My 'Revelation' About Training

Training Bodybuilding
81

[quote]tom8658 wrote:
Like squatting with a heavy barbell? Or picking up a heavy barbell off the floor?[/quote]

Indeed. Neither of which the average person at a commercial facility is going to do.

Ever.

It is enough effort making them squat with a ball against their backs. They get terrified, thinking they’ll fall over. They are complete PUSSIES.

So your choice is the following:

Have them squat and deadlift with the bar. In three months of consistent practice, you MIGHT get up to 5 pounds a side.

Or put them on machines, use real weight, and start getting results immediately.

It’s a very easy decision to make.

[quote]roybot wrote:
What’s so idiotic about stating a fact? You’ve already admitted that you post deliberately inflammatory comments.[/quote]

It’s idiotic because the fact was utterly irrelevant, and you are using it to form a circular argument.

“He can’t be right because he’s never admit to being wrong.”

You are postulating that I must admit to being wrong in order to be right. Or, at the very least, that I cannot be right because I’ve never admit to being wrong.

Excuse me, but when has being wrong been a prerequisite of being right?

Lol, elementary logic completely annihilates you. That’s why it was idiotic.

I post comments because they are true and worth saying. You can choose to be offended by them, or not. Your reaction is none of my concern.

[quote]roybot wrote:
Here is one of your gems: “the only reason I make threads
(or post at all) is to prove my superiority over others by defeating their arguments?”

Get over yourself hotshot.[/quote]

Why? Every single male posts here for the same reason, yourself included. I’m just honest enough to admit it. All males seek power and this power is always taken from others.

[quote]roybot wrote:
I’m not interested in discussing anybody else. Why does it always come back to other people? Your the one that started this thread, not the people on that list.[/quote]

Because of an annoying little thing called consistency. All of my arguments are internally consistent. You can go back months, pull up something I wrote, and it will never contradict what I’m saying now. You, on the other hand, contradict yourself and expose your hypocrisy every 5 minutes.

There is no better testament to the validity of my arguments than their profound consistency contrasted with the hypocrisy of my detractors.

[quote]roybot wrote:
You aren’t Thomas Jefferson or Donald Trump. Neither of them are members of T-Nation, nor are they friends of yours, so stop trying to bring other people into it. It’s totally irrelevant.[/quote]

Wrong. Exposing hypocrisy is always relevant.

[quote]roybot wrote:
That’s meant to be a joke, right? I mean, you can’t possibly be serious when you never back up any thing you say with a shred of proof.[/quote]

Apparently, you’re too dumb to recognize proof when it’s sitting in front of your eyes.

THIS is proof:

[quote]Nominal Prospect wrote:
10 Things I’ve Learned by Alwyn Cosgrove

40 Random Thoughts by Eric Cressey

Shut the Hell Up and Listen by Dave Tate
http://www.T-Nation.com/ALSAuthor.do?p=Dave%20Tate&pageNo=1

Crack Open My Cranium by Chad Waterbury
Crack Open My Cranium [/quote]

[quote]roybot wrote:
Congratulations. You have dictionary and can look up words. Good for you![/quote]

I didn’t look anything up.

[quote]roybot wrote:
Don’t speak too soon.[/quote]

Shhh. You’re worthless and I won’t bother with you any longer unless that changes.

[quote]tribunaldude wrote:
This guy used to post as “Al Shades” earlier. I have a few pictures of his skinny ass lying around on my father’s old hard drive, and I’ll see if I can put em up sometime soon. But that would be cruel…and I;m a kind person.

In the meantime, rest assured, he’s a troll. He makes statements that only HE agrees with, and he has the results (or lack thereof) to show for it.
He basically serves the same purpose on the bodybuilding forum as I serve on the PWI forum - comic relief and annoying senior members. Listen to him and have a good laugh, don’t argue.[/quote]

Where’s the bank holiday, you zany little creep?

In contrast with your predictions in PWI, “this guy” never posts anything that gets refuted one week later.

82

Does this forum have an ignore function? I need to put Roybot on it.

He is still making lengthy, meaningless posts on this thread after 4 pages. The other flamers seem to have gone away by now.

