Modok's Training Part 2

Training Bodybuilding
41

[quote]The Mighty Stu wrote:

Modok- 1st, much respect, and I have no intention of derailing your thread, but I think a lot of people misunderstand the approach used by BBers who espouse focusing on the MMC. Personally, I don’t think I ever reach the point of lactic acid hurt in my training. I focus on a 6-8 rep range on pretty much all of my bodyparts, and still lift what most gym goers would consider stupidly heavy. Explosive concentrics (I’ve read a lot on C.A.T. theory), controlled eccentrics, non-lockouts… you know, doing everything possible to maintain stress on the target muscle.

What I don’t do (and I’m sure others like Way or E-Bomb will agree) is rep away with a light weight until we ‘feel fatigued’. The main issue in our similar approaches to the MMC, is not chasing #s in the regard that we’re losing the quality stress and contraction in the pursuit of greater weights. I’m sure you would agree that neither E, or Way are training with light weights -lol.

Best,

S
[/quote]

I hope you don’t mind my chiming in here as someone wanting to learn:

I feel like maybe the reason that I’m misunderstanding you has to do with the term “chasing numbers.” I think that maybe saying that you aren’t chasing numbers isn’t precise: you’re still chasing numbers, but just with your own precisely-crafted lifts.

Rob Fortney talks in one old Iron Radio cast about people who do things by accident versus people who do things with a purpose. For a beginner, he may bench press using only his chest because he doesn’t know what the hell he’s doing (i.e. the lift doesn’t necessarily align with his goals). For you, you could be doing literally the same movement but have a purpose behind it: really isolating your chest as much as you can. Same for any other exercise.

So, you’re taking those precisely-honed ranges of motion on the lifts–whatever those lifts are–then chasing numbers within those parameters, presumably. And granted, those numbers don’t necessarily have to be increased weight–could be less rest, longer eccentric, etc (rest periods are manipulated, e.g., in BBB).

If you’re not saying that, then I don’t understand it at all. If there’s not some sense of progression, then there’s no reason for the body to adapt, and I wouldn’t understand how not progressing could lead to improvements.

Ebomb is a bit different than you and Way, in that his training involves some MMC stuff but also just some stuff like deadlifting 650 and such.

42

Hi Modok, I have a question about calves. You mentioned on a previous thread that you struggled to grow your calves in your early days. That’s exactly my situation now. I have sticks for legs. What worked for you for calves? How many times a week, volume, intensity? I see on your training template you have it once per week, and trained like any other muscle, but you also said at one point you really focused on them to grow them.
Thanks!

43

[quote]The3Commandments wrote:

I feel like maybe the reason that I’m misunderstanding you has to do with the term “chasing numbers.” I think that maybe saying that you aren’t chasing numbers isn’t precise: you’re still chasing numbers, but just with your own precisely-crafted lifts.

Rob Fortney talks in one old Iron Radio cast about people who do things by accident versus people who do things with a purpose. For a beginner, he may bench press using only his chest because he doesn’t know what the hell he’s doing (i.e. the lift doesn’t necessarily align with his goals). For you, you could be doing literally the same movement but have a purpose behind it: really isolating your chest as much as you can. Same for any other exercise.

So, you’re taking those precisely-honed ranges of motion on the lifts–whatever those lifts are–then chasing numbers within those parameters, presumably. And granted, those numbers don’t necessarily have to be increased weight–could be less rest, longer eccentric, etc (rest periods are manipulated, e.g., in BBB).

If you’re not saying that, then I don’t understand it at all. If there’s not some sense of progression, then there’s no reason for the body to adapt, and I wouldn’t understand how not progressing could lead to improvements.

Ebomb is a bit different than you and Way, in that his training involves some MMC stuff but also just some stuff like deadlifting 650 and such.[/quote]

T3C - I know you had mentioned this to me previously, and this sounds about right for the way I’ve come to train over the last few months, especially for certain body parts.

I have no issues admitting my back is a weak point of mine… Very weak. I think the reason is that I was previously just moving weight from point A to point B, where as now I’m doing it with purpose, holding the peak contraction, and slowly lowering it, all the while THINKING about the back, contracting it, holding it, and making it grow. The goal ULTIMATELY is still to go from rowing 185 to 195 to 205, etc… Its just the way the rep is performed might be a bit different.

This type of rep performance works well for feeling the biceps too, which I previously was probably just tossing the weight around. Really focusing on the contraction and NOT just dropping the weight down on the lowering phase.

This is a bit different than doing something like a heavy Bench or Shoulder press, where the “performance” of the rep IS the press, so you dont necessarily need to think about the muscle quite as much… Just blast that bar off your chest!

