Oo ganon basahin ko ulit yung poster sa locker room sa marikina bukas alala ko pwede non-member tas pag ka confirm ko g tayo friday? sakto yon out nako ng 12pm maaga kami, sponsor ko na advil mo isang banig!
Oo ganon basahin ko ulit yung poster sa locker room sa marikina bukas alala ko pwede non-member tas pag ka confirm ko g tayo friday? sakto yon out nako ng 12pm maaga kami, sponsor ko na advil mo isang banig!
taena ang kuripot amp, banig lang ng advil ang sponsor? sagutin mo na pati post workout meal LOL
alanganin yatez, hindi kaya ng schedule kasi may pasok ako. kung magpapractice naman ako bukas lang tapos friday salang na baka 10 reps lang magawa ko dahil sa DOMS. bakit ngayon mo lang sinabi yan e October pa pala.
Sa Friday pwede ako umalis ng school ng 9am wag ka na mag praktis LOL andon din kaya yan sa locker sa new manila di nyo binabasa ahaha saka kaka enroll ko lang sa gg diba
Haha i think hindi ako credible sumagot nito since ako mismo ay biktima na ng RC injury both left & right pa. Anyway, share ko lang sayo experience ko since ngayon lang 2013 ako nainjure after 10 years. Importante yung stretching and RC rotations, alam na natin yan. Importante din ang warm up, proper form and ROM, alam na din yan. Para sakin:
1st, watch out ka sa sticking point mo kasi iba iba tayo ng structure. My right RC popped because i overstretched sa bottom while warming up sa BB BP. Pagaralan mo yung limits mo, wag ka basta basta gagaya sa form at ROM ng mga idol natin.
2nd would be exercise variety. Kung ang RC mo ay familiar lang with limited movements like press and rows, imagine how would they feel when you do flyes, vertical pulling, laterals, negatives etc...? Shock diba? Ofcourse sa umpisa kakayanin pa ng RC mo yung pressure kaso lifelong commitment to e, may wear and tear lahat
Feels na feels ko yung second point mo about exercise selection.
I can never do pullovers with a weight that would promote hypertrophy or strength kasi sobrang sakit ng RC ko even with 10lbs dumbells so I tend to not do them kahit lahat ng idol ko tulad nila Frank Zane at Bruce Lee ginagawa ito haha..
straight arm pulldowns pamalit sa db pullovers, anyway san ba merong machine dito sa pilipinas kagaya ng pullover na gamit ni dorian yates sa blood and guts? nautical ba tawag don o naulitus forgot lol
ako sakin sa nakikita ko weakness ko talaga yung Incline DB press o incline bb.. parang hindi na umangat pawir ko dun amf either nanghihina ako sa DB , di ko priority, may mali ako sa ginagawa ko, o may magiging problema ako sa future.
Yung abdominal machine sa rainforest ginagawa kong nautilus pullover. Kaso nakahiga yun hindi naka upo. Sapul naman sa lats. Mahirap lang kunin yung angle sa umpisa.
Cutting ka eh di talaga aangat yang taas na pectoral muscle masyado. Depende yan eh may mga gumagamit ng 45 iba 30(slight lang pag ka incline) pero prefer ko yung 30 dahil hindi masyadong papasok yung anterior delts sa pag press, try out try out ka ng iba ibang angle pag hindi adjustable yung bench patungan mo ng plate sa ilalim para umangat yung upuan
Cutting ka eh di talaga aangat yang taas na pectoral muscle masyado. Depende yan eh may mga gumagamit ng 45 iba 30(slight lang pag ka incline) pero prefer ko yung 30 dahil hindi masyadong papasok yung anterior delts sa pag press, try out try out ka ng iba ibang angle pag hindi adjustable yung bench patungan mo ng plate sa ilalim para umangat yung upuan
One of the longer standing arguments in the field of strength training has to do with the definition of intensity with various camps essentially defining intensity in their own way and everybody talking past one another when they have debates about it.
In my opinion, most of the arguments are simply an example of people using the same words to describe different concepts and I don’t see any real reason for there to only be a single definition of intensity that can be valuable in the weight room. In fact, by using various definitions, I think that training can be more accurately described.
Intensity of load
Arguably the first definition of intensity came from sports scientists and coaches (especially Olympic lifting coaches) trying to define and measure things relevant to them. In this case it meant defining intensity as the percentage of maximum load that was being used.
