Very insightful information, thank you.
Can you please elaborate on your approach to pre-during-post nutrition?
Do you tend to follow what is recommended here or did you find something different that works for you?
Also, I would appreciate if you could PM your progression pics.
-Yustas
[/quote]
My pre-workout meal changes depending on how I feel and whether I am gaining or trying to lose some weight. When dieting, it is almost always either chicken breasts and rice or salmon and rice (sometimes potatoes instead of rice). When gaining, it can be whole eggs, rice mixed with “Campbell’s Chunky Soup”(about 1,000cals if mixed with two cups of rice) or something to that effect.
During training, I usually just carry Gatorade with me (unless I am dieting in which case I carry nothing but water). I don’t need any lectures about Surge. It seems like a great product and I may buy it one day, but I don’t feel it is necessary or that my gains will stop if I don’t hurry and buy some quickly as it seems some here believe.
After training, I just make sure I have some simple carbs in me. That can come from anywhere available, then I eat a solid meal soon afterwards when my stomach has calmed down from training.
[quote]pookie wrote:
Professor X wrote:
It kind of reminds me of Ronnie Coleman’s gym, only they actually sweep the floors here and you can’t write on the walls.
Do you yell “Yeah buddyyyyyyyyyyyyyy!” before every set?[/quote]
No, I believe that saying copyrighted. I tried, “Yeah Boooootieeeeee!” but women got offended and started avoiding me at the water fountain.
I have just spent the past week reading articles that drill the notion of thinking in terms of ‘movement’ rather than ‘body parts’ and to balance every ‘pull’ with a ‘push.’
Yet here you post a routine that is structured into ‘body parts’ with a lot more ‘pushes’ than ‘pulls’ (no deadlift?) that I’m sure yields great results for you.
I guess this just further reinforces the fact that the ‘rules’ of working out, like the rules of writing, can be broken to great effect if one has a solid understanding of them.
Other examples are Ronnie Coleman’s or Jay Cutler’s workout routines that are split according to body-parts (and violate the 50 set/rep rule!).
I realize the articles here are guideles and are not set-in-stone, but it just seems that more experienced lifters have programs that are structured so radically different and violate every principle of the programs posted here that one begins to wonder…
[quote]Professor X wrote:
(H)ammer (S)trength machine
This is the seated isolateral bench press. The one I use is flat like a regular bench press. It uses plates and leverage for resistance.[/quote]
Ok cool.
I was thinking around the same lines of what Robert Monti had stated.
So I guess its just like doing regular compound movements (the big lifts) but is more safe (in case you cannot finish the reps) and guides you through the ROM, am I rite?
I’ve got these in the gym btw, since I like to train alone (and don’t have access to a spotter), would these kind of machines be useful when trying to go heavy without getting injured?
[quote]chirag wrote:
Professor X wrote:
(H)ammer (S)trength machine
This is the seated isolateral bench press. The one I use is flat like a regular bench press. It uses plates and leverage for resistance.
Ok cool.
I was thinking around the same lines of what Robert Monti had stated.
So I guess its just like doing regular compound movements (the big lifts) but is more safe (in case you cannot finish the reps) and guides you through the ROM, am I rite?
I’ve got these in the gym btw, since I like to train alone (and don’t have access to a spotter), would these kind of machines be useful when trying to go heavy without getting injured?
[/quote]
I think they are great, but I think people who haven’t been at this for years can get a much greater benefit from using exercises that bring more assisting muscle groups into play. I think I made some of the best gains in overall upper body strength when I was using dumbbells for chest training as my main movement (using other exercises in addition).
Just getting strong enough to get two 120+lbs dumbbells into position helps you all over. Because of that, I wouldn’t recommend that you or someone at your stage of training try to build an entire routine around HS machines.
I use them now because the weight I use makes the benchpress more dangerous without a spotter. I don’t have a spotter. Therefore, trying to do in excess of 4 plates a side would decrease my progress because I could never go all out on my own. Because of that, I truly believe that I have gained more mass and strength in my chest because of the HS machines than I would have without them.
