Matt's 15 Rules of Weight-training...(i.e. What I believe about training)

Page 1 of 3 123 Last
  1. Registered User
    Matt ALRI's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Age
    35
    Posts
    39
    Rep Power
    131

    Matt's 15 Rules of Weight-training...(i.e. What I believe about training)


    What I believe about training:

    Virtually everything you’ve ever read from a bodybuilding magazine is heresy and should be regarded as not worth the paper it was printed on. The programs written by the so called “superstars? of the bodybuilding world were actually ghost written by some guy in a cubicle who doesn’t know a thing about proper training, programming, exercise phys, or periodization. If, by chance the program was actually written by the “superstar? you can rest easy as long as you are one of the most genetically gifted people in history AND you are on such a ridiculous amount of drugs that you have to tan to hide the yellowing of your skin due to liver failure.

    The fact is that big, strong guys are a dime a dozen, and many of them get that way in spite of their training knowledge than because of it.

    I know what I’m talking about in the world of training not because I’m the biggest or the strongest (although, at 270lbs and an 800 squat, 600 bench, and 700 deadlift I can hold my own), and not because I know the most about exercise phys (though I can hold my own there too), but because I have trained with and become friends with best. I have trained at Westside Barbell Club, with the Metal Militia, talk on a continual basis with the best strength coaches in the nation and world-wide, and the training methods I prescribe have been tested in the gym on literally hundreds and hundreds of regular, everyday athletes and shown to work. Period.

    So here’s what I can stand before you today and say with great conviction what I know to be true about training:

    1) I believe in general that the majority of people don’t work hard enough. If there’s one thing we can learn from the old Eastern Bloc countries, it’s that they worked harder than us, and that primarily, is why they always beat us in the Olympics. Work hard in the gym (even if your program sucks) and you will be rewarded.

    2) I also believe that most people don’t put near enough emphasis on lower body and core work. The key to getting big is full squats and deadlifts. If you are looking at your routine and you see that you are training upper body 3 or 4 days per week and lower body once, you have a serious problem. The majority of athletes should live and die in the squat rack.

    3) And for that matter, EVERYONE’S program should be centered around these exercises: Full Squat, Deadlifts (or cleans or both), heavy barbell rows, bench press, and Standing Barbell Military/Push Presses. Add pull ups, barbell curls, dips, heavy abdominal work, and some core work (back extensions, reverse hypers, or glute hams) and that should make up 95-100% of the total number of exercises you do. The most effective training is simple and hard.

    4) Training a bodypart once per week (and one bodypart per day) is one of the worst ways to train. It will create a rut in your training that you can’t dig out of.

    Training a bodypart twice per week has always been shown to be superior to once per week training of a muscle. The problem is with the influx of "Weider Principles" and other bodybuilding trash that's posted in the magazines, the masses have been stuck in the one-bodypart-per-day-per-week rut for years.

    No strength athletes train a bodypart once per week. Most olympic lifters, powerlifters, and strongman train their backs at least four times per week, and last time I checked, they weren't lacking in back width.


    The simple fact is that training using an upper/lower split or a push/pull split or 3 full body days will provide double or triple the training stimulus than training a muscle once per week and thus, if done correctly will lead to much, much greater growth and strength gains.


    5) Training to near muscular failure has shown to induce identical hypertrophy gains than training to all out muscular failure. The reason you guys can’t train a muscle more than once per week is because you are destroying it when you do train it. Learn to hit or miss that last rep and then call it done. Don’t do ridiculous amounts of forced reps, negatives, etc. until you literally can’t move the muscle. Take it to near failure and then your muscles will recover enough so that you can train them again in 3-4 days.

    Understand that there is a huge difference in training to near failure and not training hard. I would never advocate to not train hard. Actually, quite the opposite – try to squat for 5 sets of 5 reps using only 10lbs less than your five rep max. That’s absolutely brutal. But when you get done, don’t go to the leg press machine and keep pounding out sets and stripping off weight until you literal can’t do a single leg press with only the sled. That’s absurd, and you can’t recover from it in 3 days.

    6) Squat at least below parallel every time. Are you kidding me? I can’t believe some people are still quarter squatting and saying that riding a squat all the way to the ground is bad for your knees. Learn the facts. Stopping at or above parallel puts much more strain on your knees than going ass to grass. Plus going all the way down in an Olympic style back squat will put more mass on you than any other exercise. Period.

    7) Isolation exercises are absolute crap. 90% of your routine should be made up of full squats, deadlifts or cleans, bench press, standing overhead press, heavy barbell rows, pull-ups, dips, and core work (abs, glute ham raises, back extensions, reverse hypers). Isolation exercises and machines are the worst thing that ever happened to the weight training world.

    8) Quit using pyramid rep schemes like 10,8,6,4,2 – Instead, your time would be better served doing boring (but effective) gut busting sets of 5x5 or 4x8-10 using the SAME WEIGHT for each set. They WILL produce better results than the pyramid scheme. BTW, check your ego at the door when you do these.

    9) I’ll quote my good friend, Glenn Pendlay (the best S&C coach in the nation) for the next one:

    "Most athletes do too many exercises. Many times they look over other peoples programs like they are at a buffet. They pick a little of this and a little of that from a variety of programs, and end up with something useless. People think you have to train each muscle with a different specific exercise. Many guys in college athletics would do better if they would just randomly slash off half of what they are doing, and then work twice as hard on the half that is left."

    10) Another of my favorites from Glenn:

    "im so sick and tired of hearing people who just started training who say they cant gain weight. jeez ive heard this crap so often. every day it seems i have some stupid kid ask me about how to gain weight... in resturants, at the grocery store, yo uname it. for some reason there seems to be a sign on my back or something. usually i know its worthless to talk to them, sometimes i actually waste my time. talked to a kid at the golden corral a couple of days ago. took almost an hour when i should have been enjoying my all you can eat steak night... 3 days later i see him in the gym when i just happened to go in to talk to a friend who i knew was there... kid was there doing preacher curls. said hi to me, then said well i talked to my friend about what you said and he said he tried it once and overtrained so i decided to do this thing i read about... on the other hand about 6 months ago i talked to this 6' tall, 150lb kid who wanted to know about getting stronger. kid had done well in judo, won some titles, also after that had done cycling, turned pro then quit a year later, quite a good road racer. he actually did what i told him i guess, about 3 months after i saw him the first time i saw hiim again, he weighed about 185... he wanted to try olympic weightlifting so i let him train with the team i coach. now hes weighing 204 and clean and jerking about 300lbs, 54lbs gained in 6 months. no drugs. olympic squat from 175lbs to 385lbs, front squat from 150lbs to 330lbs. hell be a good lifter, has a good work ethic. needs to be 240 and fairly lean, will compete eventually in the 231 pound class. will take about another 12-15 months i suppose. why is a kid like this the exception and not the rule? why will kids do the same old thing for years in the abscense of results, and not try anything new? what the hell is wrong with people. there is a gym in town, i know the owner so i go and talk to him sometimes, there are all these kids in there, skinny little ****s, doing curls. they never progress, you see the same faces one year to the next, same bodies too."

    11) Ultra slow reps or TUT is, for the most part completely worthless. Will it work? Yes. But the total amount of work that one can complete is much lower when utilizing slow reps. Just go natural. Don’t try to be super fast, and bouncy, and don’t try to go ultra slow. Just do it naturally and controlled.

    12) “The burn?, “the pump? and “the feel? have nothing to do with the effectiveness of an exercise. Yes, even I have been caught on upper body days looking at myself in the mirror when I’m all blown up, but that has nothing to do with the effectiveness of the last exercise. You do hammer strength bench presses and flyes for sets of 20 and I’ll do heavy barbell bench presses and deep dips. One of us will “feel the pump? more and the other one will grow.

    13) Likewise, delayed onset muscle soreness (DOMS) also gives no clue as to the effectiveness of a workout. It just means A) you have a ton of microtrauma in a muscle or B) a lot of lactic acid/ waste products. Congratulations.

    14) “Core stability training? is not done on a swiss ball or a stability board. It’s done by pulling heavy deadlifts, standing overhead presses, full squats, heavy barbell rows, heavy farmer’s walks, Atlas stones, tire flipping, reverse hypers, heavy back extensions, glute ham raises, and heavy abdominal work.

    15) A good gym has nothing to do with how nice the machines are or if they have a pool or tanning beds or even if it’s air conditioned. A good gym smells like a mix of body odor and liniment and supplies their members with a big box of chalk.


  2. Board Supporter
    Magickk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Saint Louis Metro
    Age
    31
    Posts
    769
    Rep Power
    498

    Matt, very interesting post, and I'm sure a ton of "PL-minded" people on here will agree with you 100%. I'm not questioning your knowledge, and I appreciate you taking the time to make this post, but I do have a question.

    Would you say the same rules apply to someone who is NOT playing a sport, or doing PL meets? Someone who just wants to build a perfectly symmetrical body, nothing huge and ridiculous, just an amazing body that is proportioned very well? Or would you say combine the information you have given until you've reached a desired size, and then work on the sculpting from that point? Interested on your input, and possibly a few other elite member of the board, namely Bobo.
  3. I am faster than 80% of all snakes
    Dwight Schrute's Avatar
    Stats
    6'1"  221 lbs.
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Southwest Florida
    Age
    41
    Posts
    12,913
    Rep Power
    7016

    Quote Originally Posted by Matt ALRI
    What I believe about training:

    Virtually everything you’ve ever read from a bodybuilding magazine is heresy and should be regarded as not worth the paper it was printed on. The programs written by the so called “superstars? of the bodybuilding world were actually ghost written by some guy in a cubicle who doesn’t know a thing about proper training, programming, exercise phys, or periodization. If, by chance the program was actually written by the “superstar? you can rest easy as long as you are one of the most genetically gifted people in history AND you are on such a ridiculous amount of drugs that you have to tan to hide the yellowing of your skin due to liver failure.

    The fact is that big, strong guys are a dime a dozen, and many of them get that way in spite of their training knowledge than because of it.

    I know what I’m talking about in the world of training not because I’m the biggest or the strongest (although, at 270lbs and an 800 squat, 600 bench, and 700 deadlift I can hold my own), and not because I know the most about exercise phys (though I can hold my own there too), but because I have trained with and become friends with best. I have trained at Westside Barbell Club, with the Metal Militia, talk on a continual basis with the best strength coaches in the nation and world-wide, and the training methods I prescribe have been tested in the gym on literally hundreds and hundreds of regular, everyday athletes and shown to work. Period.

    So here’s what I can stand before you today and say with great conviction what I know to be true about training:

    1) I believe in general that the majority of people don’t work hard enough. If there’s one thing we can learn from the old Eastern Bloc countries, it’s that they worked harder than us, and that primarily, is why they always beat us in the Olympics. Work hard in the gym (even if your program sucks) and you will be rewarded.

