[quote]LoRez wrote:
Lol. I didn’t ask the original question.[/quote]
No a larger man did. Hows the training? By this time next year will you be up 20 lbs or 2,000 post?
[quote]rds63799 wrote:
maybe we really are water filled sausage balloons after all[/quote]
I once was told I looked like an over stuffed sausage by some one once and that he never wanted to look like me. He was nearly 6 ft tall at 170.
he also said people commented on the size of his arms. I find this hard to believe but yeah he sucked.
[quote]Vagina Whisperer wrote:
[quote]LoRez wrote:
Lol. I didn’t ask the original question.[/quote]
No a larger man did. Hows the training? By this time next year will you be up 20 lbs or 2,000 post?[/quote]
Both, probably.
Training’s fine. Waiting until the February/March callout thread for the next photo. I’m um, I dunno, 15ish pounds from that picture I think. And up 35lbs since February 2012.
yes yess let their hate fuel you, young Lorez
[quote]Vagina Whisperer wrote:
[quote]LoRez wrote:
Lol. I didn’t ask the original question.[/quote]
No a larger man did. Hows the training? By this time next year will you be up 20 lbs or 2,000 post?[/quote]
How’s your training? DYEL?
[quote]paulieserafini wrote:
Okay I care now… teach me.
All this talk about powerlifting routines and how they don’t matter or how they can benefit a bodybuilder got me interested in the different types of hypertrophy associated with the two since I know very little.
To my understanding bodybuilding style routines yeild Sarcoplasmic hypertrophy…Which is mostly fluid???
Powerlifting syles create the more denser muscle from myofibrillar hypertrophy?
This sarcoplasmic hypertrophy sounds like crap…Is either muscle type more resilient? maybe during dieting or any other internal or environmental factors that can affect gains?
is there an optimal way to get the best of both worlds at the same time without commiting to one or the other for a period of time?
such as maybe during a bench routine starting with flat bench for 3-5 sets of 5 or less.
then moving towards bodybuilding style stuff like 3x10 incline and finishing with pumping style movements like flies or decline or something?
[/quote]
Maybe look into undulating periodization. It’s all the rage in natural bodybuilding circles lately.
[quote]LoRez wrote:
[quote]Andrewdwatters1 wrote:
wrong sub-forum Lo-Rez. The one you’re looking for is spelled beginners[/quote]
Why do you say that?
Obviously (?) he who trains within BB ranges will have a larger cross sectional area, for the same strength level.
My question is what’s actually going on at a cellular level. I know it’s sarcoplasmic AND myofibrillar hypertrophy AND glycogen storage AND [probably] some degree of inflammation. But why does this occur more when training BB-style and not when training PL-style?[/quote]
Factors important for the development of strength
-
Intermuscular coordination- the sequencing of multiple muscles firing
-
Intramuscular coordination- recruiting as many fibers as one can in individual muscle groups
-
tendon strengthening
-
thickening and increased density of the bony knobs that tendons attach
-
increased bone density and perhaps even thickening
-
larger muscle- the more contractile cross sectional area, the more potential force a muscle can generate
BBs just go for the muscles and and only go for the others for the sake of developing the muscles better for the most part.
In my opinion many of what is written is for $$$$$.
It gets confusing because we read stuff that is true and other stuff. Just looking at the many ridiculous titles of books/articles(i do not blame the authors i know they do not allways choose the title). So we are left spending months and years to find out what has value.
A few weeks back i read an article here(it might have been from the databank) from a well respected man with over 30 years of personal experience who was saying we can choose to get big or strong injury free or just about. But if we want to reach 100% of our potential we will have many. So our choices are many.
I will let experts answer your question but you might like reading Chad Waterbury: Huge in a hurry from the librairy about neural, fiber recruitement. I think there is an ondulation/wave that is not the hot subject/fad that might have value.
Touch ang go. By that i mean finding the minimal stimulus we can use. The benefit is we can train more frequenly without over training. I just gained muscles size and strenght by doing pulldown 6 days weekly over the last 4 weeks. I do not pretend it is a miracle way to train but maybe we can benefit from some weeks of frequent training and alternate those with lower frequency.
All the best !
[quote]paulieserafini wrote:
[quote]rds63799 wrote:
maybe we really are water filled sausage balloons after all[/quote]
I once was told I looked like an over stuffed sausage by some one once and that he never wanted to look like me. He was nearly 6 ft tall at 170.
he also said people commented on the size of his arms. I find this hard to believe but yeah he sucked.[/quote]
some people are just dicks
[quote]csulli wrote:
[quote]Vagina Whisperer wrote:
[quote]LoRez wrote:
Lol. I didn’t ask the original question.[/quote]
No a larger man did. Hows the training? By this time next year will you be up 20 lbs or 2,000 post?[/quote]
How’s your training? DYEL?[/quote]
Still very curious about this.
@ paulieserafini i found the article i had in mind that might interest you. In short going against many suggested ways might earn an olympic medal.
[quote]Dave Rogerson wrote:
If memory serves me correctly, I think that Vladimir Zatsiorsky may have popularized the idea in the west. [/quote]
Yes Dave, Vladimir Zatsiorsky wrote about it and so did Dr. Mell Siff. The theory is based off of:
Nikituk, B., Samoilov, N. (1990) The adaptive mechanisms of muscle fibers to exercise and possibilities for controlling them. Teoriya i Praktika Fizischeskoi Kultury 5:11-14.
