Annoying Gym Behaviour - Mk2(?)

leggo

2nd Row Donkey wrote: »

Swimming in to pool/ relaxing in Jacuzzi

But quite a few shower in their shorts too now that you mention it. That's a whole different thread.

How do you know what they're wearing while they shower?? :eek: :pac:

2nd Row Donkey

leggo wrote:

How do you know what they're wearing while they shower??

There are approx 20 shower cubicles in total. About 5 of them have no door for some reason.

Pussyhands

Pussyhands wrote: »

People on like 15 degree inclines on treadmills hanging on for dear life. They're only cheating themselves.

max incline and a fast walk is actually a very difficult exercise. I know people who swear by to lose weight and get strong abs and these aren't fly by gymnasts

Alf Veedersane

Deleted User wrote: »

max incline and a fast walk is actually a very difficult exercise. I know people who swear by to lose weight and get strong abs and these aren't fly by gymnasts

It's the hanging on to the handrails bit that the poster is flagging.

It's obviously too difficult if you're hanging onto the handrails and they're not getting nearly the benefit from the exercise that they think they are.

silverharp

it must be rare enough, ive never noticed anyone struggling on an aerobic machine , if anything its more irritating seeing loads of people just coasting on them.

Alf Veedersane

silverharp wrote: »

it must be rare enough, ive never noticed anyone struggling on an aerobic machine , if anything its more irritating seeing loads of people just coasting on them.

I've seen lots of people walking at pace holding the handrails. It doesn't bother me in the slightest but it kinda defeats the purpose of increasing the pace/incline/both

Mellor

Alf Veedersane wrote: »

I've seen alots of people walking at pace holding the handrails. It doesn't bother me in the slightest but it kinda defeats the purpose of increasing the pace/incline/both

I see it all the time too. Also doesn't annoying me. But don't see the point.

silverharp

Alf Veedersane wrote: »

I've seen lots of people walking at pace holding the handrails. It doesn't bother me in the slightest but it kinda defeats the purpose of increasing the pace/incline/both

I remember one guy years ago and anytime I saw him he was doing the exact same thing, arms locked and walking, probably doing a reasonable amount of work but there was just something peculiarly repetitive about it, always wore a full tracksuit too summer or winter too , and he must have been doing it for at least an hour at a time.
My impression is not a lot of people vary the work so they are missing out on lots of benefits for a bit of marginal effort

GreeBo

unless you are almost doing dips holding the bars is going to make a negligible difference and is usually done for balance when a person starts to tire.

They are still expending pretty much the same energy as they are still lifting their body weight by the same amount.

Alf Veedersane

GreeBo wrote: »

unless you are almost doing dips holding the bars is going to make a negligible difference and is usually done for balance when a person starts to tire.

They are still expending pretty much the same energy as they are still lifting their body weight by the same amount.

Anytime I've seen it done, the person is holding the bars from the go. Which indicates it reduces the load as opposed to for balance. I'm not sure people really lose balance when they tire on incline treadmill...they do lose the ability to keep up the pace at the incline.

Just to clarify, in case we're talking about different things, I'm talking about people setting the incline high and then hanging on to the rails.

They'd usually be better off doing a lower incline and not hanging on than using the incline that means they're hanging on from the start.

It'd the equivalent of doing half squats and thinking you're doing full squats. Not sure why it would be annoying to anyone else though

Mellor

GreeBo wrote: »

They are still expending pretty much the same energy as they are still lifting their body weight by the same amount.

Except they aren't lifting their whole body weight.
Any pressure you put on the support is weight you aren't lifting.
Even a few Kgs would have a big impact.

GreeBo

Alf Veedersane wrote: »

Anytime I've seen it done, the person is holding the bars from the go. Which indicates it reduces the load as opposed to for balance. I'm not sure people really lose balance when they tire on incline treadmill...they do lose the ability to keep up the pace at the incline.

Just to clarify, in case we're talking about different things, I'm talking about people setting the incline high and then hanging on to the rails.

They'd usually be better off doing a lower incline and not hanging on than using the incline that means they're hanging on from the start.

It'd the equivalent of doing half squats and thinking you're doing full squats. Not sure why it would be annoying to anyone else though

I dont think its equivalent to half squats at all to be fair.
Half squat means half the range of motion, so force is 9.8m/s/s times the weight being lifted (body weight included)
Energy required is force times the distance, so half squat = half distance = half the energy required.

