[quote]The Mighty Stu wrote:
[quote]Yogi wrote:
I like the The Predator Program guy, personally[/quote]
lol. He is already an e-book author, just a matter of time before he’s got the front page on here.
S[/quote]
You guys just don’t understand science.
[quote]Yogi wrote:
[quote]csulli wrote:
[quote]infinite_shore wrote:
I say let’s get our pitchforks and burn him at a stake.but he doesn’t really have much experience in strength training. Just sad.[/quote]
Anyway, how fucking depressing is it that Bret is actually one of the smarter guys in the “industry”. I haven’t come across a single intelligent AND experienced S&C writer in all my years. Lyle McDonald is the closest I found,
What about Mike T?[/quote]
I like the The Predator Program guy, personally[/quote]
Thank gawd I just finished sipping my coffee before I read this.
Literally LOLd.
Way to cross reference that a55hat into the discussion. Well played, sir. Well played.
[quote]Dianaballs wrote:
also sort of on topic, where the hell did this new ugly stiff legged sumo technique come from?im seeing it more and more now. i mean if hes an expert he should know how to sumo deadlift right? [/quote]
Wellll, I think there’s room for a modified sumo. And furthermore, I don’t think it should be referred to as “not knowing how to sumo.” Bret’s looks pretty bad because he doesn’t look like he’s in a sumo position at all with his knees, but I’ve gotten to 590 with technique that everyone and their brother thinks is awful. Basically you can get the benefits of lower back strength and improved starting position by going to a modified stance.
[quote]MinotaurXXX wrote:
[quote]Yogi wrote:
[quote]csulli wrote:
[quote]infinite_shore wrote:
I say let’s get our pitchforks and burn him at a stake.but he doesn’t really have much experience in strength training. Just sad.[/quote]
Anyway, how fucking depressing is it that Bret is actually one of the smarter guys in the “industry”. I haven’t come across a single intelligent AND experienced S&C writer in all my years. Lyle McDonald is the closest I found,
What about Mike T?[/quote]
I like the The Predator Program guy, personally[/quote]
Thank gawd I just finished sipping my coffee before I read this.
Literally LOLd.
Way to cross reference that a55hat into the discussion. Well played, sir. Well played. [/quote]
thanks brother, I’m here to learn and lol
[quote]HeavyTriple wrote:
[quote]Dianaballs wrote:
also sort of on topic, where the hell did this new ugly stiff legged sumo technique come from?im seeing it more and more now. i mean if hes an expert he should know how to sumo deadlift right? [/quote]
Wellll, I think there’s room for a modified sumo. And furthermore, I don’t think it should be referred to as “not knowing how to sumo.” Bret’s looks pretty bad because he doesn’t look like he’s in a sumo position at all with his knees, but I’ve gotten to 590 with technique that everyone and their brother thinks is awful. Basically you can get the benefits of lower back strength and improved starting position by going to a modified stance.[/quote]
his isnt really doing modified sumo though, if modified sumo means a closer stance one which i presume it does. ed coan is a good example of great modified sumo, his hips are low whereas bret does a stiff leg for the entire movement
[quote]Dianaballs wrote:
[quote]HeavyTriple wrote:
[quote]Dianaballs wrote:
also sort of on topic, where the hell did this new ugly stiff legged sumo technique come from?im seeing it more and more now. i mean if hes an expert he should know how to sumo deadlift right? [/quote]
Wellll, I think there’s room for a modified sumo. And furthermore, I don’t think it should be referred to as “not knowing how to sumo.” Bret’s looks pretty bad because he doesn’t look like he’s in a sumo position at all with his knees, but I’ve gotten to 590 with technique that everyone and their brother thinks is awful. Basically you can get the benefits of lower back strength and improved starting position by going to a modified stance.[/quote]
his isnt really doing modified sumo though, if modified sumo means a closer stance one which i presume it does. ed coan is a good example of great modified sumo, his hips are low whereas bret does a stiff leg for the entire movement[/quote]
Yea, I agree Bret’s is bad. He isn’t driving his knees out like you should in a sumo or modified sumo.
A modified stance isn’t just about being closer, though. The hips will start much higher than in a full sumo, but lower than a conventional. This allows you to have more pop off the floor by involving more back, but still improves starting position and thus lockout.
