[quote]Matt McGorry wrote:
Someone who does not have the genetics to be elite in the 165 class will not have the genetics to be elite in the 242 class.
[/quote]
You are wrong. That is just a dumb thing to say.
[quote]vandalay15 wrote:
Matt McGorry wrote:
Someone who does not have the genetics to be elite in the 165 class will not have the genetics to be elite in the 242 class.
You are wrong. That is just a dumb thing to say.
[/quote]
Agreed.
McGorry’s statement is incorrect.
If someone is six foot and 165 lbs there is little to no chance of making elite, that person is just too damned skinny for that height. At 242(lean), a six footer would have a much better chance of reaching elite and even better still at a lean 275.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
Matt McGorry wrote:
Prof,
I’ve heard you mention this a couple of times, but I’m not sure what validity it has. I agree that competitors at elite levels of development in the “Iron Sports” (o-lifting, PL, BB, Strongman) cannot be there without genetic gifts.
Does, that mean it’s pointless to strive for goals in relative strength otherwise? It seems to me like you’re just making an easy out for the same type of people who are “hardgainers” in the BBing world.
Unless you are in powerlifting meets, worrying about relative strength BEFORE worrying about ABSOLUTE STRENGTH makes no sense to me. Your “relative strength” will be based on genetics, neural adaptation and learning of technique. There isn’t anything more to it. Once you have learned an exercise well and trained your muscles to respond efficiently (which for some is easier than others), if you expect to gain more strength, you should also expect to gain some lean body mass. It seems some of you truly believe that strength will simply increase infinitely without any more increases in lean body tissue and this just isn’t the case. Once those factors mentioned above are maxed out, you should expect to gain lean body mass to move up in strength.
Strength is directly related to an increase in muscle contractile proteins. While ‘individual A’ may be naturally stronger than ‘individual B’ while they both may weigh the same, past maxing out those factors they will both have to gain lean body mass to continue moving up in strength. Strength and size are NOT completely disassociated.[/quote]
I’m not disagreeing that a base level of muscle mass has to be put in place before a person can become more efficient at using it.
You say that your genetics, neural adaptation, and technique are the most important factors. Genetics is not changeable, obviously. Technique can only be refined so much as well. Neural adaptation is the key here. You say it as if it were something that cannot be trained, and that is absolutely not true. The gains in strength using primarily neural adapaptation will be slower than gains in strength accompanied with bodyweight all things being equal.
The key to what you said was once the factors have been maxed out. At what level does this occur? I’m not saying that gaining LBM is completely unavoidable, but limiting it is absolutely important for doing well in any sport that has weight classes. I know that with myself, I have increased my squat close to 100lbs in the last year with little gains in LBM specifically training and eating with that in mind. In the years previous to that, I had gained 25lbs of BW without my squat going up anywhere near that amount.
This is why many lifters will try to max out their potential in one weight class before moving up into the next one. As a person gets closer to their genetic potential at their weight, the gains will of course slow down.
-Matt
[quote]Roland Fisher wrote:
Prof, what you said cannot be argued with, once you max out your nervous system, you’re not getting stronger without adding mass.
With less than a 1.5 x bodyweight, I really doubt he’s maxed his potential though.
With that said, your advise is still spot on, getting the strength by adding bodyweight is still the way to go. Look at what lifters in weight classes do, they add weight to get stronger, then make weight for the meet. After doing this for long enough, they simply cannot make weight anymore, and go up in weight class.
[/quote]
I agree with this.
[quote]f_fatman9999 wrote:
vandalay15 wrote:
Matt McGorry wrote:
Someone who does not have the genetics to be elite in the 165 class will not have the genetics to be elite in the 242 class.
You are wrong. That is just a dumb thing to say.
Agreed.
McGorry’s statement is incorrect.
If someone is six foot and 165 lbs there is little to no chance of making elite, that person is just too damned skinny for that height. At 242(lean), a six footer would have a much better chance of reaching elite and even better still at a lean 275.[/quote]
I thought that this didn’t even need saying because of how obvious it was.
Yes, height will have some effect on how much you should weight for appropriate leverages. For a guy who is 5’10 and 198lbs and no chance of making elite, it is unlikely that they would make elite at 5’10 220lb. This is a less extreme example. Agreed?