Mellor wrote: »

Except they aren't lifting their whole body weight.
Any pressure you put on the support is weight you aren't lifting.
Even a few Kgs would have a big impact.

How much weight can you take on your arms considering the position of these bars?
So taking an average weight of 75KG I'd argue that a) 5kg isn't significant and b) that the 5KG doesnt just disappear, the person is lifting that weight off the machine so expending the same energy just now using arms/back instead of legs, buts its still a very small amount of weight.

Your argument would make sense if they were resting the weight on the machine, i.e. the machine was doing the work, but how much weight can you rest on the machine? I'd argue its even less than 5KG.

Now holding onto anything for stability will disengage your core, but thats not really what we are talking about here I think?

Alf Veedersane

GreeBo wrote: »

I dont think its equivalent to half squats at all to be fair.
Half squat means half the range of motion, so force is 9.8m/s/s times the weight being lifted (body weight included)
Energy required is force times the distance, so half squat = half distance = half the energy required.

I didn't mention energy expenditure. Energy expenditure isn't a measure of a full squat. The principle is the same: you're not doing what you think you are.

As an aside, saying a half squat burns half the energy of a full squat is assuming the resistance profile of a squat is the same through the full range of motion. It isn't.

This is an example of what I'm talking about:



Holding onto the bar on an incline as above is taking out the incline. Be as well off walking naturally on the flat...less likely to injure yourself as well

GreeBo

Alf Veedersane wrote: »

I didn't mention energy expenditure. Energy expenditure isn't a measure of a full squat. The principle is the same: you're not doing what you think you are.

As an aside, saying a half squat burns half the energy of a full squat is assuming the resistance profile of a squat is the same through the full range of motion. It isn't.

This is an example of what I'm talking about:



Holding onto the bar on an incline as above is taking out the incline. Be as well off walking naturally on the flat...less likely to injure yourself as well

The energy required to squat the first 5 inches is the same as the last 5 inches, you may think its harder due to flexibility and ability to engage specific muscles in specific positions, but the universe doesn't care.


Its still easier to walk on the flat than it is to walk on an incline holding the bars, at a bare minimum you are working your upper body to hold you in position and fighting gravity.

As for why people find other people doing it annoying....I have no idea!

IvoryTower

usually we would say this deserves its own thread, but it really doesn't

Mellor

GreeBo wrote: »

How much weight can you take on your arms considering the position of these bars?
So taking an average weight of 75KG I'd argue that a) 5kg isn't significant and b) that the 5KG doesnt just disappear, the person is lifting that weight off the machine so expending the same energy just now using arms/back instead of legs, buts its still a very small amount of weight.

Energy used when running is roughly mass x distance. So even 5kg would be significant. And thats noticable if you do it,its physically easier.

Your argument would make sense if they were resting the weight on the machine, i.e. the machine was doing the work, but how much weight can you rest on the machine? I'd argue its even less than 5KG.

Stand on a scale and place you hands on the counter, you don't need to press hard to knock off 5-10kg.

That's basically how weight distribution works in grappling. Any contact with the mat removes pressure from your opponent.

GreeBo

Mellor wrote: »

Energy used when running is roughly mass x distance. So even 5kg would be significant. And thats noticable if you do it,its physically easier.


Stand on a scale and place you hands on the counter, you don't need to press hard to knock off 5-10kg.

That's basically how weight distribution works in grappling. Any contact with the mat removes pressure from your opponent.

Rather than keep the thread off topic I'm going to stop after this point/post.

The 5KG doesnt vanish, if the person is supporting the 5KG with their arms rather than 100% with their legs, they are still supporting that 5KG so your running with 5KG less weight analogy doesnt work in this instance.

You need to press with 5KG of force to lower your "weight" by 5KG on a scales, thats how it works according to Newton's third law. So your legs are supporting 5KG less but your arms are now supporting 5KG more, its a zero sum game.

Mellor

GreeBo wrote: »

The energy required to squat the first 5 inches is the same as the last 5 inches, you may think its harder due to flexibility and ability to engage specific muscles in specific positions, but the universe doesn't care.

Hmm, That's incorrect. The universe cares about force, not mass.

Overhead press 40kg. It's relatively easy.
Now try hold it at arms length. Not so easy.
Same weight, different forces. Same applies to squats.

GreeBo wrote: »

The 5KG doesnt vanish, if the person is supporting the 5KG with their arms rather than 100% with their legs, they are still supporting that 5KG so your running with 5KG less weight analogy doesnt work in this instance.