83

aussie101 wrote:
You could have someone change there program almost weekly, making them do different exercises, activities etc, and they would probably get far more DOMS than if they stayed on the same routine. Would they grow more however? No.

Yes they would.

Your joking right, saying that changing your routine every week would make you grow more than if you stayed on the same one for awhile…

84

is OP jacked? cause if not, he’s doing it wrong.

85

[quote]aussie101 wrote:
Your joking right, saying that changing your routine every week would make you grow more than if you stayed on the same one for awhile…[/quote]

Depends on what you mean by change. I’m a believer in keeping the routine constant but always changing the “small” things. Technically, you should never do the same workout twice, even though you are performing the same exercises.

I do not think there is ever any need to change the entire routine itself. I see this as just another weight lifting fairy tale.

[quote]Invictica wrote:
is OP jacked? cause if not, he’s doing it wrong.[/quote]

OP is very jacked compared to when he started.

And that, as I’m sure you all know, is the only legitimate measure of progress.

86

[quote]Nominal Prospect wrote:
Does this forum have an ignore function? I need to put Roybot on it.

He is still making lengthy, meaningless posts on this thread after 4 pages. The other flamers seem to have gone away by now.[/quote]

If you’d refrain from typing so much pseudo-intellectual bullshit, and stopped trying to pass it off as something I’ve said, then maybe my replies would be shorter.

In most of my replies I’ve had to defend myself against your lies about what I’ve said.

That’s obviously a deliberate move on your part, because it takes all the focus away from the subject at hand: the fact that hypertrophy is not always preceded by DOMS.
I’ve already proven you wrong, because you have to resort to dirty tactics, like implying that I’ve said something I haven’t.

Example 1:

“You are postulating that I must admit to being wrong in order to be right. Or, at the very least, that I cannot be right because I’ve never admit to being wrong.”

I never said that. If if did, please specify the post when I did. It it is a blatant lie to draw attention away from the subject under disscussion.

Example 2: "Because of an annoying little thing called consistency. All of my arguments are internally consistent. You can go back months, pull up something I wrote, and it will never contradict what I’m saying now. You, on the other hand, contradict yourself and expose your hypocrisy every 5 minutes. "

I have never once contradicted myself. The only inconsistencies are in statements of your own making that you dishonestly attribute to me. Nothing you say has any credibility because you have lied about what I’ve said to you on more than one occasion.

Example 3: “There is no better testament to the validity of my arguments than their profound consistency contrasted with the hypocrisy of my detractors”.

BUT YOUR ARGUMENTS AREN’T CONSISTENT. First you assert that hypertophy can be condensed to this formula: soreness = microtrauma = hypertrophy.

Then, when this is debunked, you conveniently decide that you were talking specifically about DOMS. THAT IS AN INCONSISTENCY - just one example of many.

You were the originator of this thread, so that is nobody’s fault but your own.

The ignore button is in your t-page, genius. Feel free to use it. What sort of attention whore are you that you have to make a public announcement every time you put somebody on ignore? If you can’t sustain a fair debate with me without resorting to lies and the manipulation of facts and statements to suit your own argument, as you’ve been doing, then go ahead and put me on ‘ignore’ - it would be an honour (albeit a dubious one), and a welcome reprieve from your incessant gasbagging.

If I have to read much more of your blatant shit-mongering, I think my head will explode.

Your entire life is one long meaningless post. BTW, posting links to a string of articles by authors who don’t share your views isn’t proof of anything, other than the fact that you know how to use links…

I think that they would be rather insulted that you are trying to leech off their good name and reputation. Let’s face it: from the direction your argument has taken, you have neither.

I still haven’t stopped laughing at your belief that Madonna built her physique through yoga alone.

I wrote:
Are you going to try to convince me that you can build muscle through Yoga as well?

Your reply:

“Yes. Madonna did it. For her body, THAT was enough stimulus for change. Everything is relative.”

This statement shows just how out of touch with reality you really are.

If everything is relative, then why are you trying to convince us that you can lump every type of trainee into one of just two categories?
You’ve just done a complete u-turn on the ideas you so clumsily tried to articulate in your first post.

