Oh well… carrying on with the broscience…
There is NO FUCKING HYPERTROPHY REP RANGE. This is a fallacy based on flawed assumptions on unproven nonsense about sarcoplasmic vs myofibrillar hypertrophy. Hence, there is no such thing as REP RANGES DICTATING WHETHER YOU ARE TRAINING FOR STRENGTH OR HYPERTROPHY.
dt79- I agree. I think of hypertrophy phases as placing more emphasis on building strength and size (getting high total rep count regardless of set/rep scheme) and strength phases as placing more emphasis on peaking to display maximal strength (working with higher intensities). Some programs have no distinction between the two because they are directly related.
craze9- To be fair I’m not saying that hip hinging exercises aren’t useful. I just think that the deadlift and bench press aren’t necessary for people not competing in powerlifting. The drawback with the deadlift is that a person starts off at an arbitrary pull height and in the weakest position of the lift. This makes it more difficult to learn and hard to fully benefit from without going through a large learning curve. Exercises like the good morning, RDL, SLDL, etc. are better alternatives and are great for general strength and development.
There is also a large learning curve for the bench press because the shoulders are externally supported making it difficult to learn intuitively what muscles are necessary for stabilization. It seems like push up variations, including weighted push ups, are more useful and can reduce the learning curve if transitioning to bench press later on. This is just my opinion so it’s fine if others disagree with it.
Edit: To clarify, higher intensities can include many forms. It could be near max PRs for reps, TUT, ROM, etc. - whatever the progression goal is. It doesn’t always have to be a 1RM.
holy s==t this thread is why you so many beginers say" i am so confused"
granted there is some good info in this thread and some of the posters on this thread i follow their posts and blogs
but s==t keep it simple adjust as neccesary everthing works for somebody
[quote]cavemansam wrote:
holy s==t this thread is why you so many beginers say" i am so confused"
granted there is some good info in this thread and some of the posters on this thread i follow their posts and blogs
but s==t keep it simple adjust as neccesary everthing works for somebody[/quote]
Teeheehee.
[quote]cavemansam wrote:
holy s==t this thread is why you so many beginers say" i am so confused"
granted there is some good info in this thread and some of the posters on this thread i follow their posts and blogs
but s==t keep it simple adjust as neccesary everthing works for somebody[/quote]
At one point, I realized the presence of debate on the topic of lifting is less indicative that things are more confusing are more indicative that there are multiple avenues for success, which makes things very liberating.
Assuming, of course, both sides have encountered success with their methods.
i think people with alot of experience would understand what you see in this thread of multiple avenues to success
but people with little experience and understanding i think would be confused by this thread
[quote]cavemansam wrote:
i think people with alot of experience would understand what you see in this thread of multiple avenues to success
but people with little experience and understanding i think would be confused by this thread
[/quote]
Well, hopefully they’ll think to look at the results of those offering advice. That went a long way for me.
that is why i follow your blog
[quote]cavemansam wrote:
that is why i follow your blog [/quote]
x2. T3hPwnisher is one of the best contributors on this site.
You guys are right. I enjoy discussing and learning about sports science (and bro science) but need to remember that sometimes it’s more useful to keep things simple.
[quote]lift206 wrote:
[quote]cavemansam wrote:
that is why i follow your blog [/quote]
x2. T3hPwnisher is one of the best contributors on this site.[/quote]
x3
Th3Pwnisher has had more impact on my training than any other contributors to this site.
[quote]
You guys are right. I enjoy discussing and learning about sports science (and bro science) but need to remember that sometimes it’s more useful to keep things simple.[/quote]
More useful for who?
beginners
[quote]dagill2 wrote:
More useful for who?[/quote]
Beginners or anyone. It depends on the situation.
Sometimes throwing a bunch of info at someone isn’t helpful unless they ask for it. The content and delivery are important and sometimes I don’t think about that.
Beginners are already bombarded by most of the things discussed here through articles by wannabe authors on various websites trying to find a niche in this industry, most of the time written in an overly complex manner to instill “credibility”. I believe we’re simply trying to put these things a proper context.
I appreciate the kind words everyone.
[quote]dt79 wrote:
Beginners are already bombarded by most of the things discussed here through articles by wannabe authors on various websites trying to find a niche in this industry, most of the time written in an overly complex manner to instill “credibility”. I believe we’re simply trying to put these things a proper context.[/quote]
Spot on. The reality is, the things that ensure success in training (showing up, hard work, consistency and time) don’t take up a lot of space on a page. It’s hard to sell them, and you can’t really write a whole lot on it. If you want to write a lot, you have to specialize and make minor things seem huge.
[quote]T3hPwnisher wrote:
I appreciate the kind words everyone.
