|
|
|
|
|
|
|
spikeddem
Aug 4, 2011, 6:00 PM
Post #252 of 273
(7932 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 27, 2007
Posts: 6319
|
cracklover wrote: spikeddem wrote: cracklover wrote: Learner wrote: jt512 wrote: Learner wrote: The Effect of Body Weight on Climbing Performance Recruit a group of climbers. They must be willing to allow their diet to be manipulated. GROUP 1: CONTROL GROUP Caloric intake of each participant in this group is maintained throughout the study. Average daily caloric intake is determined, then the participants in this group are instructed to consume that many calories on a daily basis. GROUP 2: 'SKINNIER' GROUP Daily caloric intake of participants in this group is decreased considerably. The participants in this group presumably lose weight. GROUP 3: 'FATTER' GROUP Daily caloric intake of participants in this group is increased considerably. The participants in this group presumably gain weight. PROCEDURE Take a few days to determine caloric intake of each participant. Use this measure as the basis for the manipulation of caloric intake for each participant. Measures are first taken on all participants on 1) body weight, 2) body composition, 3) climbing ability and 4) grip strength. Participants are then instructed to continue to climb as they normally would for a certain period of time, while maintaining a diet as instructed above. The reason participants are instructed to climb as they normally would despite individual differences in routines is to allow for the modifications individuals have made to their climbing routines in response to their personal requirements in terms of recovery. It is an indirect way to control for recovery ability. After the duration of the study, each participant is again tested for 1) body weight, 2) body composition, 3) climbing ability and 4) grip strength. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS One-way, between-subjects Analysis of Covariance (ANCOVA) on climbing ability. Use measures derived before and after the duration of the study on 1) body weight, 2) body composition, and 3) gripping strength as covariates. This follows the assumption that grip strength and body composition influence climbing ability. It also accounts for the differences in the degree to which body weight changes between participants. (Option: Use MANOVA instead of ANCOVA, in order to also explore the potential influence of changes in measures of body composition on climbing performance.) CONCLUSION If a "skinnier you" is a better (or worse) climber than a "fatter you," significant differences should be detected in climbing performance between groups 2 ("skinnier") and 3 ("fatter"). If a "skinnier you" or a "fatter you" is a better (or worse) climber than the you as you are right now, we should derive significant differences in climbing performance between group 1 (maintained) and the other two groups ("skinnier" and "fatter"). CURRENT CHALLENGES Develop a reliable measure for climbing ability. Simply using the grade of routes and/or problems one can send may not be a precise enough measure. There are reliable (and precise) ways to measure grip strength. ASSUMPTIONS One assumption of this study is that the effect size depends on the degree to which body weight changes. This is because change in body weight is used as a covariate. Again, we also assume that grip strength and body composition influence climbing ability. Finally, the study assumes that the climbing technique of each participant will not diminish throughout the study. All climbers are allowed to continue to climb as they normally would, which is an attempt to allow climbing technique to atleast maintain its current level. If anything, climbing technique would more likely improve than deteriorate, simply because climbing technique tends to improve with more climbing experience. So, we assume that climbing technique will not decline during this study, as long as the participants' climbing routines are maintained. Big hint from a professional: make your hypothesis explicit before you try to design your study. Changes in body weight will be associated with changes in climbing performance. My hypothesis is that both those who gain a lot of weight and those who lose a lot will have higher injury rates than your control group. GO You're talking about finger injuries? Why do you believe that those losing weight will have more finger injuries? As long as their diet is still well-balanced, what's the issue? Potential causes off the top of my head: - Muscle imbalances, as those muscles not recruited in climbing lose mass more quickly. - Epicondylitis issues, as the tissues see almost equal stress, but have less available to repair them. - Tendon, tendon pulley, and tendon sheath issues in the hand and fingers. These don't have a blood supply, and my understanding is they get most of their nutrition from what they can get out of the synovial fluid. A limited diet might mean less fluid, and less nutrition in the fluid. People with more of a medical background could probably triple the number of reasons I came up with. I'm simply making what I consider a pretty educated guess. Essentially, you're putting severe stress on some pretty small structures - a level of stress that can cause injury even in the best of times - while depriving them of nutrients. Think about it - let's say, in a best case scenario, losing ten pounds enabled you to climb two letter grades harder. Consider what that means for the holds, the angle of the climb, and the dynamic nature of the climbing, and what those differences would mean for the small structures taking the brunt of those repetitive forces. If one were to lose weight more gradually, perhaps the above wouldn't be an issue, or not as much of an issue. Who knows. GO
Hmm. I guess I figured we were talking about losing weight gradually. I've been losing an average of 1.41 lbs per week for 8 weeks now. My fingers feel incredible.
