Poliquin Recycling

Training Bodybuilding
121

[quote]dwall33 wrote:
PonceDeLeon wrote:
threewhitelights wrote:
CT mentioned at one point that his legs were bigger when he was olympic lifting, but now they are more “completely developed.” I’d even believe they probably look bigger now, since they are more symmetric and defined.

Keep in mind that CT also intentionally throttles back his development - I should say ‘size’ - because he stated it is better for business to NOT look like Vin Di…I mean a bodybuilder. I doubt he cared about how image affects business back when he was Oly-lifting competitively.

Man, I got a good laugh out of that, I always thought he somewhat resembled Vin Diesel, which is in no way a knock on him.[/quote]

if there’s any male actor you’d want to look like, it’d be vin diesel right? i mean cmon he’s a badass. of course i personally aspire to look like christian bale from the machinist.

122

[quote]That One Guy wrote:

if there’s any male actor you’d want to look like, it’d be vin diesel right? i mean cmon he’s a badass. of course i personally aspire to look like christian bale from the machinist.[/quote]

Uh, ok. I am a firm believer in not picking qualities you desire from an object “a la carte,” so if you want to look like Mr. Badass Vin Diesel, you’ll have to be ok with sounding like he does. Can you live with yourself knowing you sound like you have the worst case of sinus congestion in medical history?

Personally, I’d commit seppuku. With a spoon.

123

[quote]Professor X wrote:

Wait. Stop. No one said there are no bodybuilders the world over with legs smaller than an Olympic hopeful. There are bodybuilders who compete as bantam weights who may have legs smaller than some high school kids. What the fuck does that have to do with the claim that there is A WOMAN out there with legs bigger than one of the most developed bodybuilders on the entire planet? [/quote]

The thread isn’t just about “A WOMAN”.

[quote]Professor X wrote:Are you all just making up shit to argue about?

[/quote]

Are you serious? Show me where I disagreed with you on this, or where I’m just trying to argue? Are you telling me I’m arguing just to argue with me?

And who said “Olympic lifters are somehow more developed than the largest bodybuilders in the country”?

[quote]Professor X wrote:
Every point you even attempted to make had been covered already in this thread. [/quote]

Then why do YOU also keep saying the same things?

[quote]Professor X wrote:
No one needs to hear yet again that there may just be some really huge guy out there who has no fucking clue how he got that way. Someone like that would not be the majority.[/quote]

Who said that?

[quote]Professor X wrote:
The REAL problem is people seem to think it takes some advanced degree in sports performance for them to understand how to build big muscles.[/quote]

Who seems to think that? I’m hoping your not implying that that is what I think, since I just said the exact opposite.

124

[quote]threewhitelights wrote:

The thread isn’t just about “A WOMAN”. [/quote]

This thread was about other authors who seemed to borrow from Poliquin. It has since veered off into a discussion about Poliquin’s use of hyperbole in his articles.

In that discussion, this was very much about “A WOMAN”. More specifically, it was about some woman that Poliquin claims had legs bigger than 36".

You missed this?

You also felt the need to tell us that big muscles don’t make someone an expert. Well, they may not make someone an “expert” or some super personal trainer. What it does make them is someone who has had experience in actually reaching that goal which has been far more valuable to me than anything I have read from supposed “super trainers” on the internet.

The results of most on this board seem to bear that out as well.

How did the biggest guys on this board train?

125

[quote]Professor X wrote:

You also felt the need to tell us that big muscles don’t make someone an expert. Well, they may not make someone an “expert” or some super personal trainer. What it does make them is someone who has had experience in actually reaching that goal which has been far more valuable to me than anything I have read from supposed “super trainers” on the internet.

[/quote]

That’s almost exactly what I said in my first post.

[quote]threewhitelights wrote:
No, but at the same time having big muscles does not mean they are an expert trainer.