Alright, not looking to hijack obviously, but I did want to chime in as one of the namby-pamby body builders on the site :wink: Hopefully that clears things up a bit.

44

Yeah, I understand what you’re saying, Lonnie. At the same time, I’m highly skeptical that this technique would be useful for someone that doesn’t already have a base of strength. That’s why Stu has said that it’s really a technique that is exclusively for advanced lifters.

E.g., if someone isn’t able to do work sets on back squat with 300lbs, I would have to think that their “MMC” is probably the least of that person’s worries as it relates to muscle hypertrophy. Of course, this is different when “supplements” are involved, but for someone training naturally, I just have a hard time understanding how the human body could adapt to, e.g., squatting 225 with careful form/mmc by inducing muscular hypertrophy (unless that person is extremely small to begin with). Seems like the body would just get more efficient at the movement or adapt in some other way (e.g., adapting the CNS to long TUT).

I fully acknowledge that I’m a beginner, and I’m just asking this stuff to learn. But hell, I only squat 375 or so–I’m still at the point in my development where I’m still pretty weak. I feel like I’m definitely still at the point where the weights I’m moving are of primary significance, and I just have a hard time understanding how I would be better off at this point dropping down in weight and doing more “MMC-centric” stuff.

45

[quote]The3Commandments wrote:
Yeah, I understand what you’re saying, Lonnie. At the same time, I’m highly skeptical that this technique would be useful for someone that doesn’t already have a base of strength. That’s why Stu has said that it’s really a technique that is exclusively for advanced lifters.

E.g., if someone isn’t able to do work sets on back squat with 300lbs, I would have to think that their “MMC” is probably the least of that person’s worries as it relates to muscle hypertrophy. Of course, this is different when “supplements” are involved, but for someone training naturally, I just have a hard time understanding how the human body could adapt to, e.g., squatting 225 with careful form/mmc by inducing muscular hypertrophy (unless that person is extremely small to begin with). Seems like the body would just get more efficient at the movement or adapt in some other way (e.g., adapting the CNS to long TUT).

I fully acknowledge that I’m a beginner, and I’m just asking this stuff to learn. But hell, I only squat 375 or so–I’m still at the point in my development where I’m still pretty weak. I feel like I’m definitely still at the point where the weights I’m moving are of primary significance, and I just have a hard time understanding how I would be better off at this point dropping down in weight and doing more “MMC-centric” stuff.[/quote]

I dont think lifts like Squats and Dead Lifts fall under the “MMC” banner. None of the HEAVY pressing movements do really. Its important to use proper form, but the MOST important thing on those lifts is to blast that weight. It’s really more for the volume/structure type work (Rows, Laterals, curls, extensions, etc…)

In addition, its ALSO about progression with MMC and things like TUT. Of course the body will adapt to the stress… Thats the goal of training. But just because you are squatting 225 “carefully” doesnt mean you cant build that up to squatting 315 “carefully.”

I think its really just a question of “what is proper form for your specific goal, on that specific exercise?” - Many of us find that concentrating on the muscle works better that just making the weight move from A to B on some exercises.

46

I guess i dont see why the body wouldnt adapt to back squats if you were doing them different then just throwing the weight up and not worrying about form (but that sounds dangerous) so Front squats i think woudl be a better example. People can just go for weight or they can do it with extra quad emphasis with their heels elevated, slower eccentric and no lockout, ect. Even if they are using very light weight because they dont have that base of strength this is still a shock to the body. As long as they keep progressing with those parameteres the shock becomes larger and requires further adaptations.

Now that i typed this i see that i am repeating what Lonnie said so i will stop and say i agree with what Lonnie is saying. Its all about progression just some progress in different ways either way a more stimulus so body adapts. That base of strength does not necessarily have to be there for that to happen

47

But just because you are focused on a certain rep perfomance doesnt always mean you cant go to failure or push with exterme intensity.

Either way the BBB program is great and you have done great with it. I dont think i could do it becuase there is just not enough volume for my liking and the sessions are just too short (certainly not saying that means they arent intense). ALso right now i have just come off a very high frequency stint and my mobility is so bad that doing things with a high frequency just ingrains the bad motor patterns and making fixing them impossible

Sorry for derail

Modok how is going with your program/body comp right now? What are the immediate and long term goals?

48

MODOK, I’ve been testing something this past week that I thought I would see what you think of:

First, an initial hypothesis:

My understanding of muscular strength is that it can stem from one of three sources: increased muscle mass, increased mechanical efficiency, and increased recruitment of previously-existing muscle (CNS).

