Deadlift on a Leg Day or a Back Day???

Training
21

[quote]jskrabac wrote:

[quote]ironmanzvw wrote:
I feel like lately…a lot of the much smaller guys have been jumping on the whole “no need to go heavy” bandwagon. [/quote]

C’mon dude. I really hope that’s not directed at me. You know I’m smarter than that, and I’d never say there’s “no need to go heavy.” This isn’t a polarized thing. Just because someone says “hey, going heavy is not all there is to it” doesn’t mean “don’t lift heavy! just go for pump, brah!”

FTR, I hit a 550 dead and 315 bench press within my first two years of training, and I 100% believe it’s part of the reason my back stood out amongst the other guys in my show. [/quote]

Not directed towards you at all man. Just a general comment. I think you have an impressive physique, most definitely.

And those are goood #s. Are you just trying to say that you do lift heavy too? Are those maxes? I don’t like maxes, dangerous and silly to me. I prefer to rep 505 x 10 on deads and 405 x 5 on bench than go up in weight for single weights. I have enough injuries lol!

22

[quote]jskrabac wrote:

[quote]ironmanzvw wrote:

[quote]jskrabac wrote:

[quote]ironmanzvw wrote:

[quote]jskrabac wrote:

[quote]ironmanzvw wrote:
I don’t care what anyone says about rep schemes and TUT and all these different fancy methods, if your can consistently increase your lifts, particularly those big compound ones, you WILL grow. You have to in order to accommodate the increasing loads you’re moving.[/quote]

That would be true if size of the muscle were the only component that contributed to strength. You’re forgetting neuromuscular efficiency–the nervous system becoming more effective at firing more motor units in less time. That can absolutely be achieved without forcing the muscle to grow (especially when there’s not a caloric surplus). Look at Eric Cressey who deadlift 660 at like 160lb. [/quote]

So you’re saying that lifting heavier weights over long periods of time will not make you bigger…given the the proper nutrition and rest?

I fully understand that the nervous system adapts. But what about progression overload?

Take two lifters with identical genetics, diet, etc. If both deadlift for 1 year, and the first guy stays at say…315
X 10…and the second guy progresses his way to 500 x 10…who do you think will have a bigger back at the end of said year?[/quote]

That is not what I’m saying at all.

P does not imply Q

is not equivalent to

P implies not Q.

I have made a statement like the former, not the latter.

And I can’t answer your question, because you’re missing many variables. If the guy who hit 500x10 did so by ONLY hitting squats and deads on 5/3/1 and maybe some pendlay rows for good measure, and the 315x10 guy was doing training program by JM for back, then I’d put my money on the second guy.

I have trained at PL gyms before with 500+ squatters who had smaller legs than me. I have trained at BB gyms before with natties with much bigger legs then me who I never see using more than 2pps on smith machine squats or 1pps on stiff-legs. [/quote]

You completely took my post out of context. I said that both lifters had identical training, nutrition, etc. Only difference is the weight they could pull for 1 set of 10. Not 5/3/1, nor any other rep schemes. You are adding variables.

This is much simpler than you seem to be making it.[/quote]

Well you didn’t say identical training in the OP =) If identical everything else, then yes, of course 500 guy wins.
[/quote]

My mistake!!! You’re absolutely right, left that tidbit out. I’m on my phone at work lol.

Ok, glad we agree on that.

I don’t like talking shit and arguing or any of that nonsense lol. Rather learn from one another :slight_smile:

23

I feel like everyone’s in agreement here, but it’s not really transparent, because we are arguing different aspects of the same argument.

24

[quote]jskrabac wrote:
I feel like everyone’s in agreement here, but it’s not really transparent, because we are arguing different aspects of the same argument. [/quote]

Lol leaning towards the same conclusion.

25

[quote]ironmanzvw wrote:

[quote]jskrabac wrote:

[quote]ironmanzvw wrote:
I feel like lately…a lot of the much smaller guys have been jumping on the whole “no need to go heavy” bandwagon. [/quote]

C’mon dude. I really hope that’s not directed at me. You know I’m smarter than that, and I’d never say there’s “no need to go heavy.” This isn’t a polarized thing. Just because someone says “hey, going heavy is not all there is to it” doesn’t mean “don’t lift heavy! just go for pump, brah!”

FTR, I hit a 550 dead and 315 bench press within my first two years of training, and I 100% believe it’s part of the reason my back stood out amongst the other guys in my show. [/quote]

Not directed towards you at all man. Just a general comment. I think you have an impressive physique, most definitely.

