Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
March 28, 2024, 02:08:49 AM

Login with username, password and session length

Search:     Advanced search
we're back, baby
*
Home Help Search Login Register
f13.net  |  f13.net General Forums  |  General Discussion  |  Topic: So. P90X anyone? (Misery loves company) 0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.
Pages: 1 ... 12 13 [14] 15 16 ... 44 Go Down Print
Author Topic: So. P90X anyone? (Misery loves company)  (Read 477136 times)
K9
Terracotta Army
Posts: 7441


Reply #455 on: August 11, 2011, 09:33:49 AM

I flirted with it for a month or two, but the facilities I can use are really not geared right, and I'm happy with my routine of powerlifting and olympic lifts. The more I read about CrossFit the more I have come to think that there are some really good core principles in there (high tempo, varied workouts) that is tied up in an awful lot of voodoo. Their stance on bench presses (no bench press) is frankly idiotic, since it is such a core strength-building lift for the whole of the upper torso.

Don't know about bench press - can't tell you the last time I actually lifted a weight - but yeah, I kinda agree about the voodoo thing. I'm very curious about CrossFit Endurance but nearest one is in Bethnal Green which is far too far away.

Google lists one in Southwark, but sod £100 per month. Crossfit seems good if your goal is to be an all-rounder, but it requires quite a lot of motivation to get results I think. I am slightly averse to joining a special cross-fit gym, but then I am fortunate to have access to two very good university gyms. Without that I might be a bit more tempted. Really the only bit of kit that a crossfit gym has that would really improve my workouts are good rings. Olympic bars, kettlebells and spots for chins and dips you can find in any half-decent gym.


I love the smell of facepalm in the morning
Cyrrex
Terracotta Army
Posts: 10603


Reply #456 on: August 11, 2011, 10:59:45 AM

I can't lift nearly as much on the flat bench.

Declines recruit lats.  That's why you (and everyone else) can lift more decline.  You can get the same results by doing flat bench and bentover rows.  I only ever use a decline bench for triceps any more and it's really just a method to break up the monotony. 

90lb military dumbell presses?  You're a beast!



You missed the part where I am actually unable to do them.  I can probably do a few 85s with a spotter, and 80s for 8 reps without a spotter.  But yeah, I seem to have unusually strong shoulders for my size (I'm about 5'8" 175lbs).

Now its moot though, because my gym only has 36kg dumbbells (i said 34 before), which is about 80 lbs.  Fucking hooray.

Regarding the declines, I find the opposite to generally be true...I usually see people are able to do less than their normal bench.  Probably a combination of not doing them very often combined with the fact that most people neglect their backs entirely.  Might depend on your gym.

K9 - I find that my range of motion gets strangely limited on the flat bench, and it can begin to bother my delts when the weights get heavy.  I am pretty sure that I am flaring out my elbows way too much...and that is primarily why I do the declines.  Not only does it allow me to move more weight (which is almost always a good thing), but I know my form is way better because my elbows are not all flared out.  It's just far more comfortable for me in all ways, so I stick to it.

"...maybe if you cleaned the piss out of the sunny d bottles under your desks and returned em, you could upgrade you vid cards, fucken lusers.." - Grunk
DraconianOne
Terracotta Army
Posts: 2905


Reply #457 on: August 11, 2011, 12:30:10 PM

Google lists one in Southwark, but sod £100 per month. Crossfit seems good if your goal is to be an all-rounder, but it requires quite a lot of motivation to get results I think. I am slightly averse to joining a special cross-fit gym, but then I am fortunate to have access to two very good university gyms. Without that I might be a bit more tempted. Really the only bit of kit that a crossfit gym has that would really improve my workouts are good rings. Olympic bars, kettlebells and spots for chins and dips you can find in any half-decent gym.

£100 a month is definitely steep. I pay £20 for an okay gym that gives me what I need at the moment - i.e. a treadmill, some floor space and a shower. With the option of some weights when I get around to it. No kettleballs though but as and when I get around to using them for training, I'll reassess.

Then again, my goals are specific: run long, run far. The race 10 days ago was 100 miles around the Lake District (although I retired after 75) and I've got an 85 miler in just over two weeks. Common wisdom says you basically need to do loads and loads of long slow runs but I'm intrigued by the fact that some of the Crossfit guys reckon they only do three runs a week and no run further than 13 miles but they still complete 100 mile races (like the Western States in the US) in under 24 hours. That's the type of bodyhack thinking I can get behind which is why I want to find out more.

