Mighty's Contest Updates & Q&A Thread

Training
1081

[quote]Ghost_Panther wrote:
just realised I didn’t even mention where I was in the above link - I’m the closest competitor in shot, on the far left (as you look at it) [/quote]

Great conditioning, and definitely symmetrical. As you forecast though, some of the guys just outsized you. That’s always the concern with being towards the lower end, or even the middle of your weight class. You can easily forget how far some competitors suck down. By 2011, I was barely sliding under the upper limit for the middleweight class, and at times it was by less than a single pound. Then there would be guys who weighed up to 15 lbs less than me onstage in the same class!

So how was your experience overall? Already planning another one? Taking time off? Maybe you’ve “gotten this out of your system?” -lol. I’ve made some great friends over the years from competing. Guys I’ve beaten, and guys who’ve beaten me. It’s all just a game at the end of the day.

S

1082

[quote]The Mighty Stu wrote:

[quote]Ghost_Panther wrote:
just realised I didn’t even mention where I was in the above link - I’m the closest competitor in shot, on the far left (as you look at it) [/quote]

Great conditioning, and definitely symmetrical. As you forecast though, some of the guys just outsized you. That’s always the concern with being towards the lower end, or even the middle of your weight class. You can easily forget how far some competitors suck down. By 2011, I was barely sliding under the upper limit for the middleweight class, and at times it was by less than a single pound. Then there would be guys who weighed up to 15 lbs less than me onstage in the same class!

So how was your experience overall? Already planning another one? Taking time off? Maybe you’ve “gotten this out of your system?” -lol. I’ve made some great friends over the years from competing. Guys I’ve beaten, and guys who’ve beaten me. It’s all just a game at the end of the day.

S[/quote]

Thanks Stu … To answer your question, I’m hooked ! I was awestruck by some of the competitors in the higher categories that I saw during the show and it has well and truly inspired me to come back in 12 months and present something bigger and better (which shouldn’t be difficult having stepped on stage last weekend at a whopping 170lb !)

Another thing I really learnt from saturday was the need to nail posing and improve stage presence / confidence ten fold … You think you’re being aggressive and on point with your posing & routine until you see the photos … It really was the one area I just didn’t pay enough attention to in preparing for this.

As a ‘rookie’ you’re always questioning your methods and I did wonder if I was ‘suffered’ enough in the 24-48 hours before the show, because I felt pretty good on the day and on stage after upping my carbs from thursday … meanwhile some of the guys I was competing against looked like they were about to die when they came off stage between their routines and going back out for the compulsory posing round … My prep coach (competed in and won the Masters) was also totally drained by the end of his round …

Might have to do a little experimenting / research over the next 12 months with regards to the water depletion because as soon as I cut water (16 hours out) my trips to the bathroom slowed down dramatically even though I was taking diuretics every couple of hours. Even resorted to a couple of cups of black coffee on show day just to get things moving again.

But all those things aside, the biggest take home message for me was the need to pack on size, first and foremost. Diet wise I’m not going to go berserk … Basically upping my carb intake significantly at breakfast + pre & post workout meals & re-introducing lean beef and some dairy sources. Will be keeping carbs much lower on non-training days.

Anyway, I’ll wind it up because I don’t want to hijack your thread here Stu … thanks again for your feedback mate.

1083

So I’ll be seeing the Ortho Surgeon this coming Wednesday for a check in. I’ve been told that usually at 4 weeks post-op, you get a recheck, and that the sling comes off so you can start bearing the weight of your own arm again. I still have very little range of motion in the shoulder, or even any strength to lift it, so aside from being able to unbend my elbow (which has truly sucked these last few weeks), it’ll still be pretty much dead weight.

While getting dressed yesterday morning, my wife saw me shirtless and commented that I looked like I was “turning into a normal person” -lol. Yes, it’s kinda funny, but a bit depressing when you realize just how quickly some people can atrophy. I always maintained that bodybuilders, or athletes who start younger, during their ‘formative years’, will always retain a decent degree of muscularity. At the opposite end of the spectrum, are those who start later in life, whose physiques can be built to similarly impressive levels, but they tend to lose the added lean body mass much easier.

In my case, I started training in my 20’s, but didn’t really start packing on muscular weight until I was almost 30 (admittedly I had no clue what I was doing, and apparently neither did the people I was training around!) As such, based totally on the mirror, I would guess I’ve dropped about 10-15 lbs of muscle since I first felt the issue in July. Also very evident is the left arm losing much quicker due to being constantly bent in the sling. Of course while my bicep feels constantly unflexed and compressed, it’s necessary as it attaches to the rear portion of the labrum.