And those are goood #s. Are you just trying to say that you do lift heavy too? Are those maxes? I don’t like maxes, dangerous and silly to me. I prefer to rep 505 x 10 on deads and 405 x 5 on bench than go up in weight for single weights. I have enough injuries lol![/quote]

Yea, those were 1rm. I don’t really go below 6 reps on sets much these days though. And I log all my workouts to ensure there’s progressive overload going on, it’s just not about the number on the bar anymore. Might be dropping 15 sec off my rest time. Adding a drop to a drop set. Adding 3 sec negatives to a squat and trying to hit same numbers as my old normal tempo reps. Stuff like that.

26

Dear T Nation,
This is a dispute settled properly and proof that you don’t have to go into 18 pages of pure shit storm to get there.

Take notes!!

Love,
That d-bag who almost quit on nez for drinking JUST A BEER!

27

[quote]jskrabac wrote:

[quote]ironmanzvw wrote:

[quote]jskrabac wrote:

[quote]ironmanzvw wrote:
I feel like lately…a lot of the much smaller guys have been jumping on the whole “no need to go heavy” bandwagon. [/quote]

C’mon dude. I really hope that’s not directed at me. You know I’m smarter than that, and I’d never say there’s “no need to go heavy.” This isn’t a polarized thing. Just because someone says “hey, going heavy is not all there is to it” doesn’t mean “don’t lift heavy! just go for pump, brah!”

FTR, I hit a 550 dead and 315 bench press within my first two years of training, and I 100% believe it’s part of the reason my back stood out amongst the other guys in my show. [/quote]

Not directed towards you at all man. Just a general comment. I think you have an impressive physique, most definitely.

And those are goood #s. Are you just trying to say that you do lift heavy too? Are those maxes? I don’t like maxes, dangerous and silly to me. I prefer to rep 505 x 10 on deads and 405 x 5 on bench than go up in weight for single weights. I have enough injuries lol![/quote]

Yea, those were 1rm. I don’t really go below 6 reps on sets much these days though. And I log all my workouts to ensure there’s progressive overload going on, it’s just not about the number on the bar anymore. Might be dropping 15 sec off my rest time. Adding a drop to a drop set. Adding 3 sec negatives to a squat and trying to hit same numbers as my old normal tempo reps. Stuff like that. [/quote]

Sounds pretty solid to me.

Just out of curiosity…what’s your weight right now. Or your current avi anyway. I’m always interested to see what guys end up weighing at such low bf

28

[quote]ironmanzvw wrote:
Sounds pretty solid to me.

Just out of curiosity…what’s your weight right now. Or your current avi anyway. I’m always interested to see what guys end up weighing at such low bf
[/quote]

Never dropped below 175 on stage…much to my surprise. My plan is to compete again at a stage weight of 185. 2-3 years I believe. I’m still new enough that +5lb/year is completely reasonable.

29

[quote]jskrabac wrote:

[quote]ironmanzvw wrote:
Sounds pretty solid to me.

Just out of curiosity…what’s your weight right now. Or your current avi anyway. I’m always interested to see what guys end up weighing at such low bf
[/quote]

Never dropped below 175 on stage…much to my surprise. My plan is to compete again at a stage weight of 185. 2-3 years I believe. I’m still new enough that +5lb/year is completely reasonable.
[/quote]

That’s cool. What is your general weight in the off season?

30

[quote]ironmanzvw wrote:

[quote]Stronghold wrote:

[quote]jskrabac wrote:
That can absolutely be achieved without forcing the muscle to grow (especially when there’s not a caloric surplus). Look at Eric Cressey who deadlift 660 at like 160lb. [/quote]

You’ve only got your story half-way correct. There is a limited extent to which increased intramuscular coordination and efficiency can improve one’s strength. There is a point at which more muscle is necessary to be stronger. In reality, the strongest men on earth use plenty of reps in their training and carry a large amount of muscle mass, as it’s not simply “neuromuscular effeiciency” that’s lifting those big weights.

Glad you brought up the common example of Cressey’s 660. First off, that lift is incomplete and wouldn’t pass in a meet, he doesn’t lock his hips out, and his knees come unlocked. You’re using a stupid example of a guy with excellent leverages wearing a deadlift suit not completing a lift. Sure, there are people with leverages favorable to a specific lift that may be able to lift a weight on that movement that is impressive without having an impressive physique, but those individuals also start out at a higher level on that lift. Someone with orangutan arms like Cressey very realistically can pull 500 in their first year of serious training, whereas someone with more normal proportions will achieve this in 2-3 years of training.

Gaining strength nothing more to a bodybuilder than simply another method of increasing tension. It becomes necessary for becoming larger at some point, as even the most dedicated pre-fatigue/pre-exhaust/super slow/whatever advocates will acknowledge that they use heavier weights generally now than they did when they started training. Meadows is a huge advocate of this style of training and he’s still using 300-400 lbs on his pressing exercises. For bodybuilding, it’s a matter of being able to generate more force over time while also being able to do so in the manner that most adequately stresses and stimulates the muscular tissue. Going from doing 200 lbs for 8 reps to 300 lbs for 8 reps on a Mountaindog-style decline press with a slow, controlled negative, deep stretch, and hard flex/contraction will undoubtedly give you a bigger chest, neuromuscular efficiency be damned.[/quote]

My point exactly.