In this scheme, a 75% load (e.g. if you can use 100 lbs maximum and are lifting 75 pounds), is a lower intensity than a 95% load (you’re using 95 pounds of your 100 pound maximum).
The pros of this method are that it’s fairly easy to measure and makes concrete comparisons simpler: the guy lifting 95% of his maximum is working at a higher intensity than the guy lifting at 85% or 75% of maximum. This is especially true in research where it’s relatively easy to test someone’s maximum and then determine what percentage of maximum they are working at based on what weight is on the bar.
Unfortunately, only looking at the percentage of maximum tends to miss some crucial aspects of the training load. In both Olympic lifting and powerlifting, it’s not uncommon for lifters to perform a sub-maximal number of repetitions at a given load. That is, in theory, a load that is 85% of maximum will allow a lifter to get 5 repetitions although it will be pretty grindy at the end.
Many lifters, and this is especially true in Olympic lifting would be more likely to do repeat sets of doubles at that same 85% of maximum to ensure that technique and bar speed stay high; some powerlifters train this way as well.
It should be obvious that performing 2 repetitions at 85% of maximum and 5 repetitions at 85% of maximum are going to be a very different level of effort/difficulty even though the intensity of load is identical.
There is an additional problem in that true maximum strength can be variable on a day to day basis. Basing training around percentages can get misleading when what should be a 90% maximum load is actually lower or higher due to changes in fitness or fatigue state.
Which brings me to the second most common definition of intensity.
Intensity of effort
Groups that are usually associated with the HIT (high intensity of training) theory tend to define intensity in their own way which has to do with relative closeness to failure or simply the effort expended during the set. You might simply look at this definition of intensity in terms of ‘difficultly’. The harder the set is to complete, the higher the intensity and vice versa.
A set taken to the point of concentric failure is generally defined as 100% intensity and while individuals in this camp usually argue that anything less than 100% intensity can’t be reliably measured, others will use methods like rating of perceived exertion (RPE) or simply reps short of failure to gauge intensity of effort.
Clearly an all out set to the lifter’s absolute limits would be 100% intensity and an RPE of 10 (on a 10 point scale) with no reps left to failure. A lifter who stopped 1 rep short of true failure might be at an RPE of 9 and 90% of maximum intensity, a set done at an RPE of 8 might leave the lifter with 2-4 reps short of failure, etc.
I’d note that knowing how close one is to failure often necessitates a period of training where true failure is achieved. With practice, most lifters will know if they had one or two or four more repetitions in the tank. Beginners who have no conception of what true muscular failure is will not. I’d also mention that a good coach can usually tell by watching things like bar speed and effort how close a lifter is to failure; again this takes some practice and experience to do well.
Complicating things even more we might examine the issue of speed work as often done by athletes and powerlifters. Typically a load of 30-60% of maximum (low intensity of load) might be lifted for very sub maximal numbers of repetitions. But the focus on lifting the weight as fast as possible/pushing as hard as possible might actually make the intensity of effort quite high.
A Mid-Article Summary
Frankly, with only the two above definitions of intensity, intensity of load and intensity of effort, I think that training can be more accurately described than with either one alone. So while a set of 12 to failure might only be a 75% load intensity but 100% effort intensity (RPE of 10), a set of 2-3 at 85% of maximum might be an 85% load intensity but only a 50-60% effort intensity (RPE of 6-8).
In this vein, I’d note that a recent book by IPF powerlifter Mike Tuscherer called The Reactive Training Manual has a lot of very good information on the above approach to training, using RPE, fatigue cutoffs, etc. to autoregulate powerlifting training. Anyone interested in the topic would be recommended to pick up a copy.
Other Aspects of Intensity
Of course, I also think that other definitions of intensity can be useful or at least descriptive in looking at training. Nobody would argue that both a 1 repetition max (100% load intensity/100% effort intensity) and a 20 rep set of squats (perhaps 70% load intensity but 100% effort intensity) are intense but they tend to be intense in a different way. A set of 8 to 1 rep short of failure on the bench press (80% load intensity, 90% effort intensity) might also be intense but in a different way than either of the other two examples.
