+- RepairmanJack.com Forums (https://repairmanjack.com/forum)
+-- Forum: Other Topics (https://repairmanjack.com/forum/forum-9.html)
+--- Forum: Off Topic (https://repairmanjack.com/forum/forum-4.html)
+--- Thread: Who'd play Jack? (/thread-1231.html)
Who'd play Jack? - Bluesman Mike Lindner - 10-09-2005
law dawg Wrote:Have you seen the New England Journal of Medicne study on testosterone? 600 mg a week for 10 weeks. Control group (diet), diet and exercise group, diet and test group (no exercise) and diet, test and workout group. Amazing results. And pretty much de-bunked the myth of the danger of steroids (although test is not a steroid really). I think the study was in like early-to-mid 90s.
One cycle a year or every other year would give you great gains with minimal side effects. I so wish they were legal. It amazes me I could go tomorrow and have female homones injected into me to try and become a woman but can't get male hormones. I could actually go and have an entire sex change operation but can't take steroids. Crazy. If baby boomers ever discovered that they are like a fountain of youth they would gobble them up. Instead the media hysteria about roids has blinded everyone.
Disagree here. Define "cheating". Lets get our terms right before this discussion because I am interested in your opinion here.
No one would think I was on roids. I am 5'10" and only about 180, although I am well under 10% body fat (at last measurement (two months ago) was 8%). I will never be big. I am a small-framed guy. So I focus on power and agility. Stength is fine but of minimal use in combat. Power and speed are other matters. The training modality I most subscribe to is found at http://www.crossfit.com if you are interested. If you go, look at the main page to the left and download the "what is fitness" PDF file if you wish.
For reasons I can't quite articulate at the moment--I'll think about it--I put steroid users in the same crew who used corked bats.
Who'd play Jack? - t4terrific - 10-09-2005
law dawg Wrote:Have you seen the New England Journal of Medicne study on testosterone? 600 mg a week for 10 weeks. Control group (diet), diet and exercise group, diet and test group (no exercise) and diet, test and workout group. Amazing results. And pretty much de-bunked the myth of the danger of steroids (although test is not a steroid really). I think the study was in like early-to-mid 90s.
One cycle a year or every other year would give you great gains with minimal side effects. I so wish they were legal. It amazes me I could go tomorrow and have female homones injected into me to try and become a woman but can't get male hormones. I could actually go and have an entire sex change operation but can't take steroids. Crazy. If baby boomers ever discovered that they are like a fountain of youth they would gobble them up. Instead the media hysteria about roids has blinded everyone.
Disagree here. Define "cheating". Lets get our terms right before this discussion because I am interested in your opinion here.
No one would think I was on roids. I am 5'10" and only about 180, although I am well under 10% body fat (at last measurement (two months ago) was 8%). I will never be big. I am a small-framed guy. So I focus on power and agility. Stength is fine but of minimal use in combat. Power and speed are other matters. The training modality I most subscribe to is found at http://www.crossfit.com if you are interested. If you go, look at the main page to the left and download the "what is fitness" PDF file if you wish.
Well, there is a problem with the cycle now and then theory. Once you are on a cycle you will see excellent gains. The problem is they will quickly disapear, once the system is cleared of the anabolic agent. Hulk Hogan described it as "being deflated like a balloon."
I call steroids in sports "cheating" because there are health risks. These are proven. All the obscure study citings in the world can't hide the effects of steroids on the millions who have used them. Some go unscathed, but far more are permanently damaged. They are banned from sports because, if one guy takes them, he has an advantage. That will make it harder for those who are more concerned about their health, to not take steroids. If they don't they will be at a disadvantage.
Finally, strength is a very large advantage in a fight. I train, daily, with guys who are more skilled than I. Many of them I can overpower. The guys who give me the most trouble are the strongest guys. Quickness is helpful too. But 95% of fights (between trained fighters) go to the groung. On the ground, strength is a huge advantage, if used properly. There are some MMA fighters, who say weight training and muscle mass is bad. Baas Rutten is one. His record speaks for it's self. There are far more fighters who train with weights to add muscle mass and strength. Andre Arlovski, current UFC Heavyweight Champion was just featured in Flex magazine. He considers himself a bodybuilder. He trains with weights daily. That aside, I know first hand, both in stand-up and on the mat, that strength makes me a better fighter. Strength alone won't make it, but, when coupled with skill, and more importantly conditioning, it is great. That's why there are weight limits in MMA. The strongest guys in each weight division are usually the better guys too.
Many martial artists (these are not fighters mind you) say to avoid muscle mass. They say it will make you slow, stiff, and kill your wind. Usually these people are of 2 schools of thought. 1 Ignorant. 2 Lazy.
1 Most old school people don't understand the benefits of weight training and muscle mass. Like anything else, if done improperly injuries will arise.