I think the issue I have with your logic is that you highlight the "putting severe stress on pretty small structures," but then ignore how small their nutritional requirements would be. If your diet is clean, then I don't think there's any issue. However, if your calories are coming from processed foods, then, perhaps, there could be an issue.
As for muscle imbalances (I was under the impression that epicondylitis was caused by a muscle imbalanced?), I don't really buy that either. First off, if someone has the type of body to be worried about it (not me), then it'll happen regardless of being on a diet. Second, if it's a possibility, then they should be training as such. I guess I really just don't believe that a caloric deficit would widen the gap between used muscles and unused muscles.
Most importantly, the BIGGEST issue here is that this pointless experiment (as designed by Learner) wouldn't get at what we're actually talking about. We haven't been talking about DIETING people (until Learner's experiment), we've been talking about LIGHTER people. Therefore, the people should diet down a certain amount of weight, then maintain that weight. In this situation, the subjects would be taking in a maintenance amount of calories and then your issues would definitely not (theoretically) come up.
|
|
|
|
|
granite_grrl
Aug 4, 2011, 6:01 PM
Post #253 of 273
(7928 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 25, 2002
Posts: 15084
|
Kartessa wrote: granite_grrl wrote: Kartessa wrote: spikeddem wrote: cracklover wrote: Learner wrote: jt512 wrote: Learner wrote: The Effect of Body Weight on Climbing Performance Recruit a group of climbers. They must be willing to allow their diet to be manipulated. GROUP 1: CONTROL GROUP Caloric intake of each participant in this group is maintained throughout the study. Average daily caloric intake is determined, then the participants in this group are instructed to consume that many calories on a daily basis. GROUP 2: 'SKINNIER' GROUP Daily caloric intake of participants in this group is decreased considerably. The participants in this group presumably lose weight. GROUP 3: 'FATTER' GROUP Daily caloric intake of participants in this group is increased considerably. The participants in this group presumably gain weight. PROCEDURE Take a few days to determine caloric intake of each participant. Use this measure as the basis for the manipulation of caloric intake for each participant. Measures are first taken on all participants on 1) body weight, 2) body composition, 3) climbing ability and 4) grip strength. Participants are then instructed to continue to climb as they normally would for a certain period of time, while maintaining a diet as instructed above. The reason participants are instructed to climb as they normally would despite individual differences in routines is to allow for the modifications individuals have made to their climbing routines in response to their personal requirements in terms of recovery. It is an indirect way to control for recovery ability. After the duration of the study, each participant is again tested for 1) body weight, 2) body composition, 3) climbing ability and 4) grip strength. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS One-way, between-subjects Analysis of Covariance (ANCOVA) on climbing ability. Use measures derived before and after the duration of the study on 1) body weight, 2) body composition, and 3) gripping strength as covariates. This follows the assumption that grip strength and body composition influence climbing ability. It also accounts for the differences in the degree to which body weight changes between participants. (Option: Use MANOVA instead of ANCOVA, in order to also explore the potential influence of changes in measures of body composition on climbing performance.) CONCLUSION If a "skinnier you" is a better (or worse) climber than a "fatter you," significant differences should be detected in climbing performance between groups 2 ("skinnier") and 3 ("fatter"). If a "skinnier you" or a "fatter you" is a better (or worse) climber than the you as you are right now, we should derive significant differences in climbing performance between group 1 (maintained) and the other two groups ("skinnier" and "fatter"). CURRENT CHALLENGES Develop a reliable measure for climbing ability. Simply using the grade of routes and/or problems one can send may not be a precise enough measure. There are reliable (and precise) ways to measure grip strength. ASSUMPTIONS One assumption of this study is that the effect size depends on the degree to which body weight changes. This is because change in body weight is used as a covariate. Again, we also assume that grip strength and body composition influence climbing ability. Finally, the study assumes that the climbing technique of each participant will not diminish throughout the study. All climbers are allowed to continue to climb as they normally would, which is an attempt to allow climbing technique to atleast maintain its current level. If anything, climbing technique would more likely improve than deteriorate, simply because climbing technique tends to improve with more climbing experience. So, we assume that climbing technique will not decline during this study, as long as the participants' climbing routines are maintained. Big hint from a professional: make your hypothesis explicit before you try to design your study. Changes in body weight will be associated with changes in climbing performance. My hypothesis is that both those who gain a lot of weight and those who lose a lot will have higher injury rates than your control group. GO You're talking about finger injuries? Why do you believe that those losing weight will have more finger injuries? As long as their diet is still well-balanced, what's the issue? I think its in reference to the considerable decrease in calorie intake - will probably leave the person with a nutritional deficit I lurve my nutritional deficit. Doritos?
