[quote]dt79 wrote:
[quote]JayPierce wrote:
You weren’t talking about TUT, either. You were talking about this “new” constant tension catchphrase.
[/quote]
Seriously, why are you arguing for the sake of arguing?
I’m getting bored with this. Here’s a video some might enjoy. Especially Craze09. I’m sorry, I just need some people to share my misery…
How does anyone take this dude seriously as both a bodybuilder and an artist? That was awful. Appreciate that dt.
LOL!
Jaypierce I wasn’t arguing with you, I don’t even read your posts. Would’ve missed your little gem there if my bro dt79 hadn’t quoted you.
[quote]dt79 wrote:
Yogi is my friend. And he says he’s busy with his career as of late, which is an excellent thing that I’m happy about, hence I wouldn’t expect him to have the time to reply till several hours later. So I replied on his behalf. If you can infer any other intentions from this, then I’m sorry to say that you think like a bitch.[/quote]
no, admit it! You think I’m an imbecile. Admit it!
[quote]Steez wrote:
[quote]dt79 wrote:
[quote]JayPierce wrote:
You weren’t talking about TUT, either. You were talking about this “new” constant tension catchphrase.
[/quote]
Seriously, why are you arguing for the sake of arguing?
I’m getting bored with this. Here’s a video some might enjoy. Especially Craze09. I’m sorry, I just need some people to share my misery…
How does anyone take this dude seriously as both a bodybuilder and an artist? That was awful. Appreciate that dt.
[/quote]
I sincerely hope no one does. But I ended up watching this fucking vid 10 times over the last few days. It’s like a bloody awful B grade flick that you just can’t stop watching over and over again. Sorry, I just had to spread the virus lol!
[quote]Yogi wrote:
[quote]dt79 wrote:
Yogi is my friend. And he says he’s busy with his career as of late, which is an excellent thing that I’m happy about, hence I wouldn’t expect him to have the time to reply till several hours later. So I replied on his behalf. If you can infer any other intentions from this, then I’m sorry to say that you think like a bitch.[/quote]
no, admit it! You think I’m an imbecile. Admit it![/quote]
No, I just think you’re delusional if you think you are sexier than me in any way!
[quote]flipcollar wrote:
God damn, those squats would be brutal. If I were to use my true 20 rep max, I’d be somewhere in the 350 range. 8 sets of 12 at 350 would be damn near impossible for me, and with 30-60 seconds in between? Fucking forget it! And I’m not even natural. This would be extraordinarily difficult with just 225 for me. I doubt I could even do that without some extra conditioning work.[/quote]
You’re not natty? Wow!
[quote]dt79 wrote:
I said it’s BECOME A CATCHPHRASE because it has previously existed as one out of many descriptory terms to describe keeping tension on the muscle. Did Serge Nubret call his program Constant Tension Training?[/quote]
Serge Nubret insisted that lifters following his recommended routines do not lock out most lifts (but BTN presses had to be locked out with the delts) because he wanted them to keep constant tension on the muscle. The info can be found on forums where he wrote and on his commercial training videos.
[quote]dt79 wrote:
[quote]Yogi wrote:
[quote]dt79 wrote:
Yogi is my friend. And he says he’s busy with his career as of late, which is an excellent thing that I’m happy about, hence I wouldn’t expect him to have the time to reply till several hours later. So I replied on his behalf. If you can infer any other intentions from this, then I’m sorry to say that you think like a bitch.[/quote]
no, admit it! You think I’m an imbecile. Admit it![/quote]
No, I just think you’re delusional if you think you are sexier than me in any way![/quote]
[quote]dt79 wrote:
I understand. Here’s my point. There are numeous “long term” beginners(150lbs going on 2 years) I have observed doing funky stuff based on what they’ve read on the internet. They would be better served asking someone far more accomplished right beside them in real life rather than following the latest “science” and methods preached by supposed internet experts claiming every other way of training is unscientific and only applicable to those who have superior genetics or on drugs. The current internet culture only perpetuates this belief.
I mean, seriously, look at all the stuff that “experts” have been regurgitating for years that are currently being disproven. Testosterone and gh spikes after squats eliciting more growth, sarcoplasmic hypertrophy independantly occuring, rep range vs fiber type activation etc…[/quote]
Well yeah, I totally agree with that. It is kind of shocking to me how rarely a guy in the gym will ask someone else for advice/tips, even when they’re doing stuff so clearly different from all the stronger and bigger guys right next to him. Especially basic stuff like FORM – if yours is TERRIBLE, and diverges dramatically from the lifters around you, wouldn’t you notice? That’s a rhetorical question (and the answer apparently is “no”).
