Anyone Believe in Cross-Training?

Training Powerlifting
21

[quote]Sloth wrote:
The average joe isn’t going to use nowhere near the level of drugs needed to look anything remotely like Kevin Levrone used to. What is the point of training as if you’re going to ever look like him, if you’re a lifetime natural.

I consider myself the average joe. I’m not aiming to compete in any sports or beauty pageants (bodybuilding). I want a blend of power, relative strength, anaerobic/aerobic endurance, while trying to maintain long term healthy joints. Copying bodybuilder, powerlifting, or marathon running routines is the last thing I want, as I don’t want specificity. I’d rather follow some of the MMA strength and conditioning routines out there. Heck, blend in some strongman training for the odd objects. I want a good mixture of strength/fitness qualities.
[/quote]

The point of training like Kevin Levrone is to change your appearance in the shortest amount of time possible.

Where a person starts and where they’d like to end up is irrelevant.

You have two points, A and B. The shortest path between them will ALWAYS be a straight line. And bodybuilding style training represents that line in regards to appearance goals.

I know that people are very fond of making drug analogies with pro bodybuilders. But I can turn that around and apply it to other sports:

What’s the point of training like a powerlifter if you’re never going to squat 1,000?
What’s the point of training like an Olympic lifter if you will never move as much weight as the top competitors?
What’s the point of training like a football pro when you’ll never be in the NFL?

You say you want a combination of power, relative strength, anaerobic/aerobic endurance, and mobility.

What you need to do is prioritize those goals realistically. Realize that when you say you want “power”, you are not looking for the level of power that a pro athlete would need. Same with relative strength and endurance.

You have to realize that all training paradigms overlap at the most basic level. That is, as a beginner, you WILL develop strength, power, endurance, mobility, etc, concurrently…but these gains will not last forever.

If you ever want to advance beyond a basic level of proficiency in any of these areas, you will need to specialize. It’s that simple.

And my suggestion to people like you would be to specialize in hypertrophy, because that is the only area that you will truly ever use. Who wouldn’t want to develop their physique as much as their genetics allowed? My theory is that the only reason why people don’t do it is because they have no idea what’s possible. They have no idea that you can really look “that good” without drugs or incredible genetics. All it takes is specialization in hypertrophy.

22

As much of a philosophical objection as I have to Nominal Prospect’s decidedly effeminate preference for cosmetics over performance, he is right about Stoitsev. The dude would be muscular and ripped if he never touched a weight in his life. (He also recently failed a test for anabolics by the way.)

23

[quote]Nominal Prospect wrote:
I already have won it. Nobody is going to refute the law of specificity. It’s simply impossible.

Elite athletes do non-specific training as an adjunct to their highly-specialized, formal training routines. The delineation is very clear.

Plus, it’s hardly “non-specific”, upon closer examination. If you have an injury, you HAVE to do some rehab work. That’s not “cross-training”. Cross-training is doing something unrelated to your goals for no particular reason. An athlete has a legitimate reason to do mobility and activation work. An average joe has no legitimate reason to be doing sports-specific drills.

You don’t have to agree with me about which particular modality is “best” for the most people, but who would seriously deny that specialization trumps cross training in its ability to bring about measurable results?[/quote]

With all due respect, I took your initial post to imply that there was no value in doing anything other than your specific sport movements.

I think we agree that one will improve more when they focus on sports specific training.

24

[quote]Nominal Prospect wrote:
What you need to do is prioritize those goals realistically. Realize that when you say you want “power”, you are not looking for the level of power that a pro athlete would need. Same with relative strength and endurance.

You have to realize that all training paradigms overlap at the most basic level. That is, as a beginner, you WILL develop strength, power, endurance, mobility, etc, concurrently…but these gains will not last forever.

If you ever want to advance beyond a basic level of proficiency in any of these areas, you will need to specialize. It’s that simple. [/quote]

Dude, aren’t we talking about the average joe, like me? I’m NOT aiming to have the greatest bench press I can possibly have. I will never compete in a bench press/powerlifting meet. And I’m most definitely not training so my arms might want day look like Mr. Olympia’s.

I want the greatest amount of strength I can have in, let’s say, the horizontal push movement (not just lying flat on my back), while still working endurance qualities with complexes, tabatas, medleys, or whatnot. Or, working on explosive qualities with jumps, medicine balls, sprints, or whatever. The last, very last, kind of training I want to do is “isolation” focused. I generally save that for some prehab work for my shoulders and ankles.

You’re assuming the average joe should be shuttled off into training for some specific event, sport, or quality. Why? Why not be good (not the best) in displaying a wider range of strength and other fitness/atheletic qualities?

25

I think that most guys would be embarrassed to admit that their primary goals are appearance oriented. Nobody wants to come right out and say it. They toss in the obligatory compounds with their isolation training. Their progress stalls because they are stuck between two opposing goals. They cannot move closer to one without abandoning the other. So they just flounder.