I feel like lately…a lot of the much smaller guys have been jumping on the whole “no need to go heavy” bandwagon. That’s bullshit and an excuse for pushing heavy weight. If you bench 225 for 10 today, and 1 year from now you still only bench 225 for 10, same tempo, form, etc. Your pecs will not have grown. Something has to change to FORCE muscle growth. And eventually, whether the guys with sub par #'s for their lifts will have to increase the weight to promote further growth.[/quote]

The weight I am using right now and have for the past 6 months are less than last summer. 1 year ago. I Am a bit heavier and a bit leaner. So yes. Weight is not always the governing factor. You can structure workouts to crush your muscles and grow safer using less weight. I will take option 2

31

[quote]ryanbCXG wrote:

[quote]ironmanzvw wrote:

[quote]Stronghold wrote:

[quote]jskrabac wrote:
That can absolutely be achieved without forcing the muscle to grow (especially when there’s not a caloric surplus). Look at Eric Cressey who deadlift 660 at like 160lb. [/quote]

You’ve only got your story half-way correct. There is a limited extent to which increased intramuscular coordination and efficiency can improve one’s strength. There is a point at which more muscle is necessary to be stronger. In reality, the strongest men on earth use plenty of reps in their training and carry a large amount of muscle mass, as it’s not simply “neuromuscular effeiciency” that’s lifting those big weights.

Glad you brought up the common example of Cressey’s 660. First off, that lift is incomplete and wouldn’t pass in a meet, he doesn’t lock his hips out, and his knees come unlocked. You’re using a stupid example of a guy with excellent leverages wearing a deadlift suit not completing a lift. Sure, there are people with leverages favorable to a specific lift that may be able to lift a weight on that movement that is impressive without having an impressive physique, but those individuals also start out at a higher level on that lift. Someone with orangutan arms like Cressey very realistically can pull 500 in their first year of serious training, whereas someone with more normal proportions will achieve this in 2-3 years of training.

Gaining strength nothing more to a bodybuilder than simply another method of increasing tension. It becomes necessary for becoming larger at some point, as even the most dedicated pre-fatigue/pre-exhaust/super slow/whatever advocates will acknowledge that they use heavier weights generally now than they did when they started training. Meadows is a huge advocate of this style of training and he’s still using 300-400 lbs on his pressing exercises. For bodybuilding, it’s a matter of being able to generate more force over time while also being able to do so in the manner that most adequately stresses and stimulates the muscular tissue. Going from doing 200 lbs for 8 reps to 300 lbs for 8 reps on a Mountaindog-style decline press with a slow, controlled negative, deep stretch, and hard flex/contraction will undoubtedly give you a bigger chest, neuromuscular efficiency be damned.[/quote]

My point exactly.

I feel like lately…a lot of the much smaller guys have been jumping on the whole “no need to go heavy” bandwagon. That’s bullshit and an excuse for pushing heavy weight. If you bench 225 for 10 today, and 1 year from now you still only bench 225 for 10, same tempo, form, etc. Your pecs will not have grown. Something has to change to FORCE muscle growth. And eventually, whether the guys with sub par #'s for their lifts will have to increase the weight to promote further growth.[/quote]

The weight I am using right now and have for the past 6 months are less than last summer. 1 year ago. I Am a bit heavier and a bit leaner. So yes. Weight is not always the governing factor. You can structure workouts to crush your muscles and grow safer using less weight. I will take option 2
[/quote]

Judging from your avi, you’re pretty new to bbing, and have tons of room for growth…no matter the means. So it is completely understandable that you were able to drop some bf and gain a little muscle changing the routine…even if you dropped your weights some. You were obviously training inefficiently before, now you’re not!!! I’m sure you mended your diet as well?

Point being, at some point, your gains will slow, then stop, heavier weight is introduced. No matter how you structure your workout. You simply have not reached that point yet.

32

[quote]ironmanzvw wrote:

[quote]ryanbCXG wrote:

[quote]ironmanzvw wrote:

[quote]Stronghold wrote:

[quote]jskrabac wrote:
That can absolutely be achieved without forcing the muscle to grow (especially when there’s not a caloric surplus). Look at Eric Cressey who deadlift 660 at like 160lb. [/quote]

You’ve only got your story half-way correct. There is a limited extent to which increased intramuscular coordination and efficiency can improve one’s strength. There is a point at which more muscle is necessary to be stronger. In reality, the strongest men on earth use plenty of reps in their training and carry a large amount of muscle mass, as it’s not simply “neuromuscular effeiciency” that’s lifting those big weights.