|
|
|
|
|
Kartessa
Aug 4, 2011, 6:10 PM
Post #254 of 273
(7914 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 18, 2008
Posts: 7362
|
granite_grrl wrote: Kartessa wrote: granite_grrl wrote: Kartessa wrote: spikeddem wrote: cracklover wrote: Learner wrote: jt512 wrote: Learner wrote: The Effect of Body Weight on Climbing Performance Recruit a group of climbers. They must be willing to allow their diet to be manipulated. GROUP 1: CONTROL GROUP Caloric intake of each participant in this group is maintained throughout the study. Average daily caloric intake is determined, then the participants in this group are instructed to consume that many calories on a daily basis. GROUP 2: 'SKINNIER' GROUP Daily caloric intake of participants in this group is decreased considerably. The participants in this group presumably lose weight. GROUP 3: 'FATTER' GROUP Daily caloric intake of participants in this group is increased considerably. The participants in this group presumably gain weight. PROCEDURE Take a few days to determine caloric intake of each participant. Use this measure as the basis for the manipulation of caloric intake for each participant. Measures are first taken on all participants on 1) body weight, 2) body composition, 3) climbing ability and 4) grip strength. Participants are then instructed to continue to climb as they normally would for a certain period of time, while maintaining a diet as instructed above. The reason participants are instructed to climb as they normally would despite individual differences in routines is to allow for the modifications individuals have made to their climbing routines in response to their personal requirements in terms of recovery. It is an indirect way to control for recovery ability. After the duration of the study, each participant is again tested for 1) body weight, 2) body composition, 3) climbing ability and 4) grip strength. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS One-way, between-subjects Analysis of Covariance (ANCOVA) on climbing ability. Use measures derived before and after the duration of the study on 1) body weight, 2) body composition, and 3) gripping strength as covariates. This follows the assumption that grip strength and body composition influence climbing ability. It also accounts for the differences in the degree to which body weight changes between participants. (Option: Use MANOVA instead of ANCOVA, in order to also explore the potential influence of changes in measures of body composition on climbing performance.) CONCLUSION If a "skinnier you" is a better (or worse) climber than a "fatter you," significant differences should be detected in climbing performance between groups 2 ("skinnier") and 3 ("fatter"). If a "skinnier you" or a "fatter you" is a better (or worse) climber than the you as you are right now, we should derive significant differences in climbing performance between group 1 (maintained) and the other two groups ("skinnier" and "fatter"). CURRENT CHALLENGES Develop a reliable measure for climbing ability. Simply using the grade of routes and/or problems one can send may not be a precise enough measure. There are reliable (and precise) ways to measure grip strength. ASSUMPTIONS One assumption of this study is that the effect size depends on the degree to which body weight changes. This is because change in body weight is used as a covariate. Again, we also assume that grip strength and body composition influence climbing ability. Finally, the study assumes that the climbing technique of each participant will not diminish throughout the study. All climbers are allowed to continue to climb as they normally would, which is an attempt to allow climbing technique to atleast maintain its current level. If anything, climbing technique would more likely improve than deteriorate, simply because climbing technique tends to improve with more climbing experience. So, we assume that climbing technique will not decline during this study, as long as the participants' climbing routines are maintained. Big hint from a professional: make your hypothesis explicit before you try to design your study. Changes in body weight will be associated with changes in climbing performance. My hypothesis is that both those who gain a lot of weight and those who lose a lot will have higher injury rates than your control group. GO You're talking about finger injuries? Why do you believe that those losing weight will have more finger injuries? As long as their diet is still well-balanced, what's the issue? I think its in reference to the considerable decrease in calorie intake - will probably leave the person with a nutritional deficit I lurve my nutritional deficit. Doritos? Nah, I've been a good girl (as long as you ignore that Cape Breton wedding last weekend), just been trying to slim down lately.
