No prob. Now stop wasting time by worrying about things that don’t matter at this stage. Go find like minded friends, get a non retarded program with a plan for progression and go kill it in the gym and the kitchen.
These are the best years of you life for this sport which you will NEVER get back.
[quote]dt79 wrote:
No prob. Now stop wasting time by worrying about things that don’t matter at this stage. Go find like minded friends, get a non retarded program with a plan for progression and go kill it in the gym and the kitchen.
These are the best years of you life for this sport which you will NEVER get back.[/quote]
Great, thank you very much, any programs that you would recommend? the texas method looks very nice and simple.
[quote]jake_richardson wrote:
[quote]1 Man Island wrote:
FWIW, CT was pretty soft at one point… though, he’s a fairly big advocate of staying lean constantly now.[/quote]
Interesting, did not know that.
…
… for instance Christian Thibaudeau, the guy is a BEAST![/quote]
Funny you should phrase it that way. These pics were in his article titled “The Beast Evolves” in 2003.
[quote]jake_richardson wrote:
So basically i feel i gotta make the choice to look nice and lean, or get big and strong.[/quote]
Just to reiterate what most guys have said already, you don’t really “make this choice” until you’ve already got years of training under your belt and a basic foundation of strength and muscle in place. And even then, you’ll find most guys (if they don’t end up competing) do end up shooting for a happy in-between. Strong, muscular, relatively lean, and generally kickass.
That is a misconception, plain and simple.
[quote]jake_richardson wrote:
[quote]dt79 wrote:
No prob. Now stop wasting time by worrying about things that don’t matter at this stage. Go find like minded friends, get a non retarded program with a plan for progression and go kill it in the gym and the kitchen.
These are the best years of you life for this sport which you will NEVER get back.[/quote]
Great, thank you very much, any programs that you would recommend? the texas method looks very nice and simple.[/quote]
I can only recommend 531 because I use the percentages for load progression in the program for my main exercises. Not tried any other program.
There was a program in your previous thread from Chris Colucci. That was perfectly fine. I don’t see why you don’t want to make use of it.
[quote]Jarvan wrote:
[quote]magick wrote:
What?
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]
Coming from the guy whose few posts thus far have been excessively antagonistic while offering very little value to the forum.
[quote]dt79 wrote:
[quote]jake_richardson wrote:
[quote]dt79 wrote:
No prob. Now stop wasting time by worrying about things that don’t matter at this stage. Go find like minded friends, get a non retarded program with a plan for progression and go kill it in the gym and the kitchen.
These are the best years of you life for this sport which you will NEVER get back.[/quote]
Great, thank you very much, any programs that you would recommend? the texas method looks very nice and simple.[/quote]
I can only recommend 531 because I use the percentages for load progression in the program for my main exercises. Not tried any other program.
There was a program in your previous thread from Chris Colucci. That was perfectly fine. I don’t see why you don’t want to make use of it.[/quote]
I am enjoying the program the Chris helped me out with, and i plan to take on the 5/3/1 in a few more months once i hit my desired numbers:
Squat 225 lbs
bench 190 bs
dead 315 lbs
Big and Lean is still a possibilty right? why not
[quote]jake_richardson wrote:
[quote]dt79 wrote:
[quote]jake_richardson wrote:
[quote]dt79 wrote:
No prob. Now stop wasting time by worrying about things that don’t matter at this stage. Go find like minded friends, get a non retarded program with a plan for progression and go kill it in the gym and the kitchen.
These are the best years of you life for this sport which you will NEVER get back.[/quote]
Great, thank you very much, any programs that you would recommend? the texas method looks very nice and simple.[/quote]
I can only recommend 531 because I use the percentages for load progression in the program for my main exercises. Not tried any other program.
There was a program in your previous thread from Chris Colucci. That was perfectly fine. I don’t see why you don’t want to make use of it.[/quote]
I am enjoying the program the Chris helped me out with, and i plan to take on the 5/3/1 in a few more months once i hit my desired numbers:
Squat 225 lbs
bench 190 bs
dead 315 lbs[/quote]
My mistake. I apologise.
Sounds like a good plan. Hitting those numbers won’t be hard with the right intensity. Good luck and remember to eat for gains as well.
[quote]dt79 wrote:
[quote]jake_richardson wrote:
[quote]dt79 wrote:
[quote]jake_richardson wrote:
[quote]dt79 wrote:
No prob. Now stop wasting time by worrying about things that don’t matter at this stage. Go find like minded friends, get a non retarded program with a plan for progression and go kill it in the gym and the kitchen.
These are the best years of you life for this sport which you will NEVER get back.[/quote]
Great, thank you very much, any programs that you would recommend? the texas method looks very nice and simple.[/quote]
I can only recommend 531 because I use the percentages for load progression in the program for my main exercises. Not tried any other program.
There was a program in your previous thread from Chris Colucci. That was perfectly fine. I don’t see why you don’t want to make use of it.[/quote]
I am enjoying the program the Chris helped me out with, and i plan to take on the 5/3/1 in a few more months once i hit my desired numbers:
Squat 225 lbs
bench 190 bs
dead 315 lbs[/quote]
My mistake. I apologise.
