Big Guys... Horrid Lifting

Training Bodybuilding
61

[quote]danmaftei wrote:
Or doing big compound movements like chins are better for biceps than curls?
…
would you call BS on someone who said that it’s better to lift fast?[/quote]

Im not prof-x, or anywhere near him(newbie, but i cant tell he knows his stuff).

I wouldn’t call bs on anyone who said lift fast—here are a few reasons.

1)some people advocate changing the tempo, adjusting the concentric and eccentric, whatever. Lifting as fast as you can will evidently give you a varied tempo. By your 7th or 8th set, your ‘fastest’ will be somewhat slower than it was on the first rep. This is true for CW programs, the variation is just built into the program(see point 3 also)

2)And its about not letting your muscles adapt, if youve been emphasizing lengthening time under tension for a while, it may be beneficial to lift things alot faster, explosive lifts do work (assuming you still use proper form – injuries arent too condusive to building muscle.

  1. For many people, maybe not particularly T-Nation’rs, things like tempo may not be an issue, and are infact the minutia of lifting. Focusing on lifting, eating, resting, repeating works best. And for many of those same people, curls are not the best option, simply because the average person is not as muscularly developed as his genetic potential may allow, and thus would benefit more from a compoud excercise like pull ups or BO Rows. But that doesnt mean curls dont work,-- plenty of frat guys running around with monsterous biceps and very little rear delt/lat development, etc. I think the argument is where and to what extent you want to benefit from a lift. If my primary concern was my biceps, sure, i might be doing curls, but at some stage theyd reach a functional limit where other muscles(back/shoulders) would not be able to work in conjunction(since your biceps dont work alone when you pull or lift something).

Anxiously awaiting Prof X’s answer. Sorry for jumping in, im just loving T-Nation after finding about a ‘T-cell’ in my area.

62

[quote]danmaftei wrote:
So now, if we’re done talking about Professor X’s training habits, the question I have is this:

Do you guys believe that there are some basic fundementals that almost everyone could benefit from? Say, doing full squats instead of half squats often puts on more form? Or doing big compound movements like chins are better for biceps than curls?

I definitely agree and disagree with a lot of comments here, but I do want to know from Prof X, do you believe in the science behind weightlifting? If scientifically lifting fast to recruit more high-treshold MUs (or whatever they’re called, the thing in the 10 x 3 Principles article by CW) gives you more growth than lifting very slowly, would you call BS on someone who said that it’s better to lift fast?[/quote]

I haven’t read an article by “CW”. I do know that lifting heavier with more explosive power recruits more fast twitch muscle fibers which are responsible for the most size and strength. That is how I train. I lift the weight relatively fast and lower it under control. If you want to follow someone who has given this practice a specific name, that is great. I would assume this concept was around long before anyone had a name to give it. No, this is not BS.

63

[quote]Professor X wrote:
Again, if I am seeing the results I like and results that are better than average, why do I need to change that? Just to do what everyone else is doing?
[/quote]

No, not to do what everyone else is doing. To see if there’s a better way.

New ideas to apply to yourself for possibly more rapid “results” (just curious, what do you mean by results anyway?), another angle to look at a problem that may help when a friend needs help, a reminder of something you haven’t thought of in a while… these guys are primarily synthesizing ideas from some great science/literature/experience in a meaningful way. It’s worth taking 5 minutes to read a recent article by an intelligent person in the field once in a while - this site is one such place to do that. The JAP and JSCR are also good places, as are other journals.

That’s good. How much have you kept up with new findings? What were your original sources of info? As the thread on muscle fatigue showed, we’re showing many old “truths” to be wrong or only partially correct all the time. Most of the authors on here do keep up with what’s going on in academia as well as the weight room.

They may well be at a disadvantage if they don’t get the information elsewhere. I’m not saying T-Nation is the one and only source. Never have. But by and large the authors know what they’re taking about and organize a lot of complex information into understandable articles. As my original point was, it’s better for most people than trying to weed through information from the big guy in the gym (unless that big guy happens to be a world class athlete/coach themselves).

-Dan

64

Like the professor said, ‘lifting fast’ is not a new concept. Don’t get me wrong, CW has many great ideas and he utilizes scientifically sound principles. Just as T-Nation has many authors, with many points of view as to how to achieve a certain goal. There are many routes to a common goal, some are more suited for certain people. T-Bation is extremely informative. However, I agree with the professor’s assessment that many people come on this site, read 2 articles and prance around like they are an expert.

beef

65

most people don’t realize that everything works some of the time, just as if they worried about themselves instead what others do, perhaps they could make the progress that they seek.

66

[quote]buffalokilla wrote:

No, not to do what everyone else is doing. To see if there’s a better way.

[/quote]

If it’s not broken why fix it?

67

Argh, I’m not criticizing here people lol. Again, I’m just wondering.

Anyways, I didn’t know that lifting as fast as possible for hypertrophy was an old idea… I hear people around me and online say that the concentric and eccentric should be about the same length each, and should be moderately slow. Oops.

