Anyone Believe in Cross-Training?

Training Powerlifting
141

[quote]Nominal Prospect wrote:
Powerlifting isn’t applicable to real world strength. The weight is simply too heavy, far and above anything that you would ever encounter in a real situation.
[/quote]

I really don’t understand the point you are making here. I do daily work on a farm and the fact that I train like a powerlifter/strongman has been very advantageous to that work.

I pick up lots of things that range from a few pounds to 100 pounds, and a lot of the time they are odd shaped objects. The fact that I can lift a lot more weight than 100 pounds makes it far easier for me to lift all those objects.

And that doesn’t even take into account the rare occasions when I have to lift or move something heavier. How would getting weaker make my life easier?

142

[quote]jayhawk1 wrote:
Nominal Prospect wrote:
Powerlifting isn’t applicable to real world strength. The weight is simply too heavy, far and above anything that you would ever encounter in a real situation.

I really don’t understand the point you are making here. I do daily work on a farm and the fact that I train like a powerlifter/strongman has been very advantageous to that work.

I pick up lots of things that range from a few pounds to 100 pounds, and a lot of the time they are odd shaped objects. The fact that I can lift a lot more weight than 100 pounds makes it far easier for me to lift all those objects.

And that doesn’t even take into account the rare occasions when I have to lift or move something heavier. How would getting weaker make my life easier?[/quote]

He is a personal trainer that does not pick up anything heavy. I guess his clients sculpt and spot reduce enough that there is no need to pick up something heavy. Heavy in this instance is relative of course. While internet lifting numbers are grossly exaggerated I think I have a good handle on when things get to the “heavy” designation.

I live in a 5 flight walk up and moved in without movers or a buddy*s pick up truck. I think that crazy powerlifting stuff helped me more than my face pulls for the impractical circumstance of changing residences. After all no one does that.

(It is like a train wreck. I can not avert my gaze.)

143

"I’m having this discussion on another board.

It’s a question of training specificity: Cross-training vs. highly specialized training."

This should have been the sum total of your post. This is an interesting and important question. The question of whether vaguely interested people who fuck around in the gym and have no goals make as much progress as highly motivated well-trained athletes has been aptly answered by yourself.

How intelligent and insightful you are.

144

OP, i keep thinking you’re going to throw out a big ol’ “just kidding” but it seems like you’re actually serious.

you care nothing about performance or strength, thats cool with me if its cool with you.

there are very many times when i am glad i can lift a ton of weight and sprint fast and jump high. heavy weight training makes this possible.

do yourself a favor and forget your login information, you are cocky and have no idea what you’re talking about; a bad combination.

145

It’s not just people’s gols he is clueless on though. He has equally little idea on bodybuilding training.

146

I see that we’re getting a new influx of people on this thread who didn’t bother to read many of the posts that I made earlier.

I’ll repeat myself twice, but there won’t be a third time. You people still aren’t getting it.

“Because machines, despite your repeated statements, are not functional. There is no real life analog.”

Functional is a completely relative term. There is no universal standard for functionality, just as there is no single strength standard.

“As for isolation developing muscular control, maybe it does. On one plane of controlled motion. No real life analog, case closed. The body was built to move and work in unison on multiple planes.”

You are just repeating bullshit that you read somewhere with no understanding of what you are saying. Explain to me how flat bench DB Flyes work in a different plane of motion than lever machine flyes. I’ll save you the trouble: They don’t. The physical movement is absolutely identical. This “multiple planes” bullshit is garbage, don’t think I haven’t heard it before.

Here’s something that’s true which you’ll never believe: Training individual parts separately helps the entire body work better in unison.

Strength, endurance and flexibility/mobility are the three major aspects of fitness. There are other components but they tend to fall under those categories.

You just wrote that Crossfit will give better physique results than isolation. Unbelievable. I would LOVE to put that to the test. You would fail miserably.

I coach my trainees according to their goals. If they want to be athletes, they will not be given a bodybuilding routine. If they don’t know what they want, don’t play any sports, and fall into the category of average, overweight gym-goer, then I take the iniative for them and put them on a routine that specializes in body recomposition.

" A 600 lb squat will make the 20 x 200# squat easier."

Think I haven’t heard this one before? The answer is, only in a lab. Because you’re not just comparing the sheer muscular strength that is necessary to move each weight. You’re comparing the builds and energy systems of the two individuals.