    2) I also believe that most people don’t put near enough emphasis on lower body and core work. The key to getting big is full squats and deadlifts. If you are looking at your routine and you see that you are training upper body 3 or 4 days per week and lower body once, you have a serious problem. The majority of athletes should live and die in the squat rack.

    3) And for that matter, EVERYONE’S program should be centered around these exercises: Full Squat, Deadlifts (or cleans or both), heavy barbell rows, bench press, and Standing Barbell Military/Push Presses. Add pull ups, barbell curls, dips, heavy abdominal work, and some core work (back extensions, reverse hypers, or glute hams) and that should make up 95-100% of the total number of exercises you do. The most effective training is simple and hard.

    4) Training a bodypart once per week (and one bodypart per day) is one of the worst ways to train. It will create a rut in your training that you can’t dig out of.

    Training a bodypart twice per week has always been shown to be superior to once per week training of a muscle. The problem is with the influx of "Weider Principles" and other bodybuilding trash that's posted in the magazines, the masses have been stuck in the one-bodypart-per-day-per-week rut for years.

    No strength athletes train a bodypart once per week. Most olympic lifters, powerlifters, and strongman train their backs at least four times per week, and last time I checked, they weren't lacking in back width.


    The simple fact is that training using an upper/lower split or a push/pull split or 3 full body days will provide double or triple the training stimulus than training a muscle once per week and thus, if done correctly will lead to much, much greater growth and strength gains.


    5) Training to near muscular failure has shown to induce identical hypertrophy gains than training to all out muscular failure. The reason you guys can’t train a muscle more than once per week is because you are destroying it when you do train it. Learn to hit or miss that last rep and then call it done. Don’t do ridiculous amounts of forced reps, negatives, etc. until you literally can’t move the muscle. Take it to near failure and then your muscles will recover enough so that you can train them again in 3-4 days.

    Understand that there is a huge difference in training to near failure and not training hard. I would never advocate to not train hard. Actually, quite the opposite – try to squat for 5 sets of 5 reps using only 10lbs less than your five rep max. That’s absolutely brutal. But when you get done, don’t go to the leg press machine and keep pounding out sets and stripping off weight until you literal can’t do a single leg press with only the sled. That’s absurd, and you can’t recover from it in 3 days.

    6) Squat at least below parallel every time. Are you kidding me? I can’t believe some people are still quarter squatting and saying that riding a squat all the way to the ground is bad for your knees. Learn the facts. Stopping at or above parallel puts much more strain on your knees than going ass to grass. Plus going all the way down in an Olympic style back squat will put more mass on you than any other exercise. Period.

    7) Isolation exercises are absolute crap. 90% of your routine should be made up of full squats, deadlifts or cleans, bench press, standing overhead press, heavy barbell rows, pull-ups, dips, and core work (abs, glute ham raises, back extensions, reverse hypers). Isolation exercises and machines are the worst thing that ever happened to the weight training world.

    8) Quit using pyramid rep schemes like 10,8,6,4,2 – Instead, your time would be better served doing boring (but effective) gut busting sets of 5x5 or 4x8-10 using the SAME WEIGHT for each set. They WILL produce better results than the pyramid scheme. BTW, check your ego at the door when you do these.

    9) I’ll quote my good friend, Glenn Pendlay (the best S&C coach in the nation) for the next one:

    "Most athletes do too many exercises. Many times they look over other peoples programs like they are at a buffet. They pick a little of this and a little of that from a variety of programs, and end up with something useless. People think you have to train each muscle with a different specific exercise. Many guys in college athletics would do better if they would just randomly slash off half of what they are doing, and then work twice as hard on the half that is left."

    10) Another of my favorites from Glenn:

    "im so sick and tired of hearing people who just started training who say they cant gain weight. jeez ive heard this crap so often. every day it seems i have some stupid kid ask me about how to gain weight... in resturants, at the grocery store, yo uname it. for some reason there seems to be a sign on my back or something. usually i know its worthless to talk to them, sometimes i actually waste my time. talked to a kid at the golden corral a couple of days ago. took almost an hour when i should have been enjoying my all you can eat steak night... 3 days later i see him in the gym when i just happened to go in to talk to a friend who i knew was there... kid was there doing preacher curls. said hi to me, then said well i talked to my friend about what you said and he said he tried it once and overtrained so i decided to do this thing i read about... on the other hand about 6 months ago i talked to this 6' tall, 150lb kid who wanted to know about getting stronger. kid had done well in judo, won some titles, also after that had done cycling, turned pro then quit a year later, quite a good road racer. he actually did what i told him i guess, about 3 months after i saw him the first time i saw hiim again, he weighed about 185... he wanted to try olympic weightlifting so i let him train with the team i coach. now hes weighing 204 and clean and jerking about 300lbs, 54lbs gained in 6 months. no drugs. olympic squat from 175lbs to 385lbs, front squat from 150lbs to 330lbs. hell be a good lifter, has a good work ethic. needs to be 240 and fairly lean, will compete eventually in the 231 pound class. will take about another 12-15 months i suppose. why is a kid like this the exception and not the rule? why will kids do the same old thing for years in the abscense of results, and not try anything new? what the hell is wrong with people. there is a gym in town, i know the owner so i go and talk to him sometimes, there are all these kids in there, skinny little ****s, doing curls. they never progress, you see the same faces one year to the next, same bodies too."

    11) Ultra slow reps or TUT is, for the most part completely worthless. Will it work? Yes. But the total amount of work that one can complete is much lower when utilizing slow reps. Just go natural. Don’t try to be super fast, and bouncy, and don’t try to go ultra slow. Just do it naturally and controlled.

    12) “The burn?, “the pump? and “the feel? have nothing to do with the effectiveness of an exercise. Yes, even I have been caught on upper body days looking at myself in the mirror when I’m all blown up, but that has nothing to do with the effectiveness of the last exercise. You do hammer strength bench presses and flyes for sets of 20 and I’ll do heavy barbell bench presses and deep dips. One of us will “feel the pump? more and the other one will grow.

    13) Likewise, delayed onset muscle soreness (DOMS) also gives no clue as to the effectiveness of a workout. It just means A) you have a ton of microtrauma in a muscle or B) a lot of lactic acid/ waste products. Congratulations.

    14) “Core stability training? is not done on a swiss ball or a stability board. It’s done by pulling heavy deadlifts, standing overhead presses, full squats, heavy barbell rows, heavy farmer’s walks, Atlas stones, tire flipping, reverse hypers, heavy back extensions, glute ham raises, and heavy abdominal work.

    15) A good gym has nothing to do with how nice the machines are or if they have a pool or tanning beds or even if it’s air conditioned. A good gym smells like a mix of body odor and liniment and supplies their members with a big box of chalk.
    I will tell you why I disagree with many of these "truths"


    1. I work "smarter", not harder. Saying you just have to work harder is entirely too simplistic.

    2. Although squats and deadlifts do train multiple muscle groups, there is nothing magical about them. Having a big squat doens't mean you wiull have big arms. This is a complete and utter myth.

    3. I disagree again with this point. I have achieved with myself and other the same results whether I incorporated those exercises or not. They are great exercises that do serve a purpose but once again they are not magical at all.

    4. Simply making statements like this is compeltely close minded. Different muscle groups require different frequencies due to recovery time and fiber makeup. I have trianed myself and many others VERY successfully using one bodypart per week method.

    5. I agree. Complete failure is not needed.

    6. Statements like these use a general template for the populations and are simply false. Going parrallel for some people is quite enough for some bone structures. Simply saying you need to go ass-to-grass all the time is wrong.

    7. Crap? Ugh... Depending on muscular fiber makeup and increased TUT, isolation exercises can greatly induce IGF and subsequent MGF release moreso than many compound exercises. Targeting both myofibullar and sarcoplasmic hypertrophy is extremely effective in obtaining optimal growth.

    8. Well I guess we can throw out all the research on progressive load, increased ECC action and increased MGF release.

    9. Strenght and conditioning coaches center their programs around performance, not asthetics. The hormonal response is completely different.

    10. Who is Glenn?

    11. Once again I guess we can throw out all that research about increased ECC action increasing MGF and subsequent growth better than faster CON/ECC actions.

    12. It depends. When working on sarcoplamsic hypertrophy the pump (actually holding it) will induce more microtrauma and increase subsequent MGF release.

    13. Actually the majority of research of DOMS is inconclusive so how anyone can state it has nothing to do with anything as fact isnt' looking at the research.

    14. Techincally the swiss ball is great for those with less musclular developent (women, elderly) because it creates the same growth/CNS stimulus in those subjects who can't do HEAVY SQUATS.

    15. Well that is your opinion. I actually like a mix of both.
    http://anabolicminds.com/forum/image...et/twitter.png http://anabolicminds.com/forum/image...t/facebook.png

    For answers to board issues, read the Suggestion and News forum at the bottom of the main page.
    •   
       

  4. Registered User
    Zero Tolerance's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Age
    42
    Posts
    1,328
    Rep Power
    786

    I'm not sure Matt's advice is the best for people who aren't making bodybuilding the single most important thing in their lives. If you want to be Mr. Olympia, then talk to Matt. If you're looking to be in excellent shape and impressive looking, you'll only get discouraged.
  5. I am faster than 80% of all snakes
    Dwight Schrute's Avatar
    Stats
    6'1"  221 lbs.
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Southwest Florida
    Age
    41
    Posts
    12,913
    Rep Power
    7016

    Quote Originally Posted by Zero Tolerance
    I'm not sure Matt's advice is the best for people who aren't making bodybuilding the single most important thing in their lives. If you want to be Mr. Olympia, then talk to Matt. If you're looking to be in excellent shape and impressive looking, you'll only get discouraged.
    Actually its the oppsite. His advice is best for people PL'ing, NOT bodybuilding.
    http://anabolicminds.com/forum/image...et/twitter.png http://anabolicminds.com/forum/image...t/facebook.png

    For answers to board issues, read the Suggestion and News forum at the bottom of the main page.
  6. Board Supporter
    DieTrying's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Age
    31
    Posts
    909
    Rep Power
    12957

    All of this list is your opinion, and being that you are a PLer, your opinions are generally different from a lot of others'.

    There are a lot of variables as to why muscles grow (training, nutrition, rest, health, drugs, supps, etc) and you could argue them over and over.
  7. I am faster than 80% of all snakes
    Dwight Schrute's Avatar
    Stats
    6'1"  221 lbs.
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Southwest Florida
    Age
    41
    Posts
    12,913
    Rep Power
    7016

    Evidence onf progressive load:

    Mechanical load increases muscle IGF-I and androgen receptor mRNA concentrations in humans.

