Why would Ronnie’s chest need to grow from 135-315? The muscle will only grow when it sees something it’s never seen before. They have seen it in warmups 1000s of times at this point and it’s old news. His growth inducing sets are that 405x10 and 495x5 which were a challenge for him.
[/quote]
Why do people like mechanics develop larger forarms if muscle only grows when it sees something it’s never seen before? A lot of physical labor jobs that create muscular physiques do so by volume rather than my shocking the muscle with added stressors.
Why would Ronnie’s chest need to grow from 135-315? The muscle will only grow when it sees something it’s never seen before. They have seen it in warmups 1000s of times at this point and it’s old news. His growth inducing sets are that 405x10 and 495x5 which were a challenge for him.
Why do people like mechanics develop larger forarms if muscle only grows when it sees something it’s never seen before? A lot of physical labor jobs that create muscular physiques do so by volume rather than my shocking the muscle with added stressors.[/quote]
To be honest, Iv never seen theses mechanics with super muscular forearms that people keep talking about…and I work as a bank teller so I see plenty of people coming in to cash checks from the local garages.
The point is, that for someone at a strength level like Ronnie, a weight like 315 for 8-10 reps as part of a warm up is probably not going to do very much.
[quote]Stronghold wrote:
eigieinhamr wrote:
Scott M wrote:
Why would Ronnie’s chest need to grow from 135-315? The muscle will only grow when it sees something it’s never seen before. They have seen it in warmups 1000s of times at this point and it’s old news. His growth inducing sets are that 405x10 and 495x5 which were a challenge for him.
Why do people like mechanics develop larger forarms if muscle only grows when it sees something it’s never seen before? A lot of physical labor jobs that create muscular physiques do so by volume rather than my shocking the muscle with added stressors.
To be honest, Iv never seen theses mechanics with super muscular forearms that people keep talking about…and I work as a bank teller so I see plenty of people coming in to cash checks from the local garages.
The point is, that for someone at a strength level like Ronnie, a weight like 315 for 8-10 reps as part of a warm up is probably not going to do very much.[/quote]
I haven’t seen these super muscular mechanics either and I know quite a few of them. Mechanic isn’t exactly a hard labor job. It is simply hands on and dirty.
I agree with you. The stronger you get, the less stimulus will be seen from weights some newbies may actually struggle with.
[quote]Stronghold wrote:
eigieinhamr wrote:
Scott M wrote:
Why would Ronnie’s chest need to grow from 135-315? The muscle will only grow when it sees something it’s never seen before. They have seen it in warmups 1000s of times at this point and it’s old news. His growth inducing sets are that 405x10 and 495x5 which were a challenge for him.
Why do people like mechanics develop larger forarms if muscle only grows when it sees something it’s never seen before? A lot of physical labor jobs that create muscular physiques do so by volume rather than my shocking the muscle with added stressors.
To be honest, Iv never seen theses mechanics with super muscular forearms that people keep talking about…and I work as a bank teller so I see plenty of people coming in to cash checks from the local garages.
[/quote]
I actually know some mechanics with decent forearm size. But, they also weight train regularly, so to say that their forearms are a direct result of their mechanic work might not be that accurate.
On the other hand, I also know mechanics (who don’t weight train) who don’t have particularly impressive forearms. I think that when someone started turning wrenches they would see some increase in forearm growth, simply due to the increased workload. But, unless the person had good genetics for forearms in the first place, I doubt that being a mechanic alone would result in hyooge forearms.
[quote]
The point is, that for someone at a strength level like Ronnie, a weight like 315 for 8-10 reps as part of a warm up is probably not going to do very much.[/quote]
Mechanic isn’t really a good reference. I don’t work on cars for a living, but it is something I’ve done as a hobbie for well over 20 years. Does it work your forarms? Sometimes.
There are so many scenarios when working with cars, it isn’t like they are sitting there cranking a wrench all day. Plus any mechanic with half a brain uses air tools now, so they seldom crank a wrench at all.
The way I see it, your body will adjust until it doesn’t need to. Mechanics may build their forearms up some, but only to the point where it accomadates the demands their job is putting on them. Sort of like your calves.
People who put on alot of weight tend to get bigger calves, but they don’t grow infinetly, only to the point where they support the weight they put on.
One day my dad told me somthing when I was probably 5 or 6 years old that for some reason has always stuck with me. I had a great uncle that raised hogs and he was showing me a baby pig one day when we were visiting.
He told me that if I picked up that baby pig every day that I’d be able to pick him up when it was full grown. Now I don’t know how fast a pig actually grows, so it may not be true, but it made sense at the time.
Ok so maybe mechanic wasn’t the best example. An example I see a lot is rowers with big traps. Rowers who don’t lift weights I’ve seen with huge traps. Those who do lift weights lift on a 36 rep scheme. No weighted pullups either. Just really high reps.
While I agree increase in weight is important, I think many people on this forum put too much emphasis on actual weight lifted (ie all this fawning for people who can lift heavy, even when that doesn’t correspond to a good physique). This is fine if you want to be really strong as well as putting on muscle, but I know many people who want to look good nakid much more than they want to be strong.
eg When you are on a cutting diet there may be an actual purpose in not getting stronger. There is a maximal strength people can possess and the closer to it the more problems people have with injuries. Muscle comes from progression rather than a high 1 rep max. So if you can retain your muscle without getting stronger, you could potentially make it easier when you go back to bulking.
