Mark Rippetoe Success Story

Training
41

[quote]Captnoblivious wrote:
Rippetoe looks like and over sized coyote turd.[/quote]
As a 56-year old who’s been coaching people since you and I were in diapers, has the respect of the overwhelming majority of his peers (professionals, not armchair trainers), and still has a 500 deadlift, I’m sure he’s heart-broken that you don’t find him aesthetic enough.

You’re saying this based on your experience as a coach, your experience trying the program for a few months, or your experience as mountain biker/rock climber with a few years of lifting under your belt?

Way to sound cool in front of the big guys. It probably worked.

42

[quote]optheta wrote:
Chris Colucci hows that Kool Aid taste?[/quote]
Probably tastes as good as having an open mind feels.

So now it’s not okay to lose abs when bulking? Rippetoe has always been pretty clear that bodyfat gain will come along with increased muscle.

And sorry, but you’re wearing blinders if you don’t see increased back, chest, shoulder, and leg muscle on some of those afters.

Not sure where you’re going with this. I didn’t say anything about benching 300 in particular, but there are a bunch of videos of people testing their lifts during their time with Starting Strength. It’s, like, a program meant to build strength. People are supposed to get stronger with it.

I really don’t mean to be “that guy”, but I have to head out now. Scouts honor I’ll be back to this thread in the morning. Can’t wait to see the hell I’ve brought down on me. I still love you guys. Mostly. :wink:

43

Honestly, in those first couple before and after pics you posted Chris, the guys just look a little shlubbier; neither looks any better from a bodybuilding perspective (which is the forum we are posting in). The third guy looked emaciated in the before picture and yes definitely looks more filled out in the after photos, and the fourth guy definitely gained some weight in his after photo (how much of it was muscle is tough to tell, but whatever).

But like you said, Starting Strength is a strength building program, not a bodybuilding program. If my son was undersized and wanted to get into football, I might have him start with SS or WS4SB (or some other strength oriented program). But if he wanted to look better and get more muscular, I would not pick either of those programs. The criticism of SS isn’t that it sucks as a strength building program, it’s that a poor choice for bodybuilding.

Finally, while I acknowledge that Rippetoe is a respected strength coach, has been coaching athletes for many years, and is still pretty strong for his age, none of those things really mean anything when discussing how he looks from a bodybuilding perspective. That would be like someone saying that Oprah would make a poor choice for a Victoria Secret Model and me coming back with “yeah, but she’s super rich and does tons of good things for charity”. One has nothing to do with the other and although perhaps good in their own right do not in any way counter the original statement.

44

[quote]Sentoguy wrote:
Honestly, in those first couple before and after pics you posted Chris, the guys just look a little shlubbier; neither looks any better from a bodybuilding perspective (which is the forum we are posting in). The third guy looked emaciated in the before picture and yes definitely looks more filled out in the after photos, and the fourth guy definitely gained some weight in his after photo (how much of it was muscle is tough to tell, but whatever).

But like you said, Starting Strength is a strength building program, not a bodybuilding program. If my son was undersized and wanted to get into football, I might have him start with SS or WS4SB (or some other strength oriented program). But if he wanted to look better and get more muscular, I would not pick either of those programs. The criticism of SS isn’t that it sucks as a strength building program, it’s that a poor choice for bodybuilding.

Finally, while I acknowledge that Rippetoe is a respected strength coach, has been coaching athletes for many years, and is still pretty strong for his age, none of those things really mean anything when discussing how he looks from a bodybuilding perspective. That would be like someone saying that Oprah would make a poor choice for a Victoria Secret Model and me coming back with “yeah, but she’s super rich and does tons of good things for charity”. One has nothing to do with the other and although perhaps good in their own right do not in any way counter the original statement.[/quote]

Excellent post!

45

Today’s article: Conditioning is a Sham

46

[quote]corstijeir wrote:
Today’s article: Conditioning is a Sham [/quote]

Rippetoe is great at talking about nothing, should be a politician.

