Why are you still falling for the Overhead Press meme perpet

So, because you can lift more weight sitting is better? Is this some kind of bait?

>>38588131
Everyone here sucks on ripplytits fat cock. There's no telling anyone that his advice isn't gonna get them what they want. Just sit back and laugh

I dont need a sports scientist to tell me why using dumbells will give me better results than barbell. How dumb are you cunts to argue over this.

>>38588187
Apparently retards here do because they still think barbells are superior because "muh rippetoe" says so

>>38588131
>Doesn't know what he is talking about
>Second best exercise

What was meant by this

>>38588216
I wonder what the spill over effect of not being able to understand basic physics and body mechanics is in relation to every day critical thinking skills.

Stay swole my fellow dumbell brah.

>>38588276
What I don't get is how they always yell "Muh stabilizer muscles most important" but then neglect that dumbbells train those stabilizers far more.

>>38588276
I'm actually a physics student, and have a far better understanding of physics than you.
However, I use barbells for two reasons
>better standard for comparison, starting strength etc
>I'm not a faggot

>>38588318
>>better standard for comparison, starting strength etc
>>I'm not a faggot

really good reasons, you got me

>>38588156

Yes.

People on /fit/ always talk about how more weight = better

>muh strength base
>muh 5 reps

>>38588324
My favorite is the 400 squats while willfully neglecting to disclose the 350lb bodyweight. LOL

>if you do the shoulder press standing up and using dumbbells you use far less weight than if you do it sitting down with a barbell.
If I press 100lbs standing up with dumbbells I'm using less weight than if I press 100lbs sitting down with a barbell. Nice science.

>>38588336
are all marcus rippetoe cult followers this retarded?

re-read what it said again

>>38588336
Low quality bait

>>38588348
I read what it said.
Your pictures first sentence implies 1pl8 is heavier whether you're standing up or sitting down.

>>38588364
You should read it
80% of your 1RM is less blah blah blah not 1pl8

>>38588364
It means that if you sitting overhead press 100lbs and that's your 90% of 1rpm, you will use less weight doing standing dumbbell press but it will be just as hard, showing that standing dumbbell presses are more effective

>>38588131
>http://www.ergo-log.com/best-shoulder-press-standing-with-dumbbells.html
That was obvious. Push press on the other hand can really only be done with a barbell.

>>38588384

By that standard, you should be doing standing tsunami bar presses.

Harder != better.

>>38588604
>Harder != better.

How is it not better if it requires more effort to stabilize dumbbells?

>>38588530
You can do push presses with dumbells, I wouldn't recommend it.
>Be me
>Do standing OHP with 50s dumbells
> Want to overload shoulders so start doing push presses
> Work Up to 65s, on my 2nd rep I feel my right shoulder pop out at the top position
> It pops back in when I lower the weight but scared as fuck
Took me a week to recover the nerves to do any heavy overhand lifting after that

>>38588330
>willfully neglecting to disclose
that's some shit writing

One of the best arguments for barbell over DB is convenience of progression, most gyms stock DBs in 5 or 10 lbs increments, so moving up by a pair means a 10 or 20 lbs, which means you'll have to work through a large rep range. With a barbell, the standard increment is 5lbs, and microloading is possible, so you can add as little as 1lbs every session in order to keep providing a new stimulus in the desired rep bracket

>>38588679
>he does low reps like a fatass

Holy shit you people exist?

so what are you saying? That you can lift more weight sitting down than standing? That you can lift more weight when you move through less range of motion? Is this some kind of newfagfuckery? Fucking idiot kys.

>>38588696

You can do the reps in any bracket you like, you could do a progression with 8s or 10s if you wanted to.

A standing barbell press is also superior to a standing DB press because when you're fatigued from a high rep set, or from some intensity technique, it's much harder to injure yourself, as it's easier to control

>>38588623

Because the difficulty of the movement is not the same thing as the muscle activation on the movement. Adding instability usually decreases the usage of the target muscles, not increases them.