Bacon-wrapped doritos?
|
|
|
|
|
jt512
Aug 4, 2011, 6:28 PM
Post #255 of 273
(7903 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 12, 2001
Posts: 21904
|
Learner wrote: Changes in body weight will be associated with changes in climbing performance.
You can drop the overfeeding group; it isn't necessary or ethical.
Without going overboard on details, start with a run-in period (say, 2 weeks) in which you determine each subject's actual caloric needs. At the end of the run-in period, randomize the subjects to two groups: weight maintenance or weight loss. Feed each group a prescribed diet, providing either 100% or 80% of the subject's total energy requirements, for eight weeks. We would expect to see about 1 lb/wk weight loss in the weight loss group. Then, I think what I'd want to do is to put the weight loss group back on a eucaloric diet (so now the two groups are on the same diet) and follow them for, say four more weeks, the idea being to allow time for any acute effect of dieting per se to wash out.
I think I'd want to control their training in an attempt to control for a possible dietary effect on training, since our interest here is in the effect of weight loss itself, not dietary intervention.
Although I'd monitor body weight throughout the study, the key measurements of body weight, body composition, and climbing level would be at the end of the run-in period, the end of the 8-week intervention, and the end of the following 4-week follow-up. The primary outcome would be change in climbing level from pre-intervention to post-follow-up, and the primary goal of the analysis would be to see if that differed between the two groups. Of course, there are other interesting questions we could answer in secondary analyses.
Obviously, this is just a broad-brush conceptualization of such a study. Innumerable details would have to be worked out in real life.
Jay
|
|
|
|
|
spikeddem
Aug 4, 2011, 6:38 PM
Post #256 of 273
(7893 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 27, 2007
Posts: 6319
|
jt512 wrote: our interest here is in the effect of weight loss itself, not dietary intervention. Jay
Exactly.
|
|
|
|
|
DocGF
Aug 7, 2011, 3:06 PM
Post #257 of 273
(7807 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 27, 2011
Posts: 6
|
BMI is considered unhealthy if <16 or >28. >28 is obese; 25-28 is overweight; 16-18 is underweight; and < 16 is "severely underweight". By plotting the weight over time on a standardized growth curve (available from the CDC), you can see if an individual is tracking appropriately or falling off the curve. Falling off the curve (crossing two percentage lines) is a big red flag. Athletes may be underweight without being unhealthy, and this may actually given them a competetive advantage in some sports. BMI is not the same as body fat percentage, which must be calculated by various skin fold thickness measurements or by using a water tank scale. When we assess people to determine whether or not they are at an unhealthy weight, we look at a variety of additional factors, such as how they feel, whether or not they are menstruating, their lab results (Tot protein, albumin, blood counts, glucose, electrolytes, and liver function), and their bone density. Osteopenia and osteoporosis develop more frequently in underweight athletes, as you might expect. Eating disorders are diagnosed when individuals have unhealthy and obsessive concerns about their weight which cause them to starve themselves, exercise excessively, or to perform ritualistic behaviors such as inducing catharsis through various means after binging. People with eating disorders frequently know their behavior is abnormal, but not always. Sometimes their perception of reality is flawed or they lack insignt. In such instances, family members or loved onces may need to confront the individual or provide the physician with information which, in light of the objective data, can confirm the presence of an eating disorder. Information on the Female athlete syndrome / triad is well documented in the literature, and may be of interest to those involved in the training, nutrition, and guidance of female athletes.
