2accidental
Level 5 Valued Member
I'm astounded by this guy's approach, conclusions and arrogance-
I'm astounded by this guy's approach, conclusions and arrogance-
I picked up on that right away. He seems to be one of those "Well, actually..." guys. Not a fan. Would not want to get stuck having a conversation with this chap at a party.Well maybe he’s not wrong overall on what his point is, but I wouldn’t know because the format he’s using as well as the way he goes about it is so obnoxious I didn’t make it past 10 minutes (and I tried really hard)
a#$%*@#^ if there ever was one, regardless how valid his points may or may not be (as said I didn’t make it to where he supposedly gets into the details of where it’s all wrong).
Some people thrive on being obnoxious I-am-so-much-better-than-anyone-else personality, but really it’s unbearable regardless of if you like the guy he tears on into or not
Agreed. I don’t know him either but I’ll take advice from the former trainer of Russian Spec War soldiers over pretty much anyone any day of the week!I don't know this guy, but I really doubt he has put in even 1/4 of the time Pavel has in studying and research involving real people performing actual exercise instead of just regurgitating lab study results. I can't get too upset with this guy either, because it is clear that he hasn't seen or read the programming in S& S or The Quick & The Dead.
Of course Pavel had to use generalizations and speak in layman terms during this interview. He is taking some extremely complex material and attempting to distill it down into terms people without degrees in biochemical engineering can actually comprehend. One thing Pavel has always said is that if you want to know more then just "look at the research." He isn't guarding any secrets.
I have never had the impression from Pavel that he is claiming to be an absolute authority on any one area of exercise, but he has done a good job IMO of bringing decades worth of proven programming principles right to the front door of anyone who wants to put some skin in the game.
This is like walking into Scientology and critiquing L. Ron Hubbard. You're not going to get an unbiased response.
This response should be applauded. All except this one are refuting the argument based on delivery, not fact. That doesn’t win a fact-based case (that you’re mostly all trying to make). The summary of points made (except quoted) is “this guy must be a jerk, Pavel trained Special Forces, I don’t know what either of them are really talking about but I’m emotionally invested in Pavel so he wins”.I'll try to work a TL;DR out because I'm interested now myself. Just watched it and found some interesting pieces of information, Bart is definitely right when they're talking about lactic acid, and polluting mitochondria, which refers to the anaerobic and aerobic threshold. Those concepts have been refuted for quite a while now actually, and as far as I understand, Pavel keeps talking about lactic acid, and acid building up, which is just not right. Should be lactate which is the anion of lactic acid and a product of anaerobic glycolysis - this intermediate product is then transported to the liver in the Cori-cycle and after that reused for glucogenesis. So Pavel says the "acidity in the muscle is a huge problem" but there is quite a big threshold for pH-levels inside the muscle, and that's why lactate is getting transported out of the cell, to stay in that threshold.
Well, Bart just doesn't like Pavel getting too deep into the topic of Exercise Physiology because his simplifying mixes with his own views, and which then again shows his views to be the correct ones.
Just to clarify here, I'm not on any side in this debate, just stating what I saw and heard. The explanations just seem a bit wonky, and I think this guy has a right not to go easy on Pavel, who also holds a degree in sport science.
This seems to be a trending technique. Yesterday my son was showing me a YouTube video of one guy playing online chess (his face and his screen), which was inset as a replay with critical and humorous commentary by another chess player. This is modern communication and entertainment, I suppose.the format he’s using as well as the way he goes about it