47

[quote]Chris Colucci wrote:

[quote]Captnoblivious wrote:
Rippetoe looks like and over sized coyote turd.[/quote]
As a 56-year old who’s been coaching people since you and I were in diapers, has the respect of the overwhelming majority of his peers (professionals, not armchair trainers), and still has a 500 deadlift, I’m sure he’s heart-broken that you don’t find him aesthetic enough.

You’re saying this based on your experience as a coach, your experience trying the program for a few months, or your experience as mountain biker/rock climber with a few years of lifting under your belt?

Way to sound cool in front of the big guys. It probably worked.[/quote]

The starting strength debate has been rehashed over and over again. At this point, there is really nothing to debate. Defending SS in the body building forum is pointless. The only credit I would give rip is for staying strong and doing a good job selling his product.

I find it interesting that you feel the need to defend another coach with a sub par physique. Practicing what you preach goes along way to validate your product or service. I would much rather read an article by Nate Myaki or Clay Height than a has been powerlifter with a 50 inch waist.

48

[quote]optheta wrote:
Chris Colucci hows that Kool Aid taste?

Notice a trend in all those pictures? The guys start with defined abs then they are gone and they just look a little bit chubbier.

Ohh and everybody and there mom can bench 300lbs like its nothing after doing starting strength.[/quote]

Shit, he just put up a motherfucking cool-aid grand stand.

Good point! Most of those pics could be manipulated through pumped/unpumped photos.

49

[quote]Sentoguy wrote:
But like you said, Starting Strength is a strength building program, not a bodybuilding program. If my son was undersized and wanted to get into football, I might have him start with SS or WS4SB (or some other strength oriented program). But if he wanted to look better and get more muscular, I would not pick either of those programs. The criticism of SS isn’t that it sucks as a strength building program, it’s that a poor choice for bodybuilding.[/quote]

I agree with this, but I do have a couple followup questions:

  1. Why are programs like WS4SB, Starting Strength, Stronglifts, etc. so popular? Especially considering that most guys, once they get their goals sorted out (i.e., once they get past the “I don’t want to look like Ronnie Coleman” stage), really just want to train like a bodybuilder. It seems odd that “beginner strength programs” are far more well known than “beginner bodybuilding programs”.

  2. What are some good bodybuilding programs for guys just starting out? Kingbeef’s thread get bumps a lot around here, and some of CTs programs get talked about, but those seem to really only be talked about on this site.

50

[quote]optheta wrote:

[quote]corstijeir wrote:
Today’s article: Conditioning is a Sham [/quote]

Rippetoe is great at talking about nothing, should be a politician. [/quote]

Meh, I wouldn’t say he is talking about nothing.

I can see the value of this article if it were presented to a beginner like he mentioned in the first paragraph or so.

Very often I run into people who tell me things like running will make me stronger, or running will make my legs big, or they tell me to run because my calves will get bigger.

We all know these things are highly unlikely, and possibly take away from the results of a beginner.

I still feel like conditioning is very important (strong heart strong body) at all levels but you should train with principles of specificity so if you’re trying to put on a lot of size or strength your conditioning/cardio should be significantly less than you’re weightlifting program.

I still don’t think starting strength is the way to go though… unless maybe, you want to be a powerlifter, which I know nothing about :slight_smile: haha

51

[quote]LoRez wrote:

[quote]Sentoguy wrote:
But like you said, Starting Strength is a strength building program, not a bodybuilding program. If my son was undersized and wanted to get into football, I might have him start with SS or WS4SB (or some other strength oriented program). But if he wanted to look better and get more muscular, I would not pick either of those programs. The criticism of SS isn’t that it sucks as a strength building program, it’s that a poor choice for bodybuilding.[/quote]

I agree with this, but I do have a couple followup questions:

  1. Why are programs like WS4SB, Starting Strength, Stronglifts, etc. so popular? Especially considering that most guys, once they get their goals sorted out (i.e., once they get past the “I don’t want to look like Ronnie Coleman” stage), really just want to train like a bodybuilder. It seems odd that “beginner strength programs” are far more well known than “beginner bodybuilding programs”.