Sounds like a good plan. Hitting those numbers won’t be hard with the right intensity. Good luck and remember to eat for gains as well.[/quote]
Thank you sir.
[quote]dt79 wrote:
[quote]jake_richardson wrote:
[quote]dt79 wrote:
No prob. Now stop wasting time by worrying about things that don’t matter at this stage. Go find like minded friends, get a non retarded program with a plan for progression and go kill it in the gym and the kitchen.
These are the best years of you life for this sport which you will NEVER get back.[/quote]
Great, thank you very much, any programs that you would recommend? the texas method looks very nice and simple.[/quote]
I can only recommend 531 because I use the percentages for load progression in the program for my main exercises. Not tried any other program.
There was a program in your previous thread from Chris Colucci. That was perfectly fine. I don’t see why you don’t want to make use of it.[/quote]
The 5/3/1 is a solid program no rout, however as an athlete it doesnt make much sense for me.
[quote]Chris Colucci wrote:
[quote]jake_richardson wrote:
[quote]1 Man Island wrote:
FWIW, CT was pretty soft at one point… though, he’s a fairly big advocate of staying lean constantly now.[/quote]
Interesting, did not know that.
…
… for instance Christian Thibaudeau, the guy is a BEAST![/quote]
Funny you should phrase it that way. These pics were in his article titled “The Beast Evolves” in 2003.
[quote]jake_richardson wrote:
So basically i feel i gotta make the choice to look nice and lean, or get big and strong.[/quote]
Just to reiterate what most guys have said already, you don’t really “make this choice” until you’ve already got years of training under your belt and a basic foundation of strength and muscle in place. And even then, you’ll find most guys (if they don’t end up competing) do end up shooting for a happy in-between. Strong, muscular, relatively lean, and generally kickass.
That is a misconception, plain and simple.[/quote]
Thanks for your words, I understand that strength training is the main topic on here, will i still get the same results doing 7x2 as 3x12? Will strength training still add mass and get me bigger
Getting larger is mostly a function of eating more. I wrote this already in the first post I wrote here.
Unless you’re already a beastly bodybuilder who has been at it for years, just eating at a moderate surplus (you need to do some work to find what that is for you personally) while lifting really hard and intensely is enough to build both strength and size.
If you’re not bigger in some form in a month, then you’re not eating enough. If you got fatter rather than building lean size within said month, then you’re not lifting intensely enough and/or eating way too much.
[quote]jake_richardson wrote:
Will strength training still add mass and get me bigger[/quote]
Will adding mass and getting bigger make you stronger?
Btw what kind of athletic sports are you participating in? Even national youth rugby players i’ve trained with basically pyramided up their bench and squat to 2-4 reps and did hang cleans and push presses for 8-10 reps and bodybuilding stuff 3-4 times a week.
[quote]jake_richardson wrote:
I understand that strength training is the main topic on here, will i still get the same results doing 7x2 as 3x12?[/quote]
No, I’d say those two ends of the training spectrum are pretty wide apart and you definitely won’t get the same results from either one.
The weight you’d use for a set of 12 will be way lighter than something you’d use for a set of 2. Even if you did sets of 2 with something like a 4-6 RM to keep speed on the bar, it’s still a very big difference. Chad Waterbury is one coach who spoke a lot about this type of stuff.
Diet will be the biggest factor, with overall training volume being the next most important variable. Meaning, 4x2 is one thing, 7x2 is something else, and 12x2 is still something else. And each method will provoke different responses in the body.
[quote]Chris Colucci wrote:
[quote]jake_richardson wrote:
I understand that strength training is the main topic on here, will i still get the same results doing 7x2 as 3x12?[/quote]
No, I’d say those two ends of the training spectrum are pretty wide apart and you definitely won’t get the same results from either one.
The weight you’d use for a set of 12 will be way lighter than something you’d use for a set of 2. Even if you did sets of 2 with something like a 4-6 RM to keep speed on the bar, it’s still a very big difference. Chad Waterbury is one coach who spoke a lot about this type of stuff.
Diet will be the biggest factor, with overall training volume being the next most important variable. Meaning, 4x2 is one thing, 7x2 is something else, and 12x2 is still something else. And each method will provoke different responses in the body.[/quote]
Interesting, do you know of any good articles that talk about different rep/set schemes? and what they do best? what are your thoughts on doing a 3-3-3-10-12-12
[quote]jake_richardson wrote:
Interesting, do you know of any good articles that talk about different rep/set schemes? and what they do best? what are your thoughts on doing a 3-3-3-10-12-12[/quote]
Jake, set/rep schemes are just one factor you have to consider, there are other factors as well. I like TehPwnisher325’s post on his thread, I can’t ever say it any better:
"Honestly, I feel the notion of rep ranges has been a far greater detriment to training than benefit. Many seem to ignore that the intent of providing a rep range/effect explanation was more to explain about the impact of time under tension, which is really an entirely different animal for most.