[quote]dt79 wrote:
Beginners are already bombarded by most of the things discussed here through articles by wannabe authors on various websites trying to find a niche in this industry, most of the time written in an overly complex manner to instill “credibility”. I believe we’re simply trying to put these things a proper context.[/quote]
Spot on. The reality is, the things that ensure success in training (showing up, hard work, consistency and time) don’t take up a lot of space on a page. It’s hard to sell them, and you can’t really write a whole lot on it. If you want to write a lot, you have to specialize and make minor things seem huge.[/quote]
I saw an interview between Dan John and Mark Rippetoe in which they spent the first 1 minute (approximately) agreeing that they agreed on the basics (showing up, lifting heavy weights etc.), and the following 30-60 minutes discussing the finer points of their contrasting training philosophies. I think this sums up the issue here, most people agree on about 80% of training so that bit isn’t discussed too much, therefore beginners mistakenly believe that it isn’t important and that the remaining 20% (that gets all the attention) must be the most important.
If I was to talk about my house I might talk about how many bedrooms it has or whether the bathroom was upstairs or downstairs. I wouldn’t discuss the important things, like whether it had a foundation or a roof or a door, not because I don’t think they’re more important, but because I assume they’re a given.
[quote]dagill2 wrote:
[quote]T3hPwnisher wrote:
I appreciate the kind words everyone.
[quote]dt79 wrote:
Beginners are already bombarded by most of the things discussed here through articles by wannabe authors on various websites trying to find a niche in this industry, most of the time written in an overly complex manner to instill “credibility”. I believe we’re simply trying to put these things a proper context.[/quote]
Spot on. The reality is, the things that ensure success in training (showing up, hard work, consistency and time) don’t take up a lot of space on a page. It’s hard to sell them, and you can’t really write a whole lot on it. If you want to write a lot, you have to specialize and make minor things seem huge.[/quote]
I saw an interview between Dan John and Mark Rippetoe in which they spent the first 1 minute (approximately) agreeing that they agreed on the basics (showing up, lifting heavy weights etc.), and the following 30-60 minutes discussing the finer points of their contrasting training philosophies. I think this sums up the issue here, most people agree on about 80% of training so that bit isn’t discussed too much, therefore beginners mistakenly believe that it isn’t important and that the remaining 20% (that gets all the attention) must be the most important.
If I was to talk about my house I might talk about how many bedrooms it has or whether the bathroom was upstairs or downstairs. I wouldn’t discuss the important things, like whether it had a foundation or a roof or a door, not because I don’t think they’re more important, but because I assume they’re a given.[/quote]
Yeah, it would be useful if there were a sticky for this that beginners could read. Things could be added or removed by general consensus.
[quote]lift206 wrote:
Yeah, it would be useful if there were a sticky for this that beginners could read. Things could be added or removed by general consensus.[/quote]
In my experience, those stickies tend to be well regarded by the experienced folks and completely ignored by the beginners. In the off chance that they actually read it, they’ll usually use it as fodder to make a good general point (You should lift weights) argue with a very specific point (“I read a study somewhere that said lifting weights actually causes premature death in 1 armed diabetic squirrels. Why does the sticky advocate this?!”).
I like the idea of coming up with a sort of “10 commandments” of training that can be universally agreed upon, but I’ve never actually witnessed it help the people it was intended to help. We pretty much all had to learn the hard way.
[quote]T3hPwnisher wrote:
[quote]lift206 wrote:
Yeah, it would be useful if there were a sticky for this that beginners could read. Things could be added or removed by general consensus.[/quote]
In my experience, those stickies tend to be well regarded by the experienced folks and completely ignored by the beginners. In the off chance that they actually read it, they’ll usually use it as fodder to make a good general point (You should lift weights) argue with a very specific point (“I read a study somewhere that said lifting weights actually causes premature death in 1 armed diabetic squirrels. Why does the sticky advocate this?!”).
I like the idea of coming up with a sort of “10 commandments” of training that can be universally agreed upon, but I’ve never actually witnessed it help the people it was intended to help. We pretty much all had to learn the hard way.[/quote]
Haha, that is true. Unless you had Ed Coan or someone similar telling you exactly what to do. That man is a genius and very humble.
[quote]T3hPwnisher wrote:
Well, hopefully they’ll think to look at the results of those offering advice. That went a long way for me.[/quote]
It’s true. Kingbeef has a bigger back than me, and he didn’t deadlift at all!
Then again, Ronnie Coleman had a bigger back than Kingbeef, and he DID deadlift. Light weight, baby!!!
[quote]craze9 wrote:
[quote]T3hPwnisher wrote:
Well, hopefully they’ll think to look at the results of those offering advice. That went a long way for me.[/quote]
It’s true. Kingbeef has a bigger back than me, and he didn’t deadlift at all!
Then again, Ronnie Coleman had a bigger back than Kingbeef, and he DID deadlift. Light weight, baby!!!
[/quote]
I would definitely follow Ronnie’s advice on training. He kept things pretty basic too from what I read.