-Matt
[quote]Matt McGorry wrote:
You say that your genetics, neural adaptation, and technique are the most important factors. Genetics is not changeable, obviously. Technique can only be refined so much as well. Neural adaptation is the key here. You say it as if it were something that cannot be trained, and that is absolutely not true. The gains in strength using primarily neural adapaptation will be slower than gains in strength accompanied with bodyweight all things being equal. [/quote]
I’m sorry, but where the hell did I write that neural adaptation can not be trained? I didn’t. Don’t put words in my mouth and then argue those as opposed to what I actually wrote. I hit all of those bases already which means you have no argument.
Most of the people on this board aren’t even involved in sports with weight classes. This original poster didn’t claim he was involved in sports with a weight class. Beyond that, if you hit a brick wall as far as strength, it may be time to simply accept that you need to gain more body weight to get stronger.
You are acting like major plateaus should be overlooked. If it takes you years to adapt a mind muscle connection to an exercise, your genetics SUCK. In “bodybuilding” this is a nonissue because the diet is immediately adapted to allow for more growth.
Uh, no shit. Who has written otherwise?
[quote]Matt McGorry wrote:
f_fatman9999 wrote:
vandalay15 wrote:
Matt McGorry wrote:
Someone who does not have the genetics to be elite in the 165 class will not have the genetics to be elite in the 242 class.
You are wrong. That is just a dumb thing to say.
Agreed.
McGorry’s statement is incorrect.
If someone is six foot and 165 lbs there is little to no chance of making elite, that person is just too damned skinny for that height. At 242(lean), a six footer would have a much better chance of reaching elite and even better still at a lean 275.
I thought that this didn’t even need saying because of how obvious it was.
Yes, height will have some effect on how much you should weight for appropriate leverages. For a guy who is 5’10 and 198lbs and no chance of making elite, it is unlikely that they would make elite at 5’10 220lb. This is a less extreme example. Agreed?
-Matt
[/quote]
You really can’t even make a claim like that either. You can’t go around and tell people that added muscular body weight won’t help them get much farther along in strength.
You really have to wonder why gaining muscle is suddenly such a despised activity. If you actually truly compete in powerlifting meets, fine, make a huge issue of it. If you don’t, quit being a wannabe.
That isn’t written to you specifically but to anyone extremely worried about “relative strength” even though they are “absolutely weak” and don’t compete.
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
Disturbed T3Ch wrote:
You must understand, the bench press is a Tri/delt/lat movement, with the pecs doing almost nothing. >>>
Congratulations on your first post at T-Nation. We are so glad you are to teach us how to work tri’s, delt’s and lat’s with pressing movements that do almost nothing to engage the pecs. This is truly revolutionary.
Please post your pull up/rowing routine for chest development as well. I’m always up for new ideas.
[/quote]
write something that is readable. and what i said is right, he needs to concentrate on doing close grip bench presses, tate presses, rows, military presses and RC shit.
[quote]Disturbed T3Ch wrote:
Tiribulus wrote:
Disturbed T3Ch wrote:
You must understand, the bench press is a Tri/delt/lat movement, with the pecs doing almost nothing. >>>
Congratulations on your first post at T-Nation. We are so glad you are to teach us how to work tri’s, delt’s and lat’s with pressing movements that do almost nothing to engage the pecs. This is truly revolutionary.
Please post your pull up/rowing routine for chest development as well. I’m always up for new ideas.
write something that is readable. and what i said is right, he needs to concentrate on doing close grip bench presses, tate presses, rows, military presses and RC shit. [/quote]
What you wrote was not right. The pectoralis major is the primary mover in a flat bench press. The triceps, lats, delts and even serratus are all accessory muscles (or secondary muscles) aiding the movement. You wrote that the pecs do almost nothing. This is false.
Yes, all of those accessory muscles should be trained well if the goal is to get even stronger in that movement, but that does not mean the pecs hardly do any work at all.
Since the primary action of the pectoralis major is adduction of the humerus, you can’t claim that this specific movement causes it to hardly work.