    Bamman MM, Shipp JR, Jiang J, Gower BA, Hunter GR, Goodman A, McLafferty CL Jr, Urban RJ.

    Department of Human Studies, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL 35294, USA. mbamman@uab.edu

    The mechanism(s) of load-induced muscle hypertrophy is as yet unclear, but increasing evidence suggests a role for locally expressed insulin-like growth factor I (IGF-I). We investigated the effects of concentric (CON) vs. eccentric (ECC) loading on muscle IGF-I mRNA concentration. We hypothesized a greater IGF-I response after ECC compared with CON. Ten healthy subjects (24.4 +/- 0.7 yr, 174.5 +/- 2.6 cm, 70.9 +/- 4.3 kg) completed eight sets of eight CON or ECC squats separated by 6-10 days. IGF-I, IGF binding protein-4 (IGFBP-4), and androgen receptor (AR) mRNA concentrations were determined in vastus lateralis muscle by RT-PCR before and 48 h after ECC and CON. Serum total testosterone (TT) and IGF-I were measured serially across 48 h, and serum creatine kinase activity (CK), isometric maximum voluntary contraction (MVC), and soreness were determined at 48 h. IGF-I mRNA concentration increased 62% and IGFBP-4 mRNA concentration decreased 57% after ECC (P < 0.05). Changes after CON were similar but not significant (P = 0.06-0.12). AR mRNA concentration increased (P < 0.05) after ECC (63%) and CON (102%). Serum TT and IGF-I showed little change. MVC fell 10% and CK rose 183% after ECC (P < 0.05). Perceived soreness was higher (P < 0.01) after ECC compared with CON. Results indicate that a single bout of mechanical loading in humans alters activity of the muscle IGF-I system, and the enhanced response to ECC suggests that IGF-I may somehow modulate tissue regeneration after mechanical damage.

    Role of insulin-like growth factor-I in the regulation of skeletal muscle adaptation to increased loading.

    Adams GR.

    Department of Physiology and Biophysics, University of California, Irvine, USA.

    Adaptations in muscle mass stimulated by changes in muscle loading state entail alternations in the synthesis and degradation of myofiber proteins and the modulation of myonuclear number such that the ratio between the number of myonuclei and the size of the myofibers remains relatively constant. As depicted schematically in Figure 2.6, the literature regarding the role of IGF-in mediating muscle adaptation to alterations in loading state suggests the following conclusions: During periods of increased loading, myofibers upregulate the expression and secretion of IGF-I. Acting as an autocrine and/or paracrine growth factor, IGF-I stimulates myofiber anabolic processes. Acting as a paracrine growth factor, IGF-I also stimulates adjacent satellite cells to enter the cell cycle and proliferate. Continued myofiber production of IGF-I stimulates some satellite cells to differentiate and then fuse with myofibers, thus providing additional myonuclei in order to maintain or reestablish the myonucleus to myofiber size ratios of the enlarged myofibers.


    Increased RMP due to increased ECC action


    Muscle damage and resting metabolic rate after acute resistance exercise with an eccentric overload.

    Dolezal BA, Potteiger JA, Jacobsen DJ, Benedict SH.

    Department of Health, Sport, and Exercise Sciences, University of Kansas, Lawrence, USA. bdolezal@prairie.nodak.edu

    PURPOSE: The purpose of this investigation was to determine whether muscle damage caused from acute resistance exercise with an eccentric overload would influence resting metabolic rate (RMR) up to 72 h postexercise in resistance-trained (RT) and untrained (UT) subjects. METHODS: Nine RT and 9 UT male subjects (mean +/- SD; age = 20.7 +/- 2.1 yr; body mass = 79.0 +/- 1.4 kg; height = 178.4 +/- 3.1 cm; and body fat = 10.2 +/- 1.6%) were measured for RMR, creatine kinase concentration ([CK]), and rating of perceived muscle soreness (RPMS) on five consecutive mornings. To induce muscle damage, after the measurements on day 2, each subject performed leg presses that emphasized the eccentric movement for 8 sets at his six-repetition maximum (6-RM). RESULTS: Compared with baseline, the RMR (kJ x d(-1) and kJ x kg FFM(-1) x h(-1) was significantly elevated for RT and UT at 24 h and 48 h postexercise. From 24 h to 48 h to 72 h postexercise, RMR significantly decreased within both groups. The UT group had a significantly higher RMR at 24 h (9,705.4 +/- 204.5 kJ x d(-1)) and 48 h postexercise (8,930.9 +/- 104.4 kJ x d(-1)) when compared with the RT group (9,209.3 +/- 535.3 and 8,601.7 + 353.7 kJ x d(-1)). Both [CK] and RPMS showed a similar time course. CONCLUSION: There was a significantly higher [CK] for the UT group at 24 h postexercise (320.4 +/- 20.1 U x L(-1)) and for both [CK] and RPMS at 48 h (1,140.3 +/- 37.1 U x L(-1) and 4.4 +/- 0.5, respectively) and 72 h postexercise (675.9 +/- 41.7 U x L(-1) and 1.67 +/- 0.5, respectively) when compared with the RT group (24 h, 201.9 +/- 13.4 U x L(-1); 48 h, 845.4 +/- 30.7 U x L(-1) and 3.7 +/- 0.5: and 72 h postexercise, 420.2 +/- 70.2 U x L(-1) and 0.89 +/- 0.3). These data indicate that eccentrically induced muscle damage causes perturbations in RMR up to 48 h postexercise.


    Evidence of different hypertrophic effects due to rep ranges and fiber makeup


    Muscular adaptations in response to three different resistance-training regimens: specificity of repetition maximum training zones.

    Campos GE, Luecke TJ, Wendeln HK, Toma K, Hagerman FC, Murray TF, Ragg KE, Ratamess NA, Kraemer WJ, Staron RS.

    Department of Biomedical Sciences, College of Osteopathic Medicine, Ohio University, Irvine Hall, rm 430, Athens, OH 45701, USA.

    Thirty-two untrained men [mean (SD) age 22.5 (5.8) years, height 178.3 (7.2) cm, body mass 77.8 (11.9) kg] participated in an 8-week progressive resistance-training program to investigate the "strength-endurance continuum". Subjects were divided into four groups: a low repetition group (Low Rep, n = 9) performing 3-5 repetitions maximum (RM) for four sets of each exercise with 3 min rest between sets and exercises, an intermediate repetition group (Int Rep, n = 11) performing 9-11 RM for three sets with 2 min rest, a high repetition group (High Rep, n = 7) performing 20-28 RM for two sets with 1 min rest, and a non-exercising control group (Con, n = 5). Three exercises (leg press, squat, and knee extension) were performed 2 days/week for the first 4 weeks and 3 days/week for the final 4 weeks. Maximal strength [one repetition maximum, 1RM), local muscular endurance (maximal number of repetitions performed with 60% of 1RM), and various cardiorespiratory parameters (e.g., maximum oxygen consumption, pulmonary ventilation, maximal aerobic power, time to exhaustion) were assessed at the beginning and end of the study. In addition, pre- and post-training muscle biopsy samples were analyzed for fiber-type composition, cross-sectional area, myosin heavy chain (MHC) content, and capillarization. Maximal strength improved significantly more for the Low Rep group compared to the other training groups, and the maximal number of repetitions at 60% 1RM improved the most for the High Rep group. In addition, maximal aerobic power and time to exhaustion significantly increased at the end of the study for only the High Rep group. All three major fiber types (types I, IIA, and IIB) hypertrophied for the Low Rep and Int Rep groups, whereas no significant increases were demonstrated for either the High Rep or Con groups. However, the percentage of type IIB fibers decreased, with a concomitant increase in IIAB fibers for all three resistance-trained groups. These fiber-type conversions were supported by a significant decrease in MHCIIb accompanied by a significant increase in MHCIIa. No significant changes in fiber-type composition were found in the control samples. Although all three training regimens resulted in similar fiber-type transformations (IIB to IIA), the low to intermediate repetition resistance-training programs induced a greater hypertrophic effect compared to the high repetition regimen. The High Rep group, however, appeared better adapted for submaximal, prolonged contractions, with significant increases after training in aerobic power and time to exhaustion. Thus, low and intermediate RM training appears to induce similar muscular adaptations, at least after short-term training in previously untrained subjects. Overall, however, these data demonstrate that both physical performance and the associated physiological adaptations are linked to the intensity and number of repetitions performed, and thus lend support to the "strength-endurance continuum".


    Different efect of different muscle fibers and their inherent activity.




    Regulation of skeletal muscle fiber size, shape and function.

    Edgerton VR, Roy RR.

    Department of Kinesiology, University of California, Los Angeles 90024-1527.

    There is convincing evidence that the cross-sectional area, the type of myosin expressed, the potential for oxidative phosphorylation and the number of myonuclei of a skeletal muscle fiber are closely interdependent. Each of these variables, as well as the shape of the fiber, has identifiable physiological consequences. Further, it is suggested that the cytoplasmic to myonucleus ratio is a function of the myosin type and the amount and/or rate of protein synthesis and degradation. Although the neuromuscular activity (electromyographic activity) as well as the associated mechanical and metabolic events have significant regulatory influences on protein metabolism, there are other important regulatory factors independent of these activity-related events. Both the activity and non-activity related regulatory mechanisms probably occur via a cascade of cellular events. The specific combinations of cellular responses that occur may define the nature of the modulatory effects on specific proteins. In spite of the complexity of the regulatory mechanisms of protein modulation and how these responses are structurally integrated into or removed from functional fibers, it is suggested that controlled studies of human neuromuscular function can be more accurately defined and interpreted when fiber and muscle size and shape are considered.



    The list goes on and on.....
    http://anabolicminds.com/forum/image...et/twitter.png http://anabolicminds.com/forum/image...t/facebook.png

    For answers to board issues, read the Suggestion and News forum at the bottom of the main page.
  8. Registered User
    burnuphard's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Age
    33
    Posts
    78
    Rep Power
    152

    Who needs studies when you have blind confidence in your self-developed opinions?
  9. I am faster than 80% of all snakes
    Dwight Schrute's Avatar
    Stats
    6'1"  221 lbs.
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Southwest Florida
    Age
    41
    Posts
    12,913
    Rep Power
    7016

    So I take you want to throw science out the window and rely on "feel".
    http://anabolicminds.com/forum/image...et/twitter.png http://anabolicminds.com/forum/image...t/facebook.png

    For answers to board issues, read the Suggestion and News forum at the bottom of the main page.
  10. Registered User
    burnuphard's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Age
    33
    Posts
    78
    Rep Power
    152

    Me? I was being sarcastic, if so.
  11. I am faster than 80% of all snakes
    Dwight Schrute's Avatar
    Stats
    6'1"  221 lbs.
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Southwest Florida
    Age
    41
    Posts
    12,913
    Rep Power
    7016

    I could not tell.

