LOL I appreciate that but no way my man. I’m running a LOT of people through this carb cycling approach and getting some awesome results and feedback from them about it.
It’s tough (and not revolutionary) but it creates some easy guidelines and is flexible in terms of food selection (and allows for breaks even during the week where you can fit “off diet” foods).
I still have some tinkering to do with it though. But just about finished. I’ll even have some diets laid out in it for those who just want to be told what to eat and what to do and take the guesswork out of it all.
The hypertrophy manual is going to be very science based. So I’m covering a lot of research for it but also in conjunction with what we are seeing real world evidence wise.
It’s why a lot of the recommendations of doing tons of volume is just flat out wrong. And has a lot of guys spending a lot of time in the gym with very little return on their investment.
Once you start breaking down some particular areas, and really understand what truly matters, it becomes apparent that volume (the way we see it and refer to it now) needs to be approached in an entirely different way. But you can’t even get to that point without understanding the need to pick the right movements.
Without all of that working together synergistically, you do a LOT of shit that isn’t just “not productive” but completely counter productive.
Also why so many guys in my groups this year are busting past plateaus and spending half the amount of time in the gym.
I’ll say it again for those who aren’t paying attention - volume is not the answer.
“Simply eat more” is an oversimplification. Lots of people overcomplicate training and nutrition, but they do get oversimplified too. “Just eat more and lift heavier” can make you fat and injured. If you want a real lean bulk, you’ll have to be fairly cognizant of what you’re putting in your body.
Of course, if by sign up you mean work with Paul, he’ll undoubtedly have that covered.
That was covered earlier in the thread and Paul doesn’t advocate for over a certain amount of protein, so again, oversimplification. Maybe he needs more carbs. We don’t know.
I clearly related to a loaded state in addition to “I wonder”!
To elaborate: The sheer forces within the knee joint are relative to the stability when “protruding forward”. Therefore it’s a question of “balanced forces”!
Every Volleyballer knows what I am relating to!
Once you load that descending movement you have to take special care to centre the weight!
“At least in it’s “last 2” positions/ pictures them knees travel forward beyond them toes!
I don’t believe this to be a really great idea concerning knee-health, at least in a loaded stage!”
That’s what he wrote. Which is wrong. Literally just wrong. There’s nothing wrong with the knees coming past the toes in a loaded stage. Good lord.
I’m not an expert enough to know whether the facts are wrong, that’s your wheelhouse, however I can tell when someone flatly contradicts their own posts, as above, they can’t be trusted.
Gee, guys!
First of all the related context is the wedge, not the standard squat!
Second I refer to “wedged” position as loaded within those last 2 pictures!
Two facts, wedged and loaded, which contribute to a higher, at least, necessity of centering that force downwards into the proper balanced stability as pointed out in the video I linked.
To me, from a bio mechanical point of view, this relates to the same caution I would urge someone to take as I would with Sissy Squats!
Why does a different way of putting things always end in a kind of personal undertone with you guys, instead of a constructive contribution to the topic?