As a total aside, I've come to the decision over the last couple of days that I'm going to change my career. Fuck software development - fuck it in it's stupid arse. Provided I don't change my mind in the next couple of days, I'm going to retrain as a Level 3 Personal Trainer and start the course in September.  DRILLING AND MANLINESS

A point can be MOOT. MUTE is more along the lines of what you should be. - WayAbvPar
ghost
The Dentist
Posts: 10619


Reply #458 on: August 11, 2011, 12:46:58 PM

The £100 per month deal sounds more like it offers classes and actual training.  It sounds pretty awesome, really.  But then it ought to. 
K9
Terracotta Army
Posts: 7441


Reply #459 on: August 11, 2011, 03:29:30 PM

Google lists one in Southwark, but sod £100 per month. Crossfit seems good if your goal is to be an all-rounder, but it requires quite a lot of motivation to get results I think. I am slightly averse to joining a special cross-fit gym, but then I am fortunate to have access to two very good university gyms. Without that I might be a bit more tempted. Really the only bit of kit that a crossfit gym has that would really improve my workouts are good rings. Olympic bars, kettlebells and spots for chins and dips you can find in any half-decent gym.
Then again, my goals are specific: run long, run far. The race 10 days ago was 100 miles around the Lake District (although I retired after 75) and I've got an 85 miler in just over two weeks. Common wisdom says you basically need to do loads and loads of long slow runs but I'm intrigued by the fact that some of the Crossfit guys reckon they only do three runs a week and no run further than 13 miles but they still complete 100 mile races (like the Western States in the US) in under 24 hours. That's the type of bodyhack thinking I can get behind which is why I want to find out more.

I suspect part of this is due to the bloody-minded nature of the average crosfitter  Oh ho ho ho. Reallllly?

Doing heavy lifting can definitely improve your stamina, I do very little cardio other than the six miles in and out of work on a bike and I did 22 miles at the weekend from Fulham up to Hampstead Heath and back without much difficulty. I could have gone further, and this was after doing eight sets of bodyweight squats the day before.

I love the smell of facepalm in the morning
JWIV
Terracotta Army
Posts: 2392


Reply #460 on: September 02, 2011, 07:23:52 AM

Just signed up to run my first half in October.   Coming off an overuse injury (protip: change your damn running shoes when they start causing issues, not a month or two later). so I may end up looking into the various run/walk plans that get mentioned so as to prevent re-injury.
Nebu
Terracotta Army
Posts: 17613


Reply #461 on: September 02, 2011, 07:35:48 AM

protip: change your damn running shoes when they start causing issues, not a month or two later

Excellent tip.  As someone over 40 that runs, I always buy well-cushioned trainers and replace them every 300 miles or so.  It has helped keep my knees in good shape. 

"Always do what is right. It will gratify half of mankind and astound the other."

-  Mark Twain
JWIV
Terracotta Army
Posts: 2392


Reply #462 on: September 02, 2011, 08:03:14 AM

protip: change your damn running shoes when they start causing issues, not a month or two later

Excellent tip.  As someone over 40 that runs, I always buy well-cushioned trainers and replace them every 300 miles or so.  It has helped keep my knees in good shape. 

I  was just being dumb and had a series of events lined up that I didn't want to try and break in new shoes with. So instead, it ended up being a month of hobbling around and PT with a bit of something (maybe ITBS, maybe some strained lower back muscles, maybe both! It's the gift that keeps giving).   But yes, I had figured that the 300-500 mile shoe thing was overstated and mostly driven by marketing.  It really isn't.   
DraconianOne
Terracotta Army
Posts: 2905


Reply #463 on: September 02, 2011, 10:11:15 AM

protip: change your damn running shoes when they start causing issues, not a month or two later

Excellent tip.  As someone over 40 that runs, I always buy well-cushioned trainers and replace them every 300 miles or so.  It has helped keep my knees in good shape. 

I  was just being dumb and had a series of events lined up that I didn't want to try and break in new shoes with. So instead, it ended up being a month of hobbling around and PT with a bit of something (maybe ITBS, maybe some strained lower back muscles, maybe both! It's the gift that keeps giving).   But yes, I had figured that the 300-500 mile shoe thing was overstated and mostly driven by marketing.  It really isn't.   