Given the general belief that training can have varying effects on either neural, muscular or metabolic effects of intensity, I don’t see it as too far fetched to look at training in terms of the neural, muscular or metabolic intensity. So sets of 1-3 are going to be more neurally intense than sets of 6-10 (more muscularly intensive) and sets of 20 or more might be primarily metabolically intensive (although the muscular effort is often still quite high).
For completeness, and having watched too many bodybuilders train, I might even go so far as to suggest another definition of intense in terms of focus and concentration. It’s not uncommon to watch bodybuilders using what are apparently fairly light loads focusing extremely intensely on every repetition, using slow movement speed and attempting to generate maximal muscular tension during all aspects of the movement. While the intensity of load may actually be fairly low, the intensity of effort (and concentration) certainly are both high. While impossible to quantify, I see that as certainly another potentially useful definition of intensity here.
Summing Up
Invariably when I see arguments about training intensity, the problem is usually that people are talking across each other, using different definitions that each thinks is the only correct definition. Rather, I think a more useful approach is to recognize that intensity in training can have different meanings all of which can have utility or value at different time points.
Alternately, as mentioned above, there are clearly cases where taking different definitions into account at the same time may give more valuable information about training than focusing on one or the other.
Good read sir Vinch. He hits it on the head when he refers to different interpretations of intensity. I'll give a popular example that confused many for some time and still does bcoz they don't know how to differentiate between worksets and warm-up/feel-sets -which all ties in to intensity regarding #'s.
You look at Arnold, a volume guy. A typical incline press scheme for him written out would look like this:
incline bb press - 135 x 15, 185 x 12, 225 x 12, 275 x 12, 315 x 8-10
You see 5 sets. It's obvious all are not worksets based on the #'s. Now lets compare to a typical incline press for Dorian Yates:
incline bb press - 135 x 12, 225 x 8, 315 x 8, 405 x 6-8
Again, obviously all are not worksets. HOWEVER, for years, and back in the 90's, many people got the word that Yates only did 1 workset per exercise, so they took that VERBATIM - exactly as written. They didn't realize that Yates did indeed pyramid up on heavy basic movements, and even did 1 warmup set on many isolations also. So what was the result? You had a shitload of guys back then tearing pecs, fucking up elbows, knees and shoulders, etc all because their interpretation of Yates's "1 set scheme" was wrong. Guys were doing 1 or 2 warmups with 135, then BOOM jumping right to 315 or 405 for a workset bcoz they didn't understand how Yates really trained. Now that I think about it, the term "workset" didn't even become popular until the Yates era. One can now see why it is so important to know what it means.
In short, the reader needs to understand if a set is a workset or not when reading a guys routine. Makes all the difference in the world - could be the difference of some n00b reading a routine and then performing 5 worksets vs 2 worksets of an exercise.
Thanks for the inputs Sir BD! Common problem i see with most lifters in the gym is they dont even stretch. Most will jump straight to the BP ang pump. Though its a way of warming up, when you ask them they'll tell you that they dont want to waste their energy with stretching and warm ups because they might not be able to go heavy later or they are saving their strength. So what i thought was their warm up set is actually their worksets.
Thanks for the inputs Sir BD! Common problem i see with most lifters in the gym is they dont even stretch. Most will jump straight to the BP ang pump. Though its a way of warming up, when you ask them they'll tell you that they dont want to waste their energy with stretching and warm ups because they might not be able to go heavy later or they are saving their strength. So what i thought was their warm up set is actually their worksets.
Haha I hear ya bro. Shit back in my day you never even heard of RC or RC exercises. That's probably one of the reasons my RC is so messed up - on chest day it was always starting with bench 135, 225, 315, 405 haha - no stretching, only warmup a little doing abs or on the bike. I only WISH I emplored more stretching/warming up back then. Nowdays I do extensive stetching before, during and after the iron - for all bdpts. Most notably I found always stretching the hams helps prevent lumbar strains, so I am stretching the hams every workout. I also regularly go over to the chin-up bar and just "hang" for 10 or 20 seconds to keep the spine unbinded. Small things like these can make a world of difference when one gets older in trying to prevent past injuries from flaring up.