A guy who squats 600 lbs. is not going to have the aerobic capacity to do anything 20 times. He will fail, not because he lacks strength, but because the nature of the lifts are so very different. He will fail for a reason that has nothing to do with lack of strength.

Having a 600 lb. squat means that you are highly specialized in strength training. You cannot expect such a high degree of specialization to carry over into other area’s. Carry-over is largely a newbie phenomenon.

Time and again, we have seen pro athletes try different sports and produce pitiful results.

There are probably no more than a handful people in the world who can both squat very heavy and also have the physical capacity to do 20 rep squats.

Simply to get to 600 requires doing a ton of highly specialized work that has absolutely no bearing on real world activities. For example, would you call powerliftering gear functional? It sure as hell isn’t. But it lets people move huge weight. The higher you go, the more specialized you get. The more specialized you get, the less carryover there is. It’s a very simple formula.

“Also, if you are all about hypertrophy, why are you so scrawny? Seriously.”

Did you not see me write that I have made significant improvements in my physique since I started training this way? Tell me, what other standard of measurement is there? None, I think.

[quote]bretcharles wrote:
I do agree that your method is the best way to train people who do not want results, do not want to work hard and who do want to throw their money away. [/quote]

I know for a fact that it brings results because I’ve seen it first hand, and if it was easy, everyone would be doing it. But what’s everyone doing? Cross training. The latter is easy and it sucks.

147

[quote]jayhawk1 wrote:
I really don’t understand the point you are making here. I do daily work on a farm and the fact that I train like a powerlifter/strongman has been very advantageous to that work.[/quote]

So, you lift over 300 lbs. at a time, wearing support gear, with a powerlifting setup, maybe even a monolift, and rest several minutes between each lift on your farm?

No, of course you don’t.

You lift, at the VERY MOST, 150 lbs. for about “5 reps” worth of effort. But far more often, you’re lifting in the 25-50 lb. range for a dozen reps or more.

THIS is precisely how you should be training.

Why is that so difficult to understand?

Being able to lift a 250 lb. object will help you lift a 200 lb. object that much better. This, I agree with.

But how far does the principle extend? There is a limiting factor. You cannot accurately say that being able to lift a 600 lb. object would help you lift that 200 lb. object better.

Why not? Because the 600 lb. lift would be occuring under very strict conditions which could not be reproduced in the real world. The 600 lb. lift would be done for a single rep, whereas you might need to do 10 reps with the 200 lb. weight. And in order to get to 600, you would have to neglect things like aerobic fitness, which is vital to your real world job.

So in reality, not in a lab, a 600 lb. squat does NOT help you lift 200 lbs. better. Come on, most heavy weight powerlifers can barely walk. Dave Tate actually wrote an article about the trials and tribulations of crossing a parking lot.

This is what it comes down to: If you think you can pretty much infinitely progress in one area and not have that progression hinder your progress in another area, then you’re deluding yourself badly.

To me, it’s obvious that none of you “lift heavy things”, because if you did, you’d know the extreme level of specialization that it takes to get there, and the corresponding sacrifices that must be made in other areas of fitness.

Once again, I show my wisdom of the iron game. I am the one who “gets it”.

148

[quote]gi2eg wrote:
you care nothing about performance or strength, thats cool with me if its cool with you.[/quote]

Wrong, I care about having a basic level of proficiency in all areas of fitness. In strength terms, I define that as being able to move my own bodyweight. In performance terms, I define that as moving athletically and being able to execute relatively difficult actions (like deceleration and lateral movement).

In all of those areas, I have a basic level of proficiency.

I don’t give a shit about specialization in any of them. I want to be flexible - not to be able to turn myself into a pretzel. I want to be able to sprint when I have to - not win a formal race. I want to be able to lift the loads that I routinely encounter in my life - which is never more than 100 lbs.

All of those things, I am able to do while pursuing my specialized bodybuilding routine.

[quote]RWElder0 wrote:
He is a personal trainer that does not pick up anything heavy. I guess his clients sculpt and spot reduce enough that there is no need to pick up something heavy. Heavy in this instance is relative of course. While internet lifting numbers are grossly exaggerated I think I have a good handle on when things get to the “heavy” designation.

I live in a 5 flight walk up and moved in without movers or a buddy*s pick up truck. I think that crazy powerlifting stuff helped me more than my face pulls for the impractical circumstance of changing residences. After all no one does that.[/quote]

What’s your point? I live on the second floor and moved myself in, as well.