Glad you brought up the common example of Cressey’s 660. First off, that lift is incomplete and wouldn’t pass in a meet, he doesn’t lock his hips out, and his knees come unlocked. You’re using a stupid example of a guy with excellent leverages wearing a deadlift suit not completing a lift. Sure, there are people with leverages favorable to a specific lift that may be able to lift a weight on that movement that is impressive without having an impressive physique, but those individuals also start out at a higher level on that lift. Someone with orangutan arms like Cressey very realistically can pull 500 in their first year of serious training, whereas someone with more normal proportions will achieve this in 2-3 years of training.

Gaining strength nothing more to a bodybuilder than simply another method of increasing tension. It becomes necessary for becoming larger at some point, as even the most dedicated pre-fatigue/pre-exhaust/super slow/whatever advocates will acknowledge that they use heavier weights generally now than they did when they started training. Meadows is a huge advocate of this style of training and he’s still using 300-400 lbs on his pressing exercises. For bodybuilding, it’s a matter of being able to generate more force over time while also being able to do so in the manner that most adequately stresses and stimulates the muscular tissue. Going from doing 200 lbs for 8 reps to 300 lbs for 8 reps on a Mountaindog-style decline press with a slow, controlled negative, deep stretch, and hard flex/contraction will undoubtedly give you a bigger chest, neuromuscular efficiency be damned.[/quote]

My point exactly.

I feel like lately…a lot of the much smaller guys have been jumping on the whole “no need to go heavy” bandwagon. That’s bullshit and an excuse for pushing heavy weight. If you bench 225 for 10 today, and 1 year from now you still only bench 225 for 10, same tempo, form, etc. Your pecs will not have grown. Something has to change to FORCE muscle growth. And eventually, whether the guys with sub par #'s for their lifts will have to increase the weight to promote further growth.[/quote]

The weight I am using right now and have for the past 6 months are less than last summer. 1 year ago. I Am a bit heavier and a bit leaner. So yes. Weight is not always the governing factor. You can structure workouts to crush your muscles and grow safer using less weight. I will take option 2
[/quote]

Judging from your avi, you’re pretty new to bbing, and have tons of room for growth…no matter the means. So it is completely understandable that you were able to drop some bf and gain a little muscle changing the routine…even if you dropped your weights some. You were obviously training inefficiently before, now you’re not!!! I’m sure you mended your diet as well?

Point being, at some point, your gains will slow, then stop, heavier weight is introduced. No matter how you structure your workout. You simply have not reached that point yet.
[/quote]

Lol I am 30lbs heavier and a bit leaner than that pic.

33

[quote]ryanbCXG wrote:

[quote]ironmanzvw wrote:

[quote]ryanbCXG wrote:

[quote]ironmanzvw wrote:

[quote]Stronghold wrote:

[quote]jskrabac wrote:
That can absolutely be achieved without forcing the muscle to grow (especially when there’s not a caloric surplus). Look at Eric Cressey who deadlift 660 at like 160lb. [/quote]

You’ve only got your story half-way correct. There is a limited extent to which increased intramuscular coordination and efficiency can improve one’s strength. There is a point at which more muscle is necessary to be stronger. In reality, the strongest men on earth use plenty of reps in their training and carry a large amount of muscle mass, as it’s not simply “neuromuscular effeiciency” that’s lifting those big weights.

Glad you brought up the common example of Cressey’s 660. First off, that lift is incomplete and wouldn’t pass in a meet, he doesn’t lock his hips out, and his knees come unlocked. You’re using a stupid example of a guy with excellent leverages wearing a deadlift suit not completing a lift. Sure, there are people with leverages favorable to a specific lift that may be able to lift a weight on that movement that is impressive without having an impressive physique, but those individuals also start out at a higher level on that lift. Someone with orangutan arms like Cressey very realistically can pull 500 in their first year of serious training, whereas someone with more normal proportions will achieve this in 2-3 years of training.

Gaining strength nothing more to a bodybuilder than simply another method of increasing tension. It becomes necessary for becoming larger at some point, as even the most dedicated pre-fatigue/pre-exhaust/super slow/whatever advocates will acknowledge that they use heavier weights generally now than they did when they started training. Meadows is a huge advocate of this style of training and he’s still using 300-400 lbs on his pressing exercises. For bodybuilding, it’s a matter of being able to generate more force over time while also being able to do so in the manner that most adequately stresses and stimulates the muscular tissue. Going from doing 200 lbs for 8 reps to 300 lbs for 8 reps on a Mountaindog-style decline press with a slow, controlled negative, deep stretch, and hard flex/contraction will undoubtedly give you a bigger chest, neuromuscular efficiency be damned.[/quote]

My point exactly.

