ok, atg squats and raw milk. I made it specific.
[quote]ocn2000 wrote:
tpa wrote:
ocn2000 wrote:
I am not just looking to gain mass, (anyone can do that). I want to create a physique.
Sounds like something a 170 pound insecure pinner would say.
Apparently you did not check out my profile pic before you posted. Just because I don’t want to be a powerlifter and I don’t play sports, why does that make me insecure? Besides, what is a “pinner”. At least you have a physique worth posting a picture about. As opposed to the other posters on this thread. I wonder why you did not just say “Hey, this is what I do and it has worked for me” instead or resorting to being a smart ass?
Thanks for the Sandow link.[/quote]
The reason I came back at you so hard is because of the “gaining mass - anyone can do that comment”. Gaining mass is without a doubt the hardest part of acquiring a “physique”. It takes years of hard work, dedication, consistency.
To answer your question, I guess I would recommend reading some of Vince Gironda’s material, but I’m sure you are already aware of him if you’ve been reading CT’s articles.
^^^now thats a good response^^^
I did come across Girondas stuff from CT’s article. He has a ton of material. He even has two dvd’s of exercise instruction. Alan palmieri and some other guy have put together a compilation of his work on a CD in PDF format. Being with limited funds, does nayone have a reccomendation as to what works of his would be the best place to start?
Have you looked at EBAY for old bodybuilding or weightlifting mags. I bought a few 50s-60s bodybuilding mags from EBAY.
[quote]ocn2000 wrote:
^^^now thats a good response^^^
I did come across Girondas stuff from CT’s article. He has a ton of material. He even has two dvd’s of exercise instruction. Alan palmieri and some other guy have put together a compilation of his work on a CD in PDF format. Being with limited funds, does nayone have a reccomendation as to what works of his would be the best place to start? [/quote]
I am in no way trying to rail on you for seeking sound information, but I also still cannot get past the notion that you are making this too complicated.
I’ll just tell you what I did. I put myself on push/pull/legs split built on a foundation of big compound movements with some strategically placed isolation exercises. For example various curls after back and various tricep movements after or in with chest and shoulders. A bit o abs on leg day.
I starting eating a bunch of good clean manfood spread over six meals and made sure I slept once in a while, I’m not much of a sleeper.
Voila, I’ve gained 16 or 17 pounds lean since March and I am well past my prime years. To be fair I did have some pretty extensive previous experience with weight training, but you get my point. Straightforward stuff. No magic, just work hard and smart, eat enough good food and rest sometimes. Has always worked and will work while anybody reading this is still alive.
[quote]TrainerinDC wrote:
They were built 27/7/365 with nothing but hard work and dedication.
[/quote]
Well now we know the secret, they had an extra three hours everyday!
so what you are saying is that the science of bodybuilding was better 50 years ago than it is today? All of the studies done on feeding times are garbage you say? Ok, heres a routine that was used a LONG time ago.
Go outside
Find an animal.
Chase it and kill it.
Eat the entire animal including the marrow to get your EFA’s.
Find big rocks.
Pick them up.
Put them back down.
This routine made some of the biggest mofos around at the time.
On a more serious note, scientific studies are done for a reason. You wouldnt drive a model T when you could have a brand new camaro would you? There is science behind most if not all of the routines made here as well as the nutrition ideas.
[quote]Brett Tucek wrote:
ocn2000 wrote:
I am not just looking to gain mass, (anyone can do that). I want to create a physique.
Explain.[/quote]
Well, you could just strive to be huge, or you could try to bring out certain body parts or parts of body parts that create a visually pleasing display, even at the expense of total mass or strength. Check out this pic of Vince Gironda
I know PLENTY of guys at my gym that are way bigger. I know many that are just as lean (or close to it). No one has the symmetry and balance that is displayed by Vince or the classic bodybuilders of that era. CT has some great articles on here about targeting muscles and they are great. I just want more info of that type.
[quote]scottiscool wrote:
TrainerinDC wrote:
They were built 27/7/365 with nothing but hard work and dedication.
Well now we know the secret, they had an extra three hours everyday![/quote]
I know. Im a personal trainer not a typist.
My friend, you are wrong if you think that the way Vince Gironda looks is not determined largely by genetics as well.
Depending on how easily you get lean you may have to sacrifice tremendous amounts of muscle to achieve the leanness that he had. Even if you did get as lean as him (from a measure of bodyfat tests), you would still look quite different based on muscle insertion points, skin thickness, levels of vascularity, type of muscle (more striated or not), where you tend to store bodyfat, etc. And thse are all mainly genetic factors that you cannot change!
Striving to look like one guy, in my opinion, is setting yourself up for dissapointment. Additionally, I highly doubt that he looked that ripped year round. Most photos of bodybuilders that you see have been prepped for with carb and water loading and/or depletion.
Gironda was one of the first true believers in low-carb eating though.
In any case, science has made incredible improvements since the “Golden Era” and before, so use what you have available to you. Most of the garbage in muscle magazines would only work for genetically gifted, steroid using bodybuilders.