You can tell if you need to replace your trainers with a simple test: put them on a table top or similar flat surface. If they rock from side to side then replace them as they've worn down unequally (likely becuase of pronation etc.) The 300-500 mile guideline is okay but generally only if you're pounding concrete. If you do a lot of off-road running, you might get away with double that. (I have one pair of trainers that are nearing the end of their useful life after nearly 800 miles and that's mainly because the uppers are coming away. YMMV - literally.)

But new trainers aren't a panacea for all running injuries. If you think you've got ITB problems (do you work behind a desk?) then you need to address that before it gets serious. Mostly you can do it through stretching the hip flexors, some strengthening and, if you can, go see a good physio for an assessment (and a massage?)

As a total aside, I'm about to start researching this whole barefoot/minimalist running stuff which people swear stops them getting injuries. I'm not convinced but don't know enough about it to make a judgement. I'm trying to keep an open mind.

Good luck with your half btw.

A point can be MOOT. MUTE is more along the lines of what you should be. - WayAbvPar
Nebu
Terracotta Army
Posts: 17613


Reply #464 on: September 02, 2011, 10:16:23 AM

I heard a great line from a shoe salesman the other day.  He asked me about my running and I told him that I was fairly neutral but tended to supinate when I got tired.  He says to me "Oh, you mean that you under-pronate".  I smiled and thanked him for his time. 

"Always do what is right. It will gratify half of mankind and astound the other."

-  Mark Twain
JWIV
Terracotta Army
Posts: 2392


Reply #465 on: September 02, 2011, 10:40:57 AM

protip: change your damn running shoes when they start causing issues, not a month or two later


You can tell if you need to replace your trainers with a simple test: put them on a table top or similar flat surface. If they rock from side to side then replace them as they've worn down unequally (likely becuase of pronation etc.) The 300-500 mile guideline is okay but generally only if you're pounding concrete. If you do a lot of off-road running, you might get away with double that. (I have one pair of trainers that are nearing the end of their useful life after nearly 800 miles and that's mainly because the uppers are coming away. YMMV - literally.)

But new trainers aren't a panacea for all running injuries. If you think you've got ITB problems (do you work behind a desk?) then you need to address that before it gets serious. Mostly you can do it through stretching the hip flexors, some strengthening and, if you can, go see a good physio for an assessment (and a massage?)

As a total aside, I'm about to start researching this whole barefoot/minimalist running stuff which people swear stops them getting injuries. I'm not convinced but don't know enough about it to make a judgement. I'm trying to keep an open mind.

Good luck with your half btw.

I'm sadly on a first name basis with the physio guys at this point (funnily enough, not even all from running - I was at the beach and had my shoulder fucked up by a wave crashing on it.  And then my wife had to visit them for awhile due to our second child throwing her pelvis out of alignment.).  

I've been doing physio now for almost a month at this point - mostly stretching and strength work, along with massage to try and get certain things to release.  On my own, it's 20-30 minutes of stretching/strength work a day, on top of my usual routine of weekly yoga.  Of course, most of the recommended things he has me doing are yoga (child pose, pigeon, lying spinal twist) and I've added a few other recommended for more hip, IT band, and hamstring work.   And it definitely all seems to be getting better - I did an easy five miles last night and while I was sore, it was nothing like what was happening when this first hit me.  So it's one of those things that'll just take time to really work through I think.

When I started looking at new shoes, I was eyeing the minimalist stuff - but there's a LOT of reports now that they're causing as many problems as they solve.  Just different ones.  Rather than shin splints, you get metatarsal stress fractures.   I figured I'd just stick with my Brooks Defyance's instead, since they've treated me very well.

« Last Edit: September 02, 2011, 10:42:32 AM by JWIV »
Nebu
Terracotta Army
Posts: 17613


Reply #466 on: September 02, 2011, 10:45:49 AM

I just picked up a pair of Brooks Ghost 4's, and I love them!  I've been an Asics Nimbus guy for years, but after only a few miles I'm sold on these shoes.  The fact that they're also $30 cheaper is a bonus!

"Always do what is right. It will gratify half of mankind and astound the other."

-  Mark Twain
JWIV
Terracotta Army
Posts: 2392


Reply #467 on: September 02, 2011, 10:59:40 AM

I just picked up a pair of Brooks Ghost 4's, and I love them!  I've been an Asics Nimbus guy for years, but after only a few miles I'm sold on these shoes.  The fact that they're also $30 cheaper is a bonus!

I really wanted to try a set of Ghost 4's - I'm hearing a lot of people rave about them over the old 3's (which I tried and was pretty enh about).