[quote]HeavyTriple wrote:
[quote]Dianaballs wrote:
[quote]HeavyTriple wrote:
[quote]Dianaballs wrote:
also sort of on topic, where the hell did this new ugly stiff legged sumo technique come from?im seeing it more and more now. i mean if hes an expert he should know how to sumo deadlift right? [/quote]
Wellll, I think there’s room for a modified sumo. And furthermore, I don’t think it should be referred to as “not knowing how to sumo.” Bret’s looks pretty bad because he doesn’t look like he’s in a sumo position at all with his knees, but I’ve gotten to 590 with technique that everyone and their brother thinks is awful. Basically you can get the benefits of lower back strength and improved starting position by going to a modified stance.[/quote]
his isnt really doing modified sumo though, if modified sumo means a closer stance one which i presume it does. ed coan is a good example of great modified sumo, his hips are low whereas bret does a stiff leg for the entire movement[/quote]
Yea, I agree Bret’s is bad. He isn’t driving his knees out like you should in a sumo or modified sumo.
A modified stance isn’t just about being closer, though. The hips will start much higher than in a full sumo, but lower than a conventional. This allows you to have more pop off the floor by involving more back, but still improves starting position and thus lockout.[/quote]
right. ive always kind of zoned out on sumo dl technique haha. i tried it a few times with 135 and i felt like my entire lower body was going to tear, fuck that ha
[quote]Dianaballs wrote:
[quote]jp_dubya wrote:
OK, if we are going to bash an author because they are weak, or because they are not strong…How many other authors and contributors barely look like they even lift? I can think of at least 5.
I also know a few people that are huge and their reasoning and explanations are silly, their approach is silly, yet they are still pretty big and strong.
My oncologist never had cancer, so he must not know anything. [/quote]
those other authors being supposed strength gurus confuses me just as much as bret being hailed one, although i suppose if you say something with enough authority and conviction, youll attract a following of people who dont know any better.
that is such an awful awful strawman. bret hasent really produced any top level strength athletes,or been successful training himself. this is equatable to your oncologist never curing anyone, because then,you know, it would be safe to say he DIDNT know anything.
and LOL at him bragging about his fucking highest hip torque record. god. i have the highest reverse grip cheat curl record set between the hours of 10.30 and 2 o clock ages 23-24 in my county[/quote]
Which contributor has produced a top level athlete?
The oncologist was a reach. Agreed.
Back to the article…
For the record, I have no problem with lifters who use anabolic steroids. Dozens of lifting partners of mine over the years have used them, and I honestly couldn’t care less, as long as they went about it in a wise and safe manner. However, I have a HUGE problem with anabolic steroid using lifters who poke fun of natural lifters for being weak. In fact, I believe it’s one of the most deplorable things I see on the internet. Think about it these individuals are taking substances that artificially make them bigger and stronger, then going around and bullying lifters who are natural. If you do this, it makes you absolutely pathetic.
I agree with this part almost completely, except for the “…most deplorable” part. Surely there is more on the internet that is tons worse.
If you get something out of what he writes, then great. If not, move along. Internet forum-ites are a strange breed.
What specifically in this piece is wrong? If that can be discussed. Stu, I think, posted the piece for IT to be discussed, not Bret.
lol, again with the “assisted lifters making fun of nattys”
When does this ever happen? I’ve never seen it
"Many steroid-using powerlifters donâ??t have a good grip on what transfers best for the natural lifter, and they donâ??t optimally understand program design for the natural lifter. Why? Because many of them have never controlled variables. Fluctuating drug cycles confound training/nutrition cycles. Because when the going got tough, many of them simply took more steroids. Many figure out quickly that taking another gram of testosterone or adding in trenbolone transferred very well to strength and got them through their training ruts.
Because it came too easy for many of them. Most never spent 8 months hammering the bench press, only to gain a meager 10 lbs of strength. Many never took the time to learn the effects of different protocols. When they were stagnating, many simply took more juice. "
It’s nonsense like this that makes people not want to dignify this article with an actual discussion.
Contreras is clearly a really insecure guy who pretends to be impressed with himself and gets butthurt when others see through it. If he was really ok with what he’s done he wouldn’t make up stories and “defend his honor” to the internet masses.
Also, his “strong, muscular pecs” comment shows just how off he is. Seriously, who says that?
[quote]MattyXL wrote:
[quote]csulli wrote:
[quote]MattyXL wrote:
Paul Carter:
I don’t think it’s cool for anyone to look down on another lifter who is natural if he is enhanced.