Doing my best to take this all in stride, but damnit I just wanna speed things up already!
I am especially luck in that my wife has been amazingly supportive through this. She’s been through a broken humorus bone a couple of years ago, and while the rehab is similar, she also acknowledges that my situation as a pro competitor being suddenly sidelined is a bit different. Little by little though, she’s actually been learning to cook (usually my job), so I guess there’s always a silver lining :slight_smile:

S

1084

Very cool post as I also want to make my body like this.

1085

[quote]The Mighty Stu wrote:

In my case, I started training in my 20’s, but didn’t really start packing on muscular weight until I was almost 30 (admittedly I had no clue what I was doing, and apparently neither did the people I was training around!)

S
[/quote]

Stu, this is a really interesting statement to me. I’m coming up on 30 in a few years and, while I THINK I know what I’m doing most times in the gym I certainly feel like I get better at it every month. Stimulating the muscle, feeling the movement better, finding better movements and positions for movements.

Was it as simple as decreasing the focus on weight being used and focusing more on making the muscle do the work?

I sure wouldn’t mind making MY best gains in my 30’s…

1086

@Lonnie- First, I’d say that you’re definitely learning your body very well. I’ve seen you make great progress the last couple of years, and your recent contest conditioning certainly speaks to your understanding of properly synching up your training and diet to the best effect. What people need to keep in mind is that the human body is not a static entity.

Any seasoned competitor will tell you that no two contest preps have played out in exactly the same manner. I know we all hear the “it’s different when you’re 30”, or “it’s a whole different ball game when you’re 40…”, but when you think about it, aging is a variable that is in a state of constant change, and the physiological issues that shift along with it are completely out of our control.

In my case, and it’s strange to bring this up, but there was no internet when I started training (you youngins reading along try and imagine that!) There was really nowhere you could go for great information. The magainzes were full of BS Weider ads for his latest “steroid alternatives” (with pics of Gaspari on the box!), and even the books you could buy never raised the issue of recovery and proper nutrition with any nod to the fact that the huge dudes in the photos were getting a little help from various PEDs.

Even if you tried to go the science text book route, sure it was cool to understand what was transpiring on a molecular level, BUT that really didn’t offer information on triggering muscle growth (I was a Bio/Premed student during most of my undergrad years, but let’s face it, it hasn’t helped me at all in my bodybuilding career.) Even the more experienced folks in the school gym didn’t shed much light on achieving my goals. In hindsight, the advice I got from the few ‘big dudes’ who trained in the college weight room I started out in, was so far off base from what I would advise young trainers today myself.

Of course, I will add that when you’re in your early 20’s, 150 lbs of non-shredded mass, and barely able to bench your own bodyweight, you assume that anyone who weighs more than 2 bills (and you don’t know the difference between ‘big’ and ‘muscular’ yet) and can lift the ‘large’ plates is an expert -lol.

What really made things click for me, in terms of training, was a few things.

1-Getting stronger does not magically lead to getting bigger. Yes, a larger muscle is usually a stronger one, but ‘progressive overload’ isn’t solely refering to mechanical loading.

2-Understanding what ‘intensity’ really means.

3-Making muscles work =/= lifting a weight

4-There are countless exercises, and if one causes you pain, or doesn’t yield results, there is no single good reason to keep using it.

5-Calories are not the be-all-end-all of putting on muscle. The people who tell you that are usually experiencing some form of denial concerning how much bodyfat they truly have, and how big they’re really not. (re-read this one a few times).

6-Once you start developing joint issues, they never fully go away.

7-If you get injured 99% of the time there is a ‘work-around’ that will allow you to keep training.

8-Diet and supplements can be magical if you use them intelligently. If you need a pre-workout supplement to get you in the gym for every training session, then maybe this isn’t for you :slight_smile:
(just a personal pet peeve of mine the last few years)

Just some things off the top of my head.

S

1087

Great read, Stu. Thanks for that.

If you have the time I’d love to hear your thoughts on your favorite types of progressive overload, and do you think different muscles respond to different types of stimulus?

1088

[quote]Lonnie123 wrote:
Great read, Stu. Thanks for that.[/quote]

x2.

[quote]If you have the time I’d love to hear your thoughts on your favorite types of progressive overload, and do you think different muscles respond to different types of stimulus?
[/quote]

And also x2.

I’m especially curious about what kind of stimulus worked best for different muscle groups. For instance, high-reps for shoulders has gotten a lot of press on here recently. Curious as to what you’ve found to work for you.

