Levrone is Back!

Noted.

I guess it depends on how far off the 315 he was.

If he was really only getting say 225 of it, then what I was saying above has no relation at all.

But if let’s say he was getting all but say 40 lb, then his improvement is still only (this being an “only,” since it is relative to having not lifted for 4 years and having so much less mass) an improvement of 47% and 2 more reps.

Whereas as a guess it could be more typical for someone after such a layoff to be able to double what he had fallen off to.

In my personal case, after a long layoff during a bad relationship, my strength actually fell to 1/3 of what it had been.

Anyway, unless Levrone wasn’t even remotely close to the 315, I still find it interesting that there is a not so enormous a percentage increase in strength from the totally-detrained condition, yet such a great increase in mass and appearance. And I am guessing it is related to this idea that when naturally stronger in a lift than would ordinarily be expected, the same sort of multiple of strength increase doesn’t occur.

[quote]Bill Roberts wrote:

It’s routine for trainees to become 2x, 3x, or even 4x as strong in many movements from the starting point.
[/quote]

Bill, that will depend on the trainee.

yes.

I admit to habitual thinking in having male trainees in mind. It is common in many exercises for such multiples to be achieved. Whether anyone is unable to accomplish it in anything, I don’t know.

And again I have a guess that how strong one is “naturally” is related to that, with naturally stronger individuals being less likely or unable to achieve as high multiples as what initially weaker persons might attain. (Of course, still attaining a higher final result!)

Thus, the fellow that can DL say 365 with no specific training is relatively unlikely to achieve a 2x increase and certain to not achieve a 3x improvement, but the guy who could only do 185 might achieve 3x and quite likely would achieve 2x.

That was what I meant.

[quote]Bill Roberts wrote:
yes.

I admit to habitual thinking in having male trainees in mind. It is common in many exercises for such multiples to be achieved. Whether anyone is unable to accomplish it in anything, I don’t know.

And again I have a guess that how strong one is “naturally” is related to that, with naturally stronger individuals being less likely or unable to achieve as high multiples as what initially weaker persons might attain. (Of course, still attaining a higher final result!)

Thus, the fellow that can DL say 365 with no specific training is relatively unlikely to achieve a 2x increase and certain to not achieve a 3x improvement, but the guy who could only do 185 might achieve 3x and quite likely would achieve 2x.

That was what I meant.[/quote]

I see what you mean now i think.You’re basically saying (put simply) that a guy who comes in straight off the bat with no specific training and is relatively strong wont have a higher multiple increase compared to a average person who may achieve a higher multiple increase over a period of time?

I’d agree with you on that one.

Yes.

And Levrone being gifted for strength as well as size, while he didn’t get a huge percentage strength increase off of his detrained condition, he certainly did improve his appearance and mass by a quite great amount.

A more average person, naturally weaker, I think would not see such mass and appearance improvement from whatever not-as-great strength percentage improvement as what Levrone achieved in this time frame.

Bill, compare levrone’s shoulders, upper chest, lower chest and arms.

He used to have an extremely thick upper chest, delt tie in and crazy delts.

Now, as a natty, that is practically completely missing. Not that his delts are bad, but his arms shot up in size while his delts are now almost lagging by comparison, and his lower chest totally overshadows the upper part.

Now, let’s consider his benching style, fairly flat-backed, retracts his scapulae perhaps, but not nearly as forceful/doesn’t get his shoulders under him as a powerlifter would. That would give me a lot of front delt involvement, too little tricep, but probably quite a bit of chest.

I believe that his “lack” of benching strength/progress compared to what he could do is simply because now, for whatever reasons (lack of site injections/gear in general, different/sometimes “random” training style due to reliance on muscle-memory…?), his shoulders have become the weak link (good raw benchers need very strong shoulders… Hell, watch Stan Efferding’s 210lb DB incline press for 11 or whatever vid… His shoulders overshadow everything else), along with the fact that he cannot rely on test to boost his strength gains/make his current routine work as well?

He used to train fairly heavy, I think 4-6 reps on his top set back in the day for many exercises, haven’t followed his current training enough to see what he does/did, beyond the 4x4 bench routine he just completed.
So it might as well have been a nervous-system issue… He did a period of jump rope and other crap only as well, that can’t help your strength much I figure.

But still, I think he did 495 for 5-6 or so in his prime ? (stronger than Ronnie, relatively speaking, as he did not weigh nearly as much and even did them full ROM I believe)… He’s already back up to an estimated 440 or so for a single… True though, one would expect more compared to what he looks like.