68

[quote]danmaftei wrote:
Argh, I’m not criticizing here people lol. Again, I’m just wondering.

Anyways, I didn’t know that lifting as fast as possible for hypertrophy was an old idea… I hear people around me and online say that the concentric and eccentric should be about the same length each, and should be moderately slow. Oops.[/quote]

Yeah, I see those guys in the gym also…lifting the weight as slowly as possible. If I had to pick a group of people that seem to make the least progress, it would be them. Honestly, how many truly large bodybuilders do you see lifting that way?

69

[quote]danmaftei wrote:
Argh, I’m not criticizing here people lol. Again, I’m just wondering.

Anyways, I didn’t know that lifting as fast as possible for hypertrophy was an old idea… I hear people around me and online say that the concentric and eccentric should be about the same length each, and should be moderately slow. Oops.[/quote]

When you put 325 on the bar, your last concern should be about the exact time it takes to loewer and raise the bar. In fact, often times when I’m nearing my last rep or heaviest weight, I’m lifting fast, but the bar ain’t goin’ fast.
It is not a new concept. It’s new to those who spent their entire formative years reading grocery store mags. That’s not even a blast at them, that’s how I started, but as I moved from mags to empirical results and talked to those people, and showed that as I was really interested, they began to share their philosophy.
And they told me right off and I haven’t forgotten–you have to DRIVE the weight.
It’s usually the guys benching 185 that are worried about moving the weight slowly, through the full ROM, while spending 45 seconds time under tension.

70

[quote]T-Quinn wrote:
If it’s not broken why fix it?[/quote]

Why drive a car when you could ride a horse?

Same idea.

-Dan

71

With regards to tempo, how do you measure your count? How do you know if you are getting stronger because, all of a sudden you are counting faster? The only way to do so, would be to have someone with a stopwatch count for you.

beef

72

[quote]buffalokilla wrote:
T-Quinn wrote:
If it’s not broken why fix it?

Why drive a car when you could ride a horse?

Same idea.

-Dan[/quote]

No it isn’t. If I was making slower progress than everyone, I would look to change something. What I usually see is people who really aren’t making all that much progress flaunting the fact that they read so much. Who cares how many scientific studies you can quote if your results don’t even match those of the idiot who can’t read but works his ass off?

Bodybuilding isn’t about who reads the most. Knowledge is a great factor in it…but so is hard work and consistency. You can be outdone regardless of books read by someone who works harder and gives this everything they have. No one in the gym cares who you can quote. If your arms are still 15" and you have been “training” for 2 years, you are FLUNKING in hard work.

73

I know a two guys that bench until their upper arms are parallel to the ground. They both have great chest development. I don’t feel obligated to go into a jealous rage and bitch them out.

beef

74

What about hard work AND knowledge? :wink:

75

[quote]danmaftei wrote:
What about hard work AND knowledge? ;)[/quote]

That should be the goal. However, bodybuilding is still an activity where you do most of your learning IN THE GYM under some heavy ass weight. I read a lot. I always have. I remember studying for exams and taking breaks in the middle and reading up on exercise physiology. However, one thing that never changed was the fact that many HUGE bodybuilders got that way without reading every scientific journal or following PhD’s around like lost puppy dogs.

If I even had to give it a rating, I would put your work ethic at having around 80% of the influence as far as your progress in the gym. The rest is based on application of knowledge learned. Hard work can make up for a less than perfect training routine.

76

[quote]danmaftei wrote:
What about hard work AND knowledge? ;)[/quote]

In the weight room–and in the businesss world–and quite frankly most places:
knowledge gained from actual experience is worth far more than book learning. Hell, even Jethro could sipher

77

What do you think constitutes as hard work? I go to the gym regularly (I never pussy out of a workout), I concentrate on my goals and I don’t fuck around with friends, and when I lift, I concentrate on lifting the weight and lifting the weight only. The only reason I don’t mention always lifting heavy is because I’m new and first of all, I don’t know what my threshold is, and second of all, since I’m doing “dangerous” lifts, I’m focusing on form. That’s not to say I use very light weights, but you get the point.

Do you have another view of “work ethic”?

78

[quote]danmaftei wrote:
What do you think constitutes as hard work? I go to the gym regularly (I never pussy out of a workout), I concentrate on my goals and I don’t fuck around with friends, and when I lift, I concentrate on lifting the weight and lifting the weight only. The only reason I don’t mention always lifting heavy is because I’m new and first of all, I don’t know what my threshold is, and second of all, since I’m doing “dangerous” lifts, I’m focusing on form. That’s not to say I use very light weights, but you get the point.

Do you have another view of “work ethic”?[/quote]

You’re a ‘new’ lifter with great work ethic who only lifts the ‘dangerous’ lifts!

Me thinks he doth(?) protest too much

Quit arguing about garbage and go lift
Though I’d skip the ‘dangerous’ lifts and stick to the heavy basics–especially as a ‘new’ lifter
You’ve used up way to much space and actually said nothing.

