Jump to content

Im Blockbuster Pinch Block


The Natural

Recommended Posts

I did a search on this topic before I decided to post, and though the topic has come up before, there are some reasons I want to revive it:

1) Many of the users now active on the forums did not respond to the thread, given how old the thread is.

2) Many of the best pinchers out there did not respond to the thread, at least the one I came across.

Having said that, I'd like to get an idea of what you guys are able to deadlift using one of the newer IM Blockbuster pinch blocks (which is slicker than the older one, from what I understand). The better pinchers out there, please give me your PR's. Given the huge variation in plates, blobs, and Euro pinch set-ups, it's shame that this common measure of pinch strength is not more widely discussed.

Thanks guys

Rex

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The IM pinch block is a poor implement. The slickness of the IM stuff gives you a huge variation in performance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The IM pinch block is a poor implement. The slickness of the IM stuff gives you a huge variation in performance.

I don't think I explained myself clearly enough. Granted, the IM block is slick. But it's slick for everyone. So this provides a common standard. Blobs, plates, and Euro pinch setups differ quite a bit in their texture. But the IM block (at least all the ones I have examined) have the same texture.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The reason it is poor as an implement is that the amount of weight you can use will wildly vary from day to day depending on humidity, hand oils, etc. It seems you can get one good grab every once in a while, and not get anything close again in a session. I think this is the reason why the implement is not very popular.

Also, wear and tear will cause the surfaces to vary significantly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The reason it is poor as an implement is that the amount of weight you can use will wildly vary from day to day depending on humidity, hand oils, etc. It seems you can get one good grab every once in a while, and not get anything close again in a session. I think this is the reason why the implement is not very popular.

Also, wear and tear will cause the surfaces to vary significantly.

I've noticed no such variation--the 5th farmer's walk I did today with the block felt the same as the first one I did, fatigue aside--but then again I'm just one data point. In any case, since I'm asking for a max, perhaps that occasional "one good grab" you speak of is really all that's needed (your considerations would be stronger in the case of high-rep comparisons).

The old thread got a good number of responses. I'm guessing that the current Gripboard members have just as much experince with the block, percentage-wise, as the old crowd.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My opinion is that it may be on the decline as far as an implement used by this group.

The best information you will find on it is to go to Bob Linpinski's website, US Handstrength, and then click on "results". In 2005 and 2006, under "grip decathlon" you can click on and find the results of two contests where it was contested as an event. The weight includes the implement and pin, it is not plates only. I found that it is one event where you can vary from workout to workout on it by over 20%, no reason, maybe humidity, maybe moisture in your hands, who knows. In 2005, Clay Edgin used all 4 attempts on his opening weight, tried about 15 times each one minute period, and then lifted it on his very last time.

Looking back at what Bob wrote on this thread. I don't think I am saying anything different that what he already said.

There was also a contest in 2002 where Big Time strongmen entered in St. Louis, and it may have been a bad atmosphere for the event (for example it was at a restaurant, no chalk, and after they ate ribs for dinner). That was covered in the December 2002 IronMind:

Plates only weights

Wade Gillingham 65, Phil Pfister 60, Brian Schoonveld, Karl Gillingham 55, Nick Osborne, Mark Phillippi 52, Steve Kirit 42, Whit Baskin, Matt Mehany 37, Tony Harris, Jesse Marunde, Walt Gogola, Pat Rankin 27.

I understand many don't like it. For that reason, and its unpredictability, I think it is a wonderful "wild card" event. The worst gripper could get lucky on it, and the stud could bomb out. However, I doubt if any contest producers share my amusement.

I have not used the implement in a few years. I would have to dig around for my PR. I felt good whenever I did 55. I doubt if I ever did 60. I imagine modestly strong guys on this board have had good workouts and hit 70.

Like Rolling Thunder, some hate chalk on the implement, some swear by it. I am obsessive, and wipe off moisture, chalk etc with a rag before touching it.

MC Hubgeezer

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I bought something similar from StrongerGrip.com that you guys may want to try. I like some of you hated the IronMind pinch block, but the one from StrongerGrip is better in my opinion. The paint isn't that slick. Works good without chalk and even better with it. The only thing I didn't like is that it has a post welded to it for standard plates.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I did a search on this topic before I decided to post, and though the topic has come up before, there are some reasons I want to revive it:

1) Many of the users now active on the forums did not respond to the thread, given how old the thread is.

2) Many of the best pinchers out there did not respond to the thread, at least the one I came across.

Having said that, I'd like to get an idea of what you guys are able to deadlift using one of the newer IM Blockbuster pinch blocks (which is slicker than the older one, from what I understand). The better pinchers out there, please give me your PR's. Given the huge variation in plates, blobs, and Euro pinch set-ups, it's shame that this common measure of pinch strength is not more widely discussed.

Thanks guys

Rex

Randy Strossen asked me this last week. I have in my records that I have done 104, weighed on a scale. I actually think I have done 107 but would have to comb through my logs to find it. Rob Vigeant Jr. told me he did around 100, otherwise i've never heard of anyone close to this weight. In response to Bob L., I agree on the surface being very difficult to maintain consistancy on. What I have done the past couple years is to tape the surfaces to make them more consistant for training. My 1 rep max doesn't really change - may actually go down - but allows me to train consistantly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The reason it is poor as an implement is that the amount of weight you can use will wildly vary from day to day depending on humidity, hand oils, etc. It seems you can get one good grab every once in a while, and not get anything close again in a session. I think this is the reason why the implement is not very popular.

Also, wear and tear will cause the surfaces to vary significantly.

I agree completely. I have one on lone out in the garage.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We used one for a short period of time because more time was taken up with washing hands than lifting! The exact clamminess of hand was needed more than strength!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We used one for a short period of time because more time was taken up with washing hands than lifting! The exact clamminess of hand was needed more than strength!

David,

Do you happen to remember what you and your training partners were able to lift during the time that you used one?

-Rex

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would also say that anything that has that slippery surface is a poor tool for training and even more so for any kind of competition. Some guys might be be able to work more consistently than others on those blocks, but it's a greatly individual matter. I would not spend any time on working with such slippery surfaces, it takes a lot away from training in my opinion as you really can't tell if you get a grip on or not and the results vary all over from one attempt to the next.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

yeah, I got it too and its hit or miss on any given session

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All right guys. There's some consensus on the variability of performance that is due to the slickness of the block. So I'm granting that.

But even if it's "hit or miss", isn't it still possible to provide the weight you lifted on a day when it was a "hit"? This is really all I want to know. Wade has no doubt set the upper limit with his 104 lift. But I want some more data points so I can get a picture of what the performance curve looks like. Anyone out there record their lifts on the days when things went well?

-Rex

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was able to get 45 on it today. I didn't have any alcohol to wipe it clean so I probably couldn't have done a few more lbs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All right guys. There's some consensus on the variability of performance that is due to the slickness of the block. So I'm granting that.

But even if it's "hit or miss", isn't it still possible to provide the weight you lifted on a day when it was a "hit"? This is really all I want to know. Wade has no doubt set the upper limit with his 104 lift. But I want some more data points so I can get a picture of what the performance curve looks like. Anyone out there record their lifts on the days when things went well?

-Rex

I'll start experimenting.

As a rule of thumb, I think this may apply: if chalk doesn't help with lifting an implement it will prove very tricky getting optimal friction. Like David said, the right degree of clamminess is key.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just finished a few attempts on it and managed 64 total pounds.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Last time I used it a few months ago i managed 22.5kg not including the block and loading pin.

Will try again soon and send you some feedback so you can compare.

take care

Tom

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy policies.