    Opinion is great but I always have a problem when someone states one way is the best for everyone. I tend to base my opinions on what works for the majority first, then look at other options. As with most things, if you incorporate the best of all areas you will most likely get the best results.

    Well, it seems to work for my clients
    http://anabolicminds.com/forum/image...et/twitter.png http://anabolicminds.com/forum/image...t/facebook.png

    For answers to board issues, read the Suggestion and News forum at the bottom of the main page.
  12. Registered User
    burnuphard's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Age
    33
    Posts
    78
    Rep Power
    152

    Yeah, when it comes down to it...there's really no arguing with results.

    Your clients seem to indicate that you're doing something right.
  13. Gold Member
    Beowulf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Boston
    Age
    36
    Posts
    3,430
    Rep Power
    2149

    Quote Originally Posted by Bobo
    Well, it seems to work for my clients
  14. Registered User
    Zero Tolerance's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Age
    42
    Posts
    1,328
    Rep Power
    786

    Quote Originally Posted by Bobo
    Actually its the oppsite. His advice is best for people PL'ing, NOT bodybuilding.
    Right. That's sorta what I meant to say.
  15. Registered User
    jweave23's Avatar
    Stats
    6'0"  237 lbs.
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    PA
    Posts
    2,628
    Rep Power
    1459

    Quote Originally Posted by Bobo
    Actually its the oppsite. His advice is best for people PL'ing, NOT bodybuilding.
    Agreed, I have tried many ways of training myself, and this seems to be the typical mantra of the powerlifter, not that it's bad or wrong, but simply limited in scope.

    Unless you fit into that specific criteria (PL'ing, strength training, certain sports training), these commandments may no be right for many out there.
  16. Registered User
    Matt ALRI's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Age
    35
    Posts
    39
    Rep Power
    131

    First off Guys, thank you for your responses. (Especially yours Bobo - I knew it you spent a good deal of time trying to combat my thoughts on training.)

    It's obvious that some of us disagree about a majority of things when it comes to training. And that's ok. Obviously I could have woken up this morning and been pissed because everyone jumped all over my training ideas. But it's no big deal.

    Let me say this first...

    My thread was intended to help people who are trying to get big in the shortest amount of time. I made a mistake when used words like "everybody." What I should have said was "everyone who wants to grow as fast as possible..." I am a strength and conditioning coach and work with high school and college kids. I'm not a personal trainer working with soccer moms and grandmas. I assumed that most of you reading this would be the typical guy who wanted to get substancially bigger, but just had a hard time doing so. I assumed wrong. FOr those of you who are models and looking to stay at 170lbs and lean, then these ideas aren't for you.

    Second, there is more than one way to skin a cat. We should all know this. There are guys who get big despite their training programs all the time because they have incredible genetics or lots of drugs or both. (BTW, I'm most certainly not knocking good genetics or drugs as to be honest I wish I had a little more of both :-)

    Third, I take some offense at you guys writing off my ideas because I am a "powerlifter." Actually I'm a strength athlete and compete at both powerlifting and strongman. But what's more relevent to you guys is that I am a strength and conditioning coach who's primary goal is to make my kids much, much bigger and stronger in a short amount of time without drugs. I have trained hundreds of kids this way and had collegues of mine do the same and this list of things I believe comes directly out of trenches of what has worked for these kids.

    I'll finish with this...I've had many poeple in the past tell me when I start to train them that "they don't want to get too big." I usually have them take a look around the gym to see all the 150lb college kids training their ass off on machines or curls and tell my client that every one of those guys are doing everything they can to get bigger and it isn't working. We all see it every single day. Kid after kid doing curls and bench presses like there's no tomorrow and they never grow. But every once in a while you see a couple of guys come into the weight room and throw a ton of weight on a bar and start full squatting it or deadlifting or cleaning and you know that those guys have paid their dues to get where they are.

    All I'm asking is are you willing to pay your dues?

    Matt
  17. I am faster than 80% of all snakes
    Dwight Schrute's Avatar
    Stats
    6'1"  221 lbs.
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Southwest Florida
    Age
    41
    Posts
    12,913
    Rep Power
    7016

    Well I think the problems with your arguement is that you are lacking any type of scientific evidence and the statements such as "get big faster" is an example. I am not a personal trainer who works with soccer moms and grandmas and I am not a strength and conditioning coach working with young athletes. I am a personal trainer who works almost exclusively with bodybuilders designing both exercies and nutrition programs for the novice all the way up to the competitor and I have worked with hundreds as well, the difference being I tell them what to eat down to the every meal and macronutrient. I practice what I preach and know from experience what works for the MAJORITY of people, not all. There are many ways to skin a cat but your recommendations are a very small part of the overall picture. The literature is filled with examples of how increase TUT, ECC action, moderate weight can induce myofibullar hypertrophy much more than and strenght training program will. Its 2 different beasts and simply ignoring a large part of research and stating "it doesn't work" or its "crap" isn't exactly conclusive evidence on your part.


    You shouldn't take offense because you have repeated so many times what I have heard form many PL'er and OL'ers. It generally is the same arguement and I have done this many times. So it really didn't take me all that long at all. I rolled that off in about 5 minutes and the studies are just as easy to find through any Medline search.


    I tinhk everyone here is willing to pay their dues but the big questions is you diet and nutrition going to back it up? Quite frankly, training is the easy part. Nutrition is 80% of this game.
    http://anabolicminds.com/forum/image...et/twitter.png http://anabolicminds.com/forum/image...t/facebook.png

    For answers to board issues, read the Suggestion and News forum at the bottom of the main page.
  18. CDB
    CDB is offline
    Registered User
    CDB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Age
    38
    Posts
    4,545
    Rep Power
    2674

    Quote Originally Posted by Bobo
    7. Crap? Ugh... Depending on muscular fiber makeup and increased TUT, isolation exercises can greatly induce IGF and subsequent MGF release moreso than many compound exercises. Targeting both myofibullar and sarcoplasmic hypertrophy is extremely effective in obtaining optimal growth.

    8. Well I guess we can throw out all the research on progressive load, increased ECC action and increased MGF release.

    12. It depends. When working on sarcoplamsic hypertrophy the pump (actually holding it) will induce more microtrauma and increase subsequent MGF release.
    Hey, Bobo. We were discussing this on the HST boards a while ago. Quite a few people over there are of the opinion that sarcoplasmic growth is negligible or even a myth. The reason behind this I believe was research showing that the cell itself can only hold so much sarcoplasm, and the size of the cell can only grow proportional to the nucleus. So basically they were saying sarcoplasmic growth while it exists is limited by myofibular growth, and that myofibular growth should be the focus of a hypertrophy training program. I believe the release of MGF was discussed, and the basic concensus was that any work aimed at sarcoplasmic growth only helped in spurring the release of more such hormones to repair the myotrauma done by heavier work, but did not cause any damage to the muscle itself. Any opinion on this?
  19. Board Supporter
    Magickk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Saint Louis Metro
    Age
    31
    Posts
    769
    Rep Power
    498

    Quote Originally Posted by Matt ALRI
    FOr those of you who are models and looking to stay at 170lbs and lean, then these ideas aren't for you.
    How about wanting to get to 195-205 and lean?
  20. I am faster than 80% of all snakes
    Dwight Schrute's Avatar
    Stats
    6'1"  221 lbs.
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Southwest Florida
    Age
    41
    Posts
    12,913
    Rep Power
    7016

    In many ways its true which is why you should ALWAYS incorporate both. If you concentrate just on sarcoplasmic hypertrophy you will mostly likely only increase muscular endurance. Myofibullar hypetrophy (which is still within the 6-10 rep range) should always be the focal point but there is a point of diminishing returns. This is why one should facilitate the next giving you a one-two punch in both fiber thickness and the increase in nutrient capacity.

    As for the increase in MGF, regardless of why its release, increases are always a positive. It goes well boyond just repairing microtrauma (which the research suggests, mRNA translocation, gene expression, AR mRNA concentrations, subsequent increase in protein and RM rates, etc...). I also think there is apoint of diminishing returns in that aspect as well whichc is why I never understood anyone holding a 6-9 second negative. You get the same response from a 3 second negative in terms of hormonal output. As with all things, there is a balance that should be achieved and one should never veer to one extreme or another.
    http://anabolicminds.com/forum/image...et/twitter.png http://anabolicminds.com/forum/image...t/facebook.png

    For answers to board issues, read the Suggestion and News forum at the bottom of the main page.
  21. I am faster than 80% of all snakes
    Dwight Schrute's Avatar
    Stats
    6'1"  221 lbs.
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Southwest Florida
    Age
    41
    Posts
    12,913
    Rep Power
    7016

    Quote Originally Posted by Magickk
    How about wanting to get to 195-205 and lean?
    How about 225 and lean? How about 245 and lean? How about 275 and lean?

    Balance my friend
    http://anabolicminds.com/forum/image...et/twitter.png http://anabolicminds.com/forum/image...t/facebook.png

    For answers to board issues, read the Suggestion and News forum at the bottom of the main page.
  22. Gold Member
    TheCrownedOne's Avatar
    Stats
    6'3"  215 lbs.
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Enshrouded by a luciferous arbor
    Posts
    1,363
    Rep Power
    801

    I'm pretty sure he was directing that comment at me Magickk. Thanks Matt Your ideas aren't for me because I already know what I'm doing. God forbid somebody doesn't want to be 468lb, throwing soccer moms and their minivans around like footballs.
  23. Registered User
    Matt ALRI's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Age
    35
    Posts
    39
    Rep Power
    131

    Bobo,

    In regard to your responses, the very last thing I'd want to do is come on to this board and piss off the admin. I'm sure you are a fantastic personal trainer, and you have obviously put in your time to get the body you've got now.

    However, your responses seemed so totally negative towards me, and I'm not sure why? I believe we agree on 90% of training issues, but maybe I'm wrong.

    Let me adress them...

    1) I didn't say that all you have to do is work harder. I said I believe most people don't work hard enough. If all you had to do was work harder then there wouldn't have been 14 more points following that one.

    2) All I said was that people don't put enough emphasis on lower body. Do you disagree? I've never seen ANYONE deadlift or clean at my gym and never seen ANYONE full squat on my gym. But I have seen hundreds of 130lb kids banging out hammer strength curls. Surely you don't disagree with this?

    3) I don't think I called these exercises "magic." What I would call them is "effective". From your post I can assume that you believe that you can achieve equal size and strength gains without using heavy compound free-weight movements. I guess we disagree here.

    4) LIke I said, more than one way to skin a cat. Will one bodypart per day per week work? Sure. Will training the same muscle group twice per week work better if done correctly? Yep. (C'mon, you know Ex Phys enoughto know that if you can present the muscles with double the training stimulus and recover enough that they'll grow better.)