I feel like lately…a lot of the much smaller guys have been jumping on the whole “no need to go heavy” bandwagon. That’s bullshit and an excuse for pushing heavy weight. If you bench 225 for 10 today, and 1 year from now you still only bench 225 for 10, same tempo, form, etc. Your pecs will not have grown. Something has to change to FORCE muscle growth. And eventually, whether the guys with sub par #'s for their lifts will have to increase the weight to promote further growth.[/quote]

The weight I am using right now and have for the past 6 months are less than last summer. 1 year ago. I Am a bit heavier and a bit leaner. So yes. Weight is not always the governing factor. You can structure workouts to crush your muscles and grow safer using less weight. I will take option 2
[/quote]

Judging from your avi, you’re pretty new to bbing, and have tons of room for growth…no matter the means. So it is completely understandable that you were able to drop some bf and gain a little muscle changing the routine…even if you dropped your weights some. You were obviously training inefficiently before, now you’re not!!! I’m sure you mended your diet as well?

Point being, at some point, your gains will slow, then stop, heavier weight is introduced. No matter how you structure your workout. You simply have not reached that point yet.
[/quote]

Lol I am 30lbs heavier and a bit leaner than that pic. [/quote]

Lol…so you gained 30 lbs of muscle in the past year and lost some fat huh? Why not post that current pic. That’d some absolutely astonishing progress. If that was me I certainly wouldn’t have an old skinny pic as my avi lol…

34

[quote]ironmanzvw wrote:

[quote]ryanbCXG wrote:

[quote]ironmanzvw wrote:

[quote]ryanbCXG wrote:

[quote]ironmanzvw wrote:

[quote]Stronghold wrote:

[quote]jskrabac wrote:
That can absolutely be achieved without forcing the muscle to grow (especially when there’s not a caloric surplus). Look at Eric Cressey who deadlift 660 at like 160lb. [/quote]

You’ve only got your story half-way correct. There is a limited extent to which increased intramuscular coordination and efficiency can improve one’s strength. There is a point at which more muscle is necessary to be stronger. In reality, the strongest men on earth use plenty of reps in their training and carry a large amount of muscle mass, as it’s not simply “neuromuscular effeiciency” that’s lifting those big weights.

Glad you brought up the common example of Cressey’s 660. First off, that lift is incomplete and wouldn’t pass in a meet, he doesn’t lock his hips out, and his knees come unlocked. You’re using a stupid example of a guy with excellent leverages wearing a deadlift suit not completing a lift. Sure, there are people with leverages favorable to a specific lift that may be able to lift a weight on that movement that is impressive without having an impressive physique, but those individuals also start out at a higher level on that lift. Someone with orangutan arms like Cressey very realistically can pull 500 in their first year of serious training, whereas someone with more normal proportions will achieve this in 2-3 years of training.

Gaining strength nothing more to a bodybuilder than simply another method of increasing tension. It becomes necessary for becoming larger at some point, as even the most dedicated pre-fatigue/pre-exhaust/super slow/whatever advocates will acknowledge that they use heavier weights generally now than they did when they started training. Meadows is a huge advocate of this style of training and he’s still using 300-400 lbs on his pressing exercises. For bodybuilding, it’s a matter of being able to generate more force over time while also being able to do so in the manner that most adequately stresses and stimulates the muscular tissue. Going from doing 200 lbs for 8 reps to 300 lbs for 8 reps on a Mountaindog-style decline press with a slow, controlled negative, deep stretch, and hard flex/contraction will undoubtedly give you a bigger chest, neuromuscular efficiency be damned.[/quote]

My point exactly.

I feel like lately…a lot of the much smaller guys have been jumping on the whole “no need to go heavy” bandwagon. That’s bullshit and an excuse for pushing heavy weight. If you bench 225 for 10 today, and 1 year from now you still only bench 225 for 10, same tempo, form, etc. Your pecs will not have grown. Something has to change to FORCE muscle growth. And eventually, whether the guys with sub par #'s for their lifts will have to increase the weight to promote further growth.[/quote]

The weight I am using right now and have for the past 6 months are less than last summer. 1 year ago. I Am a bit heavier and a bit leaner. So yes. Weight is not always the governing factor. You can structure workouts to crush your muscles and grow safer using less weight. I will take option 2
[/quote]

Judging from your avi, you’re pretty new to bbing, and have tons of room for growth…no matter the means. So it is completely understandable that you were able to drop some bf and gain a little muscle changing the routine…even if you dropped your weights some. You were obviously training inefficiently before, now you’re not!!! I’m sure you mended your diet as well?