Minotaur you make some good points. I wasn’t suggesting that bodybuilders should train for maximal strength so much as I don’t necessarily think size should always be the criterion by which someone’s experience/knowledge/work ethic is judged. The old trope about the biggest guy in the gym not necessarily being the one to listen to. Though I agree w/ dt79’s point that people seem to have taken this way too far in the opposite direction.
If I see a truly huge dude, I’m pretty safe assuming he’s also strong and has put in a lot of work, even if he’s doing wrist curls. But there are also a lot of “physique” guys walking around who may look great but strike me as having pretty limited athletic / performance ability. And I personally am not super impressed by that, because I think the implication is that these guys are relying quite a lot on genetics/drugs. In other words – the top natural bodybuilders are all pretty damn strong. If a guy is carrying the same amount of muscle as a top natural bodybuilder and is weak, I assume PEDs are a big piece of the puzzle.
[quote]dt79 wrote:
I’m getting bored with this. Here’s a video some might enjoy. Especially Craze09. I’m sorry, I just need some people to share my misery…
I don’t know what to say about this. Lol
[quote]craze9 wrote:
The old trope about the biggest guy in the gym not necessarily being the one to listen to. Though I agree w/ dt79’s point that people seem to have taken this way too far in the opposite direction.
[/quote]
For sure, the truth is usually somewhere in between.
The most impressive guy or gal may not be the most knowledgeable - and often isN’T.
At the same time, in this day and age anyone can come across as a guru yet begs the question: “If you know so much bro, why do you look like shit…?”
Ultimately, it’s caveat emptor. I’m at a point where I rarely take in new information with completely open arms. I will, however, do my best to avoid dogma and apply critical thought and, should it pass that test, try integrating it in small increments to see if it has merit.
I agree that the whole notion that one shouldn’t talk to the biggest guys in the gym has gone too far. Who to get advice from in the gym depends, obviously, on how much experience and knowledge the guy has and if he can articulate these adequately.
The most developed guy at me gym is a natural pro (but I highly doubt he is natural) and although he is a nice guy, he can’t explain anything in a way in which the information can be applied and can’t and doesn’t want to coach anyone else.
Another natural pro used to go to my gym and is a prep coach who knows how to get the job done. There are also quite a few powerlifters and guys serious about training who know how to explain what they do and how to advise someone else.
I train at the best gym in my city, full of bodybuilders on steroids. I have spoken to a few about bodybuilding and every time I am disappointed at what they say. Things like ‘lower lats’ or that doing flyes will fill the gap between my pecs. And we are talking like big guys, I know may come across as someone on here who doesn’t listen to others comments or who thinks they know it all, but I think I do what everyone who receives other comments should do: I evaluate it and consider 1) if it is logical (a lot of ideas fail this test, especially the causation test) 2) whether or not it can fit into my program and 3) if it is evidence-based.
I made one of the most radical changes to my program around February of last year when I spoke with someone I know who is a contest prep guy, when he suggested I open my rep ranges. He wanted me to drop my lower rep sets entirely, (I was doing 4-6 reps as my low end rep sets at the time and 8-12 as my moderate rep sets, now it is 4-8 and 8-15) I opened them up and grew because of it. But I don’t think it was because of the higher reps being better, I think the problem was that when you move up in weight after hitting the 6 or the 12 rep number you end up doing a lot more low rep sets because a 5 lb increase can mean going from 12 reps to 6 or 7 at the higher weight, especially with Dumbbells or singles or doubles after a 6 rep increase.
I have to say the most frustrating, and by most frustrating I mean dumbest, thing I hear is ‘Do whatever works for you’. Usually it is said by people who 1) don’t care, 2) have no idea what they are talking about and 3) are talking to people who do not know what works for them. I can think of one major thing that I do that is radically different from what others do, my training frequency, but 95% of what everyone does in their sport should be exactly the same. Bodybuilders should be doing 95% the same things as other bodybuilders. I allow that there are things that need to be different to compensate for genetics or limb length or metabolism etc. But the principles must be the same. Most of the exercises should be the same most of the time.
I think what causes it is that people are libertines in their own life, or at least relativists, particularly with regards to morality; and they take this attitude that they have towards that issue and apply it to something that should be largely scientific. The other cause I think, is that the old bodybuilders truly were experimenting, since they did what they did before much scientific research was done in the area, and their attitudes are a part of the Bodybuilding culture.
[quote]tuttle wrote:
I train at the best gym in my city, full of bodybuilders on steroids. I have spoken to a few about bodybuilding and every time I am disappointed at what they say. Things like ‘lower lats’ or that doing flyes will fill the gap between my pecs. And we are talking like big guys, I know may come across as someone on here who doesn’t listen to others comments or who thinks they know it all, but I think I do what everyone who receives other comments should do: I evaluate it and consider 1) if it is logical (a lot of ideas fail this test, especially the causation test) 2) whether or not it can fit into my program and 3) if it is evidence-based.