(This post was edited by DocGF on Aug 7, 2011, 3:20 PM)
|
|
|
|
|
rrrADAM
Aug 11, 2011, 5:48 PM
Post #258 of 273
(7738 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 19, 1999
Posts: 17553
|
sungam wrote: Hell, rrrADAM is a nuclear plant maintanace dude ...
To be pedantic, I'm an inspector... I inspect what the 'maintanace dudes' [and others] do, if it's on a safety related or critcal system. And yes, I'm an autodidact, with verrie pore speling.
(This post was edited by rrrADAM on Aug 11, 2011, 5:50 PM)
|
|
|
|
|
sungam
Aug 11, 2011, 7:39 PM
Post #259 of 273
(7711 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 24, 2004
Posts: 26804
|
rrrADAM wrote: sungam wrote: Hell, rrrADAM is a nuclear plant maintanace dude ... To be pedantic, I'm an inspector...
(This post was edited by sungam on Aug 11, 2011, 7:40 PM)
|
|
|
|
|
damienclimber
Aug 11, 2011, 11:51 PM
Post #260 of 273
(7661 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 13, 2011
Posts: 313
|
sungam wrote: rrrADAM wrote: sungam wrote: Hell, rrrADAM is a nuclear plant maintanace dude ... To be pedantic, I'm an inspector... Well, whatever the title (thanks for the correction, though), all I was sure of was that it is bad ass and fascinated when you were explaining in detail how the plant worked in the Japan thread. Pretty clear that formal schooling isn't required for someone to be intelligent, informed and successful.
this is just an illusion !
|
|
|
|
|
Kartessa
Aug 12, 2011, 3:44 AM
Post #261 of 273
(7644 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 18, 2008
Posts: 7362
|
DocGF wrote: BMI is considered unhealthy if <16 or >28. >28 is obese; 25-28 is overweight; 16-18 is underweight; and < 16 is "severely underweight". By plotting the weight over time on a standardized growth curve (available from the CDC), you can see if an individual is tracking appropriately or falling off the curve. Falling off the curve (crossing two percentage lines) is a big red flag. Athletes may be underweight without being unhealthy, and this may actually given them a competetive advantage in some sports. BMI is not the same as body fat percentage, which must be calculated by various skin fold thickness measurements or by using a water tank scale. When we assess people to determine whether or not they are at an unhealthy weight, we look at a variety of additional factors, such as how they feel, whether or not they are menstruating, their lab results (Tot protein, albumin, blood counts, glucose, electrolytes, and liver function), and their bone density. Osteopenia and osteoporosis develop more frequently in underweight athletes, as you might expect. Eating disorders are diagnosed when individuals have unhealthy and obsessive concerns about their weight which cause them to starve themselves, exercise excessively, or to perform ritualistic behaviors such as inducing catharsis through various means after binging. People with eating disorders frequently know their behavior is abnormal, but not always. Sometimes their perception of reality is flawed or they lack insignt. In such instances, family members or loved onces may need to confront the individual or provide the physician with information which, in light of the objective data, can confirm the presence of an eating disorder. Information on the Female athlete syndrome / triad is well documented in the literature, and may be of interest to those involved in the training, nutrition, and guidance of female athletes.
They're called "Paragraphs"
|
|
|
|
|
notapplicable
Oct 23, 2011, 7:12 PM
Post #262 of 273
(7432 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 31, 2006
Posts: 17771
|
Looks like that anorexic woman you were so concerned about is now the first American female to crush .14d
Strong work!
http://www.dpmclimbing.com/...ure-imagination-514d
In reply to: In an interview with DPM last spring, Sasha stated, “I do not know where my first 5.14d will go down, but I would love to try Pure Imagination at the RRG…that line looks really cool!” Yesterday, Oct 15th, she clipped the chains on her 6th try overall. Bolted by Kenny Barker, Pure Imagination was first climbed by Jonathan Siegrist last November, 2010. It saw its first repeat by local Adam Taylor in the spring of 2011. This ascent puts Sasha Digiulian in a very elite group of women to have climbed the grade. Josune Bereziartu was the first female to climb the grade with Bain de Sang (5.14d) in 2002. Just two months ago, Charlotte Durif became the second woman when she climbed PPP (5.14d) in the Verdon Gorge. And now Sasha Digiulian has climbed the grade in only six tries. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
adigiulian
Jun 21, 2012, 2:17 PM
Post #264 of 273
(7048 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 21, 2012
Posts: 1
|
Since you are so concerned about my daughter's physical health let me assure you that she has regular check ups. Her doctor is one of the leading physicians in Washington DC. He says her health is excellent. Further Sasha's grandmother was a leading dietician in her day. Healthy diet is a family tradition.