Since when does furniture weigh more than 225 lbs a piece? I post that I squat 225, and get idiots telling me that I’m “weak”. In the next post, they are talking about moving loads in real life that are, in all likelyhood, far less than that “weak” 225. So I guess my strength helped me, after all. And how much did your 400+ squat help you?

How much extra time did it take for you to get there, versus the time it took for me to get my 225 squat, and how much real world benefit have you gotten from it? None, I’ll wager. Nobody outside the gym knows or cares how much you lift. In fact, that is even true of most people IN the gym.

The point is, you have a finite amount of training time, and you could have spent the extra time you had developing a 1.7 shoulder to waist ratio, as I have done. But no, you went with the 450 lb. squat. So be it. Enjoy it, and I’ll do the same.

P.S. I actually worked as a mover for a month, and some of the guys I worked with train at my gym. One of them is an Irish guy, probably 6’2 and 250. He is built really thick. And he never lifts more than 225. That’s his choice. I bet his logic is exactly the same as mine.

Actually, I heard him say once, “I’m not one of these guys who needs to bench 400 lbs…”

He looks better than most of you and could probably lift just as much if he wanted to.

149

NP,

Have you seen the poster squatDR on this forum? He has more than a 600lb squat, and jumps in the upper 40" range.

Do you think bodyweight squats would have given him the same results because he’s only moving his bodyweight?

Ever seen a football player? Do you not think there are many 600lb squats with the work capacity to run a sub 2:15 800m?

You need to crawl the hell out of your ass and look at some of the people who have decided that “basic proficiency” is not good enough.

I posted a link before.

See high-performing crossfitters for an example of how you’re exactly incorrect.

And do you really think that you’re controlling weight in all planes on a machine? At first you didn’t seem that dumb.

150

[quote]Nominal Prospect wrote:
So, you lift over 300 lbs. at a time, wearing support gear, with a powerlifting setup, maybe even a monolift, and rest several minutes between each lift on your farm?

No, of course you don’t.[/quote]

First of all, virtually no one who trains seriously needs to wear support gear to deadlift or squat over 300 pounds. I don’t even own support gear. Generally speaking, pretty much anyone can attain a 2x body weight deadlift with a decent amount of training.

Second of all, most of the heavy lifts I do on the farm ARE in fact one time lifts. Yesterday I had to lift an old sink in to the back of my truck, and then a few minutes later lift it out and carry it to a barn. So in instances like that the fact that I DO train for 1rm maximal efforts IS important.

[quote]
You lift, at the VERY MOST, 150 lbs. for about “5 reps” worth of effort. But far more often, you’re lifting in the 25-50 lb. range for a dozen reps or more.

THIS is precisely how you should be training.

Why is that so difficult to understand?[/quote]

Another task I had to do involved me “bear hugging” large piles of uprooted bean plants and carrying them about a hundred yards over uneven ground to my truck. I wonder if the fact that I have trained that exact type of movement with heavy sandbags had any carryover to hauling those beans?

As far as the low weight high rep stuff is concerned, if you go to the Elite site and look at the logs you will see that tons of training is done at lower weights for high reps. I did 20 rep sets yesterday of Dimel deadlifts, for example. So it’s not like training for a bigger squat makes you less capable of doing higher rep sets of work.

[quote]Being able to lift a 250 lb. object will help you lift a 200 lb. object that much better. This, I agree with.

But how far does the principle extend? There is a limiting factor. You cannot accurately say that being able to lift a 600 lb. object would help you lift that 200 lb. object better.

Why not? Because the 600 lb. lift would be occuring under very strict conditions which could not be reproduced in the real world. The 600 lb. lift would be done for a single rep, whereas you might need to do 10 reps with the 200 lb. weight. And in order to get to 600, you would have to neglect things like aerobic fitness, which is vital to your real world job.

So in reality, not in a lab, a 600 lb. squat does NOT help you lift 200 lbs. better. Come on, most heavy weight powerlifers can barely walk. Dave Tate actually wrote an article about the trials and tribulations of crossing a parking lot.[/quote]

My experience does not bare this out. The stronger I have gotten the easier it has become for me to lift stuff, at all weight levels and through all rep ranges. As far as the conditioning thing is concerned, I have no problem maintaining my conditioning through complexes, body weight circuits, sprinting, strong man training, sled drags, etc. It’s just not that big of a deal.

[quote]
This is what it comes down to: If you think you can pretty much infinitely progress in one area and not have that progression hinder your progress in another area, then you’re deluding yourself badly.[/quote]

I don’t think I can infinitely progress in one area, as that would be impossible. But I do think I can continue to get stronger for awhile without sacrificing all progress in other areas. I’ll never be elite as a lifter but I will still be strong and in good shape and better able to deal with the physical components of day to day life. Now that may not impress you personally but the thing is I don’t give a shit about that. I don’t live my life worrying if some other guy in a gym will be impressed by how I look in Under Armour.

[quote]
To me, it’s obvious that none of you “lift heavy things”, because if you did, you’d know the extreme level of specialization that it takes to get there, and the corresponding sacrifices that must be made in other areas of fitness.

Once again, I show my wisdom of the iron game. I am the one who “gets it”.[/quote]

I think that most people on the Strength Sports forum either already do or are striving to “lift heavy things”, and I think you should show a little consideration when dealing with them.

151

[quote]Nominal Prospect wrote:
detazathoth wrote:
Nominal Prospect wrote:

This is my physique.

I see that you’re familiar with the leg extension machine than a bar on your back.

Well, judging by the fact that I actually have visible definition and separation between all my leg muscles, you’re right - I’m pretty well acquainted with the leg extension and the leg press sled. I never had this definition when I did squats on a regular basis.

Speaking of legs, I have found 70 lbs. on the sled to be far more effective than 225 lbs. on the squat for hypertrophy.

I think my legs are completely proportional to my upper body. In fact, my entire physique is proportional - a hallmark of bodybuilder-style training.[/quote]

Youre right. Your body is entirely proprotional. Its ALL small.

You do realize that “definition” has jack shit to do with what exercises you do and everything to do with bodyfat, right? This is third grade stuff.

152

[quote]Stronghold wrote:
You do realize that “definition” has jack shit to do with what exercises you do and everything to do with bodyfat, right? This is third grade stuff.[/quote]

Definition has nothing to do with exercise selection…I can leave all shoulder work out of my routine, do bicep curls only, and expect to have the same deltoid definition in 2 months that I would have had if I had specialized in delt work. Woops, wrong.

Yeah, it IS third grade stuff, and you just bombed it.

“And do you really think that you’re controlling weight in all planes on a machine? At first you didn’t seem that dumb.”

There are an infinite number of planes (literally, it’s a mathematical fact). There is NO single exercise which trains “all planes” at once.

“Ever seen a football player? Do you not think there are many 600lb squats with the work capacity to run a sub 2:15 800m?”

Football players and other pro athletes are notorious for exaggerating their lift numbers and using shitty form constantly. I think one of the strength coaches commented on this in an article. The comment was something like, “everybody claims 600 but it’s more like 450 with full ROM”. Half squats are a rule in the NFL. As I’ve written before, nobody does Westside shit outside of Ohio.

Football is anaerobic dominant, at any rate.

“Second of all, most of the heavy lifts I do on the farm ARE in fact one time lifts. Yesterday I had to lift an old sink in to the back of my truck, and then a few minutes later lift it out and carry it to a barn. So in instances like that the fact that I DO train for 1rm maximal efforts IS important.”

Yeah, but that sink still didn’t weigh 450 lbs, hoss.

“Another task I had to do involved me “bear hugging” large piles of uprooted bean plants and carrying them about a hundred yards over uneven ground to my truck. I wonder if the fact that I have trained that exact type of movement with heavy sandbags had any carryover to hauling those beans?”

I have no doubt that it did.

“As far as the low weight high rep stuff is concerned, if you go to the Elite site and look at the logs you will see that tons of training is done at lower weights for high reps. I did 20 rep sets yesterday of Dimel deadlifts, for example. So it’s not like training for a bigger squat makes you less capable of doing higher rep sets of work.”

There is a point of diminishing returns. It is somewhat of a grey area, but there’s no doubt the point is valid. Some “extra” strength obviously helps. Too much is more trouble than its worth. For instance, when you’re at the point where you’d have to gain 20 lbs. in order to put 40 lbs. on your squat, you know that it’s no longer worth it and it will negatively affect you in other areas.

“My experience does not bare this out. The stronger I have gotten the easier it has become for me to lift stuff, at all weight levels and through all rep ranges. As far as the conditioning thing is concerned, I have no problem maintaining my conditioning through complexes, body weight circuits, sprinting, strong man training, sled drags, etc. It’s just not that big of a deal.”

Then you must not be that “strong” yet, by absolute standards. Every heavy weight powerlifter has a BIG problem “maintaining their conditioning”. The fact that you do such a wide variety of training tells me that you haven’t really specialized in strength.

“But I do think I can continue to get stronger for awhile without sacrificing all progress in other areas”

The key point is, “for a while”. Not forever.

“I think that most people on the Strength Sports forum either already do or are striving to “lift heavy things”, and I think you should show a little consideration when dealing with them.”

I am not going to be considerate to people who are deliberately insulting me, my physique, and my ideas. You get what you give.

153

Definition is a function of muscle size and body fat. You do your leg extensions, ill squat. Have fun not looking like you train, let me know how your thoughts work out for you :]

154

Jeepers, is this thread still going?

It’s an open and shut case. NP has nothing to show for all the spruiking of his method, literally.

From personal experience, when I first started lifting and knew nothing about the gym I had a trainer just like NP. The guy didn’t even mention the word ‘squat’ and ‘deadlift’ once. He didn’t have me doing a proper barbell benchpress until much later. I made all my significant gains when I stopped using him and researched things for myself.

Beware of personal trainers! Choose the right one because most are indoctrinated in this dogma to give you the sleek, gay ‘toned’ look which is neither impressive to real men or women or functional.

155

small guy is small

156

[quote]Nominal Prospect wrote:

Wrong, I care about having a basic level of proficiency in all areas of fitness. [/quote]

Sounds like cross-training of the worst kind. Looks like that makes one person who believes in it.

Seriously, I really hope you’re a troll, for your sake.

157

[quote]Defekt wrote:
Have fun not looking like you train, [/quote]

LOL. Most idiotic comment so far. You have got to be kidding me. Who the fuck has a V-taper, teardrop quads, and rounded deltoids without doing any specialized training? Flex Wheeler, maybe. Not me.

If I don’t look like I train, then how come several people on this thread took one look at my pic and accurately guessed that I do both leg extensions and machine lateral raises? Was it just a lucky guess? I don’t fuckin’ think so. They knew it because I look like I train.

To “not look like you train” is the worst insult that you could make about someone who has been training for years. I will not sit back and let you spew such nonsense without a counter challenge. Why don’t you put up your own pics.

[quote]batman_wannabe wrote:
Jeepers, is this thread still going?

It’s an open and shut case. NP has nothing to show for all the spruiking of his method, literally.

From personal experience, when I first started lifting and knew nothing about the gym I had a trainer just like NP. The guy didn’t even mention the word ‘squat’ and ‘deadlift’ once. He didn’t have me doing a proper barbell benchpress until much later. I made all my significant gains when I stopped using him and researched things for myself.

Beware of personal trainers! Choose the right one because most are indoctrinated in this dogma to give you the sleek, gay ‘toned’ look which is neither impressive to real men or women or functional. [/quote]

You are wrong on every possible count.

  1. In order for you to say that I have nothing to show for my way of training, you’d have to see what I looked like when I started. Do you know this? No. So how can you possibly know that my methods haven’t obtained results?

  2. You have no idea what kind of trainer I am. On every page of this thread, I repeated the assertions that I have no problem training athletes, that I have nothing against the compound lifts when they are used for a specialized strength routine, and that I would never train an athlete the same way as a bodybuilder. Anybody who is still making comments like the one you just made about me is an idiot.
    I trained a housewife the other day and the first two exercises were DB Squats and Romanian Deadlifts.

I can train someone to be an athlete just as well as I can train someone to be a bodybuilder.

I would never put an athlete on a bodybuilder’s routine.

I would never put an athlete on a bodybuilder’s routine.

I would never put an athlete on a bodybuilder’s routine.

I would never put an athlete on a bodybuilder’s routine.

How many more times should I repeat it before you idiots get it?

Most people AREN’T athletes and shouldn’t train as such. Most people BENEFIT from training like bodybuilders more than they benefit from training like athletes.

  1. If you trained under me, you would learn a ton and progress faster in one area than you ever have in your life.

  2. 90% of mainstream Personal Trainers endorse the “functional cross training” methodology that I am so vehemently opposed to. Your attempt to stereotype me as part of that crowd when I’m so obviously opposed to it is bullshit. You do NOT see PT’s putting people on dedicated bodybuilding routines. Using a machine does mean you’re doing a bodybuilding routine. It’s about isolation and exhaustion.

  3. Finally, the “toned” look is EXACTLY what the vast majority of people - both men and women (but needless to say, with females the percentage is more like 99%) - are after.

I have not encountered an average male (non-bodybuilder) who gives a rats ass about his leg hypertrophy. Guys want to train abs, arms, and chest, in that order. On the other side of the fence, most women couldn’t care less about the size of their arms. 9 out of 10 people, men and women alike, want to lose weight. People want to get SMALLER. Not “bulk up”.

I know far better than you do what sorts of expectations normal people have. I know what they consider to be a desirable physical appearance. I can tell you that it ISN’T anything you would find in a photo gallery on this site.

I, personally, would kill to look like Dennis Wolf, but you could take 100 lbs. of mass off his frame and MOST of the general public would still consider you to be “disgustingly muscular”. This is reality. I have a duty to correct your miserable lies and slander.

158

[quote]TravisTouchdown wrote:
Nominal Prospect wrote:

Wrong, I care about having a basic level of proficiency in all areas of fitness.

Sounds like cross-training of the worst kind. Looks like that makes one person who believes in it.

Seriously, I really hope you’re a troll, for your sake.
[/quote]

How is it cross training when I do NO specialized training for any of those qualities? Did you not see what I wrote immediately below that comment?

[quote]
In all of those areas, I have a basic level of proficiency.

I don’t give a shit about specialization in any of them. I want to be flexible - not to be able to turn myself into a pretzel. I want to be able to sprint when I have to - not win a formal race. I want to be able to lift the loads that I routinely encounter in my life - which is never more than 100 lbs.

All of those things, I am able to do while pursuing my specialized bodybuilding routine.[/quote]

You can maintain a basic level of proficiency while doing a specialized routine. There is absolutely no need to combine formal strength, hypertrophy, and endurance work as you would in a cross training routine.

I train STRICTLY for bodybuilding and I’m still flexible, I can still move my own bodyweight, I’m agile, fast, and have decent endurance.

Re-read what I wrote on the first page. I said that Cross Training is a gimmick because beginners will see gains across the spectrum no matter what type of routine they do. There is no need to ever do specialization work that isn’t directly related to your goals. And if something is related to your goals, then it counts as specialization work, by definition.

159

Err no, the fact that you don’t think deadlifting and squatting aren’t part of a bodybuilding routine when they are absolutely essential and the best means of building long term muscle mass is exactly why I compared you to my ex personal trainer. The fact that you think using only machines is an optimal way of bulking up and that somehow mere ‘pump’ is enough as opposed to hard won gains from HGH and test. boosting compound exercises is another way in which you were completely similar to my ex personal trainer.

160

[quote]batman_wannabe wrote:
Err no, the fact that you don’t think deadlifting and squatting aren’t part of a bodybuilding routine when they are absolutely essential and the best means of building long term muscle mass is exactly why I compared you to my ex personal trainer. The fact that you think using only machines is an optimal way of bulking up and that somehow mere ‘pump’ is enough as opposed to hard won gains from HGH and test. boosting compound exercises is another way in which you were completely similar to my ex personal trainer. [/quote]

Ah, well then - you’re wrong.

I did your precious HGH boosting compounds for a year and I was noticeably skinnier then than I am now, with no visible physique changes during that time. I have seen enough skinny guys lifting heavy, like Diesel Weisel, to know that this is not the optimal way of bulking up.

I would put money on the fact that you’ve never been on a proper bodybuilding routine. All machines are not created equal and isolation training doesn’t mean you’re doing bodybuilding.

Listen, it is physically impossible NOT to bulk up when you train with isolation and exhaustion. You train for the pump and get the fluid into the muscles. Much of that fluid volume stays there after you leave the gym. That’s instant hypertrophy.

Anybody who denies it is lying.

Anybody who claims you can get a better pump from compounds than isolations done to failure is also lying.

Compounds will NOT put 3/4 an inch on your arms in one workout. Isolations done to failure will.

It’s called fluid hypertrophy. I wrote about it earlier and I know what I’m talking about. Hypertrophy is all about getting the fluid into the muscle and has little to do with muscle fiber hypertrophy, which occurs at a snail’s pace compared to fluid hypertrophy,