79

I think alot of us are missing the big picture and this is true of all of us at one point or another. There is no gospel when it comes to so called “exercise science”. If there was a true “right” and “wrong” way, we’d have one basic training protocol and variations thereof. Instead what do we have? Many protocols, each with its own adherents and converts, many with “science” behind it.

There simply is no “best” way to train. “Better”, perhaps, in some cases. But the human body is too varied, too adaptable, to put a “bead” on the perfect training regimen.

In addition, “perfect” training, or even “better” training is a moot point for most individuals because you will always be limited by your genetics. If you don’t have the genetics for an 18" arm (for example) or greater, it doesn’t matter how you train - you won’t achieve it. Same with strength. When considering genetics, you must consider muscle fiber type, attachment points, leverages, your immune system, etc etc - all of which you have no control over. Its why some guys can train in a so-called unconventional manner and still achieve great results and why other guys can train with the “latest cutting edge science”, taking thier suppls, getting rest, doing everything “perfect” and still only make moderate, if any, progress.

No training methodology will overcome who your parents were!!! So, I guess my point is this; in the grand scheme of things, for the average trainee, do you think one training protocol over another makes an appreciable difference? I don’t think so. Now, I’m talking generally accepted practices, not someone who just doesn’t know what their doing - out there in left field somewhere, but someone “in the ballpark” of generally accepted training principles so to speak.

I hear all the time, bla bla bla, about someone training for years, switched to this system, and this lift or that lift skyrocketed. Fine. Maybe so. But it wouldn’t have happened if your genetics weren’t there. Same with size gains. Factor in all the other folks that switched to various systems and made little or no progress and you’re right back to my point.

Unless you are an elite athlete, I think the most important thing you can do is just train and be consistent. For most folks, you will never have 18" arms let alone 20". You will never bench 400 let alone 300 and I don’t care whether you train WSB, superslow, superfast, on a swiss ball with a kettlebell strapped to your forehead - I don’t think it makes a big difference to the results of the “average” trainee.

Now I’m not trying to say anything is not possible, but realistically, most trainees are not elite athletes, are not trying to compete in strength events or even bodybuilding events. They want to look good and be healthy and fact is, there are many acceptable ways to achieve it. I do believe many things are achievable with hard work and knowledge, but you’re still ultimately limited by genetics.

Oh, by the way, caught an earlier thread about the “average man”. Seems to be a big aversion to “average man”. No one wants to be average. NEWSFLASH; I assure you, guarantee you, most of you here are genetically average. Thats not a slight to anyone, but a fact of life. You may be more physically fit than “average man”, but genetically, most of you are average.

So, isn’t the discussion somewhat academic? For most of you, the micro management of your training regimen will not make an appreciable difference. EVERYTHING works. Put a workload on the body and the body will respond. Just keep it fresh. How much you respond will always be limited to your genetics - under ANY training system or methodology - even if you’re on the great vitamin S.

Maybe harsh, maybe a little off the main topic, but the truth nonetheless. My two cents, however awkwardly expressed :slight_smile:

Steve

80

[quote]NNNNate wrote:
The topic of discussion was big guys who seem to do crappy things in the gym. It was said that things could be learned from these guys. I say bullshit.

Professor X wrote:

If that is the way your mind works, then I feel sorry for you. I have learned something from everyone I have ever worked out with, whether it was the simple concept of pushing past perceived limits or the realization that we do not all recover the same.

So why not read the articles here? (You mention you almost never do). Why can’t you learn from them? I learned the concept of pushing past perceived limits myself (or from a book or article I forget). There was no big guy to teach me this.

You learn what is crap and what isn’t by learning what is basic as fact. That means open a biology book and learn how your body works.

So after this (and reading more advanced and specific info on building muscles) . . . who needs to pay attention to the big guy using the smith machine for squats?

Learn the names of each muscle and their actions. Those things are constants. By your logic, you might as well die now because you will never know who to learn from in life and who is telling you straight bullshit.
O
r I will just ignore other people in the gym. Duh.

My ONLY source of knowledge of working out and nutrition is what I have learned from books and articles. I have always worked out alone or with someone less experienced than me. And gasp I make gains. Better gains than those who only follow advice from the “big guys” in the gym.

I really don’t see what’s so strange about saying learning from the big guys in the gym (at this point in time) is a bad idea. If I did this instead of reading books and articles I would not deadlift, would only have found out what a proper squat is several months ago, and would not know a single thing about proper nutrition. I would use the smith machine regularly.
[/quote]

Well, apparently, there is our answer - ask NNNNNNate, because he knows the answer to whatever lifting questions you have because he read about it or taught himself. Apparently, you can’t learn anything from asking a big guy in the gym.

As for not following advice of a big guy in the gym who gets drunk a lot and eats only 3 meals a day, there has to be reason he got big. You could probably learn something from his workouts that is the real reason for his getting big. The presence of 2 conditions doesn’t mean one caused the other or vice versa. The sooner you figure out that nothing is black and white, the better off you’ll be in life.

DB