When you started training seriously what was your weight and the stats? How long did it take you to build a base?
Thanks,
-Yustas[/quote]
5’11"
150lbs
I started training seriously my sophomore year in college and had built a decent base by my third year training (depending on what each person considers “decent”). That pic of me at 210lbs was after 3 years (I was heavier than that but dropped some weight before that pic was taken).
I started training seriously my sophomore year in college and had built a decent base by my third year training (depending on what each person considers “decent”). That pic of me at 210lbs was after 3 years (I was heavier than that but dropped some weight before that pic was taken).[/quote]
Just curious, what type of program and how often a week did you train in order to balloon from 150 - 210?
Did you perform supersets using antagonistic movements (ie, bench press / bent-over row)?
[quote]loctite_zexel wrote:
Professor X wrote:
5’11"
150lbs
I started training seriously my sophomore year in college and had built a decent base by my third year training (depending on what each person considers “decent”). That pic of me at 210lbs was after 3 years (I was heavier than that but dropped some weight before that pic was taken).
Just curious, what type of program and how often a week did you train in order to balloon from 150 - 210?
Did you perform supersets using antagonistic movements (ie, bench press / bent-over row)?[/quote]
I have never done supersets and may never do them unless it is part of some conditioning training. I trained 5 days a week, because the gym was originally closed on weekends. It was mostly back/biceps, chest/triceps, shoulders, and legs, however, I ended up training biceps up to 3 times a week when I first started and ignoring legs, mostly so I could walk out the gym with a pump in them because I had to walk past the girls’ dorms to get back to my room. I wouldn’t do anything like that now, but at the time, they grew. I still have the stretch marks from about that time because they gained size (and strength) pretty quickly. By my junior year, I had gotten up to curling 70lbs dumbbells for reps. You also have to realize that I wasn’t “weak” to begin with. I just never ate enough to actually grow well until I got to college.
I was skinny growing up because food wasn’t available to meet my caloric needs. Until I was able to buy food on my own with an understanding of how important it was, I made little progress from any weights I had lifted before. College meant internet access…which meant I learned very fast what was needed once I had access to an entire library on one computer screen. Classes in biology, anatomy and physiology helped as well.
I have never done supersets and may never do them unless it is part of some conditioning training. I trained 5 days a week, because the gym was originally closed on weekends. It was mostly back/biceps, chest/triceps, shoulders, and legs, however, I ended up training biceps up to 3 times a week when I first started and ignoring legs, mostly so I could walk out the gym with a pump in them because I had to walk past the girls’ dorms to get back to my room.[/quote]
It’s kinda confusing how a body-part type split worked so well for you, particularly since virtually every article I read now preaches how much more effective it is to think in terms of ‘movement’ rather than ‘muscle.’
Not to mention the taboo notion of clumping the entire lower body together as ‘one body part’ and working them out in one day while a little ol’ muscle like the bicep gets its own full blown day. (in your case three! hehe)
Oh yeah, I noticed that the current routine you do that you posted here is structured into ‘body parts’ as well, not to mention that it has a lot more ‘pushes’ than ‘pulls’ (no deadlift?) but it apparently works great for you.
to repeat what I said in my previous post:
“I realize the articles here are guideles and are not set-in-stone, but it just seems that more experienced lifters have programs that are structured so radically different and violate every principle of the guidelines posted here that one begins to wonder…”
[quote]loctite_zexel wrote:
It’s kinda confusing how a body-part type split worked so well for you, particularly since virtually every article I read now preaches how much more effective it is to think in terms of ‘movement’ rather than ‘muscle.’[/quote]
I seriously don’t understand why the concept is confusing. Your body is a machine built for a variety of tasks. It doesn’t shut down if you simply need to scratch your ass. It doesn’t do a squat to get the job done. It simply gets one hand to grab an ass cheek and start scratching. As complex as it is, it is equally simple in terms of getting specific tasks done.
