So basically i feel i gotta make the choice to look nice and lean, or get big and strong.
Diet wise looking lean is great and cool, however the diet isn’t fun, and I’m not as strong. On the other hand, big and strong is just kick ass.
Now i feel like there has gotta be some way to essentially be Both, for instance Christian Thibaudeau, the guy is a BEAST! lean as hell, and strong as an Ox.
Im just stuck in the misconception that i can’t be like that, i understand he is training with low reps, heavy weight and such, but i don’t see how he is shredded and bulky, all the time. I always was under the impression that if you were to lift heavy with low reps you will just bulk up, when you look at Christian, he’s got low BF % and is very strong
Bulking up is purely a function of how much you eat, not how you train…
How about training as hard as you damned can while eating at a slight surplus? Then give it about 5-10 years of time? Do you think CT got that way in a couple of months?
Bulking up is purely a function of how much you eat, not how you train…
How about training as hard as you damned can while eating at a slight surplus? Then give it about 5-10 years of time? Do you think CT got that way in a couple of months?[/quote]
How about the rep set range, lifting heavier will add more mass in the 1-6 rep range? correct me if I’m wrong, as opposed to lifting in a 8-12 rep range… for hypertrophy, I’m confused on what the difference is.
Development of strength and greater recruitment of your nervous system comes from the 1-6 (or basically anything from 80% of your 1rm and up) rep range. Though, from what CT himself says, this depends more on how explosively and intensively you’re moving the weight than the amount of weight relative to your 1rm you’re actually moving.
Hypertrophy comes from pushing your muscles to their breaking point and forcing the muscle to grow more so that they can endure more. I don’t think there is any obvious set rep range for this, though people like to do more total reps. I would imagine just forcing your muscles to work beyond their ability in a variety of fashion would cause hypertrophy.
There’s really no point focusing on these things right now. Just do variations of the big four (squat, OHP, bench, deadlift) every time you lift, something for the upper back, and a couple assistance stuff for muscles that aren’t affected by the big four. However you arrange the exact exercises you do is up to you and your schedule. Lift frequently and eat at a surplus. You can do whatever rep range you want; just do each session intensively. Keep in mind that pain=/= intensity, and that intensity=/= “I’m so sore that I can’t move for days!” (well, it might, but lifting every single day sort of makes soreness go away for me so I dunno).
Get your 5rm of the squat/deadlift/bench to something in the ballpark of 315/405/225 first before you go looking for anything beyond the above.
Bulking up is purely a function of how much you eat, not how you train…
How about training as hard as you damned can while eating at a slight surplus? Then give it about 5-10 years of time? Do you think CT got that way in a couple of months?[/quote]
coming from the guy who started lifting in 2011
magick, maybe you should get another 5 years under your belt before you start belching.
Bulking up is purely a function of how much you eat, not how you train…
How about training as hard as you damned can while eating at a slight surplus? Then give it about 5-10 years of time? Do you think CT got that way in a couple of months?[/quote]
coming from the guy who started lifting in 2011
magick, maybe you should get another 5 years under your belt before you start belching.[/quote]
Bulking up is purely a function of how much you eat, not how you train…
How about training as hard as you damned can while eating at a slight surplus? Then give it about 5-10 years of time? Do you think CT got that way in a couple of months?[/quote]
coming from the guy who started lifting in 2011
magick, maybe you should get another 5 years under your belt before you start belching.[/quote]
Bulking up is purely a function of how much you eat, not how you train…
How about training as hard as you damned can while eating at a slight surplus? Then give it about 5-10 years of time? Do you think CT got that way in a couple of months?[/quote]
coming from the guy who started lifting in 2011
magick, maybe you should get another 5 years under your belt before you start belching.[/quote]
Why? Is he wrong?[/quote]
I’d say bulking definitely has to do with how you train. A 17 year old hard gainer ectomorph who eats at a ‘slight surplus’ won’t always ‘bulk’ unless he hits the iron properly. Hence the term, hard gainer, and the slew of threads and articles addressing the issue.
And telling the OP that he should hit 5 - 10 years in the gym, before getting too critical about his program, is solid advice. I actually said the same thing to the OP in one of his other threads. It’s just when magick says it, it is hypocritical.
He’s telling OP to spend 5 years hitting the iron before doing anything drastic, whereas magick is trying to accomplish 3x bw DL within a year.
Bulking up is purely a function of how much you eat, not how you train…
How about training as hard as you damned can while eating at a slight surplus? Then give it about 5-10 years of time? Do you think CT got that way in a couple of months?[/quote]
coming from the guy who started lifting in 2011
magick, maybe you should get another 5 years under your belt before you start belching.[/quote]
Why? Is he wrong?[/quote]
I’d say bulking definitely has to do with how you train. A 17 year old hard gainer ectomorph who eats at a ‘slight surplus’ won’t always ‘bulk’ unless he hits the iron properly. Hence the term, hard gainer, and the slew of threads and articles addressing the issue.