I also stretch until i feel very loose. I agree with the hams stretches, that's #1 in my list. I also do the hanging thing to decompress my spine. I sometimes tie a 10-20lb DB to my shoes for that extra stretch
*thanks for the head's up sir BD!
now, i really need to extend my stretching time to prevent any future injuries. (minsan kasi masakit na masakit RC ko after my wo, na-observe ko din yun kapag minsan saglit lang ako mag stretch at derecho agad sa set ko)
(kapag si master Vinch & sir Big Dawg talaga nagbigay ng infos, nabubusog utak ko)
Thanks for the inputs Sir BD! Common problem i see with most lifters in the gym is they dont even stretch. Most will jump straight to the BP ang pump. Though its a way of warming up, when you ask them they'll tell you that they dont want to waste their energy with stretching and warm ups because they might not be able to go heavy later or they are saving their strength. So what i thought was their warm up set is actually their worksets.
Haha I hear ya bro. Shit back in my day you never even heard of RC or RC exercises. That's probably one of the reasons my RC is so messed up - on chest day it was always starting with bench 135, 225, 315, 405 haha - no stretching, only warmup a little doing abs or on the bike. I only WISH I emplored more stretching/warming up back then. Nowdays I do extensive stetching before, during and after the iron - for all bdpts. Most notably I found always stretching the hams helps prevent lumbar strains, so I am stretching the hams every workout. I also regularly go over to the chin-up bar and just "hang" for 10 or 20 seconds to keep the spine unbinded. Small things like these can make a world of difference when one gets older in trying to prevent past injuries from flaring up.
I couldn't agree more with you Sir BD. I can practically relate to this. Before, I am one of the guys who are not into properly warming up, stretching and doing mobility drills. Well, to tell you the truth, the experience wasn't enjoyable. I repeatedly injured my lower back. My mentality back then was my body was just too fragile to handle such weights. Well, I realized nowadays, don't blame your body dumbass, it's because of my stupid non-existent warm-up habits that leads to injuries.
Right now, I make it a point to warm up properly by foam rolling, stretching and mobility drills. I couldn't be more happier. I still experience some injuries which is part of our chosen lifestyle, but not as severe as before.
Comments
taena ang kuripot amp, banig lang ng advil ang sponsor? sagutin mo na pati post workout meal LOL
@mon
sa ramen ramen ba? ahaha
THE BADASS VINCH MENTALITY ! hahaha
Duration 1:30-2:45pm
@Rainforest gym
Stretching 10minutes
Warmup: dips and chins
Superset: WS
Iso flat press and Vbar chins
270lbs x 10 / BW x 10
Iso incline press and wide pullups
240lbs x 10 / BW x 15
Inc DB flyes 30lbs x 15 x 3
Underhand machine press 3 sets
Supported T-bar rows and wide pullups
150lbs x 8 / BW x 12
One arm DB rows
100lbs x 10 x 3
Ninakaw ko lang nung nasa Miga Pawir yan
1st, watch out ka sa sticking point mo kasi iba iba tayo ng structure. My right RC popped because i overstretched sa bottom while warming up sa BB BP. Pagaralan mo yung limits mo, wag ka basta basta gagaya sa form at ROM ng mga idol natin.
2nd would be exercise variety. Kung ang RC mo ay familiar lang with limited movements like press and rows, imagine how would they feel when you do flyes, vertical pulling, laterals, negatives etc...? Shock diba? Ofcourse sa umpisa kakayanin pa ng RC mo yung pressure kaso lifelong commitment to e, may wear and tear lahat
Feels na feels ko yung second point mo about exercise selection.
I can never do pullovers with a weight that would promote hypertrophy or strength kasi sobrang sakit ng RC ko even with 10lbs dumbells so I tend to not do them kahit lahat ng idol ko tulad nila Frank Zane at Bruce Lee ginagawa ito haha..
di ko alam yung form ng tamang angle sa incline, kasi talagang makikita mo sa boobs ko yun ang naiiwan hehe
Duration 10:40-11:10am
Worksets:
CGBP 200lbs x 8
BB curls 100lbs x 10
Circuit: 30lbs each
DB curls
rope pressdown
rear laterals
front laterals
side laterals
This. Nasa Max-OT 'to. Around 25-30º inclination.
One of the longer standing arguments in the field of strength training has to do with the definition of intensity with various camps essentially defining intensity in their own way and everybody talking past one another when they have debates about it.
In my opinion, most of the arguments are simply an example of people using the same words to describe different concepts and I don’t see any real reason for there to only be a single definition of intensity that can be valuable in the weight room. In fact, by using various definitions, I think that training can be more accurately described.