(funny btw that everyone claimed Levrone used oil etc in his arms, but now you can see that his arms, even his triceps, are still a strong-point, and virtually the same shape as they used to be, even without use of any such substances… His delts and upper chest certainly did suffer, though… I haven’t seen him do his fav. delt exercise, Smith BTN presses anymore, either… Maybe there’s a reason, DB overhead presses just don’t allow for the same kind of progression… Or perhaps I missed him doing the smith BTN in some video?)

So yeah… Different training style, no gear, comparatively weak shoulders these days… I think those are the main reasons. His chest probably takes over a lot from the work his delts used to do on the bench… Chest used to be overshadowed by his shoulders back in his competitive days, now it’s the other way around.

Not saying your theory is wrong, btw, those are just some of the thoughts I’ve entertained for a while now.

Or maybe muscle-memory just works that way in his case… Size comes back before strength follows? Back in the day his lay-offs were only half a year or so each, now it was 4… Tendons could be weaker now or any other sort of limiting factor…

[quote]Bill Roberts wrote:
yes.

I admit to habitual thinking in having male trainees in mind.[/quote]
I wasn’t talking gender. My mistake. I was rushing and left my thoughts incomplete.
I meant to elaborate:
Some people start at the top.
The bottom top range of their strength.
( That applied to me; I cannot speak for other females but I believe Firebug told me years ago she started with big numbers as well )

Look at this model:

High Level

level 1
level 2
level 3 <------- I started here. Completely untrained.

Average Level

level 4
level 5
level 6

Low level

level 7
level 8
level 9 <-------- This being a computer ‘geek’ who lives on soda and candy or a cancer patient.

I believe within this model your theory makes sense. I do not believe it is only to do with being ‘naturally strong’ but most importantly possessing direct access to one’s power.
From experience I have seen a lot of ‘naturally strong’ trainees, male and female, but the ones who distinguish themselves are those who have an immediate access to that strength.
That is power.
You don’t have to call for it. You don’t have to wait. It is there for you for the taking.
I have met very few people like this, and all agree there is something ‘special’ about them.
I believe it is this capacity.

And the reason why results come about and are observed very quickly is because there is an economy in perfection
( hypothetically speaking those at level 3 and above are closer to excellence ):

Brilliance and excellence are expressed and possess the quality of effortlessness ( a poster pages ago in this thread commented on how Levrone didn’t even seem to be ‘using his full power’/making an effort. He does, as a style, trains very quietly, making the movement/the way he lifts look very effortless ) :
Our actions are more economic since direct access to the quality of strength allows us to use exactly the right amount of force to achieve the desired results under a set of particular circumstances.

And that is why results are achieved and observed in a relatively short period of time.

It isn’t just muscle memory. It is physical brilliance.

I think you are right.

Lets kick this off!

[quote]Cephalic_Carnage wrote:
His delts and upper chest certainly did suffer, though… I haven’t seen him do his fav. delt exercise, Smith BTN presses anymore, either… [/quote]

i rember seeing him do it in about 1 of his transformations. went to find the vid but there is fucking loads and im not sittin watching through all them lol

I saw that one as well. He gave it a lot of credit. I agree.

Wish I could do them, but the presently-poor shoulder ROM doesn’t allow. :frowning:

[quote]Bill Roberts wrote:
I saw that one as well. He gave it a lot of credit. I agree.

Wish I could do them, but the presently-poor shoulder ROM doesn’t allow. :([/quote]

I used to do them from ear level… No smith machine available atm, and the free-weight version just doesn’t feel right to me… Hm. You certainly need to keep your shoulders in perfect alignment/posture/cuff muscles etc in balance in order to be able to do those without causing any issues… I switched to SHIPs eventually, less demanding in terms of shoulder health etc.

For some reason I also never made as much progress on the BTN presses as on my other overhead press exercises… Might try them again once I get a smith machine for my home gym.

I wouldn’t do them below ear level in any case. The ROM is so bad right now – both in getting the elbows that far back and, on the left, for external rotation, that I basically can’t get my upper arms and hand that far back, so even ear level is impossible at present.

I do find it satisfactory using Smith overhead presses with moderately reclined seat, and then relying on lateral raises and rear delt work for the rest of the shoulder, and supplementing front delts with plate raises. But when I could do Smith BTN, it was a fine exercise.

LOL @ the spotter

That’s “certified” spotting.

More than certified.

Looks like he was giving him a reach-around.

What year do you guys think Levrone looked his best?

[quote]B-Man wrote:
What year do you guys think Levrone looked his best?
[/quote]

I’m going with the '99 british grand prix.

On 4.20 in that movie is seems like his spotter has invented a new funky lunges exercise.

[quote]waylanderxx wrote:
B-Man wrote:
What year do you guys think Levrone looked his best?

I’m going with the '99 british grand prix.[/quote]

il 2nd that his shoulders looked like a couple of basket balls that year

2000 olympia wasnt to bad either