Point being, at some point, your gains will slow, then stop, heavier weight is introduced. No matter how you structure your workout. You simply have not reached that point yet.
[/quote]

Lol I am 30lbs heavier and a bit leaner than that pic. [/quote]

Lol…so you gained 30 lbs of muscle in the past year and lost some fat huh? Why not post that current pic. That’d some absolutely astonishing progress. If that was me I certainly wouldn’t have an old skinny pic as my avi lol…
[/quote]

Don’t go grouping me with X and thinking I mean 30lbs of lean mass. Glycogen and water plays a large part in that. And it doesnt mean i lost body fat it means that i didnt gain a proportional amount of fat. And I have an old AVI because this site sucks pretty bad but I have been bored lately and had to chime in on some things. Back then I was at 2.6x bw dead and 1.4 or so bench. Bench has always sucked with my stupid arms. My chest never grew back was never that good granted I was smaller. But my focus every workout was increasing reps or weight. Now that is a tertiary goal. Primary goal is focusing on the msucle I am working and crushing it. Takes a lot less weight when you do that. And guess what you grow better. I actually have a chest now. I have legs my back is thicker. Weird

Also I have no comparable shots. But here you go

764×1024 65.1 KB

35

[quote]ryanbCXG wrote:

[quote]ironmanzvw wrote:

[quote]ryanbCXG wrote:

[quote]ironmanzvw wrote:

[quote]ryanbCXG wrote:

[quote]ironmanzvw wrote:

[quote]Stronghold wrote:

[quote]jskrabac wrote:
That can absolutely be achieved without forcing the muscle to grow (especially when there’s not a caloric surplus). Look at Eric Cressey who deadlift 660 at like 160lb. [/quote]

You’ve only got your story half-way correct. There is a limited extent to which increased intramuscular coordination and efficiency can improve one’s strength. There is a point at which more muscle is necessary to be stronger. In reality, the strongest men on earth use plenty of reps in their training and carry a large amount of muscle mass, as it’s not simply “neuromuscular effeiciency” that’s lifting those big weights.

Glad you brought up the common example of Cressey’s 660. First off, that lift is incomplete and wouldn’t pass in a meet, he doesn’t lock his hips out, and his knees come unlocked. You’re using a stupid example of a guy with excellent leverages wearing a deadlift suit not completing a lift. Sure, there are people with leverages favorable to a specific lift that may be able to lift a weight on that movement that is impressive without having an impressive physique, but those individuals also start out at a higher level on that lift. Someone with orangutan arms like Cressey very realistically can pull 500 in their first year of serious training, whereas someone with more normal proportions will achieve this in 2-3 years of training.

Gaining strength nothing more to a bodybuilder than simply another method of increasing tension. It becomes necessary for becoming larger at some point, as even the most dedicated pre-fatigue/pre-exhaust/super slow/whatever advocates will acknowledge that they use heavier weights generally now than they did when they started training. Meadows is a huge advocate of this style of training and he’s still using 300-400 lbs on his pressing exercises. For bodybuilding, it’s a matter of being able to generate more force over time while also being able to do so in the manner that most adequately stresses and stimulates the muscular tissue. Going from doing 200 lbs for 8 reps to 300 lbs for 8 reps on a Mountaindog-style decline press with a slow, controlled negative, deep stretch, and hard flex/contraction will undoubtedly give you a bigger chest, neuromuscular efficiency be damned.[/quote]

My point exactly.never said I don’t focus just like you on said muscle group lol…I’m just pretty strong as well and need to increase weight to challenge myself. But you said you 30 lbs heavier annnnnd leaner in 1 years time. You could certainly be 30 lbs heavier, but you are not leaner with that extra 30 lbs lol? Are you? I mean you were lean as can be in that avi pic…you put on 30 lbs and got leaner than in that pic?

I feel like lately…a lot of the much smaller guys have been jumping on the whole “no need to go heavy” bandwagon. That’s bullshit and an excuse for pushing heavy weight. If you bench 225 for 10 today, and 1 year from now you still only bench 225 for 10, same tempo, form, etc. Your pecs will not have grown. Something has to change to FORCE muscle growth. And eventually, whether the guys with sub par #'s for their lifts will have to increase the weight to promote further growth.[/quote]

The weight I am using right now and have for the past 6 months are less than last summer. 1 year ago. I Am a bit heavier and a bit leaner. So yes. Weight is not always the governing factor. You can structure workouts to crush your muscles and grow safer using less weight. I will take option 2
[/quote]

Judging from your avi, you’re pretty new to bbing, and have tons of room for growth…no matter the means. So it is completely understandable that you were able to drop some bf and gain a little muscle changing the routine…even if you dropped your weights some. You were obviously training inefficiently before, now you’re not!!! I’m sure you mended your diet as well?

