Starting Strength a Myth?

Training Bodybuilding
41

[quote]Null wrote:

[quote]plateau wrote:

[quote]Null wrote:
SQUATS AND MILK![/quote]

Milk? Really the guy is “chubby” and wants to lose weight.[/quote]

Some people have no sense of history.[/quote]

If those photos in your profile are recent then I wouldnt bash his comment. Just saying.

The majority of people do not digest milk or absorb it well to begin with.

If hes trying to make an optimal diet then there are many foods that will be more useful to him macronutrient wise then milk.

The quality of milk has diminished an absurd amount since the 1970s or whenever you were referring to when you said history. Milk contains more estrogen along with other things we as bodybuilders or athletes do not want now then it did back then.

42

OP, at 240 lbs you should be eating AT LEAST 300g of protein/day.

I weigh almost 50 lbs less than you and I’m almost at 300g, so you need a LOT more.

43

[quote]mr popular wrote:

[quote]skiracer wrote:

I remember seeing Mr. Popular bitching about Starting Strength on another post and I’m wondering if maybe he’s on to something.
[/quote]

If you want to get big, why in the world aren’t you just doing a bodybuilding program?

And no, you absolutely do not have to be at some arbitrary level of “strength” before you are “allowed” to start putting on size. That is unbelievably stupid and I wish people would stop propagating that BS.

As a matter of fact, I’m positive you would make better strength gains overall on a typical bodybuilding split right now than on starting strength. Would your squat go up 100lbs in 4 months? Probably not. But it will still go up along with everything else, because you will be training everything instead of putting all your energy into one exercise at the expense of all other muscles.[/quote]
I am pretty new to the bodybuilding game, and am by no means “big.” Feel free to discount my opinion on this basis, but I completely agree with mr popular. I spent my first year of lifting focused on gaining maximal strength. I made decent progress, but I have progressed much more quickly after switching to a bodypart split and higher rep ranges (8-12), and I am still getting stronger. My only regret is not switching over sooner.

44

[quote]Blackaggar wrote:

[quote]Null wrote:

[quote]plateau wrote:

[quote]Null wrote:
SQUATS AND MILK![/quote]

Milk? Really the guy is “chubby” and wants to lose weight.[/quote]

Some people have no sense of history.[/quote]

If those photos in your profile are recent then I wouldnt bash his comment. Just saying.

The majority of people do not digest milk or absorb it well to begin with.

If hes trying to make an optimal diet then there are many foods that will be more useful to him macronutrient wise then milk.

The quality of milk has diminished an absurd amount since the 1970s or whenever you were referring to when you said history. Milk contains more estrogen along with other things we as bodybuilders or athletes do not want now then it did back then. [/quote]

By “history” he is talking about the phrase “SQUATS AND MILK” being the old answer to everything on this site. Kinda like “did you try hitting her/him/it” and “put it in her/his/it’s butt”

45

[quote]Null wrote:

[quote]plateau wrote:

[quote]Null wrote:
SQUATS AND MILK![/quote]

Milk? Really the guy is “chubby” and wants to lose weight.[/quote]

Some people have no sense of history.[/quote]

Or possibly irony, if the latter you need to use the secret irony or sarcasrm font.

46

[quote]skiracer wrote:
I get the hormonal release concept in theory, but squatting is no needle-of-T-in-the-ass substitute. Mr. Popular’s point seems pretty obvious to me in hindsight, but I can’t find one article on this site that doesn’t flatly contradict what he’s saying.
[/quote]

The whole hormonal arguement is silly at best, yes if you compare squats to leg extensions then there maybe a benefit over time.

Make things simple

  1. Establish a few goals that are not mutually exclusive
  2. Pick best tools to acheieve these

But ultimately you will need to make these mistakes (I’ll admit there is plenty of stuff I wouldn’t have done looking back), it’s part of the journey - just don’t make the same mistakes again.

Now how about you do two things for me

  1. Plan out a new workout
  2. Plan out a rough meal plan
47

[quote]gregron wrote:

[quote]Blackaggar wrote:

[quote]Null wrote:

[quote]plateau wrote:

[quote]Null wrote:
SQUATS AND MILK![/quote]

Milk? Really the guy is “chubby” and wants to lose weight.[/quote]

Some people have no sense of history.[/quote]

If those photos in your profile are recent then I wouldnt bash his comment. Just saying.

The majority of people do not digest milk or absorb it well to begin with.