1089

[quote]The Mighty Stu wrote:
5-Calories are not the be-all-end-all of putting on muscle. The people who tell you that are usually experiencing some form of denial concerning how much bodyfat they truly have, and how big they’re really not. (re-read this one a few times).
[/quote]

Can you explain what you mean by this please as I can see a few angles you could be coming from but am not sure which one (maybe all of them?)

Do you mean nutrients are more important/ or peri workout/ macros?/ or taking your time or all/none of these?

From a nutrition standpoint, what would you say is the “be-all-end-all” then?

Thanks

1090

[quote]yolo84 wrote:

[quote]The Mighty Stu wrote:
5-Calories are not the be-all-end-all of putting on muscle. The people who tell you that are usually experiencing some form of denial concerning how much bodyfat they truly have, and how big they’re really not. (re-read this one a few times).
[/quote]

Can you explain what you mean by this please as I can see a few angles you could be coming from but am not sure which one (maybe all of them?)

Do you mean nutrients are more important/ or peri workout/ macros?/ or taking your time or all/none of these?

From a nutrition standpoint, what would you say is the “be-all-end-all” then?

Thanks[/quote]

What he’s saying is that macronutrient breakdown and prescription is just as important as total caloric amount. You can have 4,000 calories providing 30% good fats, 1.25 grams high quality protein per pound, and rest carbs from veggies, fruits, tubers, legumes, and whole grains or you can have 4,000 calories with total disregard for protein amount and food quality or any macronutrient allowance. It’s both: caloric amount and macronutrient content. You can have one without the other when you need both to make the best gains. You can have a high quality diet with too few or too many calories and you can have too little or too many calories with crap quality.

I don’t know for sure, but I suspect he is referring to so-called big guys who really are overly fat and just “eat big” with total disregard for macronutrient content and food quality and body composition.

1091

[quote]BrickHead wrote:
[/quote]

Thanks for your view, makes sense.

1092

@Yolo- Brick pretty much hit it with his “it’s both” answer. A few things that are true no matter who you are: (I’m really starting to like giving these bullet-point answers lately -lol)

-You need a surplus amount of nutrients to support synthesis of new muscle tissue
-New tissue will require additional protein
-New tissue (and the training involved) may require additional energy substrates (usually carbohydrates)
-Adequate fat intake must be addressed to optimize your body’s production of anabolic hormones

Now, we can get all involved in an individual’s preferences in terms of fat vs carbohydrates as a chosen fuel source, or the fact that the human body can convert certain macronutrients into others if they’re needed, or even the maximum bodyfat level that allows for more efficient muscle growth, BUT, certain things will always be true:

-Your body can only create new tissue at the maximum rate it’s genetically coded to
-If your body is operating at it’s maximum level, any additional nutrients beyond the ‘expenses’ required to do so is unnecessary, and as such, will be stored as body fat.

To keep it simple; YOU CAN’T FORCE FEED MUSCLE GROWTH.

So while you do need a surplus of calories, you’d usually be better off addressing your nutrient needs if you can.

When you get into peri-workout stuff, then we’re trying to get an extra benefit by addressing the main anabolic and catabolic hormone levels at key points of the day. Your body may be more efficient at making use of certain macros as these times, but that doesn’t negate the “cant’ force feed growth” truism.

S

1093

@Lonnie & LoRez:

Sorry I haven’t had time to sit down and give you guys a decent response yet. Some questions I can just knock out some rambling and get everything across. Other times, I know what I’m gonna write, but I like to mull it a bit and make sure I’m keeping things simple and straightforward. I’ll get to it once I have more than a few minutes here and there, promise!

On my injury front, I had my recheck with the surgeon earlier today, and finally got approval to lose the sling. I can’t tell you how thrilled I am for this. Having my arm bent almost constantly for the last month has just been making me crazy. My inner elbow is all irritated and feels almost like scar tissue from the constant rubbing, and the area where my arm has been ‘glued’ to my torso has more than a few ingrown hairs, which have been itching to no end.

My arm is still basically dead weight above the elbow. Both my PT (Jessica) and the Doc agree on my excellent range of motion so far, so I guess now we push things a bit more, and try to start building some degree of strength back. The advice this morning was that while I don’t need to keep my arm in the sling, I should get used to putting my hand in my pocket so that I don’t accidentally use it. Lemme tell ya, folding my laundry this afternoon with one arm wasn’t exactly as easy as I would have thought.

I am reminded though that my brother said no direct bicep work for 8 weeks. I’m assuming that time frame includes any torso work (not sure what I even could do at this point). That would mean that I’m half way to being able to at least do something resistance wise.