Jimbo
Terracotta Army
Posts: 1478

still drives a stick shift


Reply #468 on: September 02, 2011, 11:32:52 AM

I switched to Brooks too!  I'm wearing the Beast from them, and Addiction-walker which is there all white leather which is a great hospital shoe if your department wants and all white shoe, they have all black if that is what is in the dress code too (mine wants white, the other one I start PRN at wants black...go figure!).
DraconianOne
Terracotta Army
Posts: 2905


Reply #469 on: September 02, 2011, 01:21:55 PM

Brooks are awesome. I wore Beast for years when I was doing lots of road running. Switched to Ravenna this year and got a pair of trail shoes from them too which have been great - no blisters, feels like I've been wearing them for years (in a good way).

When I started looking at new shoes, I was eyeing the minimalist stuff - but there's a LOT of reports now that they're causing as many problems as they solve.  Just different ones.  Rather than shin splints, you get metatarsal stress fractures.   I figured I'd just stick with my Brooks Defyance's instead, since they've treated me very well.

What little I have looked into regarding minimalist stuff so far, this doesn't surprise me - not because it's anything to do with running barefoot but because people just think they can put on a pair of Vibrams and go running like they usually do.

Skip to the end if you're not interested in my musings:


What I've read so far is that minimalist running requires a total change in technique - shorter stride pace, quicker cadence, forefoot/midfoot landing, more fluid motion and, most importantly, less impacting foot strikes. It's not something that can be rushed into though - for a start, no padding on the heel in particular means that you're achilles and calf are going to work harder than they're used to because they're going to get stretched more. So switching to minimalist shoes is not something someone does unless they're prepared to spend weeks or even months changing the way they run.

What strike me about all this, though, is that it's describing something similar to the technique I was taught 25 years ago when I started getting coached properly on the track (as a sprinter and long jumper). It wasn't revolutionary thinking - it was just my coach trying to get me to run properly - like a sprinter instead of a rugby player. I have a suspicion that the same thing is happening here - the people who find success using barefoot/pose method/chi running or whatever are doing so because they're learning to run more efficiently: not letting the hips sag, avoiding heel strikes, getting a better range of motion with their legs, having a better posture etc. But now I'm at a point where I want to find out more.

tl;dr I don't know that much about minimalist running. Yet.

A point can be MOOT. MUTE is more along the lines of what you should be. - WayAbvPar
NowhereMan
Terracotta Army
Posts: 7353


Reply #470 on: September 03, 2011, 08:09:27 AM

Yeah from what I've read on minimalist stuff for running it's really that if you're not running the way your body is 'designed' to then something lets you know about it pretty soon. If you ease into it and practice the correct form it can clear up issues people have had but mostly because you're being forced to run in a way your body copes well with rather than any magical thing from getting rid of padding and protection of the foot. If you don't change your running style you'll end up a lot worse off than sticking with well padded and properly fitted shoes.

"Look at my car. Do you think that was bought with the earnest love of geeks?" - HaemishM
Cyrrex
Terracotta Army
Posts: 10603


Reply #471 on: September 04, 2011, 10:25:28 PM

Other things our bodies weren't designed for:

Clean water
Cooked food
Medicine
Beds
Toilets
Toothbrushes

I'm being snarky, but I don't buy into that minimalist footwear stuff (unless you're hardcore like that Cody guy on Dual Survival).  Plus, don't forget the biggest reason:  they look enormously stupid.  Quite probably the lamest looking footwear ever invented.

"...maybe if you cleaned the piss out of the sunny d bottles under your desks and returned em, you could upgrade you vid cards, fucken lusers.." - Grunk
NowhereMan
Terracotta Army
Posts: 7353


Reply #472 on: September 05, 2011, 07:17:39 AM

The 'designed' was very much in quotes, the point being (if you buy into the minimalist hype) having all that cushioning lets us run in ways our bodies aren't really set up to cope with. Heel striking isn't particularly comfortable without a load of cushioning to take the force once you get past a very slow jog. Of course some people also insist that running on concrete will kill you pretty quick since our ancestors never had to run on such hard and regular surfaces and our bodies can't cope, though I believe that there's no strong statistical difference in injury rates for runners who tend to use different surfaces.

As far as looking stupid are you thinking of the Vibrams? They certainly do look awful but there are quite a lot of other makes of minimalist footwear around as well. I've got a pair of Merrel trailgloves that don't look any stupider than other running shoe I've owned and I think you could probably get away with wearing their tough glove as a casual shoe.