You need to press with 5KG of force to lower your "weight" by 5KG on a scales, thats how it works according to Newton's third law. So your legs are supporting 5KG less but your arms are now supporting 5KG more, its a zero sum game.

It's a treadmill. You burn energy by moving mass with your legs.
Your arms are static. If they support your weight, they do the same work whether it's going 5km/h or 15km/h.
If what you say was true you could put all your weight on your hands are crank it up to 30km/h.

But I agree, we're way off topic now.
Nobody annoyed me in gym today. Anybody see any hats?

Alf Veedersane

GreeBo wrote: »

You need to press with 5KG of force to lower your "weight" by 5KG on a scales, thats how it works according to Newton's third law. So your legs are supporting 5KG less but your arms are now supporting 5KG more, its a zero sum game.

Newton's second law says that the acceleration of an object is directly proportional to the net force. Your assertion earlier was that because acceleration due to gravity is a constant and the barbell weight is constant, that the force is constant is wrong because you haven't allowed for any other forces that come into play or any acceleration outside of gravitational acceleration.

The force isn't constant.

ButtersSuki

Ah lads come on will ye?

Can we have less of the physics lessons?

Alf Veedersane

ButtersSuki wrote: »

Ah lads come on will ye?

Can we have less of the physics lessons?

Yes, can we get back to the abomination that is people wearing hats.

Triceratops Ballet

Alf Veedersane wrote: »

Yes, can we get back to the abomination that is people wearing hats.

what about people wearing headphones OVER hats!! how can they hear the music properly?! maybe it doesn't matter if you look super cool!

2nd Row Donkey

Saw a guy on a threadmill yesterday doing an inclined walk while holding the rails. He was wearing mma style under armour , a hat and a pair of oversized headphones. He may or may not have been using multiple lockers in the changing room and the use or otherwise of locks on the aforementioned lockers is unknown.

Mellor

Triceratops Ballet wrote: »

what about people wearing headphones OVER hats!! how can they hear the music properly?! maybe it doesn't matter if you look super cool!

maybe there is no music and they're trying to keep the voices out

Alf Veedersane

Mellor wrote: »

maybe there is no music and they're trying to keep the voices out

Or keep the voices in...so no one around knows that they're onto them.

Barna77

Triceratops Ballet wrote: »

what about people wearing headphones OVER hats!! how can they hear the music properly?! maybe it doesn't matter if you look super cool!

Hear, hear!

GreeBo

Triceratops Ballet wrote: »

what about people wearing headphones OVER hats!! how can they hear the music properly?! maybe it doesn't matter if you look super cool!

Worse, I saw a guy wearing a hat over his headphones!

D'Agger

I bought a lock for the gym as I hadn't been using one since in joined in November - TK Maxx is where it's at folks

Alf Veedersane

I saw a guy wearing a hat over his hat.

Caliden

Alf Veedersane wrote: »

I saw a guy wearing a hat over his hat.

Ah Johnny Two Hats

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y8K1fTZaR7w

Circuital

I opened 4 lockers this morning before I found one that was empty.

silverharp

Circuital wrote: »

I opened 4 lockers this morning before I found one that was empty.

trick is to go for the ones on the bottom

Alf Veedersane

Circuital wrote: »

I opened 4 lockers this morning before I found one that was empty.

Try them the other way around next time.

Pussyhands

Circuital wrote: »

I opened 4 lockers this morning before I found one that was empty.

I never lock my locker. haha

ittakestwo

Pussyhands wrote: »

I never lock my locker. haha

I don't either as I know I would lose the key on the gym floor. But I leave the strap of my sports bag sticking out a bit from under the locker door so people know it is in use.

ButtersSuki

ittakestwo wrote: »

I don't either as I know I would lose the key on the gym floor. But I leave the strap of my sports bag sticking out a bit from under the locker door so people know it is in use.

Combo lock?

D'Agger

ButtersSuki wrote: »

Combo lock?

I'll say it again - TK Maxx

GrumPy

Circuital wrote: »

I opened 4 lockers this morning before I found one that was empty.

This, this is the worst.
Drives me insane. Makes me want to move stuff to different lockers to mess with people's heads.
Also, people playing with their phones for ages in the changing rooms? Are you changing, showering, leaving, going? Play with your phone elsewhere, you're in the way!

Triceratops Ballet

not gym behaviour but I really hate those hip thrust benches, with that raised platform at the front if your thighs are in anyway big dragging the bar up to your hips is like the most excruciating quad rolling ever!! someone tell me this is a common thing and I'm not just using it wrong!