I made one of the most radical changes to my program around February of last year when I spoke with someone I know who is a contest prep guy, when he suggested I open my rep ranges. He wanted me to drop my lower rep sets entirely, (I was doing 4-6 reps as my low end rep sets at the time and 8-12 as my moderate rep sets, now it is 4-8 and 8-15) I opened them up and grew because of it. But I don’t think it was because of the higher reps being better, I think the problem was that when you move up in weight after hitting the 6 or the 12 rep number you end up doing a lot more low rep sets because a 5 lb increase can mean going from 12 reps to 6 or 7 at the higher weight, especially with Dumbbells or singles or doubles after a 6 rep increase.
I have to say the most frustrating, and by most frustrating I mean dumbest, thing I hear is ‘Do whatever works for you’. Usually it is said by people who 1) don’t care, 2) have no idea what they are talking about and 3) are talking to people who do not know what works for them. I can think of one major thing that I do that is radically different from what others do, my training frequency, but 95% of what everyone does in their sport should be exactly the same. Bodybuilders should be doing 95% the same things as other bodybuilders. I allow that there are things that need to be different to compensate for genetics or limb length or metabolism etc. But the principles must be the same. Most of the exercises should be the same most of the time.
I think what causes it is that people are libertines in their own life, or at least relativists, particularly with regards to morality; and they take this attitude that they have towards that issue and apply it to something that should be largely scientific. The other cause I think, is that the old bodybuilders truly were experimenting, since they did what they did before much scientific research was done in the area, and their attitudes are a part of the Bodybuilding culture.[/quote]
I don’t have the time to discuss this further at the moment, perhaps later. Right now I can’t help but ask, remembering the thread you started, in regards to your current training and diet alone, you seem to be some sort of anomaly yourself if what you’re doing works for you. Don’t you find that rather contradictory to what you’ve written?
[quote]MinotaurXXX wrote:
[quote]craze9 wrote:
The old trope about the biggest guy in the gym not necessarily being the one to listen to. Though I agree w/ dt79’s point that people seem to have taken this way too far in the opposite direction.
[/quote]
For sure, the truth is usually somewhere in between.
The most impressive guy or gal may not be the most knowledgeable - and often isN’T.
At the same time, in this day and age anyone can come across as a guru yet begs the question: “If you know so much bro, why do you look like shit…?”
Ultimately, it’s caveat emptor. I’m at a point where I rarely take in new information with completely open arms. I will, however, do my best to avoid dogma and apply critical thought and, should it pass that test, try integrating it in small increments to see if it has merit. [/quote]
Completely agree.
[quote]craze9 wrote:
[quote]dt79 wrote:
I understand. Here’s my point. There are numeous “long term” beginners(150lbs going on 2 years) I have observed doing funky stuff based on what they’ve read on the internet. They would be better served asking someone far more accomplished right beside them in real life rather than following the latest “science” and methods preached by supposed internet experts claiming every other way of training is unscientific and only applicable to those who have superior genetics or on drugs. The current internet culture only perpetuates this belief.
I mean, seriously, look at all the stuff that “experts” have been regurgitating for years that are currently being disproven. Testosterone and gh spikes after squats eliciting more growth, sarcoplasmic hypertrophy independantly occuring, rep range vs fiber type activation etc…[/quote]
Well yeah, I totally agree with that. It is kind of shocking to me how rarely a guy in the gym will ask someone else for advice/tips, even when they’re doing stuff so clearly different from all the stronger and bigger guys right next to him. Especially basic stuff like FORM – if yours is TERRIBLE, and diverges dramatically from the lifters around you, wouldn’t you notice? That’s a rhetorical question (and the answer apparently is “no”).
Minotaur you make some good points. I wasn’t suggesting that bodybuilders should train for maximal strength so much as I don’t necessarily think size should always be the criterion by which someone’s experience/knowledge/work ethic is judged. The old trope about the biggest guy in the gym not necessarily being the one to listen to. Though I agree w/ dt79’s point that people seem to have taken this way too far in the opposite direction.
If I see a truly huge dude, I’m pretty safe assuming he’s also strong and has put in a lot of work, even if he’s doing wrist curls. But there are also a lot of “physique” guys walking around who may look great but strike me as having pretty limited athletic / performance ability. And I personally am not super impressed by that, because I think the implication is that these guys are relying quite a lot on genetics/drugs. In other words – the top natural bodybuilders are all pretty damn strong. If a guy is carrying the same amount of muscle as a top natural bodybuilder and is weak, I assume PEDs are a big piece of the puzzle.