While complex movements may be great in terms of a base of strength and even overall body growth, how many people do you know with muscular arms bigger than 18" who never did biceps curls? If I want a big chest, shouldn’t I do a pressing movement? If I want to work my shoulders, why avoid lateral raises and overhead presses? To do powercleans? I just don’t see where the confusion is.
If that was the case, your legs should presently be more lagging than say, your arms.
Judging by your pics, you don’t look like the typical guys who is all upper body and little (or no) lower body size.
How could training your legs only once a week as opposed to training your biceps more than once, provide you with such a balanced physique?
There is something of your split and routine that you posted that I simply do not get.
Did you start prioritising your legs afterwards (ie. when your knowledge on bodybuilding increased and you realised how important leg training is to obtain a balanced phyisique)??
It doesn’t shut down if you simply need to scratch your ass. It doesn’t do a squat to get the job done. It simply gets one hand to grab an ass cheek and start scratching. As complex as it is, it is equally simple in terms of getting specific tasks done.
Thank you, Professor X! I truly needed a good chuckle today – wife just got out of surgery and the kids are driving me nuts!
[quote]chirag wrote:
If that was the case, your legs should presently be more lagging than say, your arms.
Judging by your pics, you don’t look like the typical guys who is all upper body and little (or no) lower body size.
How could training your legs only once a week as opposed to training your biceps more than once, provide you with such a balanced physique?[/quote]
I still see myself as having a long way to go, but it isn’t like I don’t train my legs. I have for years now. I just didn’t originally and that was a mistake. My calves have always lagged though and there isn’t much I can do about that. They measure about 18" which is small to me, and they don’t have that “diamond” shape you see on some lifters. I wasn’t gifted in that area genetically.
[quote]
There is something of your split and routine that you posted that I simply do not get.
Did you start prioritising your legs afterwards (ie. when your knowledge on bodybuilding increased and you realised how important leg training is to obtain a balanced phyisique)??[/quote]
I didn’t “prioritize” them, I just added them back in. When I started training with other guys who were more experienced than me, it was a kick in the ass when I couldn’t squat what they could. That was enough motivation.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
loctite_zexel wrote:
It’s kinda confusing how a body-part type split worked so well for you, particularly since virtually every article I read now preaches how much more effective it is to think in terms of ‘movement’ rather than ‘muscle.’
I seriously don’t understand why the concept is confusing. Your body is a machine built for a variety of tasks. It doesn’t shut down if you simply need to scratch your ass. It doesn’t do a squat to get the job done. It simply gets one hand to grab an ass cheek and start scratching. As complex as it is, it is equally simple in terms of getting specific tasks done.
While complex movements may be great in terms of a base of strength and even overall body growth, how many people do you know with muscular arms bigger than 18" who never did biceps curls? If I want a big chest, shouldn’t I do a pressing movement? If I want to work my shoulders, why avoid lateral raises and overhead presses? To do powercleans? I just don’t see where the confusion is.[/quote]
Yes. There’s nothing wrong with bodypart splits. I had great gains on my bulk with ABBH and other T-Nation programs. But I also had great gains at the beginning of the bulk training 4-5 days per week and splitting bodyparts. One day was legs. Another back. Another chest. And another shoulders. (not necessarily in that order) Bicep and tricep isolation work was either a fifth day or biceps were paired with one day and triceps paired with another.
I used to split my chest into two different days (upper and lower chest) but now that my chest is pretty filled in on top, I now just train it all in one day.
[/quote]
Correct me if I’m wrong but aren’t the pecs just one muscle? (can’t find the ‘upper’ and ‘lower’ chest in my dusty old anatomy book)
But then again, I have been hearing (And reading) a lot of mixed comments regarding this. For instance:
Some say that incline presses emphasize the ‘upper chest’ while declines emphasize the ‘lower chest’
While others say inclines just involve more front delts while declines involve more triceps. And others say declines involve more front delts AND triceps.
I know I shouldn’t get all caught up in the detail considering I’m still pretty new to this, but it would be great to get this issue straightened out once and for all.