  2. What are some good bodybuilding programs for guys just starting out? Kingbeef’s thread get bumps a lot around here, and some of CTs programs get talked about, but those seem to really only be talked about on this site.[/quote]

I dunno man bodybuilding was a really simple concept to me, almost common sense.

No one really even had to tell me, it just made sense to pound the shit out of every muscle one day a week.

you know I would just come in one day do a few variations of bench press and flys for chest
and the same concept for every other bodypart really

52

I have read Starting Strength. Most of the book focuses on lifting technique; however, the programming is designed to provide a strength base for athletes.

If you use a strength program and want bodybuilding results, you have chosen the wrong tool for your goals. Blame your discrimination not the program, and quit shitting on an excellent strength coach.

53

[quote]LoRez wrote:

[quote]Sentoguy wrote:
But like you said, Starting Strength is a strength building program, not a bodybuilding program. If my son was undersized and wanted to get into football, I might have him start with SS or WS4SB (or some other strength oriented program). But if he wanted to look better and get more muscular, I would not pick either of those programs. The criticism of SS isn’t that it sucks as a strength building program, it’s that a poor choice for bodybuilding.[/quote]

I agree with this, but I do have a couple followup questions:

  1. Why are programs like WS4SB, Starting Strength, Stronglifts, etc. so popular? Especially considering that most guys, once they get their goals sorted out (i.e., once they get past the “I don’t want to look like Ronnie Coleman” stage), really just want to train like a bodybuilder. It seems odd that “beginner strength programs” are far more well known than “beginner bodybuilding programs”.

  2. What are some good bodybuilding programs for guys just starting out? Kingbeef’s thread get bumps a lot around here, and some of CTs programs get talked about, but those seem to really only be talked about on this site.[/quote]
    I disagree with point one because I feel the exact popularity of these programs, that you speak of, indicates that “most people” don’t want to train like body builders.
    Many people want to train like athletes.
    That is part of personal experience as far as why I began training utilizing a strength focused program.
    The second reason for the “popularity” of these programs, is that the Weider principles concept for plateau surpassing = more drugs.

If you don’t use drugs you need a program that accounts for and programs to surpass plateaus, or your growth will stagnate.
There are bodybuilder archetypes, that program past plateau’s, DC is the one I have first hand knowledge of, when I trained like that I always left the gym wanting to feel more beat, which is part of the idea behind how DC works, I did not like that, I like to enjoy my training and part of that “enjoyment” is feeling like I’ve had the shit kicked out of me, at least occasionally.

54

[quote]Sentoguy wrote:
Honestly, in those first couple before and after pics you posted Chris, the guys just look a little shlubbier; neither looks any better from a bodybuilding perspective (which is the forum we are posting in). The third guy looked emaciated in the before picture and yes definitely looks more filled out in the after photos, and the fourth guy definitely gained some weight in his after photo (how much of it was muscle is tough to tell, but whatever).[/quote]
I guess we have different perspectives, which is fine. I think the significant strength gain and 10-15 pounds per month of bodyweight is a pretty good start for a beginner. And primarily, I wanted to show that not everybody who follows the Starting Strength program as written ends up fat, as was the running joke.

It’s a strength building program that teaches newbs proper technique on the basic lifts, which will/should carryover to whatever they move onto after. Spending a few months doing almost nothing but learning how to squat, bench, and deadlift properly while building strength on those lifts and gaining bodyweight is, from Rippetoe’s point of view, supposed to be a foundation that will benefit a beginner when they move onto bodybuilding or whatever particular goal.

As he’s said before, " If I have a 6-foot kid who weighs 155 pounds, what’s his problem? Whether he wants to be a bodybuilder, he wants to be a powerlifter, an Olympic weightlifter, or a thrower, what’s his problem? He’s little. He’s 6-foot and weighs 155. And our program is the best way to get him to 6-foot, 195."