    5) Whew. If you and I were married, we'd start our marital counseling on this point.

    6) You know what? I'll agree with you here. I believe full squatting is more beneficial because the amount of work involved is greater and it loads the system more than higher squats. BUT, if I could just get people in the gym to squat TO parallel I'd be a happy man. I've personally never seen it in a commercial gym. What most of these guys do shouldn't even be considered a 1/4 squat. Surely you agree that most guys don't squat low enough and if they'd all just squat to parallel, then the world would be a better place?

    7) I agree that targeting both myfibral hypertorphy (sets in the 3-6 rep range) and sarcoplasmic hypertrophy )sets in the 7-12 range) are needed for optimal muscle growth. I guess I disagree, however, that machine isolation exercises will induce more sarcoplasmic growth than free weight exercises. Even if it were equal, I'd rather kill 2,3,4, or 5 birds with one stone than having to do an isolation exercise for every single muscle in my body.

    8) You obviously misunderstood what I was saying here. What I'm saying is that doing 5 sets of 5 (or 4x10 or whatever) using the same weight for each set (and then going up in weight the next workout) is much better than doing 8 reps, 6 reps, 4 reps, 2 reps with escalating weight. The studies you quoted are concerned with "periods of increased loading" - meaning that over time the load must increase. I couldn't agree more.

    Furthermore, the studies quote that there is some definite gains to be made using eccentrics, and I agree here as well as the microtrauma on a muscle is increased with eccentrics, though one has to be careful at how he uses them as recovery becomes much tougher with eccentrics. They can and should be used in a bodybuilders repetoire, but use them sparingly.

    9) Ok, I can agree with you here a bit, but please understand that those of us who work with high school aged kids and many times freshman in college are VERY concerned over the kids size, rather than his performance. However, as much as people want to argue against them, the size and performance results are closely related.

    10) The best strength and conditioning coach in the US, maybe the world. Read my interview with him in the march issue of www.ReadtheCore.com

    11) I've addressed the eccentric issue already. However, let me say this about the studies. I love studies on Exercise science. I have been part of many. However, many of us know these are not closely regulated and are nearly ALWAYS performed on average joe college kid. The average weight of the kids in the Ecc study was 170lbs. These guys weren't exaclty highly trained athletes or bodybuilders. The hypertrophy study was done on 32 UNTRAINED men. LOL So take these things with a grain of salt.

    12) Oh come on, you know what I was saying. I understand that isometric holds and posing in front of the mirror can have benefit for hypertophy. However, I'm talking about the kid that says, "Oh man, I really felt the burn" after he completed an exercise. The fact is, "the burn, the pump, the feel" etc, have more to do with how much blood you just pumped into a muscle, not the effectiveness of the exercise. You don't believe me? Grab a pair of 10lb dumbells and do dumbell bench press for a set of 200. You'll have a huge pump, But you didn't really accomplish anything.

    13) Again, I apologize to all the women and elderly reading my comments.

    14) OK, the last one was just for fun.

    Matt
  24. Board Supporter
    Magickk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Saint Louis Metro
    Age
    31
    Posts
    769
    Rep Power
    498

    Quote Originally Posted by Bobo
    How about 225 and lean? How about 245 and lean? How about 275 and lean?

    Balance my friend
    So basically just keeping my nose to the grindstone, working hard, and mixing my routine up? Changing things when I "feel" like my body needs a change?

    It's not good to be impatient I know, but my goal is:
    45-6" chest
    17-18" arms
    24-5" quads
    30" waist
    16" calves
    and at about 195 with 7-8% within at least 3 years. Right now I'm at
    40" chest
    15.75" arms
    22.5" quads
    33" waist
    14.5" calves
    and weighing about 182 and I'd guess 15%.
  25. CDB
    CDB is offline
    Registered User
    CDB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Age
    38
    Posts
    4,545
    Rep Power
    2674

    Quote Originally Posted by Bobo
    In many ways its true which is why you should ALWAYS incorporate both...
    Cool, thanks for the response. I wanted another opinion on that subject.
  26. Board Supporter
    Magickk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Saint Louis Metro
    Age
    31
    Posts
    769
    Rep Power
    498

    Wink


    Quote Originally Posted by Matt ALRI
    Bobo,

    In regard to your responses, the very last thing I'd want to do is come on to this board and piss off the admin. I'm sure you are a fantastic personal trainer, and you have obviously put in your time to get the body you've got now.

    However, your responses seemed so totally negative towards me, and I'm not sure why? I believe we agree on 90% of training issues, but maybe I'm wrong.

    Let me adress them...

    1) I didn't say that all you have to do is work harder. I said I believe most people don't work hard enough. If all you had to do was work harder then there wouldn't have been 14 more points following that one.

    2) All I said was that people don't put enough emphasis on lower body. Do you disagree? I've never seen ANYONE deadlift or clean at my gym and never seen ANYONE full squat on my gym. But I have seen hundreds of 130lb kids banging out hammer strength curls. Surely you don't disagree with this?

    3) I don't think I called these exercises "magic." What I would call them is "effective". From your post I can assume that you believe that you can achieve equal size and strength gains without using heavy compound free-weight movements. I guess we disagree here.

    4) LIke I said, more than one way to skin a cat. Will one bodypart per day per week work? Sure. Will training the same muscle group twice per week work better if done correctly? Yep. (C'mon, you know Ex Phys enoughto know that if you can present the muscles with double the training stimulus and recover enough that they'll grow better.)

    5) Whew. If you and I were married, we'd start our marital counseling on this point.

    6) You know what? I'll agree with you here. I believe full squatting is more beneficial because the amount of work involved is greater and it loads the system more than higher squats. BUT, if I could just get people in the gym to squat TO parallel I'd be a happy man. I've personally never seen it in a commercial gym. What most of these guys do shouldn't even be considered a 1/4 squat. Surely you agree that most guys don't squat low enough and if they'd all just squat to parallel, then the world would be a better place?

    7) I agree that targeting both myfibral hypertorphy (sets in the 3-6 rep range) and sarcoplasmic hypertrophy )sets in the 7-12 range) are needed for optimal muscle growth. I guess I disagree, however, that machine isolation exercises will induce more sarcoplasmic growth than free weight exercises. Even if it were equal, I'd rather kill 2,3,4, or 5 birds with one stone than having to do an isolation exercise for every single muscle in my body.

    8) You obviously misunderstood what I was saying here. What I'm saying is that doing 5 sets of 5 (or 4x10 or whatever) using the same weight for each set (and then going up in weight the next workout) is much better than doing 8 reps, 6 reps, 4 reps, 2 reps with escalating weight. The studies you quoted are concerned with "periods of increased loading" - meaning that over time the load must increase. I couldn't agree more.

    Furthermore, the studies quote that there is some definite gains to be made using eccentrics, and I agree here as well as the microtrauma on a muscle is increased with eccentrics, though one has to be careful at how he uses them as recovery becomes much tougher with eccentrics. They can and should be used in a bodybuilders repetoire, but use them sparingly.

    9) Ok, I can agree with you here a bit, but please understand that those of us who work with high school aged kids and many times freshman in college are VERY concerned over the kids size, rather than his performance. However, as much as people want to argue against them, the size and performance results are closely related.

    10) The best strength and conditioning coach in the US, maybe the world. Read my interview with him in the march issue of www.ReadtheCore.com

    11) I've addressed the eccentric issue already. However, let me say this about the studies. I love studies on Exercise science. I have been part of many. However, many of us know these are not closely regulated and are nearly ALWAYS performed on average joe college kid. The average weight of the kids in the Ecc study was 170lbs. These guys weren't exaclty highly trained athletes or bodybuilders. The hypertrophy study was done on 32 UNTRAINED men. LOL So take these things with a grain of salt.

    12) Oh come on, you know what I was saying. I understand that isometric holds and posing in front of the mirror can have benefit for hypertophy. However, I'm talking about the kid that says, "Oh man, I really felt the burn" after he completed an exercise. The fact is, "the burn, the pump, the feel" etc, have more to do with how much blood you just pumped into a muscle, not the effectiveness of the exercise. You don't believe me? Grab a pair of 10lb dumbells and do dumbell bench press for a set of 200. You'll have a huge pump, But you didn't really accomplish anything.

    13) Again, I apologize to all the women and elderly reading my comments.

    14) OK, the last one was just for fun.

    Matt
    Matt and Bobo,
    There's always a "tension", even if both parties aren't exactly trying to criticize the other, when compaing BB and PL. This is one thing I've noticed while spending endless hours reading on here. It sometimes comes across as insulting arguments, but I think most of that is because, in BB / PL everyone is soal goal-oriented, and one group doesn't want to read stuff that isn't going to give them the best benefits they're looking for, the fastest. Basically what I'm saying is, I'm sure neither one of you are trying to demeen the other, but anytime when comparing BB to PL (especially between two avid members of each group) there is always that mindset of "my way is better". And that's just perfectly natural, because if you didn't think that way, you wouldn't be doing what you're doing. But in the end, the one thing we can all agree on, is the BB group is much more asthetically appealing
  27. I am faster than 80% of all snakes
    Dwight Schrute's Avatar
    Stats
    6'1"  221 lbs.
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Southwest Florida
    Age
    41
    Posts
    12,913
    Rep Power
    7016

    Quote Originally Posted by Matt ALRI
    Bobo,

    In regard to your responses, the very last thing I'd want to do is come on to this board and piss off the admin. I'm sure you are a fantastic personal trainer, and you have obviously put in your time to get the body you've got now.

    However, your responses seemed so totally negative towards me, and I'm not sure why? I believe we agree on 90% of training issues, but maybe I'm wrong.

    Let me adress them...

    1) I didn't say that all you have to do is work harder. I said I believe most people don't work hard enough. If all you had to do was work harder then there wouldn't have been 14 more points following that one.

    2) All I said was that people don't put enough emphasis on lower body. Do you disagree? I've never seen ANYONE deadlift or clean at my gym and never seen ANYONE full squat on my gym. But I have seen hundreds of 130lb kids banging out hammer strength curls. Surely you don't disagree with this?

    3) I don't think I called these exercises "magic." What I would call them is "effective". From your post I can assume that you believe that you can achieve equal size and strength gains without using heavy compound free-weight movements. I guess we disagree here.

    4) LIke I said, more than one way to skin a cat. Will one bodypart per day per week work? Sure. Will training the same muscle group twice per week work better if done correctly? Yep. (C'mon, you know Ex Phys enoughto know that if you can present the muscles with double the training stimulus and recover enough that they'll grow better.)

    5) Whew. If you and I were married, we'd start our marital counseling on this point.