>>38588131
>>38588177
>>38588187
>>38588216
>>38588276
>>38588291
>>38588324
>>38588330
>letting hate and some form of misplaced superiority complex indoctrinate your thoughts
>unnecessarily taking sides
>not embracing the benefits of both worlds and ascend into strength and swoleness
Starting strength is the absolute best book a beginner should read. Notice how I said "beginner", " book" and "read". Teaching low bar instead of high bar to a non specialised beginner is dumb, as is 1x5 DLs right after 3x5 squats.
Do 1x5 of one barbell main lift every day for CNS adaptation, then do 5x5 of another main lift at moderate intensity to really pound the form down and gain some conditioning, then do 3x10ish accessories with dumbells. For example
>1x5 bench, new 5rm PR
>5x5 OHP @80% 5rm
>3x10 dips (weighted if you get way more than 10)
>3x10 incline DB bench
Here. Was it so hard?

Either the initial info-graphic does not fully summarise the study or it misses out key information which connects what it found with the statement 'results in stronger and bigger shoulder muscles'.
I'm not sure anyone would argue that sitting down with a barbell doesn't enable the heaviest weight but nothing in the picture supports the conclusion that this would in the long term lead to stronger and bigger shoulders.
Also this hatred of Rippletoe is pretty hilarious and seemingly founded on baseless stereotypes and misconceptions.

>>38588929

Unless they're going to be training six days a week, that setup isn't going to be the best for equal development.

>>38588965
This is the internet: everyone and anyone can be an expert

>>38588131
Most gyms have dumbbells that are way roo far apart from each other in weight.
If they have 2.5kg jumps, it is basically a 5kg jump compared to barbells, which is too much to progress for any overhead press variation.
Barbell is better because it is easier to progressively overload and thus get stronger faster.

File: 1463768446201.gif (89KB, 600x450px) Image search: [Google]

89KB, 600x450px

>>38588131
>kinetic chain is twice as short
>It's easier to do it sitting!
No shit Sherlock.

I know right, it's not like you could incorporate both into your routine or anything, you absolutely MUST pick one or the other. It's obviously impossible to do low rep main work with a barbell and high rep assistance work with dumbbells, LMAO.

>>38589017

Unless you run with rep range progression rather than just weight, which his how most people work with lifts that are lighter or require larger relative jumps. Works just as well in most cases.

>>38588965
I don't see why not.
5 days a week here.
>PPLPPxx
>LPPLPxx
>PLPPLxx
You train every body part 2x week minimum (ignoring how Deadlifts work your back too but they are on leg day, how Push Press works legs too but is on push day, and Chinups work triceps too but are on pull day). 2x week is recommended by everyone except roidsplitters because muscle protein synthesis yada yada.
You get a deload week per body part every three weeks but without detraining or lowering intensity (for example on week one you only train legs once)
You break PRs week after week
Plenty but not too much rest on weekends, you get to drink and sleep like shit and it's still enough rest because it is 3 nights of sleep from Friday's to Monday's workout.
Only downside is you spend pretty much half a day per week in the gym. But if you expect to get swole from just DBs, as this thread says, you have to do that anyway

If you want to be that much of a fucking autist do standing Inch dumbell presses
They're much harder to lift than a normal dumbell, after all.

why is it always DYELs that can't strict OHP 100kg that bitch and moan about how bad standing bb OHP is

can you not just take your meme shit elsewhere and let actual lifters continue to lift

>>38589049

I don't see how you can reconcile "train every bodypart 2x/wk minimum" with a routine that by your own admission spends a third of its time not actually doing that.

>>38589074
>I can't read
Aren't there deloads on like every intermediate programming?

>>38589094
not Texas method ideally

>>38589094

Only when required. Which is often every two or three months rather than spending every week deloading something (which wouldn't really work for most intermediate routines anyway, as the issue is a buildup of systemic rather than localised fatigue).

>>38589064
They're acting like the basic fat bitch in this situation
>current beauty standards are shit and unhealthy
>what I am should be the standard
See where I'm going with here?

>>38589105
Only if you permabulk. I did Canditos linear and textbook VRI TM, didn't work, switched to this PPL-TM hybrid, works like a charm. And that's the only thing that matters to me.
>>38589109
Well I guess I am a weak bitch for "deloading" that often. Who cares, this program gets me to break on average 3 PRs per week on all lifts, and I'm sticking with it.

>>38588674
No it's not.

File: mark-rippletoe.jpg (38KB, 433x480px) Image search: [Google]

38KB, 433x480px

>>38588131

Dumbbell > barbell for everything unless all you care about is putting up big numbers.

Likewise, sitting for shoulder press is like using a smith machine for squats. You're only cheating yourself out of additional stabilizer muscle activation. You might as well be doing an isolation lift.