I do not read Russian and have not see this study but Mel Siff was a very good friend of mine and I do trust that he had read the study and had offered this theory as a plausible explanation as to the differences between bodybuilders and powerlifters. Is this the only theory, no.
Dr. Jose Antonio said in a communication between us, it is primarily an adaptation of the CNS system that makes the difference between bodybuilders and powerlifters. Many other researchers have show there is a selective adaptation of muscle fibers. It seems BB’s selective recruit Type 2X and to some extent Type 2AX fibers, while Olympic and powerlifters selective recruit Type 2A muscle fibers.
Giuseppe D’Antona, Francesca Lanfranconi, Maria Antonietta Pellegrino, Lorenza Brocca, Raffaella Adami, Rosetta Rossi, Giorgio Moro, Danilo Miotti, Monica Canepari1 and Roberto Bottinelli. Skeletal muscle hypertrophy and structure and function of skeletal muscle fibres in male body builders. February 1, 2006 The Journal of Physiology, 570, 611-627.
Fry AC, Webber JM, Weiss LW, Harber MP, Vaczi M, Pattison NA. Muscle fiber characteristics of competitive power lifters. J Strength Cond Res. 2003 May;17(2):402-10.
Fry AC, Webber JM, Weiss LW, Harber MP, Vaczi M, Pattison NA.Muscle fiber characteristics and performance correlates of male Olympic-style weightlifters. J Strength Cond Res. 2003 Nov;17(4):746-54.
Goldberg et al (1975) also say that the increase in muscle weight reflects an increase in protein, especially sarcoplasmic protein, and results from greater protein synthesis and reduced protein breakdown. So obviously non-contractile protein enlarges as a result of exercise.
Goldberg et al. Mechanism of work-induced hypertrophy of skeletal muscle.
Med Sci Sports. 1975 Fall;7(3):185-98.
Now, while some completely scoff at this THEORY and say they have the answer, remember sarcoplasmic hypertrophy is is just that…theory. The truth is, science is still not exactly what they exact process is in muscle hypertrophy. Some parts are a mystery.
As evidence of the mystery, D’Antona et al (2006) in their study concluded that â??the extreme hypertrophy of vastus lateralis muscle could not be explained simply on the basis of muscle fiber hypertrophy as would be commonly expected. Collectively the data not only confirm the known mechanisms, but also suggest still undefined mechanisms able to shape muscle phenotype. Among such phenomena the following need to be considered: increase in non-contractile tissue; changes in muscle architecture; fiber hyperplasiaâ??
Giuseppe D’Antona, Francesca Lanfranconi, Maria Antonietta Pellegrino, Lorenza Brocca, Raffaella Adami, Rosetta Rossi, Giorgio Moro, Danilo Miotti, Monica Canepari1 and Roberto Bottinelli. Skeletal muscle hypertrophy and structure and function of skeletal muscle fibres in male body builders. February 1, 2006 The Journal of Physiology, 570, 611-627.
McDonagh (1984)as so stated in a previous study that the exact biomechanical mechanisms whereby hypertrophy is stimulated by resistance training is not yet known and theories are incorrect or incomplete.
M. J. N. McDonagh, C. T. M. Davies. Adaptive response of mammalian skeletal muscle to exercise with high loads. European Journal of Applied Physiology and Occupational Physiology. January 1984, Volume 52, Issue 2, pp 139-155
While some of us may think we have it figured out, science has not yet completely solved the mystery of muscle hypertrophy. Obviously intensity and volume manipulations make a huge difference between the physique of bodybuilders and powerlifters. How exactly this happens is not 100% certain. One thing for sure, Ronnie Colemn, Branch Warren and Johnny Jackson have certainly taken hypertrophy to a new limit by including powerlifting and BB training in their protocols.
Wow, seriously old thread bump.
Interesting read though. Everything I’ve read on the topic pretty much states that we [people who study this stuff] haven’t really figured it all out yet. In the meantime though, there are plenty of things in regard to training and nutrition that we don’t know and everyone seems to be doing just fine 
S
[quote]csulli wrote:
[quote]csulli wrote:
[quote]Vagina Whisperer wrote:
[quote]LoRez wrote:
Lol. I didn’t ask the original question.[/quote]
No a larger man did. Hows the training? By this time next year will you be up 20 lbs or 2,000 post?[/quote]
How’s your training? DYEL?[/quote]
Still very curious about this.[/quote]
I can understand where vagina’s coming from. LoRez gets a free pass from a lot of people for a number of reasons. One is that he parrots the main ideas about training on this site. So, he seems to be saying all the things most members agree with.
I think another reason he gets a pass is because most newbies don’t know how small he is. If LoRez does actually trains the way he tells others to,his physique is proof that all the common knowledge on this site is wrong!
I think he is sort of like a groupie
[quote]confusion wrote:
I can understand where vagina’s coming from.
[/quote]
Ok, a bit off topic, but this sentence really cracked me up…
–Me
[quote]kravi wrote:
[quote]confusion wrote:
I can understand where vagina’s coming from.
[/quote]
Ok, a bit off topic, but this sentence really cracked me up…
–Me[/quote]
LMAO. I love that. Happy new year. Confusion