[quote]-Sigil- wrote:
CT - hypothetically what kind of physique would you get doing ring training for upper body and O-lifts for lower body. It’s been a perfect blend for me recently and incredibly fun so I’ve been gravitating towards that lately.
My thinking is “tension is tension” and muscles don’t “see” the weight on the bar, but only fire in response to the neural drive. On rings, you can get incredible tension on lats through front levers and tension on pressing muscles through modified iron crosses. Different angles, body position, etc. can produce so many variations in holds and target muscle emphasis.
Basically, does the body perceive tension from a tucked front lever row (intense focus/form) different than a snatch grip bent over row? Or feet elevated ring flyes variations vs. different angles of bench presses? Or handstand pushups vs. OHP/push press? Etc.
If you do body weight variations that legitimately cause you to “fail” around 8-10RM and you accrue massive volume on these, is the hypertrophy effect less/greater/comparable to doing barbell equivalent?
Lower body and traps would be optimally stimulated by sghp, deadlift, squat, etc.
Not assuming rings are superior for upper body by any means but just very curious on your thoughts. Is “tension” through leverage/bodyweight less powerful than that from explosive contractions via external weights?
[/quote]
Assuming a very low level of body fat (8% or less), roughly 2.5 to 2.65lbs of body weight per inch of height is the upper limit I see by doing exclusively that type of training.
So if you are 5’6", about 165 to 175lbs in very lean condition
If you are 5’9", about 172 to 182lbs in very lean condition
If you are 6’, about 180-190lbs in very lean condition
It doesn’t sound like much, but keep in mind that the average ring specialist are on average 135 to 140lbs on 5’3’’ to 5’6"" giving a ratio of about 2.1 to 2.2… with legs equivalent to their upper body they would likely fall in the 2.4 - 2.5 range.
That is the highest I see normal people possibly achieving by doing only ring and olympic lifts using hypertrophy parameters. So for most people achieving 90% of that is realistic and the truely dedicated who do it for long enough could reach the highest level possible.
Obviously things can be different if you are more muscular then that to start with. For example I was 217 when I began focusing on rings, I’m 5’9", I didn’t regress to 182. But I didn’t gain size either in that my weight did not go up (I stayed in the 213-217 range). What happened though is that the look of my physique changed… more biceps, much better lats, slightly improved chest, shoulders stayed round but lost some size, legs decreased a bit, lost some traps. So ultimately I had a “redistribution” of the muscle I had. Would it have been different if I also did olympic lifts? Maybe, but I believe that the body will tend to limit the amount of body weight it carries when a significant portion of the training is done using body weight exercises.
As for the type of physique. From my experience doing rings almost exclusively for 6-8 months, and having done the olympic lifts as an olympic lifter for 6 years, I can say that it would lean to a pretty complete physique in that no muscle group would be truly neglected or underdeveloped. If you stick to doing “only olympic lifts for the lower body” (no squatting or deadlifting) you might have legs that are slightly small relative to the upper body, but not to the point of making you look weird.
A caveat on olympic lifting to build size… they are not ideal for that purpose, even if done for slightly higher reps because of the lack of eccentric and low time under tension. High pulls will be a bit more effective, especially if done from the hang.
BTW, a while ago you posted a biceps exercise you came up with on rings, could you post it again?