Disagree with his point of view if you want - that’s valid because different coaches/trainer use different methods - but it’s safe to say that there are plenty of beginners on traditional bodybuilding splits who see terrible progress in strength and bodyweight for months at a time. Does that doesn’t mean that traditional bodybuilding training is the wrong way to go for them?

This thread was created to bash the program outright, or so it seemed from the start. Saying that Starting Strength/Rippetoe/GOMAD is “ruining” people is what I took issue with and wanted to address.

C’mon man, that original comment was nothing but a cheap shot at Rippetoe, trying to discredit him by saying he doesn’t look like a bodybuilder when that was never his personal goal. And the “coach looks out of shape so they shouldn’t give advice” routine is a very tired argument anyhow. If that were the case, people like Cosgrove, Staley, Dan John a few years ago, Jim Wendler (five years ago), or Dave Tate (10 years) ago should not be giving advice. (No disrespect) That’s an ignorant line of thinking, but it belongs in a different thread if any.

55

[quote]Captnoblivious wrote:
Defending SS in the body building forum is pointless.[/quote]
I agree it does seem pointless. I knew what I was stepping into, a huge uphill fight, but I think it’s at least worth point out that the program isn’t worthless like most believe.

First of all, if he didn’t “practice what he preached”, he probably wouldn’t be pulling 500 at his age. So there’s that. Secondly, see my above comments to Sento.

I do appreciate how you guys see my bringing up counter-points as just drinking Kool-aid. If every one of my posts in the Beginners forum told people to be on Starting Strength, you’d have a better case. But for now, it does nothing to add to the discussion. Thanks though.

56

[quote]knotginuwhine wrote:
I disagree with point one because I feel the exact popularity of these programs, that you speak of, indicates that “most people” don’t want to train like body builders.
Many people want to train like athletes.
That is part of personal experience as far as why I began training utilizing a strength focused program.[/quote]

Well, that’s exactly what I was talking about. Most beginners in my experience, hear ‘bodybuilder’ and they thing of huge veiny guys, and they say don’t want that. When they think of something like the “world’s strongest man”, all they see are fat guys. But when they think athletes, or, hell, Navy SEALs, they see something they want.

So, naturally, when they see something that says “train like an athlete” or “train like a special forces operator” (cough Pavel with his kettlebells cough), and that’s what they latch onto. Somewhere after that point, many get sucked into the whole “functional strength” rhetoric without realizing it.

Most people who’ve never lifted seem to be far more interested in looking like a guy out of Men’s Health than a guy out of M&F. Why? Probably because they’ve seen enough women say that’s what they want, and most guys start lifting for the wimmenz. The guys who keep lifting do it for other reasons, but that’s often the gateway. After they get burned out with the Men’s Health BS workouts and don’t get the results they want, they tend to gravitate toward the “athlete” route. Hence, things like Starting Strength and even WS4SB.

Now, everyone around here seems to know that if you really just want to look like a fitness model, or a guy from Men’s Health, your best bet is to train like a bodybuilder. But very few people that I’ve met in real life – outside of the gym – seem to know that.

However, if someone could figure out a bodybuilding program that brands itself as “do this and look like a fitness model”, I think that would steer a lot of people in the right direction.

57

[quote]optheta wrote:
Notice a trend in all those pictures? The guys start with defined abs then they are gone and they just look a little bit chubbier.[/quote]

I thought the bodybuilding forum was better than this :confused:

So it’s all about skinny guys keeping their abs year round and not having any muscle?