Sloth, anyone who works out on a regular basis (no matter the protocol they use) is probably going to be stronger, faster, more flexible, and have more endurance than the average person who doesn’t train.

So, my question is, isn’t that enough for you? Why do you feel the need to do any dedicated strength or endurance work? What’s the point - you can develop a basic level of strength and endurance by training as a bodybuilder. Pro bodybuilders are often very flexible and at least somewhat strong and have decent cardio - not compared to top athletes in those respective sports, but to the average person.

Why are you concerned with being able to press as much as you can. Isn’t a 225 bench and 350 DL enough? Again, it’s more than the majority of the population. Anything over that will constitute “specialization” and thereby diminish your gains in other areas.

26

How many bodybuilders train using only isolation exercises and light weight?

27

[quote]Nominal Prospect wrote:

What’s the point of training like a powerlifter if you’re never going to squat 1,000?
What’s the point of training like an Olympic lifter if you will never move as much weight as the top competitors?
What’s the point of training like a football pro when you’ll never be in the NFL?
[/quote]

That’s my point! Why would I train for any specific event/sport/look? I don’t! I simply train for a blend of qualities.

And my suggestion to people like you would be to specialize in hypertrophy, because that is the only area that you will truly ever use. [/quote]

What?! Prehab work doesn’t safeguard my shoulders and ankles? Seems to be working pretty good, and I’ve had some issues in the past. What if I go play some basketball, football, or softball? What if I want the feeling of being able to know I can jump respectively, change direction, stop, run fast or for some distance, if the need ever arrived? What if I’m more concerned with being able to do a variety of heavy tasks (to the untrained eye) repetively without feeling like I’m going to go into cardiac arrest? I don’t train to look good in a tank top. The workload I use and my nutrional habits seem to take care of that.

28

[quote]JoeG254 wrote:
How many bodybuilders train using only isolation exercises and light weight?[/quote]

Depends on what you mean by light. Generally, the optimal rep range for hypertrophy is as low as 6 and as high as 25.

<5 reps stresses the bone structure more than the musculature.

But at the end of the day, anything that breaks down the muscle works. You do not leave the gym until the target muscles have been completely exhausted, plain and simple.

Sloth, you have a response on the last page.

[quote]
You’re assuming the average joe should be shuttled off into training for some specific event, sport, or quality. Why? Why not be good (not the best) in displaying a wider range of strength and other fitness/atheletic qualities? [/quote]

Yeah, I’m assuming that the average joe or jane is best off focusing on hypertrophy, and I’ve given my reasons for that already.

You can be good, you can be the best, or you can simply be mediocre. Too often, I’ve seen cross-training result in being mediocre (not good) rather than good (not the best).

29

Light to me is using pump sets and not trying to get stronger in whatever rep range you’re training in.

30

[quote]JoeG254 wrote:
Light to me is using pump sets and not trying to get stronger in whatever rep range you’re training in.[/quote]

It’s impossible not to get stronger in whatever rep range you use simply by training regularly. Whether you train in the 5 or 20 rep range, you’ll get stronger (be able to use more weight) in each respective case with continued training.

And if, by “pump sets”, you mean isolating and going to exhaustion, this is the optimal way of eliciting hypertrophy. The pump is useful because it tells you exactly which muscle groups you are hitting. It helps you isolate better. Besides that, fluid hypertrophy results in much greater size gains that contractile hypertrophy.

Getting stronger in a certain rep range is entirely a function of training in that rep range on a consistent basis. How else would it happen? lol.

There is strength carryover from low to high ranges, but that is really besides the point.

31

[quote]Nominal Prospect wrote:
JoeG254 wrote:
How many bodybuilders train using only isolation exercises and light weight?

Depends on what you mean by light. Generally, the optimal rep range for hypertrophy is as low as 6 and as high as 25.

<5 reps stresses the bone structure more than the musculature.

But at the end of the day, anything that breaks down the muscle works. You do not leave the gym until the target muscles have been completely exhausted, plain and simple.

Sloth, you have a response on the last page.[/quote]

Because I train like I move. There are many times I run, jump, kick, throw, lift, etc. I want to do those things with a respectible level of power, strength, and endurance. I don’t curl that heavy object on the floor, aiming to use only my biceps while not involving my hips and knees. I won’t lateral raise that same weight up to shoulder height, I’ll clean it up. If if I need to place it overhead? It’ll probably look like a push press. I don’t worry if I’m isolating my quads when I kick. Or, that I’m not feeling my chest muscles pump up when I punch or throw.

32

[quote]Sloth wrote:
Nominal Prospect wrote:
JoeG254 wrote:
How many bodybuilders train using only isolation exercises and light weight?