Point being, at some point, your gains will slow, then stop, heavier weight is introduced. No matter how you structure your workout. You simply have not reached that point yet.
[/quote]

Lol I am 30lbs heavier and a bit leaner than that pic. [/quote]

Lol…so you gained 30 lbs of muscle in the past year and lost some fat huh? Why not post that current pic. That’d some absolutely astonishing progress. If that was me I certainly wouldn’t have an old skinny pic as my avi lol…
[/quote]

Don’t go grouping me with X and thinking I mean 30lbs of lean mass. Glycogen and water plays a large part in that. And I have an old AVI because this site sucks pretty bad but I have been bored lately and had to chime in on some things. Back then I was at 2.6x bw dead and 1.4 or so bench. Bench has always sucked with my stupid arms. My chest never grew back was never that good granted I was smaller. But my focus every workout was increasing reps or weight. Now that is a tertiary goal. Primary goal is focusing on the msucle I am working and crushing it. Takes a lot less weight when you do that. And guess what you grow better. I actually have a chest now. I have legs my back is thicker. Weird

Also I have no comparable shots. But here you go

http://i1186.photobucket.com/albums/z377/ryanbCXG/IMG_00341_zps552319d0.jpg[/quote]

36

[quote]ryanbCXG wrote:

[quote]ironmanzvw wrote:

[quote]ryanbCXG wrote:

[quote]ironmanzvw wrote:

[quote]ryanbCXG wrote:

[quote]ironmanzvw wrote:

[quote]Stronghold wrote:

[quote]jskrabac wrote:
That can absolutely be achieved without forcing the muscle to grow (especially when there’s not a caloric surplus). Look at Eric Cressey who deadlift 660 at like 160lb. [/quote]

You’ve only got your story half-way correct. There is a limited extent to which increased intramuscular coordination and efficiency can improve one’s strength. There is a point at which more muscle is necessary to be stronger. In reality, the strongest men on earth use plenty of reps in their training and carry a large amount of muscle mass, as it’s not simply “neuromuscular effeiciency” that’s lifting those big weights.

Glad you brought up the common example of Cressey’s 660. First off, that lift is incomplete and wouldn’t pass in a meet, he doesn’t lock his hips out, and his knees come unlocked. You’re using a stupid example of a guy with excellent leverages wearing a deadlift suit not completing a lift. Sure, there are people with leverages favorable to a specific lift that may be able to lift a weight on that movement that is impressive without having an impressive physique, but those individuals also start out at a higher level on that lift. Someone with orangutan arms like Cressey very realistically can pull 500 in their first year of serious training, whereas someone with more normal proportions will achieve this in 2-3 years of training.

Gaining strength nothing more to a bodybuilder than simply another method of increasing tension. It becomes necessary for becoming larger at some point, as even the most dedicated pre-fatigue/pre-exhaust/super slow/whatever advocates will acknowledge that they use heavier weights generally now than they did when they started training. Meadows is a huge advocate of this style of training and he’s still using 300-400 lbs on his pressing exercises. For bodybuilding, it’s a matter of being able to generate more force over time while also being able to do so in the manner that most adequately stresses and stimulates the muscular tissue. Going from doing 200 lbs for 8 reps to 300 lbs for 8 reps on a Mountaindog-style decline press with a slow, controlled negative, deep stretch, and hard flex/contraction will undoubtedly give you a bigger chest, neuromuscular efficiency be damned.[/quote]

My point exactly.

I feel like lately…a lot of the much smaller guys have been jumping on the whole “no need to go heavy” bandwagon. That’s bullshit and an excuse for pushing heavy weight. If you bench 225 for 10 today, and 1 year from now you still only bench 225 for 10, same tempo, form, etc. Your pecs will not have grown. Something has to change to FORCE muscle growth. And eventually, whether the guys with sub par #'s for their lifts will have to increase the weight to promote further growth.[/quote]

The weight I am using right now and have for the past 6 months are less than last summer. 1 year ago. I Am a bit heavier and a bit leaner. So yes. Weight is not always the governing factor. You can structure workouts to crush your muscles and grow safer using less weight. I will take option 2
[/quote]

Judging from your avi, you’re pretty new to bbing, and have tons of room for growth…no matter the means. So it is completely understandable that you were able to drop some bf and gain a little muscle changing the routine…even if you dropped your weights some. You were obviously training inefficiently before, now you’re not!!! I’m sure you mended your diet as well?

Point being, at some point, your gains will slow, then stop, heavier weight is introduced. No matter how you structure your workout. You simply have not reached that point yet.
[/quote]

Lol I am 30lbs heavier and a bit leaner than that pic. [/quote]

Lol…so you gained 30 lbs of muscle in the past year and lost some fat huh? Why not post that current pic. That’d some absolutely astonishing progress. If that was me I certainly wouldn’t have an old skinny pic as my avi lol…
[/quote]

Don’t go grouping me with X and thinking I mean 30lbs of lean mass. Glycogen and water plays a large part in that. And I have an old AVI because this site sucks pretty bad but I have been bored lately and had to chime in on some things. Back then I was at 2.6x bw dead and 1.4 or so bench. Bench has always sucked with my stupid arms. My chest never grew back was never that good granted I was smaller. But my focus every workout was increasing reps or weight. Now that is a tertiary goal. Primary goal is focusing on the msucle I am working and crushing it. Takes a lot less weight when you do that. And guess what you grow better. I actually have a chest now. I have legs my back is thicker. Weird

Also I have no comparable shots. But here you go

http://i1186.photobucket.com/albums/z377/ryanbCXG/IMG_00341_zps552319d0.jpg[/quote]

Great progress man!!!