If hes trying to make an optimal diet then there are many foods that will be more useful to him macronutrient wise then milk.

The quality of milk has diminished an absurd amount since the 1970s or whenever you were referring to when you said history. Milk contains more estrogen along with other things we as bodybuilders or athletes do not want now then it did back then. [/quote]

By “history” he is talking about the phrase “SQUATS AND MILK” being the old answer to everything on this site. Kinda like “did you try hitting her/him/it” and “put it in her/his/it’s butt”
[/quote]

lol that makes his comment contain even more fail then i thought then :smiley:

48

[quote]skiracer wrote:

[quote]mr popular wrote:

[quote]skiracer wrote:

I remember seeing Mr. Popular bitching about Starting Strength on another post and I’m wondering if maybe he’s on to something.
[/quote]

If you want to get big, why in the world aren’t you just doing a bodybuilding program?

And no, you absolutely do not have to be at some arbitrary level of “strength” before you are “allowed” to start putting on size. That is unbelievably stupid and I wish people would stop propagating that BS.

As a matter of fact, I’m positive you would make better strength gains overall on a typical bodybuilding split right now than on starting strength. Would your squat go up 100lbs in 4 months? Probably not. But it will still go up along with everything else, because you will be training everything instead of putting all your energy into one exercise at the expense of all other muscles.[/quote]

I’m starting to get that. Squats really do make you feel light on your feet, strong in general and are a great LEG exercise, but there’s this idea I’ve seen on TNation and other sites that squats are the magic bullet to getting your upper body big too. It’s not happening.

Deadlifting seems to have a greater upper body effect, but my deadlift has been somewhat neglected all summer on SS because of the focus on squatting for a PR 3 times per week and only going for one deadlift set x5 3 times every 2 weeks. Why is this myth of squats-will-make-you-huge so accepted? Are a lot of other people finding that getting their squat up makes their arms/back/chest bigger?

I get the hormonal release concept in theory, but squatting is no needle-of-T-in-the-ass substitute. Mr. Popular’s point seems pretty obvious to me in hindsight, but I can’t find one article on this site that doesn’t flatly contradict what he’s saying.

I don’t think I’m alone here - I think 90% of the guys on this site never want to compete in bb, powerlifting or O-lifting. They want to get as big as possible, look good naked, and develop some real strength along with it.
[/quote]

Squats are great. For my first several years of lifting weights the one thing I made sure to do was squat at least once a week without fail. Usually I was squatting every 4 or 5 days, and I attribute squats to 99% of my thigh size. Got a double bodyweight squat in competition a year ago, my leg workouts are usually squats and one or two other exercises, and I have squatted till I puked on multiple occasions. I love squats.

But squats are not the be-all-end-all of training, especially not for bodybuilding. If I had given the same amount of attention to my bench press, bent row, barbell curl, and seated military as I did to my squat in those first few years (and actually bothered to eat correctly) I would be much further along than I am now in my opinion.

Don’t stop squatting, but squatting three times a week just to get rapid gains in that exercise is no different than the douche bags that do bench and curls three times a week for the same reason. The popularity of starting strength is the response of people who don’t want to be identified with your typical “curl monkey” and so they let the pendulum swing in the opposite direction, which is just as bad.

There are guys who follow starting strength and rippetoe’s programs religiously that have a 495 squat but 15 inch arms (not an exaggeration). Do you want to be that guy?

If I were going to recommend a routine to a beginner or intermediate lifter that wants to get bigger, it would be to do squats, bench, incline, barbell rows, pullups, seated press, deadlifts, barbell curls, and barbell extensions in whatever combination you want, as long as you do them all twice a week for 3-5 sets of 8-12 reps, and then one or two more freeweight exercises per muscle group for 3-4 sets. To keep progress going, eat 1.5lbs of meat every day, gain weight every month, and add at least 10lbs to the basics every month.

49

[quote]mr popular wrote:

[quote]skiracer wrote:

[quote]mr popular wrote:

[quote]skiracer wrote:

I remember seeing Mr. Popular bitching about Starting Strength on another post and I’m wondering if maybe he’s on to something.
[/quote]

If you want to get big, why in the world aren’t you just doing a bodybuilding program?

And no, you absolutely do not have to be at some arbitrary level of “strength” before you are “allowed” to start putting on size. That is unbelievably stupid and I wish people would stop propagating that BS.