Depends on what you mean by light. Generally, the optimal rep range for hypertrophy is as low as 6 and as high as 25.

<5 reps stresses the bone structure more than the musculature.

But at the end of the day, anything that breaks down the muscle works. You do not leave the gym until the target muscles have been completely exhausted, plain and simple.

Sloth, you have a response on the last page.

Because I train like I move. There are times I run, jump, kick, throw, lift, etc. I want to do those things with a respectible level of power, strength, and endurance. I don’t curl that heavy object on the floor, aiming to use only my biceps while not involving my hips and knees. I won’t lateral raise that same weight up to shoulder height, I’ll clean it up. If if I need to place it overhead? It’ll probably look like a push press.

[/quote]

Well, okay dude. Good luck with that. All I tell you is that, once in your life, you should try a dedicated bodybuilding routine according to the principles of isolation and exhaustion.

You may find you enjoy looking like you can lift a ton more than actually being able to do it. Especially as you get older, and your joints no longer allow you to move the poundages that your muscles are capable of.

33

[quote]Nominal Prospect wrote:
JoeG254 wrote:
Light to me is using pump sets and not trying to get stronger in whatever rep range you’re training in.

It’s impossible not to get stronger in whatever rep range you use simply by training regularly. Whether you train in the 5 or 20 rep range, you’ll get stronger (be able to use more weight) in each respective case with continued training.

And if, by “pump sets”, you mean isolating and going to exhaustion, this is the optimal way of eliciting hypertrophy. The pump is useful because it tells you exactly which muscle groups you are hitting. It helps you isolate better. Besides that, fluid hypertrophy results in much greater size gains that contractile hypertrophy.

Getting stronger in a certain rep range is entirely a function of training in that rep range on a consistent basis. How else would it happen? lol.

There is strength carryover from low to high ranges, but that is really besides the point.[/quote]

So then why are you talking about strength being useless for hypertrophy. A pump may be useful in telling you what muscles are working but you can get a pump from curling a soup can, I doubt that’s doing much to make your muscles bigger.

34

[quote]JoeG254 wrote:
So then why are you talking about strength being useless for hypertrophy. A pump may be useful in telling you what muscles are working but you can get a pump from curling a soup can, I doubt that’s doing much to make your muscles bigger.[/quote]

Dude, anything that isolates and exhausts results in hypertrophy.

Does a soup can curl isolate? Check.

The pump results from the isolation.

Does a soup can curl exhaust? Fail.

1/2 = no good
Very simple formula. There is nothing else to consider besides isolation and exhaustion.

35

Ok so if you are getting stronger, and using more weight to exhaust your muscles then that seems to contradict your theory that you don’t need to get stronger to get bigger, and please tell me what successful bodybuilders use only isolation exercises. Maybe I’m biased because I’m one of those <5’8" midgets of Eastern European heritage =/

36

[quote]Nominal Prospect wrote:

Well, okay dude. Good luck with that. All I tell you is that, once in your life, you should try a dedicated bodybuilding routine according to the principles of isolation and exhaustion.

You may find you enjoy looking like you can lift a ton more than actually being able to do it. Especially as you get older, and your joints no longer allow you to move the poundages that your muscles are capable of.[/quote]

Not everyone wants to be a bodybuilder, and having a strength to weight ratio at a lighter mass is a desirable goal for some.

So age takes it toll on the body, doesn’t mean you can’t still lift heavy, you just have to periodize and monitor the volume you do. There is a 60 year old in my gym that benches over 330 in pling with no shirt or wraps, while his son can deadlift 485 single ply at a bw of 160-165lbs. If your 60 and can even bench 200lbs, thats impressive to me to say the least.

And don’t take this post as a downer to bodybuilding, because its fine to do if thats what you want.

37

I really don’t understand what your beef is… First you’re against crossfit and the general crowd, then you’re against strength athletes (and strength altogether), and now you’re against anything that doesn’t isolate and exhaust (whatever that means…)??

I think you had a bad day and had to vent, because really… I don’t think it matters that much to you what other people are doing or believing, just as much as it (most probably) doesn’t matter to anyone else on this thread. Do your thing and let others do theirs, everybody’s happy!!

38

[quote]Nominal Prospect wrote:

Stop posting 5’9 hairy midgets from Bulgaria.[/quote]

Funny, didn’t know that 5’9" is apparently midget height, and Stoitsov doesn’t exactly look shaggy.

39

Everybody stop feeding the troll…now.

40

Isolation and Exhaustion only?

I would argue Progression to be as, if not more, important than those.

You guys are all arguing the same thing, too. A trainee with a low-level of preparation can rapidly advance all qualities simultaneously.

As an athlete’s level of preparation rises, so too does the need for specificity.

Conjugate vs. Block systems. When athletes stopped advancing with the conjugate system, they began to do blocks of training with the focus on a single quality.