Hell, I will take that one step further. I don’t think we as lifters should be looking down on each other at all, thought it does happen at times, and even I have been guilty of this.[/quote]
LOL
Paul Carter has been like, the MOST guilty of this. I’m glad to see he’s, ostensibly, turned over a new leaf or whatever. I agree with most of what he said in that post, but I found this bit kinda funny and ironic given who it’s coming from.[/quote]
He has flip flopped on a lot of issues, one of them being this very website and its products. I like his training methods but steer clear of everything else.
[/quote]
Flip flopped on issues?
Everyone has the right to change their mind as they learn and grow. Do you believe all the same things about life and lifting that you believed 5+ years ago? I hope not.
Second, my opinion on T-Nation has been that, like most sites, it has good content and bad content. Unlike a lot of people that hide behind fake personas while they bad mouth people in private, I’ve been open about my opinions on various issues. If that pisses people off I don’t care. Most people just want people to be passive in their opinions or beliefs and that’s just not me and won’t ever be. I have learned how to temper them a bit, and understand I don’t have to argue about everything.
As far as putting down people, I said I’ve been as guilty as anyone else at times. However to say I’ve done it more than everyone else is baseless and absurd AT BEST.
[quote]Paul Carter wrote:
[quote]MattyXL wrote:
[quote]csulli wrote:
[quote]MattyXL wrote:
Paul Carter:
I don’t think it’s cool for anyone to look down on another lifter who is natural if he is enhanced.
Hell, I will take that one step further. I don’t think we as lifters should be looking down on each other at all, thought it does happen at times, and even I have been guilty of this.[/quote]
LOL
Paul Carter has been like, the MOST guilty of this. I’m glad to see he’s, ostensibly, turned over a new leaf or whatever. I agree with most of what he said in that post, but I found this bit kinda funny and ironic given who it’s coming from.[/quote]
He has flip flopped on a lot of issues, one of them being this very website and its products. I like his training methods but steer clear of everything else.
[/quote]
Flip flopped on issues?
Everyone has the right to change their mind as they learn and grow. Do you believe all the same things about life and lifting that you believed 5+ years ago? I hope not.
Second, my opinion on T-Nation has been that, like most sites, it has good content and bad content. Unlike a lot of people that hide behind fake personas while they bad mouth people in private, I’ve been open about my opinions on various issues. If that pisses people off I don’t care. Most people just want people to be passive in their opinions or beliefs and that’s just not me and won’t ever be. I have learned how to temper them a bit, and understand I don’t have to argue about everything.
As far as putting down people, I said I’ve been as guilty as anyone else at times. However to say I’ve done it more than everyone else is baseless and absurd AT BEST. [/quote]
Paul,
Of course there are things I have changed my tune on five years ago. With regards to your views specifically with this site, its obvious you have changed your tune. I understand that, and it seems as if when a good, highly respected friend of yours became even more of a contributor and vouched for Biotest products you changed your tune as well, and hell thats fine I have done it my life as well. Nothing wrong with changing your mind on ideas, people and issues, it was relevant to the conversation we were/are having here.
[quote]infinite_shore wrote:
I say let’s get our pitchforks and burn him at a stake.
Anyway, how fucking depressing is it that Bret is actually one of the smarter guys in the “industry”. I haven’t come across a single intelligent AND experienced S&C writer in all my years. Lyle McDonald is the closest I found, but he doesn’t really have much experience in strength training. Just sad.[/quote]
Either you have extremely high standards or you don’t read enough. What do you think of Greg Nuckols or Scott Stevenson? Mike Tuchscherer or Borge Fagerli?
If you use steroids your a cheater period.
Bret was “called out” as being weak, not because he randomly entered a meet and had pretty mediocre numbers, but because he wrote a book called “2x4 The Most Effective Training Program for Maximum Strength and Muscle.”
I think it’s perfectly fair, and this something Tate has written about, to ask what qualifies a person to be an expert in the field of strength and conditioning. I think this is even more true when talking about claims made about being an expert, let alone the “Most Effective”, in a particular discipline. I have read much from Bret that I like, and much where I feel he is way out of his depth. If you are going to write a book like that and are neither strong, nor have any claim to coaching others to be strong, expect criticism. Some of these criticisms are probably a bit harsh, but accurate nonetheless.
It makes matters much worse when the videos of his lifts show rather poor technique even for a intermediate lifter, let alone a coach/trainer/author.
Bret has gotten some flak in the past about his numbers and always replies with - I’m tall, levers and such. No one wants to hear it. Again, if he could claim more than knowing strong lifters (many of whom probably are assisted), like have produced results in others, even if he himself were not strong, he would have some ground to stand on. He is really just being called out for making claims that have no merit.