    6) You know what? I'll agree with you here. I believe full squatting is more beneficial because the amount of work involved is greater and it loads the system more than higher squats. BUT, if I could just get people in the gym to squat TO parallel I'd be a happy man. I've personally never seen it in a commercial gym. What most of these guys do shouldn't even be considered a 1/4 squat. Surely you agree that most guys don't squat low enough and if they'd all just squat to parallel, then the world would be a better place?

    7) I agree that targeting both myfibral hypertorphy (sets in the 3-6 rep range) and sarcoplasmic hypertrophy )sets in the 7-12 range) are needed for optimal muscle growth. I guess I disagree, however, that machine isolation exercises will induce more sarcoplasmic growth than free weight exercises. Even if it were equal, I'd rather kill 2,3,4, or 5 birds with one stone than having to do an isolation exercise for every single muscle in my body.

    8) You obviously misunderstood what I was saying here. What I'm saying is that doing 5 sets of 5 (or 4x10 or whatever) using the same weight for each set (and then going up in weight the next workout) is much better than doing 8 reps, 6 reps, 4 reps, 2 reps with escalating weight. The studies you quoted are concerned with "periods of increased loading" - meaning that over time the load must increase. I couldn't agree more.

    Furthermore, the studies quote that there is some definite gains to be made using eccentrics, and I agree here as well as the microtrauma on a muscle is increased with eccentrics, though one has to be careful at how he uses them as recovery becomes much tougher with eccentrics. They can and should be used in a bodybuilders repetoire, but use them sparingly.

    9) Ok, I can agree with you here a bit, but please understand that those of us who work with high school aged kids and many times freshman in college are VERY concerned over the kids size, rather than his performance. However, as much as people want to argue against them, the size and performance results are closely related.

    10) The best strength and conditioning coach in the US, maybe the world. Read my interview with him in the march issue of www.ReadtheCore.com

    11) I've addressed the eccentric issue already. However, let me say this about the studies. I love studies on Exercise science. I have been part of many. However, many of us know these are not closely regulated and are nearly ALWAYS performed on average joe college kid. The average weight of the kids in the Ecc study was 170lbs. These guys weren't exaclty highly trained athletes or bodybuilders. The hypertrophy study was done on 32 UNTRAINED men. LOL So take these things with a grain of salt.

    12) Oh come on, you know what I was saying. I understand that isometric holds and posing in front of the mirror can have benefit for hypertophy. However, I'm talking about the kid that says, "Oh man, I really felt the burn" after he completed an exercise. The fact is, "the burn, the pump, the feel" etc, have more to do with how much blood you just pumped into a muscle, not the effectiveness of the exercise. You don't believe me? Grab a pair of 10lb dumbells and do dumbell bench press for a set of 200. You'll have a huge pump, But you didn't really accomplish anything.

    13) Again, I apologize to all the women and elderly reading my comments.

    14) OK, the last one was just for fun.

    Matt

    Well now that you have cleared some of that up I will respond to those points I feel need to be clarified.

    2. I agree. MAny people do not work the lower body enough simply because it IS harder due to taxing your system both aerobically and anaerobically.

    3. Size gains yes, as many people who are just unable to perform sqats due to injury (when they previously have done so) can attest to. Strenght I tihnk is a whole other ballpark.

    4. Its not about double the training stimulus but maximal training stimulus and sometimes that easily can be achieved with larger muscle groups one every 5-7 days. The research cleary satates this as the physiological response is different for different muscle groups that have different fibral composition. I have done it with myself and MANY others. You simply are making a generalized statement that simply isn't true.

    6. True, for many people parralel is plenty enough to shift weight balances from the knees to the glut's and hammy's.

    7. Well here is where we disagree on rep ranges. From most studies and reseach (also varies with what college text you are reading) the rep range for myofib hypertrophy is usually around 6-10 reps. There are some that dip into the 4-6 rep ranges but overall the majority of data seems to have an average of around 6-8 being the most effctive. Sarcoplasmic can be anywhere from 10-16+

    8. Yes but as again there are many ways to skin a skin and those studies also correlate with increasing CON/ECC time so progressive load can achieved many ways. I agree with your explanation though and it ceratinly would be effective.

    Any I agree as well with increasign ECC time, its a matter of balance.

    9. Size and perforamnce can be correlated but tehy also could be complete opposites. I know many kids that can gain size fairly fast but loose performance especially in explosive type activities. Once again, its a balance.

    10. Well that is your opinion. I simply don't believe there is ONE best coach. That could be a debate and don't really need the Louis Simmons die hard group to come in lecture everyone.

    11. That was just one example. I can find at least 10 on trianed individuals. Studies are a guide and the guide has suggest many times the the advantages of ECC training as I mentioned above

    (mRNA translocation, gene expression, AR mRNA concentrations, subsequent increase in protein and RM rates, etc...)

    11. Once again if you break the exercises down and study the mechanisms at work, the pump CAN be a good indicator and increasing ECC times will increases bloodflow much more than any heavy weight will accomplish. This subsequent increase in bloodflow and hold can most certianly increase localized IGF-1 moreso than heavy training. You have to look at all the aspects of what you are stating. Of course some guy posing in a mirror pumping up isn't going to do much. That is common sense.

    13. Core strenght training can be achieved with the swiss ball even for a guy. Granted you won't see me on one (the male ego has to kick in as some point) but regardless its still effective.
    http://anabolicminds.com/forum/image...et/twitter.png http://anabolicminds.com/forum/image...t/facebook.png

    For answers to board issues, read the Suggestion and News forum at the bottom of the main page.
  28. I am faster than 80% of all snakes
    Dwight Schrute's Avatar
    Stats
    6'1"  221 lbs.
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Southwest Florida
    Age
    41
    Posts
    12,913
    Rep Power
    7016

    Quote Originally Posted by Magickk
    Basically what I'm saying is, I'm sure neither one of you are trying to demeen the other, but anytime when comparing BB to PL (especially between two avid members of each group) there is always that mindset of "my way is better". And that's just perfectly natural, because if you didn't think that way, you wouldn't be doing what you're doing. But in the end, the one thing we can all agree on, is the BB group is much more asthetically appealing
    This is where I disagree. There is simply isnt' "my way". I incorporate all ways. There have been programs that attempted to cover all aspects (HST come to mind first) but even then you have nurmerous variations for different goals and conditions. I would never state "my way" is the best.
    http://anabolicminds.com/forum/image...et/twitter.png http://anabolicminds.com/forum/image...t/facebook.png

    For answers to board issues, read the Suggestion and News forum at the bottom of the main page.
  29. Registered User
    cpa5oh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Age
    39
    Posts
    285
    Rep Power
    269

    Matt, I've found that, for me, alot of the "Rules" you posted are required for me to progress. I don't know about ass-to-the-grass squats. Your failure concept is interesting...I've just come to do that naturally without ever really reading that before. Compound exercises without alot of accessory stuff and training a bodypart more than once per week work for me as well.

    So don't forget about that powerlifting routine in the other thread! I'm more interested now than ever about how you'd put together a solid routine.
  30. Registered User
    glennpendlay's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Age
    43
    Posts
    4
    Rep Power
    114

    comments on matts post



    well since this thread makes reference to me and has created a bit of controversy, i thought i would comment... please take these comments for what they are, one persons opinion. i do think that i have enough experience as a coach and athlete to make my opinions count, but certainly i nor anyone else has a stranglehold on "truth" or knows everything.

    1. i agree with this point. i have trained in russia, at the olympic sports complex in moscow, and can vouch for how hard they train. but by training "hard" i dont mean forced reps or things like that... just lots of basics, lots of basic hard work. a set of 5 hard reps on the squat, even if you end the set with a rep or two left in you, is harder than a set of curls to failure, at least in my opinion.

    2. again i agree. training the legs and back as hard as the chest and arms, is, in my opinion, important whether you want to to grow a little or a lot, whether you really want to be lean, or whether you dont care about looks. many people DONT put the same effort into say, pullups and rows that they do into benches and flys. i think this is a mistake for just about all who do it.

    3. basic, compound exercises have always worked best for me and anyone i have trained. i dont discount the worth of every isolation exercise, but i dont think they should make up the bulk of a program, i cant think of a goal in the weightroom that would be better served by using only isolation exercises.

    4. training frequency is a controversial topic. depending on how you train, your age and condition, your drug usage, etc, almost any frequency can be made to work, and likewise almost any frequency can be made to fail. this having been said, however, i feel that giving a muscle group stimulation 2-3 times a week is usually best. you might not train it equally hard each session, but still train it. if you use the types of exercises matt mentioned, its hard not to give most of ;your muscle groups at least some stimulation each time you are in the gym.

    5. im not a fan of training to failure.

    6. i do think that deeper squats are better for most people. we could argue about parrallel vs. below parrallel, but the fact is that most people i see in commercial gyms, if they do squats, are doing little bitty range of motion things that couldnt really be called squats. i doubt anyone would argue that this is the best way to go. for most people, squats are a great exercise if done correctly.

    7. again, i agree that for most people, compound exercises should make up the bulk of the program. there are too many reasons why to list.

    8. i agree with this, i have been a proponent of 5 sets of 5 for a long time. it just seems to work really well if you want to gain muscle.

    9. thats a quote from me so i have to agree... many of the people who dont make progress in the weightroom dont do so because they are trying to do EVERY exercise, hit EVERY muscle from EVERY angle... if you are really training hard you simply CANT do 15 exercises in a workout. and yes, no matter what your goals, i do think that training hard is neccessary.

    10. again, a quote from me so i cant disagree. young kids who want to get big but never quite get there seem to share some characteristics...

    11. TUT is, in my opinion, a variable that isnt worth manipulating directly, since it gets manipulated naturally by the differing sets and reps of a normal program. if you do 3 sets of 5 at a normal rep speed, and want more TUT, then do 4 or 5 sets instead.

    12. again i agree. i dont think a burn or a pump is the end all of progress indicators... certainly most people encounter these things if they train, but the people who use them as the sole criteria for a "successfull" workout are, in my opinion, misguided. and yes, i think there are quite a lot of those people.

    13. i agree that most people pay too much attention to DOMS. like a good pump, getting DOMS doesnt mean you had a successfull workout, and not getting DOMS doesnt mean you had a bad workout.

    14. if you lift weights overhead, and you squat, you get a core workout. if you train exercises like these heavy and hard, you get quite a good core workout. not everyone wants to be a good deadlifter or squatter, but ive never seen someone good at these lifts who didnt have a lot of abdominal and lower back muslce and strength. if you want a good strong core, doing these types of exercises is a good step towards getting one.

    15. ill agree about the traits of a good gym.
  31. Registered User
    Matt ALRI's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Age
    35
    Posts
    39
    Rep Power
    131

    Wow. Didn't expect to see you here. Thanks for pulling me out of the mire.