3 reps is supposed to be in the power range of training. Well lets say I do 3 fast reps with 60% 1rm? Then yeah, I’m developing power. What about 90% of 1rm? Now it’s strength. What about if I did 10 sets of 3 with 75% and 1 minute of rests between sets? Now I’m developing hypertrophy. What about a weight circuit, where I do 3 reps of dips, 3 reps of chins, and 3 reps of kettlebell swings for 15 minutes? Now it’s endurance/conditioning.
Lets go back to that 3 reps with 90% set. Say I’m doing squats. On one set, I lockout each rep at the top and pause for a second before starting the next rep. On the second set, I don’t lockout at the top and immediately begin the next rep before coming completely to the top of the last one. Did both sets accomplish the same degree of strength/size development? They were both 90% of 1rm for 3 reps.
There are far more variables at play than rep range, and honestly, I think moving away from thinking in “rep ranges” and more in terms of how everything builds to the overall goal is a boon. I go by feel for the most part these days, and measure success as my outcome."
[quote]Mizery wrote:
[quote]jake_richardson wrote:
Interesting, do you know of any good articles that talk about different rep/set schemes? and what they do best? what are your thoughts on doing a 3-3-3-10-12-12[/quote]
Jake, set/rep schemes are just one factor you have to consider, there are other factors as well. I like TehPwnisher325’s post on his thread, I can’t ever say it any better:
"Honestly, I feel the notion of rep ranges has been a far greater detriment to training than benefit. Many seem to ignore that the intent of providing a rep range/effect explanation was more to explain about the impact of time under tension, which is really an entirely different animal for most.
3 reps is supposed to be in the power range of training. Well lets say I do 3 fast reps with 60% 1rm? Then yeah, I’m developing power. What about 90% of 1rm? Now it’s strength. What about if I did 10 sets of 3 with 75% and 1 minute of rests between sets? Now I’m developing hypertrophy. What about a weight circuit, where I do 3 reps of dips, 3 reps of chins, and 3 reps of kettlebell swings for 15 minutes? Now it’s endurance/conditioning.
Lets go back to that 3 reps with 90% set. Say I’m doing squats. On one set, I lockout each rep at the top and pause for a second before starting the next rep. On the second set, I don’t lockout at the top and immediately begin the next rep before coming completely to the top of the last one. Did both sets accomplish the same degree of strength/size development? They were both 90% of 1rm for 3 reps.
There are far more variables at play than rep range, and honestly, I think moving away from thinking in “rep ranges” and more in terms of how everything builds to the overall goal is a boon. I go by feel for the most part these days, and measure success as my outcome."
[/quote]
This is one of the best posts about the topic i’ve read.
I’m going to add that even the training effect of percentages of 1rm will not be the same at all for beginners, intermediates and advanced people.
[quote]magick wrote:
Getting larger is mostly a function of eating more. I wrote this already in the first post I wrote here.
Unless you’re already a beastly bodybuilder who has been at it for years, just eating at a moderate surplus (you need to do some work to find what that is for you personally) while lifting really hard and intensely is enough to build both strength and size.
Okay, i will take that in to consideration
If you’re not bigger in some form in a month, then you’re not eating enough. If you got fatter rather than building lean size within said month, then you’re not lifting intensely enough and/or eating way too much.[/quote]
I feel like I’m making progress every week, weather it is my weight, how i look and how much I’m lifting,
[quote]Mizery wrote:
[quote]jake_richardson wrote:
Interesting, do you know of any good articles that talk about different rep/set schemes? and what they do best? what are your thoughts on doing a 3-3-3-10-12-12[/quote]
Jake, set/rep schemes are just one factor you have to consider, there are other factors as well. I like TehPwnisher325’s post on his thread, I can’t ever say it any better:
"Honestly, I feel the notion of rep ranges has been a far greater detriment to training than benefit. Many seem to ignore that the intent of providing a rep range/effect explanation was more to explain about the impact of time under tension, which is really an entirely different animal for most.
3 reps is supposed to be in the power range of training. Well lets say I do 3 fast reps with 60% 1rm? Then yeah, I’m developing power. What about 90% of 1rm? Now it’s strength. What about if I did 10 sets of 3 with 75% and 1 minute of rests between sets? Now I’m developing hypertrophy. What about a weight circuit, where I do 3 reps of dips, 3 reps of chins, and 3 reps of kettlebell swings for 15 minutes? Now it’s endurance/conditioning.
Lets go back to that 3 reps with 90% set. Say I’m doing squats. On one set, I lockout each rep at the top and pause for a second before starting the next rep. On the second set, I don’t lockout at the top and immediately begin the next rep before coming completely to the top of the last one. Did both sets accomplish the same degree of strength/size development? They were both 90% of 1rm for 3 reps.
There are far more variables at play than rep range, and honestly, I think moving away from thinking in “rep ranges” and more in terms of how everything builds to the overall goal is a boon. I go by feel for the most part these days, and measure success as my outcome."
[/quote]
Wow, now that you put it like that it is FAR more complex then just reps and sets, therefore would the 3-3-3-10-12-12 be beneficial for generating strength and hypertrophy?
