Primitive People Parallel Play

Above: some important activity going on here but I’m not sure exactly what.

img_20170308_142241.jpg

Above: I’m at playgroup. Time to do this.

I think one of the things that surprises first-time parents the most is how 1-2 year olds interact.  Because they don’t.  Not only do they not play together, they actually seem completely unable to see one another.

For example, Coach Jr goes to the play kitchen and reaches into a cabinet and a kid closes the door on his head. He didn’t do it on purpose; he just happened to be opening and closing that door and Coach Jr put his fat invisible head in the way.  A minute later, Coach Jr yanked a plastic frying pan out of the kid’s hand, but according to my invisible toddler theory, that frying pan looked like it was floating in midair.

But if you think about it, this is pretty close to how adults are supposed to behave around people they don’t know.  It’s later childhood interactions that are abnormal and bizarre.  Of course you shouldn’t seize objects from other people, bump into them, or close doors on their heads, but for example, if you were in a coffee shop or on a subway, how would you interact with people?

A. Approach them and say “My name is _____, what’s yours?”

B. Fidget, then blurt out, “Do you like Minecraft? I’m a Level 25 Explorer on Pokemon Lego Star Wars!”

C. Sit down next to them and mimic what they do while muttering to yourself (aka actual parallel play)

D. Play with your plastic phone and ignore everyone else.

0924100910a

Above: Correct.

IMG_20170109_141153

Above: Incorrect.

IMG_20170115_094832

Above: Incorrect.

WP_20150213_005

Above: The lad on the right is clearly socially aberrant.


Minnie Mouse Figurine: Quincy, do you want to be a doctor when you grow up?

Quincy: No.  I want to be a cookie.

Minnie Mouse: A cookie?  But someone could eat you up.

Quincy: I want to be a pretend cookie.

Me (concerned, dropping the falsetto): Do you mean… a cook?

Quincy: I want to be a pretend baby cookie.

Me: Sigh.


Tues, 3/7/17

wt: 163.6

CGB: 285,290,295 x 2; 300 x 1 (did 2 but 2nd was illegal)

HBPS: 300,305,310,315 x 1

SLDL: 225,235,245,255 x 4

BTN: 102.5,107.5,117.5,122.5 x 4

BBCurl: 75 x 12

time: 1:15


Wed, 3/8/17

wt: 163.0

t/h: 50/88%

CPP: 180,185 x 2

i always warm up with regular squats before BPS so going to stop typing them in

BPS #16: 445 x 1

SGDL: 295,315,325,335 x 3

SH: 4:10

Time: 72 min

Advertisements

18 thoughts on “Primitive People Parallel Play

  1. So the Jendler talk about 5/3/1 sent me on a walk through your archives.

    I am kind of embarrassed to admit this, but I only actually learned about autoregulation very recently, both in the sense of “oh, that’s what it’s called?” and “oh, people have actually built programs around that?” (myoreps and AMRAP don’t count). I’m still going to be running 5/3/1 for the foreseeable future, but I was wondering if you had any recommendations for reading material? The Reactive Training Systems blog seems like pretty good shit for the most part.

    *looks at the unread copy of Supertraining on his kitchen table*
    SHAAAAAAME

    • I like dinosaur training as I’ve said before. I still like reading what Broz and sheiko have to say. Jaimie lewis, Damian pezzuti and pl2win. And various Olympic lifting insights that Celica exposes me to. I don’t subscribe 100% to any of them but they are all mostly awesome. I guess I’d need to know more about someone’s goals, lifestyle etc to even point them to the right books/sites. Like some people I’d steer to starting strength. For nutrition i get a lot of good ideas from Tim Ferriss but debunk half of them on examine. com.

      • Whoops, I left out the salient bit; I’d like to read more about autoregulation specifically. Here’s a story about why I’d like more breadth of exposure:

        There’s some dude selling his ebook program called “APRE” on EliteFTS, and he hypes the shit out of how “scientific” his program is, and I almost bought his damn book. Then I looked at his paper, and it turns out he’s the kind of asshole who reports 1RM bench press improvement in Newtons (did you measure velocity or force directly? No? Then use kilos, motherfucker) and runs a study on people for six weeks then writes an “ebook” (pamphlet) about it.

        So yeah. The RPE and fatigue percentage or whatever from Reactive are neat ideas, and it’d be cool to hear what other people outside of that tree are doing.

        Also, fuck TC Luoma.

        • Sorry man. I’m not a big believer in RPE to me it seems like making science out of nothing. Adding the RPE of sets is like guessing how much calories is in each food and then adding it all up.
          I believe in it (and prilepins table) only as rough guidelines. Like if you can bench 300, 3x3x280 is gonna be real real hard (if possible) and will wear you down and make you more tired than usually probably.
          Also your Newton friend sounds like an idiot. The lifting internet is full of these.

        • Reactive Training is good stuff. I read the first edition manual and pretty much changed my opinion on RPEs (of which I was just as skeptical as Coach). I even ran a RTS experiment for a few months and it was good, but then my workouts became so irregular I had to give it up.

          RPEs are not really that sciencey. They’re more or less the same as using percentages, which most people do anyway. A “10” is an all-out set, regardless of repetitions used. A “9” is basically one rep left in the tank, and anything below “6” is not particularly relevant from a programming perspective. Then you work out a set and rep scheme at any given intensity, etc.

          It’s actually a great way to autoregulate your training. Likewise, “fatigue percentages” are just a fancy way of figuring out weight for back-off sets. Reactive Training is what I’d be doing now if not for the time constraints. Recommended reading 9/10.

          • I’ll reopen my mind to it. In my own training there’s decisions made based on “that set was harder than it should have been” and “you could have done more and thereby progressed quicker”
            So yes i guess my training is a complex calculus of nonsense too

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s