.
>>>>
>>>> Can anyone explain this weird conundrum,
>>>
>>>Yes, and it's not weird.
>>>
>>>> given that the weight stack
>>>> is exactly the same for both? I certainly can't, and neither could any
>>>> of the gym staff.
>>>
>>>He he he.
>>>
>>>> For all of you who know what a jolly japer I am, this is not a joke
>>>> and is absolutely true.
>>>
>>>I know. But to think that gym staff couldn't solve it! What a puzzle.
>>>;-)
>>
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pulley
>
>How dare you? Charles might not get it!

There's always that danger! ;o)

On Wed, 6 Dec 2006 20:08:52 +0000 (UTC), Andrzej Rosa
<bakters@yahoo.com> wrote:

>Dnia 2006-12-06 Charles napisa³(a):
>> On Wed, 06 Dec 2006 14:17:19 -0500, JMW
>><jmwilliams@enforcergraphics.f2s.com> wrote:
>>
>>>Andrzej Rosa <bakters@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>Dnia 2006-12-06 Charles napisa³(a):
>>>>>
>>>>> I have been using the stack on the seated Precor pec machine for some
>>>>> considerable time, with no way of adding additional weight. I have
>>>>> been obliged to repeatedly alter the sets and reps in order to achieve
>>>>> any sort of overload.
>>>>>
>>>>> Today I hit on the novel idea of doing one arm at a time, and to my
>>>>> utter amazement, the one-arm reps were as easy (if not easier) than
>>>>> doing both together.
>>>>>
>>>>> Can anyone explain this weird conundrum,
>>>>
>>>>Yes, and it's not weird.
>>>>
>>>>> given that the weight stack
>>>>> is exactly the same for both? I certainly can't, and neither could any
>>>>> of the gym staff.
>>>>
>>>>He he he.
>>>>
>>>>> For all of you who know what a jolly japer I am, this is not a joke
>>>>> and is absolutely true.
>>>>
>>>>I know. But to think that gym staff couldn't solve it! What a puzzle.
>>>>;-)
>>>
>>>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pulley
>>
>> We are already familiar with pulleys, mechanical advantage, purchase,
>> Newton's Law etc, having discussed them at some length a short while
>> ago.
>>
>> However, the puzzle was why one arm moving the same weight was easier
>> than two, which Wikipedia® doesn't address at all.
>>
>> Pete was able to explain it very clearly and a lot less cryptically,
>> and English is not his first language.
>>
>> The link to Wikipedia® was not very helpful, particularly as all
>> normal reference to Wikipedia® here, is usually met with derision from
>> a couple of the resident 'gurus'.
>
>I told you so, JMW. Didn't I?

You're on your way to the Gulag comrade!