It seems your willing to discard the ideas of your so-called ‘revelation’ just for the sake of winning an argument. Your hypocrisy is unfathomable, and you so called “profound consistency” is laughable.

Are you a comedian? You really should think about taking it up as a career - your material is priceless.

I won’t even go into your belief that pro bodybuilders do not suffer DOMS because of the drugs they take. Wait, I think I will - it’s just too good. Brace yourselves guys, this one is pure comedy gold:

"Pro bodybuilders have anabolic assistance to recover from soreness as fast as possible. Also, many of them are addicted to painkillers. If hypertrophy and soreness weren’t directly related, then how do you explain the fact that most pro’s are in constant pain? "

You’ve just said that pro bodybuilders experience no soreness because of their intake of AAS and painkillers, then totally contradicted yourself once again, in the same paragraph, by saying that they are in “constant pain”. These are your own words!

Yet another drop in your vast ocean of contradictions.

How do you expect anyone to take you seriously when you type this wank? Wait. That’s right - nobody does take you seriously.

I was pretty sure you were a troll before, but that just clinched it for me. Absolutely priceless.

I don’t have to continue this debate any longer: you’ve already proven yourself to be a liar and a hypocrite, and unlike you, I have provided solid proof of that throughout this post.

The many cracks in your argument have been exposed for all to see. It’s just that you are too arrogant and deluded to see it.

You’ve already failed, because nobody in their right mind is going to follow your moronic approach to exercise. Your worse fears will come true and you’ll fade back into obscurity where you belong.

Nobody’ll give you a second though. The best you can hope for is for the occasional newb to accidentally stumble onto this thread, only to point and laugh at the attention seeking cretin that started it.

All this was a waste of time anyway. Because by now I’ll be occupying a prime spot on your ignore list. Boo fucking Hoo.

Edit: Don’t bother posting up some typically shitty reply. I won’t take the bait. You’ve already admitted that you’re only here to assert your so-called ‘superiority’ over everyone.

It’s clear that you don’t even believe what you’ve said yourself, because there isn’t a shred of substance or conviction in your views. It’s just a way to flex your vast and all-encompassing ego.

I realize that any further attempt to engage in an adult conversation with you would be futile. This thread and its creator need to be euthanized with extreme prejudice.

87

[quote]Nominal Prospect wrote:
"

Well, you’d better inform Cressey, Cosgrove, Tate, Waterbury, et. al. Everything they’ve written has been wrong. [yes, appeal to authority]

Was the kid fat? Sounds like he was playing the wrong position.

[/quote]

If they would advocate just getting him stronger, then yes, I would call them all wrong. If you had a more than cursory understanding of their material, you’d know that they would not advocate this across the board. All of these coaches understand that training CANNOT be simplified into two simple groups of trainees.

Cressey’s Off-Season Training Manual is just one example of a training template that takes into account and differentiates between training clients with radically different performance needs. The oversimplification you propose indicates that no one with any credible performance goals should follow your advice.

I disagree with most of what Mike Boyle thinks, although I do respect his knowledge and time in the field. Whether you find it necessary or not, your own stats are anecdotal evidence of the efficacy of your beliefs. I wouldn’t necessarily listen to the biggest guy in the room, but when ALL the biggest guys in ALL the rooms are telling me that I should pursue getting stronger at compound movements, I am inclined to listen. The burden of proof is on you.

88

[quote]Nominal Prospect wrote:
dankid wrote:
Your “claims” are not claims. Your just stating the obvious and completely oversimplifying as if you’ve seen the light and your here to show us all the way. You need to realize that in life, and especially training thing ARE usually in a gray area.
…

I suggest you spend less time having these revealations and more time reading the articles on here

Speaking of the articles, what I’d like you to do right now is to PM the authors of the following articles as soon as you can and inform each one of them that “things are usually in a gray area” pertaining to training.