As a matter of fact, I’m positive you would make better strength gains overall on a typical bodybuilding split right now than on starting strength. Would your squat go up 100lbs in 4 months? Probably not. But it will still go up along with everything else, because you will be training everything instead of putting all your energy into one exercise at the expense of all other muscles.[/quote]

I’m starting to get that. Squats really do make you feel light on your feet, strong in general and are a great LEG exercise, but there’s this idea I’ve seen on TNation and other sites that squats are the magic bullet to getting your upper body big too. It’s not happening.

Deadlifting seems to have a greater upper body effect, but my deadlift has been somewhat neglected all summer on SS because of the focus on squatting for a PR 3 times per week and only going for one deadlift set x5 3 times every 2 weeks. Why is this myth of squats-will-make-you-huge so accepted? Are a lot of other people finding that getting their squat up makes their arms/back/chest bigger?

I get the hormonal release concept in theory, but squatting is no needle-of-T-in-the-ass substitute. Mr. Popular’s point seems pretty obvious to me in hindsight, but I can’t find one article on this site that doesn’t flatly contradict what he’s saying.

I don’t think I’m alone here - I think 90% of the guys on this site never want to compete in bb, powerlifting or O-lifting. They want to get as big as possible, look good naked, and develop some real strength along with it.
[/quote]

Squats are great. For my first several years of lifting weights the one thing I made sure to do was squat at least once a week without fail. Usually I was squatting every 4 or 5 days, and I attribute squats to 99% of my thigh size. Got a double bodyweight squat in competition a year ago, my leg workouts are usually squats and one or two other exercises, and I have squatted till I puked on multiple occasions. I love squats.

But squats are not the be-all-end-all of training, especially not for bodybuilding. If I had given the same amount of attention to my bench press, bent row, barbell curl, and seated military as I did to my squat in those first few years (and actually bothered to eat correctly) I would be much further along than I am now in my opinion.

Don’t stop squatting, but squatting three times a week just to get rapid gains in that exercise is no different than the douche bags that do bench and curls three times a week for the same reason. The popularity of starting strength is the response of people who don’t want to be identified with your typical “curl monkey” and so they let the pendulum swing in the opposite direction, which is just as bad.

There are guys who follow starting strength and rippetoe’s programs religiously that have a 495 squat but 15 inch arms (not an exaggeration). Do you want to be that guy?

If I were going to recommend a routine to a beginner or intermediate lifter that wants to get bigger, it would be to do squats, bench, incline, barbell rows, pullups, seated press, deadlifts, barbell curls, and barbell extensions in whatever combination you want, as long as you do them all twice a week for 3-5 sets of 8-12 reps, and then one or two more freeweight exercises per muscle group for 3-4 sets. To keep progress going, eat 1.5lbs of meat every day, gain weight every month, and add at least 10lbs to the basics every month.[/quote]

This post is absolute gold

50

[quote]Blackaggar wrote:

[quote]mr popular wrote:

[quote]skiracer wrote:

[quote]mr popular wrote:

[quote]skiracer wrote:

I remember seeing Mr. Popular bitching about Starting Strength on another post and I’m wondering if maybe he’s on to something.
[/quote]

If you want to get big, why in the world aren’t you just doing a bodybuilding program?

And no, you absolutely do not have to be at some arbitrary level of “strength” before you are “allowed” to start putting on size. That is unbelievably stupid and I wish people would stop propagating that BS.

As a matter of fact, I’m positive you would make better strength gains overall on a typical bodybuilding split right now than on starting strength. Would your squat go up 100lbs in 4 months? Probably not. But it will still go up along with everything else, because you will be training everything instead of putting all your energy into one exercise at the expense of all other muscles.[/quote]

I’m starting to get that. Squats really do make you feel light on your feet, strong in general and are a great LEG exercise, but there’s this idea I’ve seen on TNation and other sites that squats are the magic bullet to getting your upper body big too. It’s not happening.

Deadlifting seems to have a greater upper body effect, but my deadlift has been somewhat neglected all summer on SS because of the focus on squatting for a PR 3 times per week and only going for one deadlift set x5 3 times every 2 weeks. Why is this myth of squats-will-make-you-huge so accepted? Are a lot of other people finding that getting their squat up makes their arms/back/chest bigger?

I get the hormonal release concept in theory, but squatting is no needle-of-T-in-the-ass substitute. Mr. Popular’s point seems pretty obvious to me in hindsight, but I can’t find one article on this site that doesn’t flatly contradict what he’s saying.