However, it does mean that they have been here before, have put their time in, and have figured this shit out. You can’t get the big muscles without getting the experience, and while some of the biggest guys might not have the latest book on conjugated periodization or a degree in biomechanics, there is still a lot to learn from them. You can’t put in the hours, the blood and sweat, and hundreds of lbs of chicken, without learning something along the way. A lot of times, the things you can learn won’t be found in a textbook or on the interwebz.
[/quote]

126

[quote]PonceDeLeon wrote:
That One Guy wrote:

if there’s any male actor you’d want to look like, it’d be vin diesel right? i mean cmon he’s a badass. of course i personally aspire to look like christian bale from the machinist.

Uh, ok. I am a firm believer in not picking qualities you desire from an object “a la carte,” so if you want to look like Mr. Badass Vin Diesel, you’ll have to be ok with sounding like he does. Can you live with yourself knowing you sound like you have the worst case of sinus congestion in medical history?

Personally, I’d commit seppuku. With a spoon.[/quote]

it was a joke…

127

In his Nausea Leg Workout article, he stated that he and Eric Serrano put 18# of muscle on some guy in 8 weeks. How can one not say “are you fucking kidding me?!”

128

[quote]Bricknyce wrote:
In his Nausea Leg Workout article, he stated that he and Eric Serrano put 18# of muscle on some guy in 8 weeks. How can one not say “are you fucking kidding me?!”[/quote]

He makes loads of claims like that, but I’m willing to believe many of them. He usually doesn’t set up a context for the claim. The dude he put those 18# of muscle on may not have seen a gym for quite some time. May have just been muscle memory associated gains.

Even if he has told some tall tales- it has people talking about him and that’s what the industry is about. Getting your name around!

129

Something just came to my mind - althought it may not be a profound thought!

There is all this talk about Poliquin and others bringing things to “the West” that are so damn groundbreaking.

There is all of this damn fascination with “Eastern” secrets and last time I checked, the USA has some damn good athletes and we RULE the IFBB - I mean RULE it!

Ronnie, Jay Cutler, Dexter Jackson, Lee Haney, Dorian Yates … they were all from “DA WEST” and they none of them used any “Eastern” secrets for muscle building!

NOPE - no fancy periodization phases, no magical two-a-days similar to Bulgarian weightlifting campers, no personal docs and scientists, and I doubt any underground drugs! And they all did just fine in DA WEST! Ed Coan is from DA WEST and does just fine too and his training method is “outdated” and “antiquated”.

Michael Jordan, Derek Jeter, A-Rod, Tiger Woods are all from DA WEST and seem to be doing just fine too!

130

Perhaps when people talk about the wonders of the east, they are talking about powerlifting. I think some people are forgetting that this is bodybuilding section in the forum.

Also, Waterbury is great for fighting conditioning, strength, and adding some size along the way. That’s different from bodybuilding. That is a different pursuit than pure bodybuilding.

131

[quote]Bricknyce wrote:
Something just came to my mind - althought it may not be a profound thought!

There is all this talk about Poliquin and others bringing things to “the West” that are so damn groundbreaking.

There is all of this damn fascination with “Eastern” secrets and last time I checked, the USA has some damn good athletes and we RULE the IFBB - I mean RULE it!

Ronnie, Jay Cutler, Dexter Jackson, Lee Haney, Dorian Yates … they were all from “DA WEST” and they none of them used any “Eastern” secrets for muscle building!

NOPE - no fancy periodization phases, no magical two-a-days similar to Bulgarian weightlifting campers, no personal docs and scientists, and I doubt any underground drugs! And they all did just fine in DA WEST! Ed Coan is from DA WEST and does just fine too and his training method is “outdated” and “antiquated”.

Michael Jordan, Derek Jeter, A-Rod, Tiger Woods are all from DA WEST and seem to be doing just fine too!

[/quote]

Olympic lifting is what he’s referring to when he talks about translating eastern european training journals. Here’s the world records in olympic lifting as of the end of athens 2004. I couldn’t find the 2008 records.