Definitely not leaner lol…absolutely not. But still lean for sure.

So, what cycle did you run? :stuck_out_tongue:

37

[quote]ryanbCXG wrote:

[quote]ironmanzvw wrote:

[quote]Stronghold wrote:

[quote]jskrabac wrote:
That can absolutely be achieved without forcing the muscle to grow (especially when there’s not a caloric surplus). Look at Eric Cressey who deadlift 660 at like 160lb. [/quote]

You’ve only got your story half-way correct. There is a limited extent to which increased intramuscular coordination and efficiency can improve one’s strength. There is a point at which more muscle is necessary to be stronger. In reality, the strongest men on earth use plenty of reps in their training and carry a large amount of muscle mass, as it’s not simply “neuromuscular effeiciency” that’s lifting those big weights.

Glad you brought up the common example of Cressey’s 660. First off, that lift is incomplete and wouldn’t pass in a meet, he doesn’t lock his hips out, and his knees come unlocked. You’re using a stupid example of a guy with excellent leverages wearing a deadlift suit not completing a lift. Sure, there are people with leverages favorable to a specific lift that may be able to lift a weight on that movement that is impressive without having an impressive physique, but those individuals also start out at a higher level on that lift. Someone with orangutan arms like Cressey very realistically can pull 500 in their first year of serious training, whereas someone with more normal proportions will achieve this in 2-3 years of training.

Gaining strength nothing more to a bodybuilder than simply another method of increasing tension. It becomes necessary for becoming larger at some point, as even the most dedicated pre-fatigue/pre-exhaust/super slow/whatever advocates will acknowledge that they use heavier weights generally now than they did when they started training. Meadows is a huge advocate of this style of training and he’s still using 300-400 lbs on his pressing exercises. For bodybuilding, it’s a matter of being able to generate more force over time while also being able to do so in the manner that most adequately stresses and stimulates the muscular tissue. Going from doing 200 lbs for 8 reps to 300 lbs for 8 reps on a Mountaindog-style decline press with a slow, controlled negative, deep stretch, and hard flex/contraction will undoubtedly give you a bigger chest, neuromuscular efficiency be damned.[/quote]

My point exactly.

I feel like lately…a lot of the much smaller guys have been jumping on the whole “no need to go heavy” bandwagon. That’s bullshit and an excuse for pushing heavy weight. If you bench 225 for 10 today, and 1 year from now you still only bench 225 for 10, same tempo, form, etc. Your pecs will not have grown. Something has to change to FORCE muscle growth. And eventually, whether the guys with sub par #'s for their lifts will have to increase the weight to promote further growth.[/quote]

The weight I am using right now and have for the past 6 months are less than last summer. 1 year ago. I Am a bit heavier and a bit leaner. So yes. Weight is not always the governing factor. You can structure workouts to crush your muscles and grow safer using less weight. I will take option 2
[/quote]

This line of thinking is smart sometimes but IMO it doesn’t apply very well to deadlifts. In my experience as you progress to heavier weights on DLs, the mechanics of the lifts change. Heavier weights require much greater contributions from the mid and upper back. If your reason for deadlifting is to develop your entire back and not just the erectors, aiming for 500x10 will get you more development in the long run than just stagnating at 315x10 for instance

38

I am leaner. Skin folds don’t lie. Like I said. Water. People like to ignore water. Still have a long way to go though. Especially with my lanky frame.

All I know is I rack pull at the end of back day now if I do anything like that and use 405 for 10 or so just below the knee. Used to do that from the ground. Plenty of backs have been built without Deads. Also don’t misconstrue things. I still move up in weights but its an after thought becuas it got to easy. But form fast paced supersets ect. And a smarter choice in workout order accelerate progress much more than focusing on moving more weight

39

[quote]ironmanzvw wrote:

[quote]jskrabac wrote:

[quote]ironmanzvw wrote:
Sounds pretty solid to me.

Just out of curiosity…what’s your weight right now. Or your current avi anyway. I’m always interested to see what guys end up weighing at such low bf
[/quote]

Never dropped below 175 on stage…much to my surprise. My plan is to compete again at a stage weight of 185. 2-3 years I believe. I’m still new enough that +5lb/year is completely reasonable.
[/quote]

That’s cool. What is your general weight in the off season?[/quote]

I have no idea. This will be my first “off-season” and I don’t even consider it that. I intend to stay as lean as possible.

40

faaark Ryan you’ve been doing some growing!

Looking awesome man, well done