I don’t think I’m alone here - I think 90% of the guys on this site never want to compete in bb, powerlifting or O-lifting. They want to get as big as possible, look good naked, and develop some real strength along with it.
[/quote]

Squats are great. For my first several years of lifting weights the one thing I made sure to do was squat at least once a week without fail. Usually I was squatting every 4 or 5 days, and I attribute squats to 99% of my thigh size.

Got a double bodyweight squat in competition a year ago, my leg workouts are usually squats and one or two other exercises, and I have squatted till I puked on multiple occasions. I love squats.

But squats are not the be-all-end-all of training, especially not for bodybuilding. If I had given the same amount of attention to my bench press, bent row, barbell curl, and seated military as I did to my squat in those first few years (and actually bothered to eat correctly) I would be much further along than I am now in my opinion.

Don’t stop squatting, but squatting three times a week just to get rapid gains in that exercise is no different than the douche bags that do bench and curls three times a week for the same reason.

The popularity of starting strength is the response of people who don’t want to be identified with your typical “curl monkey” and so they let the pendulum swing in the opposite direction, which is just as bad.

There are guys who follow starting strength and rippetoe’s programs religiously that have a 495 squat but 15 inch arms (not an exaggeration). Do you want to be that guy?

If I were going to recommend a routine to a beginner or intermediate lifter that wants to get bigger, it would be to do squats, bench, incline, barbell rows, pullups, seated press, deadlifts, barbell curls, and barbell extensions in whatever combination you want, as long as you do them all twice a week for 3-5 sets of 8-12 reps, and then one or two more freeweight exercises per muscle group for 3-4 sets. To keep progress going, eat 1.5lbs of meat every day, gain weight every month, and add at least 10lbs to the basics every month.[/quote]

This post is absolute gold[/quote]

You should edit this and submit it as an article. Everything you’re saying is true, not misleading, and not redirecting the average guy into a workout that won’t achieve the goals 95% of the guys in the gym have, which are all identical - feel full of energy, look good naked, and actually get strong.

495 squat with 15" arms? That’s kinda like a genius in a wheelchair. Admirable, but not what anyone I know is shooting for. Thanks for cutting through the crap.

51

[quote]Blackaggar wrote:

[quote]Null wrote:

[quote]plateau wrote:

[quote]Null wrote:
SQUATS AND MILK![/quote]

Milk? Really the guy is “chubby” and wants to lose weight.[/quote]

Some people have no sense of history.[/quote]

If those photos in your profile are recent then I wouldnt bash his comment. Just saying.

The majority of people do not digest milk or absorb it well to begin with.

If hes trying to make an optimal diet then there are many foods that will be more useful to him macronutrient wise then milk.

The quality of milk has diminished an absurd amount since the 1970s or whenever you were referring to when you said history. Milk contains more estrogen along with other things we as bodybuilders or athletes do not want now then it did back then. [/quote]

“SQUATS AND MILK” is a mantra… Worked for me, Dead went up 100 on 5x5… but I gained 30+, probably 1/2 or more not good weight. It is also out for him due to MASSIVE insulin surge. But it would get him pulling over 500, then again, just might be body weight…

Picts when I first joined T-Nation or thereabouts.
Avatar is “Dim”, and well we look alike and other commonalities…

Last nights log entry:

DL
3x3x315 no straps
3x3x405
3x500
3x2x500 (miss on the 3x3, so settled for doubles… strangely I lost grip in left hand even with straps…)
3x3x405
3x3x315

HSPL V-Squat (love this machine!)
3x5x270
3x5x360
3x5x450
3x5x540

Time for STEAK AND BEER!

I wasted a lot of time first 3 years, like 2 years of it… The guy needs patience. 4 months? It took 35 years to break it. But figures it can be fixed in 4 months? He made spectacularly awesome progress! Our bodies are like cars, trashing 'em is easy. Fixing not so…

I have been (or am) where he is… just judging from his picture. He’s at risk of metabolic disorder… 35 hormones are well, not what they were. Squats, deads and pullups are magic. Largest hormonal response… In the over 35 crowd, that counts for a lot. New muscle cells don’t inherit the insulin resistance. It is possible to reverse it.

If starting strength isn’t for him, ok…
There’s always 5/3/1 and it’s many variants, 3x10, 5x5 (I like, it likes me back), 10x10 ( I hate, no abhor… But damn it works and my connective tissue is ever so much less painful).