But T-Nation is different. It sorts through the bullshit. I think that this is why people were taking offense to what seemed to be like accusations; that you were lumping us in with the rest of the crap out there.
Anyway, good luck and train hard. Do the best that you can FOR YOUR BODY.
Most people, even if they could weigh as much as Arnold with the same amount of muscle and fat would not look as impressive as him.
Peace.
-MAtt
[quote]ocn2000 wrote:
Brett Tucek wrote:
ocn2000 wrote:
I am not just looking to gain mass, (anyone can do that). I want to create a physique.
Explain.
Well, you could just strive to be huge, or you could try to bring out certain body parts or parts of body parts that create a visually pleasing display, even at the expense of total mass or strength. Check out this pic of Vince Gironda
I know PLENTY of guys at my gym that are way bigger. I know many that are just as lean (or close to it). No one has the symmetry and balance that is displayed by Vince or the classic bodybuilders of that era. CT has some great articles on here about targeting muscles and they are great. I just want more info of that type. [/quote]
[quote]TrainerinDC wrote:
ocn2000 wrote:
before I got twenty replies of “squats and milk” or some similar BS.
Squats and milk is NOT bs. It is some of the best advice a lifter can get. [/quote]
Certainly you must have miss typed something. Squats and milk is an old school training method and therefore could not be worth a damn. I mean there have to have been advances in workout science since this coame out in the early 1900’s. (sarcasm intended).
Matgic…points well articulated and well taken. I am going to to set physique goals for myself and work towards them.
I am may not reach them, but I enjoy weightlifting and won’t see it as time wasted. There IS a ton of great info on this site. Like the CT article of shifting muscle tension. I loved it and am looking for more like that. I wasn’t trying to provoke people or start a “controversial” topic.
I have never dogged this site or any poster until this post. All my responses to posts have been to try to give info to the poster that I think will benefit them. Someone Pm’ed me prior to any responses to my OP and told me that asking about natural Bodybuilding/old chool training would get a bunch of crap responses, and he was right. I was thinking, “No not on this site” but I was wrong.
[quote]ocn2000 wrote:
Matgic…points well articulated and well taken. I am going to to set physique goals for myself and work towards them.
I am may not reach them, but I enjoy weightlifting and won’t see it as time wasted. There IS a ton of great info on this site. Like the CT article of shifting muscle tension. I loved it and am looking for more like that. I wasn’t trying to provoke people or start a “controversial” topic.
I have never dogged this site or any poster until this post. All my responses to posts have been to try to give info to the poster that I think will benefit them. Someone Pm’ed me prior to any responses to my OP and told me that asking about natural Bodybuilding/old chool training would get a bunch of crap responses, and he was right. I was thinking, “No not on this site” but I was wrong. [/quote]
Yea, not sure if I was clear or not…but I didn’t mean to imply that you were trying to bash T-Nation or it’s people, just tried to say what some might see it as.
Nonetheless, most of us on here who have made the most progress (naturally) still do stick to the most basic forms of training.
Squats, deadlifts, benches, rows, chins, and they’re hundreds of variations for each…yes, I said hundreds. Other than some of the “newer” equiptment like cambered bars, safety squat bars, chains, bands, glute ham raises, etc.—the most progress has been made on learning how to use these various exercises through manipulating training variables.
Whether training for aesthetics or performance, always attack your weakpoints.
To each their own; I used to be into the more bodybuilding style of training. I believe that the person who truly seeks to build the ultimate aesthetic physique for their own potential, it requires one to be much more anal about training than powerlifting, olympic lifting, or other performance based programs.
I just don’t see it worth my time to spend the needed amount of energy necessary to make my inner quads and calves look “ideally” well-proportioned to my ass and hamstrings. I’d rather spend me energy finding ways to squat and deadlift more weight.
But if it’s worth it for you, go for it.
From the one pic you have (obviously old-time inspired lighting, pose, and angle, haha) it looks like you’ve got a good base. So keep working from there.
-MAtt
My brother snapped that pic in my living room. I just stood in front of a white blank wall and tilted an upright lamp on it’s side to get the lighting right. I am really surprised it came out so well.
Two words: Dinosaur training.
Check out this book(the first one).
nevermind.
beverly international look them up. They have been around since the sixties and pride themselves on old school natural approaches!
[quote]Imen de Naars wrote:
All the routines here work without steroids.
With steroids, they just work more.
Nice attempt at provocation.[/quote]
If you’re not going to answer the OP’s question, maybe you shouldn’t post at all? Next time, think it - don’t post it.
[quote]Kill’Em All wrote:
beverly international look them up. They have been around since the sixties and pride themselves on old school natural approaches![/quote]
I have used them before. They gave me a diet and a bunch of supplements. Was expensive, but worked well.
[quote]Petedacook wrote:
Kill’Em All wrote:
beverly international look them up. They have been around since the sixties and pride themselves on old school natural approaches!
I have used them before. They gave me a diet and a bunch of supplements. Was expensive, but worked well. [/quote]
Me to, but I later found out that I could get supplements from other places like 30% off of their mark up! and still use there diets. I have to say the leanest ive ever been in my life was using there principles!