I see. So the requirement to give nutritional advice, is getting yourself to single digit bodyfat? I imagine Greg has a metric butt ton of muscle under all of that fat as well.
Heightening metabolic stress
S
3 Likes
For strength yes possibly, but that’s not what this is all about.
Ummm I’ll bet he doesn’t. But we’ll never know because he’ll never diet down. But Greg doesn’t have a lot of muscle underneath his 28% bodyfat. No.
And yes, giving out nutritional advice on how to get lean, when someone has never been lean, is fairly worthless.
Do you think that if I get my single leg deadlift to 315 for reps, I won’t put on muscle?
Not really. I’ve already linked a study that looked at that in here.
When you leave a lot of reps in reserve you don’t increase metabolic stress at all. They have looked at that already.
What is it that you think increases metabolic stress? It’s not volume. It has nothing to do with volume.
Fuck me, your not really getting it.
1 Like
Because he’s a Nuckols fan boy. this isn’t hard to figure out my man.
1 Like
I’m sorry where did Greg do 315 single leg deadlifts FOR REPS???
Greg is actually a great real life point about reps and muscle growth. He’s done low rep training to build his strength. But he’s devoid of significant muscle mass.
This is an argument I have to make for guys all the time. If you want to grow, maximally, then you need to break rep PR’s. If you want to build maximal strength, then train for maximal strength in the low rep ranges to increase neural efficiency.
But you’re not going to grow much muscle, if any, doing the latter.
2 Likes
Stress, hence the term. I know you’re viewing this from an intensity standpoint and probably assuming any set not reaching complete failure is insufficient to accumulate towards a sufficient end goal. I’ll respectfully disagree though.
S
Except that we’ve got studies that show even insane amounts of volume steering clear of failure, don’t cause growth.
That’s a huge problem with this at this point.
There’s the science and the anecdotal backing me up and there’s still people going “I don’t agree”.
You’re not going to grow avoiding failure. How that is defined per movement is relevant.
But at some point you better be pushing the effort to new levels to cause that need for remodeling. That’s science and real world backing that up.
My apologies. It wasn’t for reps. I think my issue is how can someone achieve impressive strength numbers like that and not have an impressive amount of muscle? I guess “impressive” is relative.
Is this not an argument for Volume?
How would that be an argument for volume? We’re talking muscle growth.
Greg has no significant amount of muscle. He’s been successful as a strength athlete.
Now think about that.
What metric are you using to conclude that he doesn’t have significant amounts of muscle?
My eyeballs after three decades of doing this?
If someone has a significant amount of muscle, even at higher bodyfats, it’s very evident.
Greg looks like he’s never picked up a weight.
4 Likes
Got you. Thank you for clarifying that for me.
Tell you what man…google offseason bodybuilders.
A lot of those guys get pretty chubby in the offseason. But you can’t still tell they have a ton of muscle underneath that fat.
Greg just looks like an out of shape dude to me. And he’s what, 230ish?
Let’s put this into perspective. I was around 275 when I started to recomp for bodybuilding. I stepped onstage at 225 on the nose. I was definitely chunky at 275-285. But I was also really, really freaking big. By the time I hit 240 I had ab veins. But we’re still looking at something to the tune of 35-40 pounds I had to shave off. Then another 15 or so to get ultra lean.
Chris Duffin is another great example. When Chris gets into single digit bodyfat, which he’s done on a few occasions, he’s about 211-215. But at 270 you can still tell Chris is jacked. Even when he’s chubby af.
Does Greg look jacked at all at 230 or whatever? He doesn’t to me. Which tells me he’s not packing a lot of lean muscle tissue underneath that adipose.
My guess is if he were to get to single digits he’d be in the 170 something range.
Absolutely. Effort over time is a common denominator.
Because strength is built using a variety of factors, most importantly neural. It’s entirely possible to build large amounts of strength while staying the same size or even dieting down.
Thib gives a good breakdown here, The 4 Paths To Strength
2 Likes