And any number of splits…

But what he needs is to clean up the diet (consider low carb) and hit the gym on a program (almost any will work starting out) and presume 2 years of beginner status…

52

Sorry but you would not get an insulin surge with milk

the carbohydrates and sugars contained in milk take hours to digest so they will not spike insulin

also the protein and fat contained will slow down any carb source it is consumed with including milk which is already slow

milk takes hours to digest just 1 cup it wont spike your insuling, just like white bread wont spike your insulin if it is combined with a protein or a protein or fat source.

53

Bodybuilding would be a lot more straight forward if there weren’t people out there trying to blur the line all the time and turn things around just for the sake of being different.

I blame articles for this (all over the net). If the author has a clue to start with (not just a keyboard warrior regurgitating crap) they seem more interested in selling something, sounding smart, or being original (as if they’ve got to invent something). I understand that as a passion, trainers love to come up with new ideas etc, but it’s not always the best thing for newbies.

You wouldn’t have so many clueless ones around if they just asked all the big guys what to do and got a general consensus (and started listening to their own body instead of changing things all the time because they read it somewhere).

54

[quote]its_just_me wrote:
Bodybuilding would be a lot more straight forward if there weren’t people out there trying to blur the line all the time and turn things around just for the sake of being different.

I blame articles for this (all over the net). If the author has a clue to start with (not just a keyboard warrior regurgitating crap) they seem more interested in selling something, sounding smart, or being original (as if they’ve got to invent something). I understand that as a passion, trainers love to come up with new ideas etc, but it’s not always the best thing for newbies.

You wouldn’t have so many clueless ones around if they just asked all the big guys what to do and got a general consensus (and started listening to their own body instead of changing things all the time because they read it somewhere).[/quote]

Basically a lot of people would be better off if starting strength never existed

55

[quote]Blackaggar wrote:
Sorry but you would not get an insulin surge with milk

the carbohydrates and sugars contained in milk take hours to digest so they will not spike insulin

also the protein and fat contained will slow down any carb source it is consumed with including milk which is already slow

milk takes hours to digest just 1 cup it wont spike your insuling, just like white bread wont spike your insulin if it is combined with a protein or a protein or fat source.

[/quote]

Sorry, All 3 statements are factually incorrect.
Look up insulin response curves.

So much for asking guys who should know what they’re doing. Sometimes lab results contradict what everyone “knows”…

56

[quote]Null wrote:

[quote]Blackaggar wrote:
Sorry but you would not get an insulin surge with milk

the carbohydrates and sugars contained in milk take hours to digest so they will not spike insulin

also the protein and fat contained will slow down any carb source it is consumed with including milk which is already slow

milk takes hours to digest just 1 cup it wont spike your insuling, just like white bread wont spike your insulin if it is combined with a protein or a protein or fat source.

[/quote]

Sorry, All 3 statements are factually incorrect.
[/quote]

For sure bro!!!

Im leaving it at that

57

[quote]Null wrote:

[quote]Blackaggar wrote:
Sorry but you would not get an insulin surge with milk

the carbohydrates and sugars contained in milk take hours to digest so they will not spike insulin

also the protein and fat contained will slow down any carb source it is consumed with including milk which is already slow

milk takes hours to digest just 1 cup it wont spike your insuling, just like white bread wont spike your insulin if it is combined with a protein or a protein or fat source.

[/quote]

Sorry, All 3 statements are factually incorrect.
Look up insulin response curves.

So much for asking guys who should know what they’re doing. Sometimes lab results contradict what everyone “knows”…

[/quote]

Your missing the point.
If milk is combined with anything that is a protein or a fat it will not spike insulin.

By itself meaning the only thing within a very long time being ingested could raise insulin but not to the point of a mssive spike like you said.

You have to actually take studies with a grain of salt because they are not always in the conditions to give it a complete practical application.

If you were really smart you would realise that in the end insulin spikes do not matter as much as people think they do such as yourself.

LOL @ insulin response curve

try laws of thermodynamics then get back to me

58

Yeap, you were trying to cut onions with a plastic spoon my friend.

I get what you’re saying, that people are quick to spew the “Squats/Deadlifts/Bench is all you need” BS, but those people are really just trying to over simplify an already simple (should be) approach. Yes, in my opinion, those 3 should still be the foundation of many strength training routines, but should not be taken as an end all be all approach. For one, Prof X said that he did not do Deadlifts (I could be wrong) because he didn’t think they were helpful to his goals.