10 Things I’ve Learned by Alwyn Cosgrove

40 Random Thoughts by Eric Cressey

Shut the Hell Up and Listen by Dave Tate
http://www.T-Nation.com/ALSAuthor.do?p=Dave%20Tate&pageNo=1

Crack Open My Cranium

I will not be replying to any further posts made by you until you show proof of having done this. You may take a screenshot with the printscreen function, save it in MSPaint, and then upload it to a site like ImageShack. This will suffice for proof.

Get to it. Schnell.

roybot wrote:
Wrong! Soreness can just as easily result from a build up of lactic acid. It can’t be used as an accurate indicator of growth.

  1. An experienced individual can quite easily distinguish between soreness from lactic buildup and soreness from muscle damage.

  2. Lactic acid is only responsible for acute soreness, not DOMs. The latter is a fantastic and accurate indicator of growth.

My assertion stands.

PB-Crawl wrote:
i listened to a “trainer” the other day tell his client that cheese is terrible for you since he stopped eating it he lost weight (thermodynamics much?) and that no other animal anywhere drinks other species milk, so therefore milk is terrible as well. and that pasteurized milk is even worse, but radiated vegetables are not.

I fully endorse cheese and I advocate the consumption of raw milk.
http://www.realmilk.com/

slimthugger wrote:
Remember the crowd here knows it all. You didn’t expect them to read your post and provide anything insightful did you?

In truth, no I did not.

That One Guy wrote:
Listen, I’m all for going against the grain and all that shit, but when everyone thinks there’s something wrong with you…maybe it’s because there is something wrong!

If that’s the case, then practically everything I’ve ever written in 8 years online has been completely wrong. I have been at various times debunked by 16 year old stoners, senile old farts, liberal elists, conservative hicks, meatheads, vegetarians, feminists, military idiots, foreigners, and stuffed animals.

Sorry, don’t believe it. The majority has been wrong all this time, and I’ve been right.

trextacy wrote:
Since NP is posting in this thread- I have a question regarding a website you posted in another thread:

http://www.biblelife.org/myths.htm

This page (and others within that site) claim that we should eat NO carbs, that fiber is unnecessary and evil, etc. There is one quote that says “never eat lettuce”.

Now, were you just posting that link to support some isolated point or do you think the POV on that site has merit?

Good question, glad you brought it up, and I’m glad you gave the site a thorough read through.

No, I was not using it just to support an isolated link. I believe the views on that site in their entirety.

I believe that carbohydrates are highly addictive pathogens which have been used throughout history to turn humans into docile slaves (not so odd if you think of it in the context of recreational drugs - opiates and such, not to mention alcohol).

I believe that fiber is awful for one’s health and that nearly all carbs should be avoided.

I stand by most of what is written on the Bible Life site. I respect its author, Kent R Rieske.

http://www.amazon.com/gp/pdp/profile/A2AYLDGLRT88U7

I believe he is absolutely on the mark in stating that cortisol, insulin, and adrenaline are “disease causing hormones”, that chronic inflammation resulting from damage to the digestive tract is at the root of all illnesses.

http://www.biblelife.org/carbs.htm

Other sources echo these views. Diana Schwarzbein is an endocrinologist cited by Charles Poliquin as an authority on adrenal fatigue. Her book is excellent:

Among other things, she refutes the “calories in vs. out” dogma and explains how a person’s hormonal state determines whether they will be able to gain or lose weight.

No coincidence, she also defies the conventional wisdom of the medical establishment and recommends animal fats to her patients.

I believe that adrenal fatigue is a real condition, contary to allopathic medicine.

Another good “alternative nutrition” site is:

http://homodiet.netfirms.com/
From Polish doctor Jan Kwasniewski.

I also support the Weston Price foundation and its views on healthy living.

The International Network of Cholesterol Skeptics
http://www.thincs.org/links.htm

The Cholesterol Myths by Uffe Ravnskov
http://www.ravnskov.nu/cholesterol.htm

Every one of these sources is supportive of fat and protein consumption and critical, to varying degrees, of carbohydrate consumption.

I think they are all very “T-Nation friendly” sites.

dankid wrote:
But ya, this guy’s “revelations” are so unconventional that he’ll probably become a top trainer in hollywood. J/K I still think he just stated the obvious. He would be much better off being a palm reader, or a psychic so he could “reveal” more reduntant redundancies to people.