It is hard not to get antsy when various PTs and athletic trainers who have seen me regularly since July all comment on how quickly my muscles seem to be atrophying (and boy am I getting furry without my weekly grooming sessions -lol). While I certainly wish this never happened, I will acknowledge that it’s gonna be kinda cool documenting just how well I can come back from this though.

S

1094

Glad to hear your bouncing back fast from the slice and dice. Wish I would have had PT for mine. Know it would have made a huge difference.

1095

[quote]The Mighty Stu wrote:
[/quote]

Thanks - very well explained.

1096

[quote]Lonnie123 wrote:
Great read, Stu. Thanks for that.

If you have the time I’d love to hear your thoughts on your favorite types of progressive overload, and do you think different muscles respond to different types of stimulus?
[/quote]

Before anyone thinks that I’m suggesting that you just go into the gym each day and lift the same weights, with the same speed and rest periods, for the same number of sets, allow me to elaborate.

There is more to stimulating muscle growth than simply trying to add a bit of weight to your lifts each week. This is however, the simplest method available to beginners and intermediate trainers in terms of measurable progress. As such, it most certainly does have its place. Eventually though, the human body cannot be counted on to reward such an approach with a corresponding increase in muscle mass. That’s just not how it works no matter how many strength trainers use it to explain the larger than average physiques of the top athletes. Many years ago I read a book by the National Strength and Conditioning Association (NSCA), and while it began outlining an approach to muscle gains that you would typically find in any news stand muscle magazine, it also went on to later explain that advanced lifters cannot continue to strive for strength gains, as the focus on maximizing muscle growth is not always directly linked.

So once you realize that just trying to add more and more weight isn’t ALWAYS the approach you need, you get into a whole other set of questions. How exactly do we stimulate muscle growth?

To OVERsimplify things, forgetting exercise ordering and rep performance variables (we can save that discussion for another thread -lol), you have the options creating muscle damage as described in most basic texts (sliding filament theory) AND you have the option of creating cumulative muscular fatigue and a hormonal effect.

Working with heavy weights, pushing for strength gains, performing proper repetitions, will create muscle damage through structural mechanisms (this is usually understood by even the most beginner level trainers).

Working with moderate weights, creating more of a pump, with shorter rest intervals, and allowing fatigue of muscles to build up over a larger volume of work (I’ve shifted to this approach myself in recent years to spare my joints a bit) will stimulate muscle growth through the stress of fatigue combined with the hormonal stimulus of an anabolic environment (growth hormone).

Ideally, a smart trainer will make use of both methods in their programming, but realizing that you don’t always need to add more weight is a huge step in continuing to make hypertrophy gains beyond a certain point.

S

1097

Thanks for that explanation. I’ve been reading a lot of “golden age” articles, and Park/Grimek/McCallum stress one approach, whereas Gironda/Nubret stress the other. Considering the success of both camps, they clearly both worked.

It also explains the lighter “pump sets” I’ve seen thrown into the end of a number of routines.

In your experience and observation, would you say that the hypertrophy response to adding more weight tapers off as you increase in training age? (a euphemized way of saying “as you get closer to your genetic limits”) Likewise for more pump based, higher-density training, would you say there’s any relation to training age in terms of hypertrophy response?

Just going off the basis of Gironda’s clientele at his Hollywood gym, he worked with many bodybuilders that already had a good foundation from poundage-based training, and then exposed them to pump-based training (as well as focusing on finishing details with specialty exercises). Obviously he had success with that. However, anecdotally, I haven’t found many people who got big using from high-volume high-density training. They got big-ger… but that was after they’d already gotten big from poundage based training.

As far as programming, would you suggest combining both into the same workout session, or splitting them out from each other. Train one session (or even, a month+) using one progression method, and the next using the other?

1098

That’s interesting to try to draw some sort of pattern in terms of age and response to hypertrophy methods. While I can’t say for certain that older athletes making gains is due to better physiological responses to a more pump-type of workout, I will stress that in my own experience, the real motive behind the shift is usually joint-health related.

As to building a base from one approach vs the other, it might be as simple as the attributing the usual ‘newbie-gains’ to more of a structural muscle damage approach. Working in this manner for the first few years of training activates satellite cells that could theoretically be creating muscle tissue that in the future would respond better to a hormone-centric method of achieving hypertrophy. This is all just theorizing off the top of my head of course, I wouldn’t cite this as any sort of scientific evidence or argument.