58

[quote]LoRez wrote:

[quote]knotginuwhine wrote:
I disagree with point one because I feel the exact popularity of these programs, that you speak of, indicates that “most people” don’t want to train like body builders.
Many people want to train like athletes.
That is part of personal experience as far as why I began training utilizing a strength focused program.[/quote]

Well, that’s exactly what I was talking about. Most beginners in my experience, hear ‘bodybuilder’ and they thing of huge veiny guys, and they say don’t want that. When they think of something like the “world’s strongest man”, all they see are fat guys. But when they think athletes, or, hell, Navy SEALs, they see something they want.

So, naturally, when they see something that says “train like an athlete” or “train like a special forces operator” (cough Pavel with his kettlebells cough), and that’s what they latch onto. Somewhere after that point, many get sucked into the whole “functional strength” rhetoric without realizing it.

Most people who’ve never lifted seem to be far more interested in looking like a guy out of Men’s Health than a guy out of M&F. Why? Probably because they’ve seen enough women say that’s what they want, and most guys start lifting for the wimmenz. The guys who keep lifting do it for other reasons, but that’s often the gateway. After they get burned out with the Men’s Health BS workouts and don’t get the results they want, they tend to gravitate toward the “athlete” route. Hence, things like Starting Strength and even WS4SB.

Now, everyone around here seems to know that if you really just want to look like a fitness model, or a guy from Men’s Health, your best bet is to train like a bodybuilder. But very few people that I’ve met in real life – outside of the gym – seem to know that.

However, if someone could figure out a bodybuilding program that brands itself as “do this and look like a fitness model”, I think that would steer a lot of people in the right direction.[/quote]
You should write that program, make you a mint.
Almost everyone at my gyms trains bb style/weider 4ish*8-12 ish body part split ish maybe throw in some variable intensity techniques.

And now a days you’ve got the hipsters and their crossfit, tho I must say my current “home city gym” is 100% bodybuilding not an urban area or perverted by an urban areas liberalism.

Maybe people train for bitches, I don’t know.
I train mostly because it is fun, the other positives are tangential, but I’m odd in most settings.

59

[quote]LoRez wrote:

[quote]knotginuwhine wrote:
I disagree with point one because I feel the exact popularity of these programs, that you speak of, indicates that “most people” don’t want to train like body builders.
Many people want to train like athletes.
That is part of personal experience as far as why I began training utilizing a strength focused program.[/quote]

Well, that’s exactly what I was talking about. Most beginners in my experience, hear ‘bodybuilder’ and they thing of huge veiny guys, and they say don’t want that. When they think of something like the “world’s strongest man”, all they see are fat guys. But when they think athletes, or, hell, Navy SEALs, they see something they want.

So, naturally, when they see something that says “train like an athlete” or “train like a special forces operator” (cough Pavel with his kettlebells cough), and that’s what they latch onto. Somewhere after that point, many get sucked into the whole “functional strength” rhetoric without realizing it.

Most people who’ve never lifted seem to be far more interested in looking like a guy out of Men’s Health than a guy out of M&F. Why? Probably because they’ve seen enough women say that’s what they want, and most guys start lifting for the wimmenz. The guys who keep lifting do it for other reasons, but that’s often the gateway. After they get burned out with the Men’s Health BS workouts and don’t get the results they want, they tend to gravitate toward the “athlete” route. Hence, things like Starting Strength and even WS4SB.

Now, everyone around here seems to know that if you really just want to look like a fitness model, or a guy from Men’s Health, your best bet is to train like a bodybuilder. But very few people that I’ve met in real life – outside of the gym – seem to know that.

However, if someone could figure out a bodybuilding program that brands itself as “do this and look like a fitness model”, I think that would steer a lot of people in the right direction.[/quote]
One thing I forgot to say, speaking strictly for myself, if I have any kind of ideal physique in mind to attain from my training it would not be fitness model.
I’d way rather look like a linebacker and have no abs at 220, than be 180 and shredded.
I know others think similarly, and program their training similarly.

60

I remember him saying that starting strength was the program to follow to build a base no mater what you wanted to do after that. Its a decent begginer’s program, it’s a shitty bodybuilding begginer’s program, and its a horrible weightlifter begginer’s program.