And telling the OP that he should hit 5 - 10 years in the gym, before getting too critical about his program, is solid advice. I actually said the same thing to the OP in one of his other threads. It’s just when magick says it, it is hypocritical.
He’s telling OP to spend 5 years hitting the iron before doing anything drastic, whereas magick is trying to accomplish 3x bw DL within a year.
[/quote]
But… but… where… who… is the ectomorph hardgainer you speak of? Is he in this thread?
I can’t be bothered to touch on the other nonsense in the post. I’m sure magick can easily defend his points.
[quote]magick wrote:
Development of strength and greater recruitment of your nervous system comes from the 1-6 (or basically anything from 80% of your 1rm and up) rep range. Though, from what CT himself says, this depends more on how explosively and intensively you’re moving the weight than the amount of weight relative to your 1rm you’re actually moving.
Hypertrophy comes from pushing your muscles to their breaking point and forcing the muscle to grow more so that they can endure more. I don’t think there is any obvious set rep range for this, though people like to do more total reps. I would imagine just forcing your muscles to work beyond their ability in a variety of fashion would cause hypertrophy.
There’s really no point focusing on these things right now. Just do variations of the big four (squat, OHP, bench, deadlift) every time you lift, something for the upper back, and a couple assistance stuff for muscles that aren’t affected by the big four. However you arrange the exact exercises you do is up to you and your schedule. Lift frequently and eat at a surplus. You can do whatever rep range you want; just do each session intensively. Keep in mind that pain=/= intensity, and that intensity=/= “I’m so sore that I can’t move for days!” (well, it might, but lifting every single day sort of makes soreness go away for me so I dunno).
Get your 5rm of the squat/deadlift/bench to something in the ballpark of 315/405/225 first before you go looking for anything beyond the above.[/quote]
[quote]magick wrote:
Development of strength and greater recruitment of your nervous system comes from the 1-6 (or basically anything from 80% of your 1rm and up) rep range. Though, from what CT himself says, this depends more on how explosively and intensively you’re moving the weight than the amount of weight relative to your 1rm you’re actually moving.
Hypertrophy comes from pushing your muscles to their breaking point and forcing the muscle to grow more so that they can endure more. I don’t think there is any obvious set rep range for this, though people like to do more total reps. I would imagine just forcing your muscles to work beyond their ability in a variety of fashion would cause hypertrophy.
There’s really no point focusing on these things right now. Just do variations of the big four (squat, OHP, bench, deadlift) every time you lift, something for the upper back, and a couple assistance stuff for muscles that aren’t affected by the big four. However you arrange the exact exercises you do is up to you and your schedule. Lift frequently and eat at a surplus. You can do whatever rep range you want; just do each session intensively. Keep in mind that pain=/= intensity, and that intensity=/= “I’m so sore that I can’t move for days!” (well, it might, but lifting every single day sort of makes soreness go away for me so I dunno).
Get your 5rm of the squat/deadlift/bench to something in the ballpark of 315/405/225 first before you go looking for anything beyond the above.[/quote]
[quote]Jarvan wrote:
He’s telling OP to spend 5 years hitting the iron before doing anything drastic, whereas magick is trying to accomplish 3x bw DL within a year.
[/quote]
Oh wow. You proved yourself, ONCE AGAIN, to have poor-ass reading comprehension.
Fucking hilarious! You’re great for unintentional, stupid-ass comedy buddy!
Here, from my log-
Specific life-time goals-
Deadlift 3xbw x5
Barbell goals that I plan on reaching by the end of this year-
Deadlift 405lbx5
[quote]jake_richardson wrote:
So basically i feel i gotta make the choice to look nice and lean, or get big and strong.
[/quote]
Can you define the difference between these 2 in terms of muscle mass and bodyfat? [/quote]
I don’t know the exact percentages but in my thinking,
Lean: 7-11% (that shredded look, high vascularity)
Big and strong (is more bulky 12-16%)
That is just how i look at it, no means the exact or proper percentages.[/quote]
Good. Then you should understand that the lean vs bulky look, as you call it, is about bodyfat levels and not some special rep range or training method.
Both require building muscle which requires weight and strength gains.
Success will be determined by hard work, consistancy and genetics.
[quote]jake_richardson wrote:
So basically i feel i gotta make the choice to look nice and lean, or get big and strong.
[/quote]
Can you define the difference between these 2 in terms of muscle mass and bodyfat? [/quote]
I don’t know the exact percentages but in my thinking,
Lean: 7-11% (that shredded look, high vascularity)
Big and strong (is more bulky 12-16%)
That is just how i look at it, no means the exact or proper percentages.[/quote]
Good. Then you should understand that the lean vs bulky look, as you call it, is about bodyfat levels and not some special rep range or training method.
Both require building muscle which requires weight and strength gains.
Success will be determined by hard work, consistancy and genetics. [/quote]