yes, they are smaller, aerobic, slow twitch muscle fibers. my endurence comment was more related to delivering oxygen to the muscle, but was sloppy. was waiting for someone to poke me over it :-)

smaller functional muscle fibre size is one of the reasons you will often see very svelte endurance athletes.

you can build both slow twitch and the 2 types of fast twitch muscle fibers simultaneously with well planned workouts, but dont worry too much about this. your body will adapt to whatever you train for, just keep a good mix of everything you have mentioned so far and your body will respond.

never neglect the cardio though. a resonable mix of HIIT cardio will add aerobic capacity without sacrificing muscle mass or size. your high rep. punches with 16oz gloves will take care of shoulder endurance.

if you are looking for volume, research bodybuilding - its a specific approach. strength training is also different. what you are likely experiencing is endurance (muscle/cardio/etc) training in addition to the skill bumps.

fat wont hold back muscle gain, but it will hide it. good news is that as you more build muscle, you burn more calories. less mass means better cardio, which builds muscle endurance.

good luck with the boxing! its a fantastic martial art.

“obviously more than she would see in you.”

someone reach out! I feel a house lawyer in the making.

how about an ad tailored precisely by your recent history - graphics/audio/content and all, delivered to you in different ways depending on how you are feeling at any given moment? an instant and dynamic money extraction machine shaping and shaped by your second by second stream of clicks and queries, completing the transformation of everyone into lab monkeys.

ai is already your online sig-o, friend, assistant, whatever, so…?

personally, I prefer the good ol double bang (!!), but whatever floats yer boat, and all that.

not disagreeing with you - I find performative “wrestle drama” absolutely, mind numbingly pointless. my preference is to participate in (and ocassionally watch) unscripted combat sport.

however… I have trained competitive martial arts for decades (muay thai, bjj, others) and most of these “wrestling” participants are pretty skilled athletes. it takes training to turn combinations of techniques designed to injure into something reasonably harmless. there is a pretty fine line separating sparring from a fight.

I know you know this, but its still useful to remember that these players are actors as well as athletes and that can obviously be pretty inviting for a lot of viewers.

deleted by creator

Hell yeah, I fucking nailed it

big oooof on the j-dawg and his tree.

but seriously, nice bit of ackchyually here.

he brings live shakespearean actor mojo to the small screen and makes zero fucking apologies for it. its like watching a honda civic do a quarter mile with a corvette engine.

best. captain. eva.

anyone else felt the impending finger slice in that photo? case looks pissed and out for flesh.

great answer. thanks so much.

…from my cold, dead hand. no lie.

seize the means of tariffication!

what the hell is this trash post?! user is clearly a sleeper ad bot.

wow! self-reflection is something we all need more of (especially me). agree or disagree, converstaions are always better when everyone considers things for a moment. nice comment. :-)

I am sure you already know, but the objection here is going after kids. literally profiling and then abusing their vulnerabilities for profit. this isnt your standard cereal box advertising, I think this is something much darker and more disgusting.

edit: added word

ok. my apologizes.

there really are tons of things to consider with that question. RISC has historically allowed for faster clocking and fewer cycles per instruction, so thats a win. RISC also requires more instructions per useful operation and also blows up the binary size, so… :-(

all things being equal (hahaha) RISC has more headroom and legroom for future improvements that dont complecate the silicon to extreme degrees. the vast majority of CISC designs are now pretty RISC-like at their cores, but the software interface remains CISC and, I think, complicates and limits variety and advancement.

imho, a properly spec’d RISC processor and a carefully designed compiler, cycle for cycle, macro for macro and watt for watt outperforms a CISC design (even with a RISC-like core). major computing holy wars are been waged over this for decades.

all I currently have access to are older studies that show mixed general purpose results on RISC vs CISC (performance, not power efficiency), but if I had to make a choice about what my future ideal processor would be, it would be RISC core and RISC instruction set architecture simply due to less complexity, more efficient use of wafer space and lower power requirements. then we start talking about massively parallel RISC in tiny spaces and, for many (but not all) workloads, thats a big win.

this is so deliciously and disappointingly true. :-/

CPI per CPI… RISC, but thats a trap of a question and you know it ;-)

tons of variables in that question, but there should be more headroom in RISC designs and thats why, internally, most things are RISC-y.