2 Many martial artists are just lazy. They preach that skill is what you need, because training your body takes a ton of work, every day. You can go to a dojo a couple times a week, and over time, you will learn all the skills you need. Developing your body, both strength and again more importantly cardio, takes a hell of a lot of work, more than just the work you put in on the mat. While you must train your mind, you can't fight (again against skilled fighters, not some drunk in a bar) if your body isn't well prepared too. Jeff Blatnik, US Olymic Wrestling Gold Medalist said, "all things being equal, the bigger guy will win." While that's not 100% true (some guys are too big, have you seen Bob Sapp?), the main idea, is true. His point is size, and strength is an advantage.
I don't want to be some big monster, but I do want to be strong, lean, skilled, and be able to fight all night and fight a little longer. For me, it's a hobby, like dancing or riding horses. I love it. It's how I identify with the world. You know, all that mind and body and nature, blah, blah, blah,... The Japanese call it Ki. The Chinese call it Chi. I call it having your shit together.
Who'd play Jack? - t4terrific - 10-09-2005
Bluesman Mike Lindner Wrote:For reasons I can't quite articulate at the moment--I'll think about it--I put steroid users in the same crew who used corked bats.
I agree. If it's against the rules and those who follow the rules can not do it, then those that do, are cheating.
Who'd play Jack? - KRW - 10-09-2005
t4terrific Wrote:Well, there is a problem with the cycle now and then theory. Once you are on a cycle you will see excellent gains. The problem is they will quickly disapear, once the system is cleared of the anabolic agent. Hulk Hogan described it as "being deflated like a balloon."
I call steroids in sports "cheating" because there are health risks. These are proven. All the obscure study citings in the world can't hide the effects of steroids on the millions who have used them. Some go unscathed, but far more are permanently damaged. Yhey are nbanned from sports because, if one guy takes them, he has an advantage. That will make it harder for those who are more concerned about their health, to not take steroids. If they don't they will be at a disadvantage.
Finally, strength is a very large advantage in a fight. I train, daily with guys who are more skilled than I. Many of them I can overpower. The guys who give me the most trouble are the strongest guys. Quickness is helpful too. But 95% of fights (between trained fighters) go to the groung. On the ground, strength is a huge advantage, if used properly. There are some MMA fighters, who say weight training and muscle mass is bad. His record speaks for it's self. There are far more fighters who train with weights to add muscle mass and strength. Andre Arlovski, current UFC Heavyweight Champion was just featured in Flex magazine. He considers himself a bodybuilder. He trains with weights daily. That aside, I know first hand, both in stand-up and on the mat, that strength makes me a better fighter. Strength alone won't make it, but, when coupled with skill, and more importantly conditioning, it is great. That's why there are weight limits in MMA. The strongest guys in each weight division are usually the better guys too.
So the question is, did David cheat to defeat Goliath?
Who'd play Jack? - t4terrific - 10-09-2005
KRW Wrote:So the question is, did David cheat to defeat Goliath?
All is fair, when your life is on the line.
Who'd play Jack? - KRW - 10-09-2005
t4terrific Wrote:All is fair, when your life is on the line.
I remember a story of a blacksmith that was challenged to a duel. He had the choice of weapons and the battlefield. He stood six foot four and his opponant was five eight, but a great fighter with weapons. The blacksmith chose sledge hammers in six foot of water.
Who'd play Jack? - t4terrific - 10-09-2005
KRW Wrote:I remember a story of a blacksmith that was challenged to a duel. He had the choice of weapons and the battlefield. He stood six foot four and his opponant was five eight, but a great fighter with weapons. The blacksmith chose sledge hammers in six foot of water.
That is funny!! Those things really happened in America. They were called duels. Not like the wild west type stuff. The duels were more gentlemanly. There were rules to who chose what, and the terms could be accepted or refused. I heard of one where a man hired a professional duelist to challenge a man who slept with his wife. The offender accepted and was allowed to pick the site and the weapons. The challenger, I think gets to pick the "when". Anyway the challenged man chose a knife fight. The fight would take place in a 20 foot hole. The Challenger at the bottom, and the challenged man at the top. Now that's thinking!!
Who'd play Jack? - Txmoore - 10-11-2005
How about Ron Livingston?
http://www.imdb.com/gallery/ss/0361841/Ss/0361841/DF-02871.jpg?path=pgallery&path_key=Livingston,%20Ron
Who'd play Jack? - jimbow8 - 10-11-2005
Txmoore Wrote:How about Ron Livingston?Or as I like to call him Office Space. He might be good.
http://www.imdb.com/gallery/ss/0361841/Ss/0361841/DF-02871.jpg?path=pgallery&path_key=Livingston,%20Ron
Who'd play Jack? - Kenji - 10-11-2005
Txmoore Wrote:How about Ron Livingston?
http://www.imdb.com/gallery/ss/0361841/Ss/0361841/DF-02871.jpg?path=pgallery&path_key=Livingston,%20Ron
Ron Livingston...? I've never heard his name before. I checked him in IMdb. I saw "Band of Brothers" and "Adaptation"....I don't remember him. Maybe that's good factor for playing Jack.