Jump to content

scottythepinetree

Member
  • Content Count

    705
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About scottythepinetree

  • Rank
    Senior Member

Personal Information

  • Location:
    NW Ireland

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. To be fair, when dealing with the public, you can't reiterate your instructions too many times. Like lemmings, the walk past signage, over or through barriers and often ignore direct warnings. It's almost as though they think large timber would make a nice hat.
  2. Did you get a receipt when you passed your assessment? City & Guilds won't deal with anyone other than the individual or the training center. I've tried chasing up certs in the past for employees and been told they can only discuss results with the candidate. We've also had assessors forget to send in confirmation that candidates have passed, so no harm chasing it up regardless of Covid/Christmas.
  3. Nice. Concept 2 isn't cheap, but there aren't really many other options for someone your size. You'd outgrow a cheaper one in a week or two. Be careful though. You'd be surprised how many people develop back problems from rowing with bad form. Very similar movement pattern to deadlifts/rows, but high reps/low weight and encourages pushing through fatigue. Some people get sloppy when they get tired and let their back round. Over time, this can cause problems if you're not careful. I like Pendlays. I find them hard not to cheat rep when the weight gets heavy (for me that's about 100-110kg), which makes it hard to judge progression. There's not supposed to be any eccentric with them. Explosive concentric and then drop. I do 8 rep sets. I often find myself doing the first 4 or 5 with perfect form, explode, touch the chest, drop with no movement in the legs or torso. Then when I get to rep 6 or so, I get stuck a couple of inches from the chest. Before I know I've done it, I have given it a little bump with leg drive. I'm a stickler for form, so it becomes a judgement call as to whether to count the rep or not. Some of the biggest guys in my gym allow themselves lots of this and still count the reps. I try to compensate with low rows, weighted pull-ups and lat pulls though. They're easier to be controlled with. The explosive stuff is hard not to cheat a little.
  4. 20 rep sets (how many sets?) could be what did your knees in. I get that you want to stay away from one rep maxes, but have you considered meeting in the middle? 8 rep sets or similar? If you're really set on volume, you could try rest/pause with a rep goal. For example, pick a weight that you can do 8 reps with fairly handily. (Don't worry if it's too light this session). Then do 3 sets trying to hit 25 reps over the 3 sets. Do as many reps as you can for each set with perfect form, stopping at technical failure (i.e. you can't do any more without breaking form). Take 5 deep slow breaths between each set (30-60 seconds) and go again. If at the end of this, you have hit 25+ reps, add 5kg to the bar in your next session. For squats, twice a week should be enough. Especially if you're experiencing adverse effects. It's easy for the first couple of sessions, but then it gets brutal. You can't really adapt because both the volume and intensity is auto-regulated. It is possible to plateau. If this happens, pick your poison (try to grind through or drop the weight a few %) and take a run at it again. I find either one hit and miss. If one doesn't work, the other usually does. Not sure about your back issues (every injury is different of course), but for me, RDLs/SLDLs got me back to full strength pretty quickly. Their much safer than lifting off the floor, with a lot of the same benefits. I find with deadlifts, you get 100% of the weight instantly, right when you're in the most vulnerable position. With RDLs/SLDLs you increase the forces on your lower back gradually, starting in a position where it's least vulnerable. It's not a perfect substitute for the strength gains made pulling and grunting from the floor, but weighing up risk/reward I think the smart money is on RDLs for me.
  5. I'm rarely in that area. I'll make a point of stopping by that tree if I am nearby in the near future though. Good to know that it's not forgotten. It was a useful little resource.
  6. Looks close. Stems aren't as thick on my ones though. That's a cool website either way. If you were any way mycologically inclines, showing the spores under a microscope is pretty cool. Whatever happened to the Arbtalk Fungi Directory?
  7. Any ideas? The host tree was almost completely dead and more ivy than tree, so hard to tell what species. It was most likely either and Ash or an Oak judging by its neighbours. There was a Castanea nearby also, but that appears to be an odd one out.
  8. Today I learned that "Notho" translates as False generally. But the literal translation is "illegitimate or bastard". So basically, what we have here is a Bastard Beech.?
  9. Looks like a good guess to me. Definitely very close. Thanks Will
  10. I haven't looked into this much at all. I am interested in how it's calculated. It's just something that stands out as the only part of it that I don't understand. I'd love to see them publish an actual paper on this. It's an area where any research that gives you more confidence in the decision making process can only be a good thing.
  11. I had a look at Tree Calc, which looks like an impressive piece of software. But my point is that it would be difficult to make an assessment on the validity of their method without knowing how they determine that safety factor. Is it some arbitrary variable they decided on, or does it correspond to the conditions a tree would be expected to be subjected to. It's most likely sound. It looks like a lot of time/thought went into it. But I wouldn't be comfortable basing a decision on (what could be) a random number generator.
  12. Thanks for the reply. That would make sense (I think). It would be difficult to pull anything useful out of the presentation without knowing exactly how it is calculated beyond vague assumptions. Most studies would generally describe in detail the process so that results can be verified by others as repeatable. I wonder do they intend to publish this as a study at some point?

About

Arbtalk.co.uk is a hub for the arboriculture industry in the UK.  
If you're just starting out and you need business, equipment, tech or training support you're in the right place.  If you've done it, made it, got a van load of oily t-shirts and have decided to give something back by sharing your knowledge or wisdom,  then you're welcome too.
If you would like to contribute to making this industry more effective and safe then welcome.
Just like a living tree, it'll always be a work in progress.
Please have a look around, sign up, share and contribute the best you have.

See you inside.

The Arbtalk Team

Follow us

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.