56kg - Snatch Halil MUTLU TUR 137.5 16 Sep 2000 Sydney, AUS
62kg - Snatch Zhiyong SHI CHN 152.5 16 Aug 2004 Athens, GRE
69kg - Snatch Georgi MARKOV BUL 165.0 20 Sep 2000 Sydney, AUS
77kg - Snatch Taner SAGIR TUR 172.5 19 Aug 2004 Athens, GRE
105kg - Snatch Dmitriy BERESTOV RUS 195.0 24 Aug 2004 Athens, GRE
105+ kg - SnatchHossein REZAZADEH IRI 212.5 26 Sep 2000 Sydney, AUS
56kg - Clean & Jerk Halil MUTLU TUR 167.5 16 Sep 2000 Sydney, AUS
69kg - Clean & Jerk Galabin BOEVSKI BUL 195.0 20 Sep 2000 Sydney, AUS
77kg - Clean & Jerk Xugang ZHAN CHN 207.5 22 Sep 2000 Sydney, AUS
105+ kg - Clean & Jerk Hossein REZAZADEH IRI 262.5 25 Aug 2004 Athens, GRE

If someone can find the current world records as of 2008 please post them.

Not a boy from “DA WEST” in site and they’ll all train at least twice a day using what you’d call a fancy periodisation program. So please, please never compare olympic lifting to body building ever again.

132

[quote]stockzy wrote:

Not a boy from “DA WEST” in site and they’ll all train at least twice a day using what you’d call a fancy periodisation program. So please, please never compare olympic lifting to body building ever again. [/quote]

Gee, why don’t you tell the authors here to do the same? You would think you get HUGE proportioned muscles from Olympic lifts the way they write. Do you really think most of the people here are trying to get into the Olympics?

This is where BS terms like “functional” came from and it is why so many of these newbies were under the impression that you didn’t really need to lift heavy to get big…because big bodybuilders are weak.

133

[quote]Professor X wrote:
stockzy wrote:

Gee, why don’t you tell the authors here to do the same? You would think you get HUGE proportioned muscles from Olympic lifts the way they write. Do you really think most of the people here are trying to get into the Olympics?

This is where BS terms like “functional” came from and it is why so many of these newbies were under the impression that you didn’t really need to lift heavy to get big…because big bodybuilders are weak.[/quote]

Oh i’m with you. Two completely different sports. Two completely different approaches. It’s like 800m running and sprinting. They both run don’t they? Please…
An yes, NO ONE is relying on this site to get into the olympics. If they are they are in for a rude shock. The sooner people realise this the better. T-Nation was a bodybuilding site once. I think the articles should reflect that. Learning to apply the “priciples” of strength and conditioning to bodybuilding.

But to get somewhat back on the topic of legs, when i first walked into a Olmypic Lifting training facility the first thing i noticed was, these men and women have the biggest legs i’ve ever seen. Once I started doing the programs and i then realised they squat up to 10 times per week well, of course i asked about over training. The laughter didn’t stop for a while…

134

[quote]Professor X wrote:
stockzy wrote:

Not a boy from “DA WEST” in site and they’ll all train at least twice a day using what you’d call a fancy periodisation program. So please, please never compare olympic lifting to body building ever again.

Gee, why don’t you tell the authors here to do the same? You would think you get HUGE proportioned muscles from Olympic lifts the way they write. Do you really think most of the people here are trying to get into the Olympics?

This is where BS terms like “functional” came from and it is why so many of these newbies were under the impression that you didn’t really need to lift heavy to get big…because big bodybuilders are weak.[/quote]

I agree as well, and I think that was my problem in the first place. I saw writers include olympic lifts in their programs, and perhaps I saw it as an ingenious way to lifting. However, it wasn’t until I tried doing them that I found they did jack shit for muscle growth, The ONLY muscles that get a true workout from the Oly’s are the shhoulders and lower back (to a degree).

I’ve learned to think on my own and do what works for me, not someone else, which is what bodybuilding is all about. Because I got rid of my narrow minded approach and started thinking about what really works, I’ve learned and gained much more.

135

Well, the reason why I am bringing this up is because people are talking about this guy in the BODYBUILDING forum rather than the strength and conditioning one.

Poliquin sure talks about methods for bodybuilding anyway. Well, actually he speaks of bodybuilding methods that 99 percent of bodybuilders do not use.