And anyone stronger than me is obviously some kind of cheater.
[quote]Waylon wrote:
Bret was “called out” as being weak, not because he randomly entered a meet and had pretty mediocre numbers, but because he wrote a book called “2x4 The Most Effective Training Program for Maximum Strength and Muscle.”
I think it’s perfectly fair, and this something Tate has written about, to ask what qualifies a person to be an expert in the field of strength and conditioning. I think this is even more true when talking about claims made about being an expert, let alone the “Most Effective”, in a particular discipline. I have read much from Bret that I like, and much where I feel he is way out of his depth. If you are going to write a book like that and are neither strong, nor have any claim to coaching others to be strong, expect criticism. Some of these criticisms are probably a bit harsh, but accurate nonetheless.
It makes matters much worse when the videos of his lifts show rather poor technique even for a intermediate lifter, let alone a coach/trainer/author.
Bret has gotten some flak in the past about his numbers and always replies with - I’m tall, levers and such. No one wants to hear it. Again, if he could claim more than knowing strong lifters (many of whom probably are assisted), like have produced results in others, even if he himself were not strong, he would have some ground to stand on. He is really just being called out for making claims that have no merit.[/quote]
This is one of the better and well thought out criticisms of Contreras in this thread. However, I do want to point out something: Contreras is strong. Maybe not in the world of powerlifting, but his numbers are better than what most will ever achieve. I think sometimes people get so immersed in this sub-culture that they forget what regular people are like. And I’m not talking about couch potatoes, I’m talking about normal people who go to the 24 Hour Fitness gyms and dutifully hoist iron on a regular basis. I have never seen one of these guys pull a 600 pound deadlift. I have never seen one of these guys do a 400 pound squat. I can count on one hand the times I have seen one of these guys press 300 pounds. Again, these are not powerlifters or even college athletes, they’re just regular guys.
As to Contreras never having trained an elite powerlifter, well, what is more impressive, helping many regular people improve their numbers beyond what they could do on their own, or helping a handful of assisted, genetically elite lifters improve their numbers. They are both impressive, but in different ways. Just as Phil Jackson and Gregg Popovich may be the best coaches for professional basketball players, they may not be the best coach for a high school team or even a college team.
I don’t know anything about Contreras’s 2x4 program, I’m just saying the fact that he’s not strong by powerlifting standards or hasn’t trained anyone strong by powerlifting standards should not be considered prima facie evidence that his program sucks.
Going to have to disagree with you on a few points there Pantherhare.
You say that it’s more impressive that Bret helps ordinary people improve their numbers than a genetically gifted, assisted powerlifter, but that’s not a fair comparison. If he’d trained ordinary people to achieve elite numbers, then that’d be worth bragging about.
I agree that forums like this give you an unrealistic picture of how strong average gym users are, but I still don’t think you could really say that Bret is strong enough to give credence to his 2x4 system. Stronger than average, yes, but certainly not so strong that you would buy his book, IMO.
If his program could turn people into elite powerlifters, why hasn’t it done the same for him? And I don’t want to hear that shite about leverages.
For what it’s worth, I actually really like Bret Contreras, but I’ll never do 2x4…
[quote]Pantherhare wrote:
This is one of the better and well thought out criticisms of Contreras in this thread. However, I do want to point out something: Contreras is strong. Maybe not in the world of powerlifting, but his numbers are better than what most will ever achieve. I think sometimes people get so immersed in this sub-culture that they forget what regular people are like. And I’m not talking about couch potatoes, I’m talking about normal people who go to the 24 Hour Fitness gyms and dutifully hoist iron on a regular basis. I have never seen one of these guys pull a 600 pound deadlift. I have never seen one of these guys do a 400 pound squat. I can count on one hand the times I have seen one of these guys press 300 pounds. Again, these are not powerlifters or even college athletes, they’re just regular guys.
As to Contreras never having trained an elite powerlifter, well, what is more impressive, helping many regular people improve their numbers beyond what they could do on their own, or helping a handful of assisted, genetically elite lifters improve their numbers. They are both impressive, but in different ways. Just as Phil Jackson and Gregg Popovich may be the best coaches for professional basketball players, they may not be the best coach for a high school team or even a college team.
I don’t know anything about Contreras’s 2x4 program, I’m just saying the fact that he’s not strong by powerlifting standards or hasn’t trained anyone strong by powerlifting standards should not be considered prima facie evidence that his program sucks.
[/quote]
I think this is an excellent post.