Intensity of load
Arguably the first definition of intensity came from sports scientists and coaches (especially Olympic lifting coaches) trying to define and measure things relevant to them. In this case it meant defining intensity as the percentage of maximum load that was being used.
In this scheme, a 75% load (e.g. if you can use 100 lbs maximum and are lifting 75 pounds), is a lower intensity than a 95% load (you’re using 95 pounds of your 100 pound maximum).
The pros of this method are that it’s fairly easy to measure and makes concrete comparisons simpler: the guy lifting 95% of his maximum is working at a higher intensity than the guy lifting at 85% or 75% of maximum. This is especially true in research where it’s relatively easy to test someone’s maximum and then determine what percentage of maximum they are working at based on what weight is on the bar.
Unfortunately, only looking at the percentage of maximum tends to miss some crucial aspects of the training load. In both Olympic lifting and powerlifting, it’s not uncommon for lifters to perform a sub-maximal number of repetitions at a given load. That is, in theory, a load that is 85% of maximum will allow a lifter to get 5 repetitions although it will be pretty grindy at the end.
Many lifters, and this is especially true in Olympic lifting would be more likely to do repeat sets of doubles at that same 85% of maximum to ensure that technique and bar speed stay high; some powerlifters train this way as well.
It should be obvious that performing 2 repetitions at 85% of maximum and 5 repetitions at 85% of maximum are going to be a very different level of effort/difficulty even though the intensity of load is identical.
There is an additional problem in that true maximum strength can be variable on a day to day basis. Basing training around percentages can get misleading when what should be a 90% maximum load is actually lower or higher due to changes in fitness or fatigue state.
Which brings me to the second most common definition of intensity.
Intensity of effort
Groups that are usually associated with the HIT (high intensity of training) theory tend to define intensity in their own way which has to do with relative closeness to failure or simply the effort expended during the set. You might simply look at this definition of intensity in terms of ‘difficultly’. The harder the set is to complete, the higher the intensity and vice versa.
A set taken to the point of concentric failure is generally defined as 100% intensity and while individuals in this camp usually argue that anything less than 100% intensity can’t be reliably measured, others will use methods like rating of perceived exertion (RPE) or simply reps short of failure to gauge intensity of effort.
Clearly an all out set to the lifter’s absolute limits would be 100% intensity and an RPE of 10 (on a 10 point scale) with no reps left to failure. A lifter who stopped 1 rep short of true failure might be at an RPE of 9 and 90% of maximum intensity, a set done at an RPE of 8 might leave the lifter with 2-4 reps short of failure, etc.
I’d note that knowing how close one is to failure often necessitates a period of training where true failure is achieved. With practice, most lifters will know if they had one or two or four more repetitions in the tank. Beginners who have no conception of what true muscular failure is will not. I’d also mention that a good coach can usually tell by watching things like bar speed and effort how close a lifter is to failure; again this takes some practice and experience to do well.
Complicating things even more we might examine the issue of speed work as often done by athletes and powerlifters. Typically a load of 30-60% of maximum (low intensity of load) might be lifted for very sub maximal numbers of repetitions. But the focus on lifting the weight as fast as possible/pushing as hard as possible might actually make the intensity of effort quite high.
A Mid-Article Summary
Frankly, with only the two above definitions of intensity, intensity of load and intensity of effort, I think that training can be more accurately described than with either one alone. So while a set of 12 to failure might only be a 75% load intensity but 100% effort intensity (RPE of 10), a set of 2-3 at 85% of maximum might be an 85% load intensity but only a 50-60% effort intensity (RPE of 6-8).
In this vein, I’d note that a recent book by IPF powerlifter Mike Tuscherer called The Reactive Training Manual has a lot of very good information on the above approach to training, using RPE, fatigue cutoffs, etc. to autoregulate powerlifting training. Anyone interested in the topic would be recommended to pick up a copy.
Other Aspects of Intensity
Of course, I also think that other definitions of intensity can be useful or at least descriptive in looking at training. Nobody would argue that both a 1 repetition max (100% load intensity/100% effort intensity) and a 20 rep set of squats (perhaps 70% load intensity but 100% effort intensity) are intense but they tend to be intense in a different way. A set of 8 to 1 rep short of failure on the bench press (80% load intensity, 90% effort intensity) might also be intense but in a different way than either of the other two examples.