Healthy diet, active metabolisms and physical fitness ....
I wish you luck with your children, thanks for your concern (?) about mine!
|
|
|
|
|
IPissonurproj
Jun 21, 2012, 3:01 PM
Post #265 of 273
(7029 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 4, 2009
Posts: 18
|
adigiulian wrote: Since you are so concerned about my daughter's physical health let me assure you that she has regular check ups. Her doctor is one of the leading physicians in Washington DC. He says her health is excellent. Further Sasha's grandmother was a leading dietician in her day. Healthy diet is a family tradition. Healthy diet, active metabolisms and physical fitness .... I wish you luck with your children, thanks for your concern (?) about mine!
 Shit's about to get real
|
|
|
|
|
kappydane
Jun 21, 2012, 5:52 PM
Post #266 of 273
(6993 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 22, 2004
Posts: 119
|
I have had the good fortune to have a world class climber live with me for a month. Most would consider him very skinny to the point some may think he was malnourished. Believe me he ate as much or more than I did every meal. Giant burritos, junk food, plus plenty of healthy stuff to go along with it. I outweigh him by 30 to 40 pounds even though he is only about an inch or two shorter and most consider me to be thin. You really can't tell anything about someones eating habits unless you actually eat with them on a regular basis. There are those genetically gifted bodies out there that just don't put on the weight. He would also boulder all day long with long approaches in many cases.
|
|
|
|
|
Khoi
Jun 23, 2012, 2:23 PM
Post #267 of 273
(6866 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 11, 2008
Posts: 294
|
adigiulian wrote: Since you are so concerned about my daughter's physical health let me assure you that she has regular check ups. Her doctor is one of the leading physicians in Washington DC. He says her health is excellent. Further Sasha's grandmother was a leading dietician in her day. Healthy diet is a family tradition. Healthy diet, active metabolisms and physical fitness .... I wish you luck with your children, thanks for your concern (?) about mine!
No reply from Shockabuku?
|
|
|
|
|
bearbreeder
Jun 23, 2012, 6:54 PM
Post #268 of 273
(6835 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 2, 2009
Posts: 1960
|
i luuuuuuuv pink !!!!
|
|
|
|
|
JasonsDrivingForce
Jun 25, 2012, 3:29 PM
Post #269 of 273
(6754 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 3, 2009
Posts: 687
|
adigiulian wrote: Since you are so concerned about my daughter's physical health let me assure you that she has regular check ups. Her doctor is one of the leading physicians in Washington DC. He says her health is excellent. Further Sasha's grandmother was a leading dietician in her day. Healthy diet is a family tradition. Healthy diet, active metabolisms and physical fitness .... I wish you luck with your children, thanks for your concern (?) about mine!
Kind of sad that one year after the first post was made, Sasha’s(mom or dad?) has to make this their first post. I would much rather have seen their first post be something like("Here is the secret to climbing like a champion").
Whatever Sasha is doing looks like it is working to me.
|
|
|
|
|
sungam
Jun 25, 2012, 4:44 PM
Post #270 of 273
(6725 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 24, 2004
Posts: 26804
|
I must be reading/watching to much Game of thrones cuz I keep reading her name as "Sansa" and thinking "Who gives a shit? Can she just stab Joffry and get executed already so Arya and Tyrean can have more screen time?".
|
|
|
|
|
sungam
Jun 25, 2012, 9:34 PM
Post #273 of 273
(6647 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 24, 2004
Posts: 26804
|
lena_chita wrote: sungam wrote: I must be reading/watching to much Game of thrones cuz I keep reading her name as "Sansa" and thinking "Who gives a shit? Can she just stab Joffry and get executed already so Arya and Tyrean can have more screen time?". Maybe you should read the books? You got two of 4 names right.
|
|
|
|
|
|