Shouldn’t Olympic lifting be discussed in the strength sports section?

136

[quote]Bricknyce wrote:
Well, the reason why I am bringing this up is because people are talking about this guy in the BODYBUILDING forum rather than the strength and conditioning one.

Poliquin sure talks about methods for bodybuilding anyway. Well, actually he speaks of bodybuilding methods that 99 percent of bodybuilders do not use.

Shouldn’t Olympic lifting be discussed in the strength sports section? [/quote]

Newbies are confused. That is why it gets tossed in here as well. They hear that bodybuilders aren’t as strong and that they only look like that because of “genetics&drugs”. On this site alone they hear that they can’t climb stairs and that basically what they do won’t work for most people because everyone is a “hardgainer”…as if any pro bodybuilder is recommending their current routine for a rank beginner.

They get it nailed into them that big bodybuilders are the worst people to ask for advice.

That is why you have people worrying about a fucking clean and press instead of worrying about how to to build those muscles up efficiently AS WELL AS how to make them stronger.

There are no weak 250+lbs bodybuilders. Just because they may drop the weight later on in favor of more reps, no one gets 20" fucking arms from curling a 35lbs dumbbell.

137

[quote]Bricknyce wrote:
Something just came to my mind - althought it may not be a profound thought!

There is all this talk about Poliquin and others bringing things to “the West” that are so damn groundbreaking.

There is all of this damn fascination with “Eastern” secrets and last time I checked, the USA has some damn good athletes and we RULE the IFBB - I mean RULE it!

Ronnie, Jay Cutler, Dexter Jackson, Lee Haney, Dorian Yates … they were all from “DA WEST” and they none of them used any “Eastern” secrets for muscle building!

NOPE - no fancy periodization phases, no magical two-a-days similar to Bulgarian weightlifting campers, no personal docs and scientists, and I doubt any underground drugs! And they all did just fine in DA WEST! Ed Coan is from DA WEST and does just fine too and his training method is “outdated” and “antiquated”.

Michael Jordan, Derek Jeter, A-Rod, Tiger Woods are all from DA WEST and seem to be doing just fine too!

[/quote]

Are you seriously comparing the USA to Eastern Europe in regards to strength training or ANY training ?? I mean come on man…

This Eastern fascinations is there because in the East the old USSR especially Eastern Germany hired thousands of scientists and professors in order to dominate the Olympics… bodybuilding and competing in Joe Weiders Olympia is not high on the list of “to do” list of Eastern Europeans getting into the Olympics IS high on their agenda though.

And in regards to rule the IFFB you also RULE the most obese country category so their is something GLARINGLY wrong with that… now on the other hand go to any Eastern European country and come back and tell me how many males are built like tanks and women in low bodyfat compared to DA WEST… maybe that should open your eyes just a SMALL bit.

When it comes to putting on muscle, i would wager anyone ANY amount of money that the East has way better, WAY more efficient ways of doing it… i mean just take periodisation USA has made that into nuclear science whereas its considered basic stuff.

Poliquin /Pierre Le Roy and co. have stated MANY times that getting accepted by Eastern European coaches is goddamn hard they consider themselves elite for a reason.
They are THE best in the world, and anyone who thinks otherside needs to open their eyes a bit.

And finally where you say no twice a day training… read Arnolds book … you may be surprised lol.
No personal doctors … are you kidding me ? Ronnie Coleman had 6 so the rumour goes.
And no underground drugs ?? Enough said HAH.

And finally how do Michael Jordan, Derek Jeter, A-Rod, Tiger Woods possibly fit into this argument ??? A golfer and a basketball player ?? And you somehow bring them into this ?

edit:

and finally when eastern germany collasped all the scientists were let go… where did they go China …

and who dominated the Olympics this year… oh surprise

138

[quote]Professor X wrote:
Bricknyce wrote:
Well, the reason why I am bringing this up is because people are talking about this guy in the BODYBUILDING forum rather than the strength and conditioning one.

Poliquin sure talks about methods for bodybuilding anyway. Well, actually he speaks of bodybuilding methods that 99 percent of bodybuilders do not use.