Programming-wise, while I have seen people incorporate either one method or the other in an alternating approach (heavy weeks vs light weeks), I have seen even more trainers make use of both during each individual session. There are definitely benefits to each option, although if I had to make a suggestion for someone, I would base it on their joint health, as well as their recovery abilities. With aging joints, opting for less heavy work would certainly be a plus.

Whether that means complete weeks off from such stresses, or simply structuring each workout with a limited amount, is a case by case decision. With regard to recovery ability, we’ve all seen people who can actually lose lbm if they’re not receiving mechanical stress on their muscles with enough frequency. As such, dedicating entire weeks away from heavy training may not be the best option in search of maximum hypertrophy.

S

1099

Pretty interesting stuff!

How hard was it for you to transition from trying to progressively get stronger on your lifts to the way you are training now? Was it somehing you were just forced into due to injuries or was it something you dwelled on and slowly transitioned into? How long before it clicked that this was the best way for you to train after the transition?

I ask becuase I think of myself making that transition at some point and right now I just can’t bring myself to do it. It seems like a difficult thing to do to shift your training focus after training to get progressively *stronger for so many years.

*edited

1100

[quote]LoRez wrote:
I’m especially curious about what kind of stimulus worked best for different muscle groups. For instance, high-reps for shoulders has gotten a lot of press on here recently. Curious as to what you’ve found to work for you.[/quote]

Sorry I missed this earlier,… I think it’s safe to say that we all hear the usual fast twitch/slow twitch theories, and how certain muscle groups respond better to specific rep ranges early in our training journies. Some might even get as far as to read up on muscle biopsies to assess the fiber type breakdown of an individual (I distinctly recall reading an old piece on Skip Lacour and how he was ridiculously almost all fast twitch fibers in his body!)

This is obviously based on sound science of course, but as with most training related variables, there is going to be a certain degree of individuality across the population. If I may use myself as an example for a bit; my legs have always been a bit if a weakness for me. I spent many years early on chasing weights, getting stronger, but never looking like a bodybuilder. When I started focusing on hypertrophy, I adopted the oft repeated ‘higher reps for legs’ approach, and was able to attain some level of development. Still, my legs (quads especially) seemed to lag.

Eventually, I went back to heavy weights and lower reps, albeit focusing on the performance of each rep as opposed to just moving big #s. The result was a nice little growth spurt. How was this possible if my legs were supposedly comprised of high rep fibers?! Of course a year or two later, as my lower back became a bit of an issue due to injury, I let my rep range creep higher. This also gave me a nice little bit of improvement.

So looking at this example, is it really as simple as addressing a higher concentration of fast twitch or slow twitch fibers? Alternately, could it be as simple as creating a new method of stimulus via different rep ranges?

In my opinion, it’s a combination of the two. Trainers, especially new ones, love to use heavy weights for curls. This is a great approach because in every day activities, we don’t normally use this manner of movement with such appreciable resistance. Also, who doesn’t feel like a bit of a badass watching their arms swell as an impressive piece of iron is heaved against gravity amidst manly grunts and groans. Of course, this does eventually reach a point of diminished returns. I would note that I have seen many IFBB pros describe how they drifted more towards cable movements, and isolation based work as they continue to improve.

Back when he was one of the top level pro competitors, Chris Cormier would alternate a couple of times each year in attributing his recent progress to either high reps, or low reps, expousing each as if it were the holy grail, and he was blind to have not seen it before. Of course he would always revert back to his previous approach, and shout it’s praises from the mountain tops a few months later as well.

Is it really this simple? Can all the people magically benefitting from high rep shoulder work lately really just have fallen into such a groove of “do heavy work all the time to get huge”, that such a simple change will yield continued results? I’m sure we could argue the science and rudimentary theory of Specific Adaptations to Imposed Demands (S.A.I.D.) and how it sums everything up nice and neatly. Possibly the old bodybuilding adage of “everything works, but nothing works for very long” applies equally well.

I would suggest, in terms of programing your training with consideration to fiber types and rep ranges:

1-Approach your training with the understanding that in most cases, certain muscle groups can have higher amounts of slow twitch (high rep) fibers [ie.quads, solei, forearms, traps…]

2-Keep in mind that everyone is different, so if you are progressing in every area but one, take a chance that you may perhaps have a different genetic fiber type split, and make use of a different rep range for that muscle group.

3-If you reach a point of stalling out after an honest, consierable length of time, and your diet and recovery are on point, perhaps attempting a different working rep range would be worthwhile.

(Just some of my thoughts on the topic, hope that sheds some light!)

S