[quote]Disturbed T3Ch wrote:
Tiribulus wrote:
Disturbed T3Ch wrote:
You must understand, the bench press is a Tri/delt/lat movement, with the pecs doing almost nothing. >>>
Congratulations on your first post at T-Nation. We are so glad you are to teach us how to work tri’s, delt’s and lat’s with pressing movements that do almost nothing to engage the pecs. This is truly revolutionary.
Please post your pull up/rowing routine for chest development as well. I’m always up for new ideas.
write something that is readable. and what i said is right, he needs to concentrate on doing close grip bench presses, tate presses, rows, military presses and RC shit. [/quote]
I can’t add anything useful to what Professor X said.
[quote]Matt McGorry wrote:
This is why many lifters will try to max out their potential in one weight class before moving up into the next one.
[/quote]
This isn’t the best move in many cases. Many lifters really limit their progress by trying to stay in a lower weight class.
It’s a lot wiser to gain muscle and get bigger which will make getting stronger easier as leverages are improved and the lifter now has more muscle.
Most beginner and intermediate PLers shouldn’t worry about what weight class they are in until they have already totaled elite and gains are now slowing. Then clean up the diet or cut weight to become competitive in a lower weight class if necessary.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
Matt McGorry wrote:
You say that your genetics, neural adaptation, and technique are the most important factors. Genetics is not changeable, obviously. Technique can only be refined so much as well. Neural adaptation is the key here. You say it as if it were something that cannot be trained, and that is absolutely not true. The gains in strength using primarily neural adapaptation will be slower than gains in strength accompanied with bodyweight all things being equal.
I’m sorry, but where the hell did I write that neural adaptation can not be trained? I didn’t. Don’t put words in my mouth and then argue those as opposed to what I actually wrote. I hit all of those bases already which means you have no argument.
The key to what you said was once the factors have been maxed out. At what level does this occur? I’m not saying that gaining LBM is completely unavoidable, but limiting it is absolutely important for doing well in any sport that has weight classes. I know that with myself, I have increased my squat close to 100lbs in the last year with little gains in LBM specifically training and eating with that in mind. In the years previous to that, I had gained 25lbs of BW without my squat going up anywhere near that amount.
Most of the people on this board aren’t even involved in sports with weight classes. This original poster didn’t claim he was involved in sports with a weight class. Beyond that, if you hit a brick wall as far as strength, it may be time to simply accept that you need to gain more body weight to get stronger.
You are acting like major plateaus should be overlooked. If it takes you years to adapt a mind muscle connection to an exercise, your genetics SUCK. In “bodybuilding” this is a nonissue because the diet is immediately adapted to allow for more growth.
This is why many lifters will try to max out their potential in one weight class before moving up into the next one. As a person gets closer to their genetic potential at their weight, the gains will of course slow down.
-Matt
Uh, no shit. Who has written otherwise?[/quote]
I’m sorry that you’re getting so “upset” over this conversation. I hope it doesn’t anger you too much and I’m not trying to “put things” in your mouth.
You ask where you said that “neural adaptation cannot be changed” and accuse me of saying that you said that. I never did…which is strangely defeating your own argument of me apparently using made up arguments to oppose.
I said, “You say it AS IF it were something that cannot be trained, and that is absolutely not true.” to your saying,
“Unless you are in powerlifting meets, worrying about relative strength BEFORE worrying about ABSOLUTE STRENGTH makes no sense to me. Your “relative strength” will be based on genetics, neural adaptation and learning of technique. There isn’t anything more to it.”
So neural adaptation is trainable in your opinion? Then what is the point of what you are arguing? You build strength more slowly when limiting gains in muscle or body mass? I don’t think anyone is arguing this, it’s quite obviously true.
But you do not know the reasons that the individual has for not wanting to increase their bodyweight but increase their strength. If a person at 200lbs does not have an impressive bench press for THEIR WEIGHT, then moving up to 220lbs is not necessarily going to give them anymore of an impressive bench FOR THEIR WEIGHT. Yes, their bench will probably go up, but not necessarily as fast as they would want it to relative to bodymass gained. If a person has a goal of a 400 bench press no matter what, then gain all the weight you want, it’ll make it easier.