    BTW, where are my shoes you smelly bastard? :-)

    Matt
  32. Registered User
    Matt ALRI's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Age
    35
    Posts
    39
    Rep Power
    131

    Glenn,

    Are there other things I left out that you might add?

    Matt

    ps - The interview with Rip is going awesome. You'll blush like a little girl when you read it. There is a quote in there about what happens when a kid truly follows his program that is so incredible and inspiring. I wanted to put it in this thread but decided I better wait until the article comes out.
  33. I am faster than 80% of all snakes
    Dwight Schrute's Avatar
    Stats
    6'1"  221 lbs.
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Southwest Florida
    Age
    41
    Posts
    12,913
    Rep Power
    7016

    I appreciate him coming and defending his position (not at all surprised) but its still opinion and everyone knows the saying that goes along with that. As far as strength training many of the points are valid but I would rather see a scientific explanation rather than opinion if you want to express certain "rules".

    In general Matt, the way this board operates for the most part is that if you have an opinion, taht is fine but if you want to state "rules" on what works for everyone you need to come to the table with evidence. Experience certainly helps but it certainly is not conclusive given too amny facors to deal with.
    http://anabolicminds.com/forum/image...et/twitter.png http://anabolicminds.com/forum/image...t/facebook.png

    For answers to board issues, read the Suggestion and News forum at the bottom of the main page.
  34. Registered User
    ryansm's Avatar
    Stats
    6'2"  305 lbs.
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    8,142
    Rep Power
    22025

    Quote Originally Posted by glennpendlay

    well since this thread makes reference to me and has created a bit of controversy, i thought i would comment... please take these comments for what they are, one persons opinion. i do think that i have enough experience as a coach and athlete to make my opinions count, but certainly i nor anyone else has a stranglehold on "truth" or knows everything.

    1. i agree with this point. i have trained in russia, at the olympic sports complex in moscow, and can vouch for how hard they train. but by training "hard" i dont mean forced reps or things like that... just lots of basics, lots of basic hard work. a set of 5 hard reps on the squat, even if you end the set with a rep or two left in you, is harder than a set of curls to failure, at least in my opinion.

    2. again i agree. training the legs and back as hard as the chest and arms, is, in my opinion, important whether you want to to grow a little or a lot, whether you really want to be lean, or whether you dont care about looks. many people DONT put the same effort into say, pullups and rows that they do into benches and flys. i think this is a mistake for just about all who do it.

    3. basic, compound exercises have always worked best for me and anyone i have trained. i dont discount the worth of every isolation exercise, but i dont think they should make up the bulk of a program, i cant think of a goal in the weightroom that would be better served by using only isolation exercises.

    4. training frequency is a controversial topic. depending on how you train, your age and condition, your drug usage, etc, almost any frequency can be made to work, and likewise almost any frequency can be made to fail. this having been said, however, i feel that giving a muscle group stimulation 2-3 times a week is usually best. you might not train it equally hard each session, but still train it. if you use the types of exercises matt mentioned, its hard not to give most of ;your muscle groups at least some stimulation each time you are in the gym.

    5. im not a fan of training to failure.

    6. i do think that deeper squats are better for most people. we could argue about parrallel vs. below parrallel, but the fact is that most people i see in commercial gyms, if they do squats, are doing little bitty range of motion things that couldnt really be called squats. i doubt anyone would argue that this is the best way to go. for most people, squats are a great exercise if done correctly.

    7. again, i agree that for most people, compound exercises should make up the bulk of the program. there are too many reasons why to list.

    8. i agree with this, i have been a proponent of 5 sets of 5 for a long time. it just seems to work really well if you want to gain muscle.

    9. thats a quote from me so i have to agree... many of the people who dont make progress in the weightroom dont do so because they are trying to do EVERY exercise, hit EVERY muscle from EVERY angle... if you are really training hard you simply CANT do 15 exercises in a workout. and yes, no matter what your goals, i do think that training hard is neccessary.

    10. again, a quote from me so i cant disagree. young kids who want to get big but never quite get there seem to share some characteristics...

    11. TUT is, in my opinion, a variable that isnt worth manipulating directly, since it gets manipulated naturally by the differing sets and reps of a normal program. if you do 3 sets of 5 at a normal rep speed, and want more TUT, then do 4 or 5 sets instead.

    12. again i agree. i dont think a burn or a pump is the end all of progress indicators... certainly most people encounter these things if they train, but the people who use them as the sole criteria for a "successfull" workout are, in my opinion, misguided. and yes, i think there are quite a lot of those people.

    13. i agree that most people pay too much attention to DOMS. like a good pump, getting DOMS doesnt mean you had a successfull workout, and not getting DOMS doesnt mean you had a bad workout.

    14. if you lift weights overhead, and you squat, you get a core workout. if you train exercises like these heavy and hard, you get quite a good core workout. not everyone wants to be a good deadlifter or squatter, but ive never seen someone good at these lifts who didnt have a lot of abdominal and lower back muslce and strength. if you want a good strong core, doing these types of exercises is a good step towards getting one.

    15. ill agree about the traits of a good gym.
    Did you train Olympic weightlifting? I am currently training with a former olympian, actually a couple, and also with National, and World level athletes. Very much different from powerlifting, and certainly a different world to BB'ing.

  35. I am faster than 80% of all snakes
    Dwight Schrute's Avatar
    Stats
    6'1"  221 lbs.
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Southwest Florida
    Age
    41
    Posts
    12,913
    Rep Power
    7016

    Quote Originally Posted by glennpendlay

    well since this thread makes reference to me and has created a bit of controversy, i thought i would comment... please take these comments for what they are, one persons opinion. i do think that i have enough experience as a coach and athlete to make my opinions count, but certainly i nor anyone else has a stranglehold on "truth" or knows everything.



    3. basic, compound exercises have always worked best for me and anyone i have trained. i dont discount the worth of every isolation exercise, but i dont think they should make up the bulk of a program, i cant think of a goal in the weightroom that would be better served by using only isolation exercises.

    4. training frequency is a controversial topic. depending on how you train, your age and condition, your drug usage, etc, almost any frequency can be made to work, and likewise almost any frequency can be made to fail. this having been said, however, i feel that giving a muscle group stimulation 2-3 times a week is usually best. you might not train it equally hard each session, but still train it. if you use the types of exercises matt mentioned, its hard not to give most of ;your muscle groups at least some stimulation each time you are in the gym.


    7. again, i agree that for most people, compound exercises should make up the bulk of the program. there are too many reasons why to list.



    11. TUT is, in my opinion, a variable that isnt worth manipulating directly, since it gets manipulated naturally by the differing sets and reps of a normal program. if you do 3 sets of 5 at a normal rep speed, and want more TUT, then do 4 or 5 sets instead.

    12. again i agree. i dont think a burn or a pump is the end all of progress indicators... certainly most people encounter these things if they train, but the people who use them as the sole criteria for a "successfull" workout are, in my opinion, misguided. and yes, i think there are quite a lot of those people.

    13. i agree that most people pay too much attention to DOMS. like a good pump, getting DOMS doesnt mean you had a successfull workout, and not getting DOMS doesnt mean you had a bad workout.

    14. if you lift weights overhead, and you squat, you get a core workout. if you train exercises like these heavy and hard, you get quite a good core workout. not everyone wants to be a good deadlifter or squatter, but ive never seen someone good at these lifts who didnt have a lot of abdominal and lower back muslce and strength. if you want a good strong core, doing these types of exercises is a good step towards getting one.

    15. ill agree about the traits of a good gym.


    1. This depends on the goal. For someone looking for symmetry and asthetic look of a bodybuilder then the bulk of a program shouldn't include many exercies that overstimulate the core. This doens't mean eliminate them at all, just use them for their purpose as well as other types of exercises.

    2. Once again, this simply depends on what type of training, goal and fibral makeup you have. Yo can easily train a bodypart once/week DIRECTLY while indirectly trianing them again through multiple compound exercises. Its is almost impossible to strictly train a body part only once DIRECTLY/INCDIRECTLY. BUt I achieve results in MANY people with only trianing them once per week directly.

    3. I don't agree at all and looking at the result along with results it most certainly does not have to be the bulk of a program at all.

    4. If you want the full papers on this subject I would gladly send them to you. The increase in TUT from an increased ECC action has been widely documented. Just adding volume with the same fast CON/ECC time is not the same thing. I am surprised you would even state something like that.

    5. If anyone gauges a workout by the "pump" then they do have a problem but it certainly can be a factor in determing results if you primary focus is slower ECC actions.

    6. That is because DOMS as a whole is an area in which research is all over the board. There simply isn't one answer or conclusion.

    7. As Is aid earlier, there are many ways at increasing core strenght that are just as effective as squats and deadlifts.
    http://anabolicminds.com/forum/image...et/twitter.png http://anabolicminds.com/forum/image...t/facebook.png

    For answers to board issues, read the Suggestion and News forum at the bottom of the main page.
  36. I am faster than 80% of all snakes
    Dwight Schrute's Avatar
    Stats
    6'1"  221 lbs.
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Southwest Florida
    Age
    41
    Posts
    12,913
    Rep Power
    7016

    Quote Originally Posted by Bobo
    I appreciate him coming and defending his position (not at all surprised) but its still opinion and everyone knows the saying that goes along with that. As far as strength training many of the points are valid but I would rather see a scientific explanation rather than opinion if you want to express certain "rules".

    In general Matt, the way this board operates for the most part is that if you have an opinion, taht is fine but if you want to state "rules" on what works for everyone you need to come to the table with evidence. Experience certainly helps but it certainly is not conclusive given too amny facors to deal with.
    To clarify, I don't want to sound negative but its kind of a pet peeve if mine for people to explain things from a scientific vantage point.