Shouldn’t Olympic lifting be discussed in the strength sports section?

Newbies are confused. That is why it gets tossed in here as well. They hear that bodybuilders aren’t as strong and that they only look like that because of “genetics&drugs”. On this site alone they hear that they can’t climb stairs and that basically what they do won’t work for most people because everyone is a “hardgainer”…as if any pro bodybuilder is recommending their current routine for a rank beginner.

They get it nailed into them that big bodybuilders are the worst people to ask for advice.

That is why you have people worrying about a fucking clean and press instead of worrying about how to to build those muscles up efficiently AS WELL AS how to make them stronger.

There are no weak 250+lbs bodybuilders. Just because they may drop the weight later on in favor of more reps, no one gets 20" fucking arms from curling a 35lbs dumbbell.[/quote]

the last part is deff true i remember lee priest saying he takes out the 100s every once in a while when doing incline curls and have u seen his arms

139

[quote]Professor X wrote:

Newbies are confused. That is why it gets tossed in here as well. They hear that bodybuilders aren’t as strong and that they only look like that because of “genetics&drugs”. On this site alone they hear that they can’t climb stairs and that basically what they do won’t work for most people because everyone is a “hardgainer”…as if any pro bodybuilder is recommending their current routine for a rank beginner.

They get it nailed into them that big bodybuilders are the worst people to ask for advice.

That is why you have people worrying about a fucking clean and press instead of worrying about how to to build those muscles up efficiently AS WELL AS how to make them stronger.

There are no weak 250+lbs bodybuilders. Just because they may drop the weight later on in favor of more reps, no one gets 20" fucking arms from curling a 35lbs dumbbell.[/quote]

Well making muscles bigger and making them efficient are two totally different animals…

Strength is dependant on both the muscle size but moreso the efficiency of the NERVOUS SYSTEM. See it this way… the size of your muscles are like a factory… the bigger the factory is, the more production you should able to churn out. But if the empoyees are not hard workers or are not working well together, even if the factory should be able to produce a lot in theory, in reality the production is quite low.

The nervous system is like the boss who motivates and give orders to the employees. If you have a very good boss, your employees will produce more!

That’s why some peoples can be muscular but weak (big factory, bad boss, lazy employees = big muscles but inefficient nervous system). Some others are strong but not big (smaller factory but great boss and hard working employees = smaller muscles but efficient nervous system). Still some others combine both, and these are the true beasts.

When you use lower reps, the nervous system is involved more… the higher your reps are, the less nervous system dominant an exercise is. So peoples who get big by always doing higher reps will always be weaker than they look.

Im quite sure you MUST have 230-250lb ppl in your gym that use seriously underweight weights… and 250lbs just sounds huge 110kgs puts its more into perspective.

140

[quote]300andabove wrote:

Well making muscles bigger and making them efficient are two totally different animals… [/quote]

BULLSHIT. My muscles are more efficient at the exercises I use to make them larger and stronger. You don’t make strength progress without any neural adaptation.

[quote]

Strength is dependant on both the muscle size but moreso the efficiency of the NERVOUS SYSTEM.[/quote]

It is dependant on BOTH almost equally. Once you have efficiently learned how to do a certain technique, the only thing that will allow more weight to be used is the addition of muscle proteins. You can not continue to progress “neurally” forever without ever increasing muscle mass.

[quote]

See it this way… the size of your muscles are like a factory… the bigger the factory is, the more production you should able to churn out. But if the empoyees are not hard workers or are not working well together, even if the factory should be able to produce a lot in theory, in reality the production is quite low.[/quote]

Thank you for that. For some reason, in none of my biology classes or even when we cut open that body did we go over how muscles work.

Please. I know many people over 250lbs (I’m one of them) and even if they use less weight later on (which many do in favor of increased reps or “feeling” a muscle working better), they still used greater weight than average to BUILD that size in the first place.

Is this just hard to understand? You all see some huge fucker lifting a 35lbs dumbbell and you assume he isn’t stronger than that and that he never lifted more weight than that?