Maybe it’s just my frustration at not being able to get my Captain of Crush to close all the way (less than 1cm off)
[quote]eigieinhamr wrote:
Ok so maybe mechanic wasn’t the best example. An example I see a lot is rowers with big traps. Rowers who don’t lift weights I’ve seen with huge traps. Those who do lift weights lift on a 36 rep scheme. No weighted pullups either. Just really high reps.
While I agree increase in weight is important, I think many people on this forum put too much emphasis on actual weight lifted (ie all this fawning for people who can lift heavy, even when that doesn’t correspond to a good physique). This is fine if you want to be really strong as well as putting on muscle, but I know many people who want to look good nakid much more than they want to be strong.
eg When you are on a cutting diet there may be an actual purpose in not getting stronger. There is a maximal strength people can possess and the closer to it the more problems people have with injuries. Muscle comes from progression rather than a high 1 rep max. So if you can retain your muscle without getting stronger, you could potentially make it easier when you go back to bulking.
Maybe it’s just my frustration at not being able to get my Captain of Crush to close all the way (less than 1cm off)[/quote]
Which COC gripper?
Strength is somewhat a relative thing. Some people just don’t have the muscle fiber distribution, limb lengths, and leverages to be able to lift world class poundages. But it’s also no coincidence that the biggest guys in the gym are generally among the strongest (for reps) as well.
Higher reps can still produced growth (speed skaters would be another example of athletes with big body parts who do a lot of volume work for them). But even higher reps require progressive overload. My guess with the rowers is that they are constantly trying to row faster (which increases the resistance they encounter from the water), which would act as a form of overload. The same can most likely be said of sprinters, speed skaters, and other athletes that you see this in.
[quote]Sentoguy wrote:
eigieinhamr wrote:
Ok so maybe mechanic wasn’t the best example. An example I see a lot is rowers with big traps. Rowers who don’t lift weights I’ve seen with huge traps. Those who do lift weights lift on a 36 rep scheme. No weighted pullups either. Just really high reps.
While I agree increase in weight is important, I think many people on this forum put too much emphasis on actual weight lifted (ie all this fawning for people who can lift heavy, even when that doesn’t correspond to a good physique). This is fine if you want to be really strong as well as putting on muscle, but I know many people who want to look good nakid much more than they want to be strong.
eg When you are on a cutting diet there may be an actual purpose in not getting stronger. There is a maximal strength people can possess and the closer to it the more problems people have with injuries. Muscle comes from progression rather than a high 1 rep max. So if you can retain your muscle without getting stronger, you could potentially make it easier when you go back to bulking.
Maybe it’s just my frustration at not being able to get my Captain of Crush to close all the way (less than 1cm off)
Which COC gripper?
Strength is somewhat a relative thing. Some people just don’t have the muscle fiber distribution, limb lengths, and leverages to be able to lift world class poundages. But it’s also no coincidence that the biggest guys in the gym are generally among the strongest (for reps) as well.
Higher reps can still produced growth (speed skaters would be another example of athletes with big body parts who do a lot of volume work for them). But even higher reps require progressive overload. My guess with the rowers is that they are constantly trying to row faster (which increases the resistance they encounter from the water), which would act as a form of overload. The same can most likely be said of sprinters, speed skaters, and other athletes that you see this in.[/quote]
Interesting post and responses. I also have to add. I rarely see a skinny mason or lumbar jack. The guys in the lumbar jack contests have diesel backs.
Strength is somewhat a relative thing. Some people just don’t have the muscle fiber distribution, limb lengths, and leverages to be able to lift world class poundages. But it’s also no coincidence that the biggest guys in the gym are generally among the strongest (for reps) as well.
Higher reps can still produced growth (speed skaters would be another example of athletes with big body parts who do a lot of volume work for them). But even higher reps require progressive overload.
My guess with the rowers is that they are constantly trying to row faster (which increases the resistance they encounter from the water), which would act as a form of overload. The same can most likely be said of sprinters, speed skaters, and other athletes that you see this in.[/quote]
And if this is the case, then yes it is possible to bodybuild with “light weights”.
CoC 1.5 (but I have closed it a couple of times now, getting the right position in the hand is essential)
Really, I dont see why you keep making these cases about people with modestly developed bodyparts.
The only rower that I have ever seen or known (and yes, I know a few) that had any appreciable amount of muscle mass is CrewPeirce and I have a feeling that has something to do with the fact that he has been powerlifting as well as rowing. I just dont see these rowers with traps up to their ears like you are talking about.
Is it really that important to make the point that someone can acheive modest development through something other than heavy weight training when no one here cares (or at least I hope not, it is the BB forum though) about acheiving modest results.
[quote]eigieinhamr wrote:
And if this is the case, then yes it is possible to bodybuild with “light weights”.
CoC 1.5 (but I have closed it a couple of times now, getting the right position in the hand is essential)[/quote]
Possible to build some muscle, yes. But certainly not optimal.
For while speed skaters and sprinters have big legs in comparison to the rest of their bodies (competitive cyclists would fall into this category as well), their body parts still aren’t all that impressive from a bodybuilding perspective.
Also, you have to take into consideration that the athletes from these sports who you actually get to see (as in olympians, tour de france riders, etc…) are the absolute cream of the crop genetically speaking.
It’s like when people bring up gymnasts to illustrate how bodyweight exercises can build muscle, yet they use olympic level gymnasts. The truth is that there are lots of guys who do gymnastics who never even come close to those levels of muscularity.
And once again, even the most genetically gifted of these individuals isn’t all that impressive from a bodybuilding standpoint.