"Look at my car. Do you think that was bought with the earnest love of geeks?" - HaemishM
Nebu
Terracotta Army
Posts: 17613


Reply #473 on: September 05, 2011, 08:29:12 AM

Shoes are similar technology to shock absorbers.  Running with minimal cushioning means that your knees are taking maximal pounding unless you drastically alter your form.  I'd argue that you'd almost have to speedwalk to avoid excess knee trauma while running in the minimalist things.  I know what 40+ years of pounding does to joints as I wake up in pain every morning.  I like my knees.  I wear as much cushioning in my shoes as I reasonably can.

"Always do what is right. It will gratify half of mankind and astound the other."

-  Mark Twain
Mosesandstick
Terracotta Army
Posts: 2474


Reply #474 on: September 05, 2011, 08:41:18 AM

Bit OT, but anybody have experience with buying wide trainers?
Nebu
Terracotta Army
Posts: 17613


Reply #475 on: September 05, 2011, 08:47:52 AM

Bit OT, but anybody have experience with buying wide trainers?

The Ghost 4's I just bought are 2E width, if that's what you mean.  When I buy trainers, I try to find them in a brick & mortar and see how much room I have in the toe box.  Then I go online and buy the 2E versions adjusting for the extra length it took to make them stop feeling so snug.  Usually 2E's are a 1/2 size smaller than what I'd wear in a standard width. 

I hope that's what you were after. 

"Always do what is right. It will gratify half of mankind and astound the other."

-  Mark Twain
Mosesandstick
Terracotta Army
Posts: 2474


Reply #476 on: September 05, 2011, 09:09:17 AM

I never thought of that, thanks. I have unusually wide feet, and bought my first pair of wide trainers last week. They feel more comfortable, but I still get pains in my feet when walking and I'm pretty sure I'm not flat footed (done the wet test and everything).
JWIV
Terracotta Army
Posts: 2392


Reply #477 on: September 05, 2011, 11:35:45 AM

Bit OT, but anybody have experience with buying wide trainers?

The big problem with having to go wide is that it does cut down your options by quite a bit.  That said, I usually wear a 9.5 shoe, but my Brooks Defyance 4's are a 10EE. 

If you can find a local running store, they're usually really good at doing a gait analysis (neutral/over/under pronation) and fitting you for the proper shoes.

Cyrrex
Terracotta Army
Posts: 10603


Reply #478 on: September 05, 2011, 10:16:02 PM

As far as looking stupid are you thinking of the Vibrams? They certainly do look awful but there are quite a lot of other makes of minimalist footwear around as well. I've got a pair of Merrel trailgloves that don't look any stupider than other running shoe I've owned and I think you could probably get away with wearing their tough glove as a casual shoe.

If Vibrams are those things that have an individual compartment for each of your piggies, then yes, those things.  They look like aquasox for the mentally impaired.

"...maybe if you cleaned the piss out of the sunny d bottles under your desks and returned em, you could upgrade you vid cards, fucken lusers.." - Grunk
DraconianOne
Terracotta Army
Posts: 2905


Reply #479 on: September 06, 2011, 01:31:21 AM

I never thought of that, thanks. I have unusually wide feet, and bought my first pair of wide trainers last week. They feel more comfortable, but I still get pains in my feet when walking and I'm pretty sure I'm not flat footed (done the wet test and everything).

Pain in your feet while walking isn't good. Whereabouts is the pain?

A point can be MOOT. MUTE is more along the lines of what you should be. - WayAbvPar
Mosesandstick
Terracotta Army
Posts: 2474


Reply #480 on: September 06, 2011, 01:49:40 AM

Usually in the arch of the foot. I can't really describe why or how it pops up. I'm definitely heavy (working on it), but the shoe feels like it fits decently, thoug the heel is a bit lose, but if I start walking I just end up with an ache the feels like its in the arch of my foot.

The other problem I have with me feet is that they're big as well as wide. I'm somewhere around a size 12.5 (UK) which makes it a bit difficult to find shoes.
DraconianOne
Terracotta Army
Posts: 2905


Reply #481 on: September 06, 2011, 03:23:58 AM

Yeah, I hear that. I don't have quite so many problems as I'm more of an 11.5 - 12 which seems to be easier to find these days.