[/quote]
Yeah, there are always going to be freaks. Then there are the freaks among freaks that respond to training and drugs in a way that even the freaks can’t comprehend. Go look up Kevin Levrone.
I don’t see how the diet applies to this topic, since I do not know what you consider far out there. The liver thing as far as I know is just considered weird, but not in the sense that it won’t work. In the sense that it tastes awful I agree. I did the research on the liver, and apparently even the protein quality is very high.
As far as training, like I said the one thing I think I do that is radically different is frequency. And I did not come to this easily, I used to train 6-8 times a week, and cut back until I got to where I did. People ask me how I could progress, but I can tell you every time I walked into the gym 4 out 5 of the numbers I had to beat that day in reps or in weight would go up. It is how I got to 135 DB Shoulder Presses, and like I said I’m natural. I do think there are a couple of things at play, during the period when I implemented this was very stressful (First I finished university and had a very hard time finding a job, then finding out my gf was pregger, while she was still in school, later having issues with getting my boss to pay me, and later still when I was in my first year of law school; and second I believe that I am on the low end for recovery as it is, I have never believed that my muscles were not recovered, just my CNS; And third, that it takes longer to recover as you grow. But everything else is about the same (in terms of principles, and even here the principle of training when recovered or near recovered is the same) which works for my 95% argument.
My training has a very detailed name to it in Dr. Squat’s book, but I don’t remember it. The point is I have speed workouts (A) (active recovery), Strength workouts (B) and size workouts (C). The difference in my system from others is that people generally do their going past failure workouts with a variety of techniques, and generally just whenever they think they need to. My program has them scheduled, regular and constant. My C workouts are always the same, and I do not believe that many people do harder workouts than those. Except for this period on Indigo I do not do them while dieting, to avoid injury, since it seems going past failure can do this when you are dehydrated (naturally from being on a diet), with low glycogen reserves and very lean.
There is one other thing I like to do when I have time to do it, and I think it would work for everyone. I’m not a huge believer in the pump, but if you drink a gallon of water 3-4 hours before going into the gym, and do everything else for your workout the exact same as you normally do, I bet your pump will be out of this world.
[quote]tuttle wrote:
I don’t see how the diet applies to this topic, since I do not know what you consider far out there. The liver thing as far as I know is just considered weird, but not in the sense that it won’t work. In the sense that it tastes awful I agree. I did the research on the liver, and apparently even the protein quality is very high.
As far as training, like I said the one thing I think I do that is radically different is frequency. And I did not come to this easily, I used to train 6-8 times a week, and cut back until I got to where I did. People ask me how I could progress, but I can tell you every time I walked into the gym 4 out 5 of the numbers I had to beat that day in reps or in weight would go up. It is how I got to 135 DB Shoulder Presses, and like I said I’m natural. I do think there are a couple of things at play, during the period when I implemented this was very stressful (First I finished university and had a very hard time finding a job, then finding out my gf was pregger, while she was still in school, later having issues with getting my boss to pay me, and later still when I was in my first year of law school; and second I believe that I am on the low end for recovery as it is, I have never believed that my muscles were not recovered, just my CNS; And third, that it takes longer to recover as you grow. But everything else is about the same (in terms of principles, and even here the principle of training when recovered or near recovered is the same) which works for my 95% argument.
My training has a very detailed name to it in Dr. Squat’s book, but I don’t remember it. The point is I have speed workouts (A) (active recovery), Strength workouts (B) and size workouts (C). The difference in my system from others is that people generally do their going past failure workouts with a variety of techniques, and generally just whenever they think they need to. My program has them scheduled, regular and constant. My C workouts are always the same, and I do not believe that many people do harder workouts than those. Except for this period on Indigo I do not do them while dieting, to avoid injury, since it seems going past failure can do this when you are dehydrated (naturally from being on a diet), with low glycogen reserves and very lean.
There is one other thing I like to do when I have time to do it, and I think it would work for everyone. I’m not a huge believer in the pump, but if you drink a gallon of water 3-4 hours before going into the gym, and do everything else for your workout the exact same as you normally do, I bet your pump will be out of this world.[/quote]
But current science and it’s proponents will disagree with you, leading to the inevitable conclusion that you got big in spite of what you did, or you’re lying about being natural. I take it you’re not up to date with what passes off as “science” in the fitness worlÄ? today? I was a big fan of Dr Squat btw.
Too vague, no answer.
[quote]tuttle wrote:
Too vague, no answer.[/quote]
Nevermind.