Most of the people on this board are not involved in weight class sports? How do you know this? MANY of the people that I have talked with on the site are involved in sports that are very dependent on keeping their strength to bodyweight levels high. In bodybuilding, this obviously doesn’t matter. And I’m not talking about bodybuilding.
In your second to last post, you mention that all of this is a nonissue in bodybuilding because the diet is simply adjusted so that a higher caloric intake leads to more growth and usually more strength. Once again, I say that an invidual who has a “relatively” shitty bench press at a muscular 200lbs will not NECESSARILY have a relatively better bench press at 220lbs.
I gained a large amount of weight over a few years and the gain in strength that I made were not nearly as appreciable as when I was training specifically for relative strength rather than size itself.
-Matt
[quote]Professor X wrote:
Matt McGorry wrote:
f_fatman9999 wrote:
vandalay15 wrote:
Matt McGorry wrote:
Someone who does not have the genetics to be elite in the 165 class will not have the genetics to be elite in the 242 class.
You are wrong. That is just a dumb thing to say.
Agreed.
McGorry’s statement is incorrect.
If someone is six foot and 165 lbs there is little to no chance of making elite, that person is just too damned skinny for that height. At 242(lean), a six footer would have a much better chance of reaching elite and even better still at a lean 275.
I thought that this didn’t even need saying because of how obvious it was.
Yes, height will have some effect on how much you should weight for appropriate leverages. For a guy who is 5’10 and 198lbs and no chance of making elite, it is unlikely that they would make elite at 5’10 220lb. This is a less extreme example. Agreed?
-Matt
You really can’t even make a claim like that either. You can’t go around and tell people that added muscular body weight won’t help them get much farther along in strength.
You really have to wonder why gaining muscle is suddenly such a despised activity. If you actually truly compete in powerlifting meets, fine, make a huge issue of it. If you don’t, quit being a wannabe.
That isn’t written to you specifically but to anyone extremely worried about “relative strength” even though they are “absolutely weak” and don’t compete.
[/quote]
I absolutely agree that people gaining weight will make strength gains easier. Once again, we’re talking about increases in relative strength.
And I don’t see why you talk of gaining muscle as being a despised activity. You seem to be on this crusade against people who are afraid to gain mass, but you are bringing it into arguments where it is not an issue.
Gain all the mass you want, that’s great. I used to want to be a lot “huger” than I am today, but I realized that it’s not helpful to what I’m trying to do.
Personally, I’m an actor who is not trying to completely limit the roles he can play, but by the same token, I despise the idea of simply training to maintain what I have. So I have taken to increasing strength without increasing my bodyweight. I may or may not compete in a powerlifting competition, but I still want to do the best that I can within the range of my bodyweight…that’s my goal right now.
Just as a non-competeing bodybuilder might worry about having good proportions among muscle groups, a non-competeing powerlifter may worry about increasing their strength relative to bodymass.
When I considered myself a bodybuilder (without competeting) I made an effort to make sure that muscle groups didn’t blow out of proportion to one another in the same way that I wouldn’t want to be 300lbs with a 400lb bench. Yea, a 370lb bench may be impressive in and of itself, but weighing 300lbs to do so is really not very strong. This is an extreme example, but I think it illustrates my point.
-Matt
[quote]vandalay15 wrote:
Matt McGorry wrote:
This is why many lifters will try to max out their potential in one weight class before moving up into the next one.
This isn’t the best move in many cases. Many lifters really limit their progress by trying to stay in a lower weight class.
It’s a lot wiser to gain muscle and get bigger which will make getting stronger easier as leverages are improved and the lifter now has more muscle.
Most beginner and intermediate PLers shouldn’t worry about what weight class they are in until they have already totaled elite and gains are now slowing. Then clean up the diet or cut weight to become competitive in a lower weight class if necessary.[/quote]
I am not completely disagreeing with you here.
While I do not have a ton of powerlifting experience, I think it would be better to do the oppoisite and work one’s way up rather than back down.
This would come after a base level of muscularity has been achieved. How much this is depends on the individual. Most of the powerlifters that I know of who have totaled elite in multiple weight classes have generally worked their way up rather than down through different weight divisions.
When long-time plateaus are achieved at a given bodyweight, then it is probably appropriate to gain more mass in order to move up to the next weight class and find a place where there is a comfortable weight that will suit an individuals body best for lifting.