    You seem to value experience yet discount mine (at least it seems this way). I base my opinions on what is the evidence suggests then how it transfers to real world results. I don't just quote studies and claim proof. I specifially work with bodybuilders and my recommendations are solely for this area. I wouldn't sit here and tell you what the best PL'ing program because I simply do not put enough time in that area so it does get frustrating when Strength and Condition coaches come in here and tell me what works in MY area. You do not work with bodybuilders on a competitive levels. You do not design program around specific goals such as symmetry and proportion while maximizing gains. I could easily pack on more lbs doing ALL compund exercises because you would increasing core size much more than most bodybuilder want. The people I trian don't WANT a thick waist and aren't really concerned about strenght. The want strict LBM that give them better proportion. Its not quantity, but quality. I HAVE to look at things from a more specific vantage point than you do.
    http://anabolicminds.com/forum/image...et/twitter.png http://anabolicminds.com/forum/image...t/facebook.png

    For answers to board issues, read the Suggestion and News forum at the bottom of the main page.
  37. Registered User
    glennpendlay's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Age
    43
    Posts
    4
    Rep Power
    114

    no argument was neccessary


    Bobo said [To clarify, I don't want to sound negative but its kind of a pet peeve if mine for people to explain things from a scientific vantage point.]

    reply... well, i can, if needed, go the science route. believe it or not, i have a masters degree in ex phys, was a faculty member at a university with a pretty good kinesiology dept, have taught things from graduate level ex phys to cardiac physiology, and have done extensive research on several topics related to gaining strength and size... and no i dont mean the layman definition of "research" (reading internet boards and talking to friends), but actuall research at a university, which involves using human subjects, drawing blood, computing statistics, and then sending the whole thing to a review board to hopefully get published in a peer reviewed journal and become one of those "articles" that you offered to send me. now, im not saying this to brag or put you down at all, but so that you will understand that i am not operating from a position of no knowledge of physiology or science. the problem with using studies and science in a discussion like this is that its all open to interpretation, there are problems with any study, and any arguement about methods usually turns into an article about whether or not a study was valid... so nothing gets solved.



    Bobo said [You seem to value experience yet discount mine (at least it seems this way).]

    reply... i dont think i have done that. what i think i did was state a few of my opinions, or rather my agreement with anothers opinions... and prefaced the whole thing with an emphasis that it was in fact just my opinion. im well aware of the vast amount of ways there are to train with weights, and the vast amount of ways in which people have made progress. the simple fact is that my experience has led me to believe that a certain way is best for most people. this is my opinion, however, anyone who knows me knows that i always tell people to do what works. if someone were to tell me they were doing one set of leg extensions and one set of leg curls to failure every 14 days and their legs were growing like crazy, and that that was in fact their goal, for the legs to get bigger (and not neccessarily to get stronger) then i would say, stick to it till it stops working. anything that works is good. i just have a pretty strong opinion on what is most likely to work, as you seem to. i think that either of us can safely state their own opinion without discounting anothers opinion.


    Bobo said [I could easily pack on more lbs doing ALL compund exercises because you would increasing core size much more than most bodybuilder want. The people I trian don't WANT a thick waist and aren't really concerned about strenght. The want strict LBM that give them better proportion. Its not quantity, but quality. I HAVE to look at things from a more specific vantage point than you do.]

    reply... i think this is the heart of the matter. i guess we basically agree that you can get bigger, faster, with compound exercises, assuming i read your reply correctly. i know many 700 or 800 squatters, and a couple of 900-1000 squatters, and ive never really seen anyone who got a waist that was so packed with muscle as to be aesthetically unpleasing. yeah, there are some fat powerlifters, but fat has nothing to do with abs or with whether you train the squat or leg extension. i also know a lot of weightlifters, who squat 3 or 4 days a week, and have never seen one who has so much abdominal muscle that it would be considered unpleasing to the eye. most bodybuilders i have seen have quite a bit of ab muscle. in fact, just like the biceps or lats, they have more hypertrophy of the abs than most strength athletes.

    if you have honest to god discovered a way to build abdominal muscle so quickly and easily as to become displeasing to the eye, i would like very badly to know about it!
  38. I am faster than 80% of all snakes
    Dwight Schrute's Avatar
    Stats
    6'1"  221 lbs.
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Southwest Florida
    Age
    41
    Posts
    12,913
    Rep Power
    7016

    Quote Originally Posted by glennpendlay
    Bobo said [To clarify, I don't want to sound negative but its kind of a pet peeve if mine for people to explain things from a scientific vantage point.]

    reply... well, i can, if needed, go the science route. believe it or not, i have a masters degree in ex phys, was a faculty member at a university with a pretty good kinesiology dept, have taught things from graduate level ex phys to cardiac physiology, and have done extensive research on several topics related to gaining strength and size... and no i dont mean the layman definition of "research" (reading internet boards and talking to friends), but actuall research at a university, which involves using human subjects, drawing blood, computing statistics, and then sending the whole thing to a review board to hopefully get published in a peer reviewed journal and become one of those "articles" that you offered to send me. now, im not saying this to brag or put you down at all, but so that you will understand that i am not operating from a position of no knowledge of physiology or science. the problem with using studies and science in a discussion like this is that its all open to interpretation, there are problems with any study, and any arguement about methods usually turns into an article about whether or not a study was valid... so nothing gets solved.



    Bobo said [You seem to value experience yet discount mine (at least it seems this way).]

    reply... i dont think i have done that. what i think i did was state a few of my opinions, or rather my agreement with anothers opinions... and prefaced the whole thing with an emphasis that it was in fact just my opinion. im well aware of the vast amount of ways there are to train with weights, and the vast amount of ways in which people have made progress. the simple fact is that my experience has led me to believe that a certain way is best for most people. this is my opinion, however, anyone who knows me knows that i always tell people to do what works. if someone were to tell me they were doing one set of leg extensions and one set of leg curls to failure every 14 days and their legs were growing like crazy, and that that was in fact their goal, for the legs to get bigger (and not neccessarily to get stronger) then i would say, stick to it till it stops working. anything that works is good. i just have a pretty strong opinion on what is most likely to work, as you seem to. i think that either of us can safely state their own opinion without discounting anothers opinion.


    Bobo said [I could easily pack on more lbs doing ALL compund exercises because you would increasing core size much more than most bodybuilder want. The people I trian don't WANT a thick waist and aren't really concerned about strenght. The want strict LBM that give them better proportion. Its not quantity, but quality. I HAVE to look at things from a more specific vantage point than you do.]

    reply... i think this is the heart of the matter. i guess we basically agree that you can get bigger, faster, with compound exercises, assuming i read your reply correctly. i know many 700 or 800 squatters, and a couple of 900-1000 squatters, and ive never really seen anyone who got a waist that was so packed with muscle as to be aesthetically unpleasing. yeah, there are some fat powerlifters, but fat has nothing to do with abs or with whether you train the squat or leg extension. i also know a lot of weightlifters, who squat 3 or 4 days a week, and have never seen one who has so much abdominal muscle that it would be considered unpleasing to the eye. most bodybuilders i have seen have quite a bit of ab muscle. in fact, just like the biceps or lats, they have more hypertrophy of the abs than most strength athletes.

    if you have honest to god discovered a way to build abdominal muscle so quickly and easily as to become displeasing to the eye, i would like very badly to know about it!

    1. Glenn I have read your bio and that is why I asked for the clarification. I, like you, have studied this in a formal setting both at the undergrad and grad level. So if you want to get into this in a more detailed level we most certainly can. Please don't presume my education is acquired from the message board I own. You can certainly ask Author as well. If you have scientific evidence to go along with your quotes then please do so. If you want those papers that were published in the JOP then I will get them sent to you.

    2. I was talking more to Matt than you.

    3. Glen, that has to do more with the use of growth factors and enlarging of the intestinal track that actual ab muscle. The fact of the matter is that the majority of powerlifters develop more in and around the core BECAUSE of their routine. Once again its quality, not quantitiy. Where did I ever say I could build abdominal muscle faster? I said the result of extensive core work is a larger midsection resulting is more overall growth than someone not incorportain extensive core routines. Bodybuilder in general don't want 36+ inch waist. Asthetically pleasing is one thing. Winning competitions is another. I tihnk for someone to have "rules" about trianing that encompass bodybuilders they should have at least trained them.
    http://anabolicminds.com/forum/image...et/twitter.png http://anabolicminds.com/forum/image...t/facebook.png

    For answers to board issues, read the Suggestion and News forum at the bottom of the main page.
  39. CDB
    CDB is offline
    Registered User
    CDB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Age
    38
    Posts
    4,545
    Rep Power
    2674

    Bottom line is any routine that's not completely half assed is going to work to some extent. Plus you guys have two very different goals when it comes to training people, as Bobo expressed. And you've both got experience on all levels to back yourselves up, including studies I'm sure.

    So to hell with this. Let's arm wrestle!
  40. Registered User
    glennpendlay's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Age
    43
    Posts
    4
    Rep Power
    114

    all this is worth exactly what you paid for it...


    1. i think maybe everyone is taking offense when none is intended. for example, i certainly was NOT trying to imply that you got your knowledge reading this board. what i was saying was that when i say i have "studied" something, i mean a certain thing. no offense intended.

    2. see above, apparently same thing applies!

    3. i am familiar with the "growth factors" and how they affect the stomach. my point was that in training and knowing a lot of strong people, i havnt ran into anyone ever who had their stomach hypertrophy from squats and deadlifts so much that it would be a detriment to their "symmetry". my comment about your ability to build ab muscle was a little tongue in cheek because you had commented on those types of exercises bulking up the waist. i wont argue that squats build the abs, i agree wholeheartedly with that, i just dont see them doing it to a degree that would be disagreeable to most people.

    look, let me be totally honest with you, i am NOT a bodybuilder, nor do i train bodybuilders, or wish to. HOWEVER, it is my belief that the vast majority of people who train with weights (at least the men) wish to become stronger and/or have bigger muscles, that most of these people will never compete in bodybuilding, and that most of these people would reach their goals quicker, or get closer to their goals if they worry mostly about building muscle and less about "shape and symmetry". show me a 150lb teenager who is more concerned about using concentration curls to get a better "peak" on his bicep than he is worried about increasing the weight on the bar during squats and bench presses and i will wager that this is a guy who is not likely to ever weigh 200 muscular pounds and be happy with his progress.

    it is easy, very very easy, to disagree with anything anyone ever says, by thinking of one particular situation that is the exception to the rule, or pointing to one study that disagrees. the fact is, i think matts "rules" apply pretty well to the average guy who wants to get bigger and stronger. do they apply to the elite in any sport? the competitive bodybuilder who is pumped full of "growth factors"? no, maybe not. do they apply to national level olympic weightlifters? no, they train with way more frequency than he, or i for that matter, would ever recomend for the average gym rat.

    this shouldnt be an argument. i doubt we disagree as much as it would appear. its always easy and tempting to speak in absolutes even when your not really thinking in absolutes, i guess i for one just assume that everyone knows that a certain thing isnt ideal for EVERYONE.
  •   

      
     

Similar Forum Threads

  1. SHR 11/9 New Rules Of Dating PLUS Dinosaur Body Weight Training
    By triceptor in forum Super Human Radio
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 11-09-2011, 07:48 AM
  2. Replies: 11
    Last Post: 07-02-2007, 01:55 PM
  3. Replies: 60
    Last Post: 09-19-2006, 05:26 PM
  4. Matt's 15 rules
    By Joe_Ice in forum General Chat
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: 01-29-2006, 02:01 PM
  5. Matt's 15 rules
    By Joe_Ice in forum Exercise Science
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 01-28-2006, 08:10 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Log in

Log in