The reason I initially chose to train with BBB was that it seemed to me that it would underdevelop the CNS relative to the other aspects of strength increase because of the repetition ranges and the relatively slow pace that loads increase.

I’ve been injured for the past week in a way that hampers a lot of my ability to workout, but in particular makes it difficult to maintain inner-abdominal pressure for a length of time. Because of this, I’ve been training in the lower rep ranges until it gets better.

I’ve used it as a way to sort of experiment with the CNS hypothesis regarding whether training in BBB’s rep ranges allows for CNS development beyond what the weights used for the rep ranges would dictate.

Now, granted, some of these results might be tainted by the fact that the inner-abdominal pressure issue likely affects my squat more than my bench.

And yes, I know I’m weak. I’m getting there.

I started back on BBB on 1/20, after three weeks of ‘getting back to lifting’ work (similar split to BBB, but not the rep ranges or the time between sets). I had been on a layoff due to medical issues that are pretty well-documented on this site.

So, here’s what I’ve found so far:
Starting lifts, all in 2012:
1/21 squat: 235x4
2/15 BB Bench: 180x9 (I had been doing DB for the first number of weeks, with the first BBB set being the 60sx13 on 1/20

So, then, my pre-injury highs were:
3/13 Squat 335x13
3/14 BB Bench 225x7

Now, during the injury for this past week, I’ve been testing 2RM the past two days.
Squat: 375x1 (no way I could have done another)
BB Bench: 275x2. This was after a set of 245x5 where I failed on the 6th rep.

Again, some of this may be due to the injury affecting my squat more than I think it does, but it would certainly at least presumably affect my bench as well. But it’s pretty remarkable to me that the disparity between the squat and bench’s carryover to the 2RM. My initial thought is that the squat is the primary driver of the CNS for someone doing BBB, so the BB Bench’s CNS restrictions weren’t as great.

Something to this, or does this all seem like beginner’s basically trying to think about things that he’s not experienced enough to really comment upon?

49

[quote]MODOK wrote:

[quote]qsar wrote:

[quote]MODOK wrote:

[quote]qsar wrote:
Modok, You are truely awesome! I have a beginner question.

Since I’ve started doing bb correctly (last october), the exercise I have the most consistent results in terms of strength is the deadlift. I do it differently than other exercises in two ways: I only do two sets a week (4-6 range), and I do the reps the rest-pause sort of way. The rest-pause is because I can’t touch-down-and-go with 300lbs. I have to set the weights down, then stabilize them and reset myself for the next rep.

My question is: Are there other exercises that would give me the same strength gains from only doing two sets and rest-pausing or is there something special about the deadlift that makes it work for it? My weakest exercise is the bench so I’m thinking of trying it on an arm press machine.
[/quote]

That style of training does work extremely well for strength gains. Bottom start bench from the rack will likely be very beneficial for you. Don’t over-do it though. That style of training is very tough on the joints. [/quote]

Modok, thanks a lot for the answer! I have a follow-up question. When I do a 1 rep 315lb deadlift, I feel my spine compress a lot at the top position. Doesn’t hurt or anything, but is it bad for my spine? Does it mean I’m not tightening up my core enough?
[/quote]

You should have a huge breath in your belly pushing your abdomen into your lifting belt, increasing intra-abdominal pressure, and holding you spine in position. Check out Rippetoe on youtube for some good videos on this.
[/quote]

Doing deads feels a lot better with the belt, however, the place my spine feels compressed is on my upper spine; middle of the shoulderblade level. Any way I can address that?

50

[quote]MODOK wrote:

[quote]qsar wrote:
Hi Modok, I have a question about calves. You mentioned on a previous thread that you struggled to grow your calves in your early days. That’s exactly my situation now. I have sticks for legs. What worked for you for calves? How many times a week, volume, intensity? I see on your training template you have it once per week, and trained like any other muscle, but you also said at one point you really focused on them to grow them.
Thanks![/quote]

Its very hard to get them to budge. I had the best results from the Luke Sauder (or Sauter) routine by Poliquin on T-Nation years ago. Its very high volume, and very tough, but I did gain over an inch on the routine. Check it out.[/quote]

I did day one, and four days later my calves were still killing me! I even cut the workout a little short because I could tell it was going to be bad. It’s not like I never worked my calves - I worked them out every week - just not to the volume of Sauder’s routine. I haven’t done day two - I need to be able to walk! I’ll give it another try this week.

51

this thread is full of win.

52

[quote]MODOK wrote:
Program is going well. Nothing really to report good or bad. Both the immediate and long term goals remain the same- to become more and more awesome.
[/quote]

Any chance we can get an outline of weights/sets/reps of a recent work out?