-Matt
wait a minute, you’re telling me that teh chest is more important the lats/tris/delts?? you gotta be kidding man.
im not saying that the chest isnt used in the bench press, but i dont think you should even be donig flys or crossovers, dont you agree?
[quote]Disturbed T3Ch wrote:
wait a minute, you’re telling me that teh chest is more important the lats/tris/delts?? you gotta be kidding man.
im not saying that the chest isnt used in the bench press, but i dont think you should even be donig flys or crossovers, dont you agree?[/quote]
You may be a great guy, but what the hell are you talking about?
[quote]Matt McGorry wrote:
So neural adaptation is trainable in your opinion? Then what is the point of what you are arguing? You build strength more slowly when limiting gains in muscle or body mass? I don’t think anyone is arguing this, it’s quite obviously true.[/quote]
Were you asleep during the first part of this thread? the OP is attempting to gain strength without gaining much (if any) body weight which makes that statement completely relevant. What the hell did you think was being debated?
[quote]
But you do not know the reasons that the individual has for not wanting to increase their bodyweight but increase their strength. If a person at 200lbs does not have an impressive bench press for THEIR WEIGHT, then moving up to 220lbs is not necessarily going to give them anymore of an impressive bench FOR THEIR WEIGHT. Yes, their bench will probably go up, but not necessarily as fast as they would want it to relative to bodymass gained. If a person has a goal of a 400 bench press no matter what, then gain all the weight you want, it’ll make it easier.[/quote]
Who has written otherwise? Are you just writing now to see your name on the screen? I could care less about someone’s reasons for not wanting to gain weight. The point is, IF THEY CHOOSE TO NOT GAIN ANY BODY WEIGHT, THEY SHOULD ALSO ACCEPT THE FACT THAT THEY MAY NOT GET MUCH STRONGER. That has now been written about 50 different ways in this one thread.
[quote]
Most of the people on this board are not involved in weight class sports? How do you know this? MANY of the people that I have talked with on the site are involved in sports that are very dependent on keeping their strength to bodyweight levels high. In bodybuilding, this obviously doesn’t matter. And I’m not talking about bodybuilding.[/quote]
Playing a sport where someone is worried about becoming slow at a higher body weight isn’t exactly the same as competing in a sport WITH WEIGHT CLASSES which is what I wrote.
[quote]
In your second to last post, you mention that all of this is a nonissue in bodybuilding because the diet is simply adjusted so that a higher caloric intake leads to more growth and usually more strength. Once again, I say that an invidual who has a “relatively” shitty bench press at a muscular 200lbs will not NECESSARILY have a relatively better bench press at 220lbs. [/quote]
You don’t know what kind of bench press they could have if they gain more body weight. The point made was YOU DO NOT KNOW, NOT WHETHER IT IS POSSIBLE. Honestly, what was the point of this reply but to highlight that you misunderstood several things brought up in this thread?
[quote]Disturbed T3Ch wrote:
wait a minute, you’re telling me that teh chest is more important the lats/tris/delts?? you gotta be kidding man.
im not saying that the chest isnt used in the bench press, but i dont think you should even be donig flys or crossovers, dont you agree?[/quote]
Tip:
Don’t smoke weed and then write posts on the internet. Puff Puff Pass up Posting. Just sit back and wait for the screen to start vibrating.
G$, who cares about how much you can bench? Seriously if you are not willing gain weight you are going to work awfully hard to gain a tiny amount of strength and will not have any carryover.
There are many more importat things to work on if you are playing rugby. Don’t fall in love with the bench.
[quote]Disturbed T3Ch wrote:
wait a minute, you’re telling me that teh chest is more important the lats/tris/delts?? you gotta be kidding man.
im not saying that the chest isnt used in the bench press, but i dont think you should even be donig flys or crossovers, dont you agree?[/quote]
You gotta train chest and tri’s for the bench. Period. People who just train tri’s on bench either wear bench shirts, or injure their chest eventually, or never bench very much. And before you say “Dave Tate (or some other pl’er) says to train your tri’s” Dave Tate can do flyes with what a lot of people bench. He already has a lot of chest strength.