***Oh and carnage, you know if I posted this thread you’d be giving me hell for it, so why arent you now? Has it gotten old for you?

LoL really, you think my “unconventional” views on training are going to make me a “celebrity trainer” in Hollywood?

You think that advocating high saturated fat consumption and no carbs is going to go over well with latte-sipping liberals?

You think that recommending excruciating dropsets to total exhaustion, HIT-style, is going to go over well with fat housewives who “just want to tone up”?

You think that giving people effective and difficult bodybuilding routines is going to get them more engaged than doing things like kickboxing, martial arts, bosu-ball hijinks, dancing, yoga, pilates, zoomba, and all the other BS that predominates in this industry?

Click below:

533×594 35.1 KB

Let me break it down for you:
The type of “unconventional” training that sells to the masses has people doing 1-legged squats on bosu balls while chanting new age mantra’s.

Telling fat people to stop eating bread and start eating tons of butter and red meat is a little too hardcore for your average housewife.[/quote]

If there was ever a post on any sight at any time that screamed TROLLDOM this was it. At first I thought you were serious, but now im convinced that your just the typical 24hour, commercial gym trainer, and everything you say from now on can be viewed as pure comedy.

I’ll play along though, because as I said, this is entertaining.

89

np, i just like to work out…and i get results. i dont want to be put in a group; im just me.

90

[quote]Nominal Prospect wrote:
So your choice is the following:

Have them squat and deadlift with the bar. In three months of consistent practice, you MIGHT get up to 5 pounds a side.

Or put them on machines, use real weight, and start getting results immediately.[/quote]

Seriously, who that fuck are you attempting to “train” that it takes them 3 months to learn how to squat? Retarded monkeys?

When I first learned to squat and deadlift, I used the bar for 2 workouts, maybe. And I was pulling plates in way less than 3 months. And I was a 120ish pound girl.

91

[quote]Sneaky weasel wrote:
If they would advocate just getting him stronger, then yes, I would call them all wrong. If you had a more than cursory understanding of their material, you’d know that they would not advocate this across the board. All of these coaches understand that training CANNOT be simplified into two simple groups of trainees. Cressey’s Off-Season Training Manual is just one example of a training template that takes into account and differentiates between training clients with radically different performance needs. The oversimplification you propose indicates that no one with any credible performance goals should follow your advice.[/quote]

This thread isn’t a manual, is it? This thread was specifically intended to be a summation of general principles of training. I made that clear from the start.

Writing a manual didn’t stop Cressey from endorsing that “over-simplified” statement, did it?. Perhaps I’ve got my own manual.

I think you are putting a little too much stock into the “everybody is a unique snowflake” conception. Trust me, I’ve seen this belief before with new trainers. They usually learn fast. And the ones who appear not to have learned are just bullshitters. Everyone who is even moderately successful in this industry is using a template, I can assure you. You simply have to.

If you coached a lot of people, especially non-athletes, you’d probably change your tune and agree with me. You would see that all sorts of people come in, wanting to feed you various BS to prove that each one of them is “different”, but at the end of the day, everything boils down to the lowest common denominator.

You’re fat, you need to do such and such to lose weight.
You’re weak, you need to do this to get stronger.
You want to look better, you need to target your weak spots.

If people want special treatment, they have to earn it. Every good coach will tell you that. High level coaching is not supposed to mimic an amusement park. It is not egalitarian, it is a meritocracy.

Templates are perfectly useful and applicable to the masses of weight training newbies who populate commercial gyms.

A template is simply a proven formula that is easily reproduced, like an assembly line for a vehicle.

[quote]Sneaky weasel wrote:
Whether you find it necessary or not, your own stats are anecdotal evidence of the efficacy of your beliefs. I wouldn’t necessarily listen to the biggest guy in the room, but when ALL the biggest guys in ALL the rooms are telling me that I should pursue getting stronger at compound movements, I am inclined to listen. The burden of proof is on you. [/quote]

I agree, but I have no inclination to try and convince people here that my training achievements are meritable due to the lengths which I’ve come since I began training.