If you've got a pain in your arch then there's a lot of things it could be - plantar fascitis is normally felt in the heel under the calcaneus (heel bone) but it's not unheard of for the pain to be felt directly in the arch of the foot too (in the plantar fascia). Other symptoms could be tight achilles (the plantar fascia can also be put under strain while walking if there's tension in the achilles) or, rather than flat feet, your arches are quite high and so stretch too much under weight if they're not adequately supported.  If you feel like the heel is la bit loose then it may well be that the shoe is not providing enough support.

Only way to be sure, obviously, is go see a doctor or a podiatrist (who would no doubt suggest very expensive custom made orthotics).
« Last Edit: September 06, 2011, 03:28:27 AM by DraconianOne »

A point can be MOOT. MUTE is more along the lines of what you should be. - WayAbvPar
Mosesandstick
Terracotta Army
Posts: 2474


Reply #482 on: September 06, 2011, 04:00:18 AM

Thanks for the advice. Will probably check in with a doctor. Could very well be the achilles, my martial art involves break falling using the feet (either by landing on the ball or the heel).
NowhereMan
Terracotta Army
Posts: 7353


Reply #483 on: September 07, 2011, 02:30:01 PM

As far as looking stupid are you thinking of the Vibrams? They certainly do look awful but there are quite a lot of other makes of minimalist footwear around as well. I've got a pair of Merrel trailgloves that don't look any stupider than other running shoe I've owned and I think you could probably get away with wearing their tough glove as a casual shoe.

If Vibrams are those things that have an individual compartment for each of your piggies, then yes, those things.  They look like aquasox for the mentally impaired.

That's them. I do a bit of weight lifting stuff in them but just feel too self-conscious to wear them out running. Fortunately for me not all minimalist footwear looks as instantly ridiculous.

"Look at my car. Do you think that was bought with the earnest love of geeks?" - HaemishM
Sky
Terracotta Army
Posts: 32117

I love my TV an' hug my TV an' call it 'George'.


Reply #484 on: September 12, 2011, 06:17:12 AM

Shoes are similar technology to shock absorbers.  Running with minimal cushioning means that your knees are taking maximal pounding unless you drastically alter your form.  I'd argue that you'd almost have to speedwalk to avoid excess knee trauma while running in the minimalist things.  I know what 40+ years of pounding does to joints as I wake up in pain every morning.  I like my knees.  I wear as much cushioning in my shoes as I reasonably can.
If you're not going to wear your shock absorbers, you could always run on the surfaces legs were 'designed' for :) Barefoot trail running ftw.
ghost
The Dentist
Posts: 10619


Reply #485 on: September 12, 2011, 07:15:09 AM

I do all my exercising in 5 fingers and it's great.  I can't use regular shoes any more. 
Nebu
Terracotta Army
Posts: 17613


Reply #486 on: September 12, 2011, 07:31:24 AM

I see absolutely no joint advantage to running barefoot or in rubber-bottomed socks.  Considering the work that has been done on my knees over the years, I can't even imagine running in anything less than a well-cushioned trainer. 

Is there any research backing these new toe shoes?  I can see them being great as water socks or for climbing, but not for running. 

"Always do what is right. It will gratify half of mankind and astound the other."

-  Mark Twain
ghost
The Dentist
Posts: 10619


Reply #487 on: September 12, 2011, 07:34:26 AM

Not any research that I've seen.  I'm not doing any serious running in them, but I know that some folks have run marathons in them and did okay.  Serious marathoner shoes have always been pretty minimalist, so maybe it's not too much of a change for them.  For the average joe, however, it probably comes back to the deal that everyone is unique to an extent.  Some folks would do better with a minimalist shoe and some won't.  

As a funny aside, I played golf in my vibrams the other day and it was pretty awesome.  
Nebu
Terracotta Army
Posts: 17613


Reply #488 on: September 12, 2011, 07:37:47 AM

As a funny aside, I played golf in my vibrams the other day and it was pretty awesome.  

Play golf barefoot.  The greens feel awesome!

"Always do what is right. It will gratify half of mankind and astound the other."

-  Mark Twain
ghost
The Dentist
Posts: 10619


Reply #489 on: September 12, 2011, 07:49:50 AM

I worry some about the shit the sprinkle on the greens and fairways.  I get enough pesticides and fertilizer in my diet.   Oh ho ho ho. Reallllly?
Pages: 1 ... 12 13 [14] 15 16 ... 44 Go Up Print 
f13.net  |  f13.net General Forums  |  General Discussion  |  Topic: So. P90X anyone? (Misery loves company)  
Jump to:  

Powered by SMF 1.1.10 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC