So your saying being small and getting sand kicked in the face (which was actually sold by the industry itself) wasn’t a motivation for some lifters?
I vividly remember Mike Katz talking about being picked on, then going home and training to “show them”.
She decided that when she inhaled.
Some, Many, All. Which adjective would you like to use? Also, from BBers to Lifters. I think the issue is that you use words interchangeably that have very specific meanings.
Athleticism is sacrificed with excessive muscle mass. Here’s a former MLB pitcher who retired and became a bodybuilder. That amount of mass would have hindered his ability to throw at a high level. How would you define athlete?
I don’t think big Lou was a good athlete at all.
Watch him in worlds strongest man. He stumbled and fell during the wheel barrel race, his throwing was clumsy looking. Franco didn’t look any better and he broke is ankle. But Franco was a boxer so he did some sport.
Ken Patera and George Frenn were the Athletes in that contest and both displayed the best motions and footwork etc etc.
Bob young too, probably Jon Cole as well.
Here is an Athlete-
This first few minutes he discusses when he beat up half the towns police force in a hotel, he went to prison for two years-
Did he talk about doing partial squats?
I’m curious if he was going for a one rep PR.
Actually, both are examples of good genetics.
There are those that have the genetics for a good starting point, although their ability to improve from there may not be so good.
Then there are those who improve when they undertake the training that is right for them ( eg strength, hypertrophy, speed, endurance etc). You can label this as “trainability” if you will. They may be those skinny kids that have little muscle, but who grow like weeds when they start lifting. These are the types that are used to sell bodybuilding courses and supplements. The archetypal before and after. They are the hyper responders to training.
The elite are usually those who are blessed with the genetics for a good starting point AND good responsiveness to training.
The unlucky ones are those who have a poor starting point and little to no responsiveness.
A good reference to all this is the book “The Sports Gene” by David Epstein. An interesting read indeed.
If we’re going to talk about bodybuilders, let’s not ignore the elephant in the room.
I’m still listening to it, there are two interviews with him.
You should listen to it, you might learn something.
Good stories anyway.
He said he did a high pull with 770 and bent the bar.
My old training partner has 5 kids and every one of them he got into training since they could walk.
Only one didn’t show interest, but now he’s on the football team and is more eager. He already knows the ropes and is excelling.
I saw his daughter around age 8 or so casually walk up to a barbell with 95# on it bumpers plates dead lift it with a double overhand grip and strike a pose with her legs, she did this just out of the blew. She is pre teen now and lifting like a damn horse.
That guy looks pretty damn big even in the uniform.
Baseball players ain’t no joke man!!!
BTW, there are plenty of shoulder exercises that can be done that are way more beneficial to the entire function of the shoulders and will build plenty of mass.
You can actually use the movement of throwing a ball with a heavier object than a baseball and get jacked shoulders.
Way more beneficial than what?
How heavy? Weighted balls are used to increase velocity all the time
Than the standard bodybuilding front/side/rear lateral raises or cable raises.
Full shoulder rotations with very light bells or a shot put. Just do them bodybuilding style for growth instead of throwing performance.
I can’t say whether his performance would be hindered by mass id think not if he was doing those rotations.
Excellent summary.
I was tempted at one point to comment on the flawed Maximum Contraction Theory of John Little. He is a fitness entrepreneur, not a physiologist. He took one of Arthur Jones flawed 50 year old ideas and flogged it enough to sell some books. He got his money. Not sure if he even stands by the idea any more.
But the other poster seems resistant to consider any claims or evidence other than those put forth by Jones and Little long ago. Some folks just need to stick with the sacred canon.
If you read Little’s last book, “The Time Saver’s Workout” I think he acknowledges his mistakes with Max Contraction.
He looked into the work done by Bill DeSimone and the angle of peak force for each muscle.
Although DeSimone is no fan of lengthened partials, due to joint safety issues in many cases, he also is no fan of peak contraction either. There can be joint issues there in many cases and / or insufficiencies.
yep spot on agree. Power factor, max contraction, etc. were all just hype programs to sell books. zero science. Even though AJ contributed a lot to the exercise machine world, his ideas about how things worked in the body (purely from guessing and logic) sure didn’t fit reality now that we know from MRI’s, ultrasound, EMG and biopsy studies. We now have SEEN for real how things are so the ‘flat earth’ stuff is dead and buried.
For a real laugh, read the ‘Nautilus North Study’ wow, that one is so off the charts lol
ah I’ll have to look for that one, if he went back on his contracted stuff, then even that last unsupported leg of the argument is gone too.
In reality, if a person performs a good safe ‘full-ish’ range, they will hit the optimal muscle length during the reps and that is obviously good enough as every lifter, bodybuilder and athlete built tons of muscle with just good old regular range reps.
He does not explicitly reject maximum contraction. Instead, he quietly consigns it to the past. He does write that he learned from his previous work, and from consultation with experts like DeSimone. As a result of his new understanding of biomechanics and muscle physiology, he now recommends training in the position of maximum moment arm. This corresponds to the point where you are weakest due to unfavorable leverage. In most exercises, this puts the muscle in the middle of the range of contraction. Physiologists will note that this is the point where maximum muscle tension can be developed. So sliding filament theory for the win!