Given the general belief that training can have varying effects on either neural, muscular or metabolic effects of intensity, I don’t see it as too far fetched to look at training in terms of the neural, muscular or metabolic intensity. So sets of 1-3 are going to be more neurally intense than sets of 6-10 (more muscularly intensive) and sets of 20 or more might be primarily metabolically intensive (although the muscular effort is often still quite high).
For completeness, and having watched too many bodybuilders train, I might even go so far as to suggest another definition of intense in terms of focus and concentration. It’s not uncommon to watch bodybuilders using what are apparently fairly light loads focusing extremely intensely on every repetition, using slow movement speed and attempting to generate maximal muscular tension during all aspects of the movement. While the intensity of load may actually be fairly low, the intensity of effort (and concentration) certainly are both high. While impossible to quantify, I see that as certainly another potentially useful definition of intensity here.
Summing Up
Invariably when I see arguments about training intensity, the problem is usually that people are talking across each other, using different definitions that each thinks is the only correct definition. Rather, I think a more useful approach is to recognize that intensity in training can have different meanings all of which can have utility or value at different time points.
Alternately, as mentioned above, there are clearly cases where taking different definitions into account at the same time may give more valuable information about training than focusing on one or the other.
SOURCE: Lyle Mcdonald
You look at Arnold, a volume guy. A typical incline press scheme for him written out would look like this:
incline bb press - 135 x 15, 185 x 12, 225 x 12, 275 x 12, 315 x 8-10
You see 5 sets. It's obvious all are not worksets based on the #'s. Now lets compare to a typical incline press for Dorian Yates:
incline bb press - 135 x 12, 225 x 8, 315 x 8, 405 x 6-8
Again, obviously all are not worksets. HOWEVER, for years, and back in the 90's, many people got the word that Yates only did 1 workset per exercise, so they took that VERBATIM - exactly as written. They didn't realize that Yates did indeed pyramid up on heavy basic movements, and even did 1 warmup set on many isolations also. So what was the result? You had a shitload of guys back then tearing pecs, fucking up elbows, knees and shoulders, etc all because their interpretation of Yates's "1 set scheme" was wrong. Guys were doing 1 or 2 warmups with 135, then BOOM jumping right to 315 or 405 for a workset bcoz they didn't understand how Yates really trained. Now that I think about it, the term "workset" didn't even become popular until the Yates era. One can now see why it is so important to know what it means.
In short, the reader needs to understand if a set is a workset or not when reading a guys routine. Makes all the difference in the world - could be the difference of some n00b reading a routine and then performing 5 worksets vs 2 worksets of an exercise.
Haha I hear ya bro. Shit back in my day you never even heard of RC or RC exercises. That's probably one of the reasons my RC is so messed up - on chest day it was always starting with bench 135, 225, 315, 405 haha - no stretching, only warmup a little doing abs or on the bike. I only WISH I emplored more stretching/warming up back then. Nowdays I do extensive stetching before, during and after the iron - for all bdpts. Most notably I found always stretching the hams helps prevent lumbar strains, so I am stretching the hams every workout. I also regularly go over to the chin-up bar and just "hang" for 10 or 20 seconds to keep the spine unbinded. Small things like these can make a world of difference when one gets older in trying to prevent past injuries from flaring up.
*thanks for the head's up sir BD!
now, i really need to extend my stretching time to prevent any future injuries. (minsan kasi masakit na masakit RC ko after my wo, na-observe ko din yun kapag minsan saglit lang ako mag stretch at derecho agad sa set ko)
(kapag si master Vinch & sir Big Dawg talaga nagbigay ng infos, nabubusog utak ko)
hehehe
I couldn't agree more with you Sir BD. I can practically relate to this. Before, I am one of the guys who are not into properly warming up, stretching and doing mobility drills. Well, to tell you the truth, the experience wasn't enjoyable. I repeatedly injured my lower back. My mentality back then was my body was just too fragile to handle such weights. Well, I realized nowadays, don't blame your body dumbass, it's because of my stupid non-existent warm-up habits that leads to injuries.
Right now, I make it a point to warm up properly by foam rolling, stretching and mobility drills. I couldn't be more happier. I still experience some injuries which is part of our chosen lifestyle, but not as severe as before.
Reps for you sir!