Experience has taught me that people want to view everything in absolute terms and completely ignore relative achievements. The mentality of this forum is all about “raw size”.

I’ll always be “too small” by the standards of this forum, and I don’t care. I’m not going to worry about it. I’m going to continue presenting my arguments and backing them up thoroughly.

In the meantime, I’ll keep improving my own physique, and I’ll keep the benefits of that to myself.

92

Bank holiday, shades? Its-a-coming.
Dude, everyone here refuted your crap, the only difference is I receive “fan mail” telling me how entertaining they find my PWI and GAL posts - while you probably receive hate mail from your clients.
I won’t post your pictures yet, for I find you most amusing and want you to hang around and provide some amusement to liven up my day - and that will come to an end when people realize what the great “Al Shades” looks like.

What about your buddy who went after Thibs when Thibs commented on his training video - another skinny fuck who considers a 500 dead a herculean achievement and allows his female clients to perform tail under weighted back squats! Is he immortal as well, lol?

On a side note, kind uncle Oogie was very nice to provide details about you (as well as a “variety” of members of interest here) to use at will…BUTTTTT we want you to live on, shades and entertain us in the manner to which we are accustomed. We will not refute you - we will throw you a craker every time you extract a guffaw.

Now do your job and make us laugh.

[quote]Nominal Prospect wrote:
tribunaldude wrote:
This guy used to post as “Al Shades” earlier. I have a few pictures of his skinny ass lying around on my father’s old hard drive, and I’ll see if I can put em up sometime soon. But that would be cruel…and I;m a kind person.

In the meantime, rest assured, he’s a troll. He makes statements that only HE agrees with, and he has the results (or lack thereof) to show for it.
He basically serves the same purpose on the bodybuilding forum as I serve on the PWI forum - comic relief and annoying senior members. Listen to him and have a good laugh, don’t argue.

Where’s the bank holiday, you zany little creep?

In contrast with your predictions in PWI, “this guy” never posts anything that gets refuted one week later.[/quote]

93

[quote]buckeye girl wrote:
Seriously, who that fuck are you attempting to “train” that it takes them 3 months to learn how to squat? Retarded monkeys?

When I first learned to squat and deadlift, I used the bar for 2 workouts, maybe. And I was pulling plates in way less than 3 months. And I was a 120ish pound girl.[/quote]

LOL.

One of the major lessons I’ve learned from posting online is to NEVER engage female weight lifters in a debate. The reason being that there is such a gross disparity in attitude and beliefs between every woman I have ever seen in real life and every one of these internet broads. It’s simply impossible for me to communicate with them because there is ZERO common ground.

I took a terrible flaming from the butch lesbians over at JP Fitness for daring to post such observations as “Women, in general, aren’t as accustomed to physical exertion under heavy loads as men.”

So, you asked me who I’ve been training? Middle-aged, liberal, Democratic pussies from Massachusetts. People whose conception of “exercise” invariably involves some type of long, slow endurance event. People who would keep asking, “when are we gonna get to the aerobics” if I showed them squats.

94

[quote]tribunaldude wrote:
I won’t post your pictures yet, for I find you most amusing and want you to hang around and provide some amusement to liven up my day - and that will come to an end when people realize what the great “Al Shades” looks like.[/quote]

You mean, what I looked like when I was 17. And by the way, go ahead and post them if you have them. There’s nothing to be ashamed of. I was lean and muscular for a teenager.

[quote]tribunaldude wrote:
What about your buddy who went after Thibs when Thibs commented on his training video - another skinny fuck who considers a 500 dead a herculean achievement and allows his female clients to perform tail under weighted back squats! Is he immortal as well, lol?[/quote]

You must be mistaken, I don’t have any “buddies” here.

[quote]tribunaldude wrote:
On a side note, kind uncle Oogie was very nice to provide details about you (as well as a “variety” of members of interest here) to use at will…BUTTTTT we want you to live on, shades and entertain us in the manner to which we are accustomed. We will not refute you - we will throw you a craker every time you extract a guffaw.[/quote]

What’s this, a perpetual bullshitter making yet another unsupported claim? Take your fear mongering back to PWI, you’re not scaring me.