Mellor

Triceratops Ballet wrote: »

not gym behaviour but I really hate those hip thrust benches, with that raised platform at the front if your thighs are in anyway big dragging the bar up to your hips is like the most excruciating quad rolling ever!! someone tell me this is a common thing and I'm not just using it wrong!

These ones?
https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn%3AANd9GcS0nFP5pRrmclB4KtTBtHoXLg9QPpvlfAqgPPriVIOjF6fK-7ui

Triceratops Ballet

Mellor wrote: »

These ones?
https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn%3AANd9GcS0nFP5pRrmclB4KtTBtHoXLg9QPpvlfAqgPPriVIOjF6fK-7ui

yup! :mad:

Mellor

Triceratops Ballet wrote: »

yup! :mad:

I'm not really sure what you are doing tbh. I've only used it once or twice. But I didn't need to roll the bar up my quads.
Start on the floor.

Triceratops Ballet

Mellor wrote: »

I'm not really sure what you are doing tbh. I've only used it once or twice. But I didn't need to roll the bar up my quads.
Start on the floor.

yeah I sit on the floor with my back against the bench, legs out straight and the bar loaded, but I need to get to a position where my pelvis/hips are under the bar so I can bend my knees up into the starting position, rolling it up is the easiest way but because my feet are on the raised bit at the front and my thighs are not small there's very little space for me to get under the bar.

A bit of googling shows that the trick is to have the barbel elevated on each side with the plates resting on something like this guy...

JayRoc

Mellor wrote: »

I'm not really sure what you are doing tbh. I've only used it once or twice. But I didn't need to roll the bar up my quads.
Start on the floor.

I've never seen a hipthrust bench in a gym in Ireland...where are you guys training that has them???

There have been selectorised "booty-builder" machines put in the Westwoods lately which are the closest I've seen.

Normally I just use a regular bench and roll the bar up my thighs while sitting on the ground.

GreeBo

Triceratops Ballet wrote: »

not gym behaviour but I really hate those hip thrust benches, with that raised platform at the front if your thighs are in anyway big dragging the bar up to your hips is like the most excruciating quad rolling ever!! someone tell me this is a common thing and I'm not just using it wrong!

Wait....thats *not* for tying your shoes on?

Triceratops Ballet

JayRoc wrote: »

I've never seen a hipthrust bench in a gym in Ireland...where are you guys training that has them???

There have been selectorised "booty-builder" machines put in the Westwoods lately which are the closest I've seen.

Normally I just use a regular bench and roll the bar up my thighs while sitting on the ground.

Flyefit have them and Ben Dunne have them too

Blacktie.

When I'm doing it I just pick the thing up and rest it on my hips before slowly putting myself on the ground. Then putting it back I just do a half rep up and slowly get into the sitting position so I can unload the bar. Dono how people can crawl under them without it just crushing your quads.Between sets I just sit there under the bar. No big deal when it's in position really. It's a bit tiht at the quads but nothing major.

JayRoc

My first visit today to Westwood in Sandymount (due to works in my normal gym).

It's like a bricks-and-mortar embodiment of this thread. I've never seen so many signs insisting on so many rules in one place. From the standard (don't use a locker without locking it, use flip flops in the changing/pool area, don't be a weirdo in the spa), to the odd (you MUST wear swim hats while sitting in the jacuzzi) to the hilarious (please use a towel to dry your bollix, not the hairdyers....complete with an actual illustration of what not to do. That one was my favourite).

I didn't need to train. I was exhausted just reading all the rules

Alf Veedersane

JayRoc wrote: »

My first visit today to Westwood in Sandymount (due to works in my normal gym).

It's like a bricks-and-mortar embodiment of this thread. I've never seen so many signs insisting on so many rules in one place. From the standard (don't use a locker without locking it, use flip flops in the changing/pool area, don't be a weirdo in the spa), to the odd (you MUST wear swim hats while sitting in the jacuzzi) to the hilarious (please use a towel to dry your bollix, not the hairdyers....complete with an actual illustration of what not to do. That one was my favourite).

I didn't need to train. I was exhausted just reading all the rules

Should really have said "Don't be a spa in the spa".

I love that they had an illustration...lad blowdrying his ballbag with a red circle around and a line through?

JayRoc

Alf Veedersane wrote: »

I love that they had an illustration...lad blowdrying his ballbag with a red circle around and a line through?

Pretty much, and a drawing of a very happy chappy giving himself the old "bowling ball" dry with a towel. So weird