You’re going on my ignore list.
Right now.

95

[quote]Nominal Prospect wrote:
I can’t talk to you because your a woman. And women, especially ones that are stronger than me, scare the shit out of me.[/quote]

Oh. Ok. That makes sense. Especially since I’m one of those liberal pussies that’s also stronger.

96


NO PLEASE…NOT THAT…ANYTHING BUT THAT!

OHHH THE HUMANITY…THE HUMAAAAANITYYYY!!!

[quote]Nominal Prospect wrote:
You’re going on my ignore list .
Right now.[/quote]

97

[quote]Nominal Prospect wrote:

When DOMs disappears, growth disappears. [/quote]

Uhhhh

No.

98

[quote]aussie101 wrote:
Sigh, any advanced trainer would stop getting DOMS pretty soon. Surely you (with the body of a natural BB apparently) would be aware of this.
Yes DOMS is a good indicator for growth, but the sad fact that by week 3 of a program it almost completely disappears due to your body adapting (even if you are progressing on weight, volume etc). Therefore relying on it as a indicator for growth is flawed.

You could have someone change there program almost weekly, making them do different exercises, activities etc, and they would probably get far more DOMS than if they stayed on the same routine. Would they grow more however? No. [/quote]

Time to derail a stupid thread with useful information.

I always get DOMS, I rarely change my routine. My nutrition should be pretty diled in. Am I pushing myself to hard? Or something else?

99

[quote]Nominal Prospect wrote:

I think you are putting a little too much stock into the “everybody is a unique snowflake” conception. Trust me, I’ve seen this belief before with new trainers. They usually learn fast. And the ones who appear not to have learned are just bullshitters. Everyone who is even moderately successful in this industry is using a template, I can assure you. You simply have to.

[/quote]

I’m not anti-template. You can have a template that emphasizes reactive strength or alactic conditioning; the content of the template doesn’t matter. You can even have an entire team follow a template. That’s irrelevant to the discussion of whether making an athlete stronger makes him a better athlete. What matters is that the nature of the training means corresponds to the bioenergetic demands of the sport activity, and that you, as a trainer, generate a positive transference from the training setting onto the field. When getting an athlete stronger accomplishes that, then that is the appropriate action. But when it does NOT, you’d be an idiot to keep trying to get the athlete stronger.

But your contention that everyone is using a template has nothing to do with your original contention: that maximal strength and training like a powerlifter is effective for all athletes. This is an excessively generalized and therefore incorrect statement.

But we’re not talking about non-athletes. You made a specific, unqualified contention that the performance-oriented crowd should ALWAYS just get stronger. This is FALSE. Even if we were to abstract the discussion to the level of thought experiments, it would be FALSE, because it’s very easy to come up with a scenario in which the trainee is NOT served by getting stronger. Your grandiose generalizations make your positions untenable.

[quote]

I agree, but I have no inclination to try and convince people here that my training achievements are meritable due to the lengths which I’ve come since I began training.

Experience has taught me that people want to view everything in absolute terms and completely ignore relative achievements. The mentality of this forum is all about “raw size”.

I’ll always be “too small” by the standards of this forum, and I don’t care. I’m not going to worry about it. I’m going to continue presenting my arguments and backing them up thoroughly.

In the meantime, I’ll keep improving my own physique, and I’ll keep the benefits of that to myself.[/quote]

A sprinter who runs faster than he did a year ago, but still places last in every race is still a poor sprinter, and I would be inclined to question the validity of his training methods. I would not be inclined to listen to his claims that he has found the ultimate principles of training for his sport.

If you are small and lean, as you say, these adjectives apply equally well to many sprinters, gymnasts, Olympic weightlifters in the lower weight classes, rock climbers, male Crossfitters, and every kid who posts in the RMP forum asking for critiques of his “hawt abz.” This does not place you in a position to declare a monopoly on effective training via your “principles,” since all of them arrived at their level of development via different means.

100

can we make this a sticky?