Point is, look at yourself, then your goals, then find out the best approach. Just because a respected author wrote an article laying out what “should be done”, doesn’t mean it’s gonna work for everybody. Take everything you read with a grain of salt and be open minded.

You’re a grown man. You should be able to spot bullshit when you see it. Or at least be able to tell if something is worth trying, which is one over looked key to all of this.

4 months is nothing for a guy in his mid 30s and 26% body fat. You need to be patient with it, and realize its gonna take a while. Use your body as a lab, and experiment with different foods/training programs.

59

[quote]Blackaggar wrote:

[quote]its_just_me wrote:
Bodybuilding would be a lot more straight forward if there weren’t people out there trying to blur the line all the time and turn things around just for the sake of being different.

I blame articles for this (all over the net). If the author has a clue to start with (not just a keyboard warrior regurgitating crap) they seem more interested in selling something, sounding smart, or being original (as if they’ve got to invent something). I understand that as a passion, trainers love to come up with new ideas etc, but it’s not always the best thing for newbies.

You wouldn’t have so many clueless ones around if they just asked all the big guys what to do and got a general consensus (and started listening to their own body instead of changing things all the time because they read it somewhere).[/quote]

Basically a lot of people would be better off if starting strength never existed[/quote]

Starting Strength and the likes instil the mantra in people’s minds that all bodybuilders are weak, and that somehow strength needs to be completely separated from size (pretty much what Mr Popular said).

It also gives bodybuilding routines a stigma that somehow doing more than 5 exercises a week is bad.

It’s authors like Rippetoe who make fun of bodybuilders and make people (READ: weak newbies) feel smug that they are on a “strength” program (thus superior to those “muscle pumping vain bodybuilders” out there). Not only is that idea far from the truth and detrimental to a persons goals, it’s downright insulting and even more frustrating that people actually believe this crap.

60

[quote]skiracer wrote:

[quote]Blackaggar wrote:

[quote]mr popular wrote:

[quote]skiracer wrote:

[quote]mr popular wrote:

[quote]skiracer wrote:

I remember seeing Mr. Popular bitching about Starting Strength on another post and I’m wondering if maybe he’s on to something.
[/quote]

If you want to get big, why in the world aren’t you just doing a bodybuilding program?

And no, you absolutely do not have to be at some arbitrary level of “strength” before you are “allowed” to start putting on size. That is unbelievably stupid and I wish people would stop propagating that BS.

As a matter of fact, I’m positive you would make better strength gains overall on a typical bodybuilding split right now than on starting strength. Would your squat go up 100lbs in 4 months? Probably not. But it will still go up along with everything else, because you will be training everything instead of putting all your energy into one exercise at the expense of all other muscles.[/quote]

I’m starting to get that. Squats really do make you feel light on your feet, strong in general and are a great LEG exercise, but there’s this idea I’ve seen on TNation and other sites that squats are the magic bullet to getting your upper body big too. It’s not happening.

Deadlifting seems to have a greater upper body effect, but my deadlift has been somewhat neglected all summer on SS because of the focus on squatting for a PR 3 times per week and only going for one deadlift set x5 3 times every 2 weeks. Why is this myth of squats-will-make-you-huge so accepted? Are a lot of other people finding that getting their squat up makes their arms/back/chest bigger?

I get the hormonal release concept in theory, but squatting is no needle-of-T-in-the-ass substitute. Mr. Popular’s point seems pretty obvious to me in hindsight, but I can’t find one article on this site that doesn’t flatly contradict what he’s saying.

I don’t think I’m alone here - I think 90% of the guys on this site never want to compete in bb, powerlifting or O-lifting. They want to get as big as possible, look good naked, and develop some real strength along with it.
[/quote]

Squats are great. For my first several years of lifting weights the one thing I made sure to do was squat at least once a week without fail. Usually I was squatting every 4 or 5 days, and I attribute squats to 99% of my thigh size.

Got a double bodyweight squat in competition a year ago, my leg workouts are usually squats and one or two other exercises, and I have squatted till I puked on multiple occasions. I love squats.

But squats are not the be-all-end-all of training, especially not for bodybuilding. If I had given the same amount of attention to my bench press, bent row, barbell curl, and seated military as I did to my squat in those first few years (and actually bothered to eat correctly) I would be much further along than I am now in my opinion.

Don’t stop squatting, but squatting three times a week just to get rapid gains in that exercise is no different than the douche bags that do bench and curls three times a week for the same reason.

The popularity of starting strength is the response of people who don’t want to be identified with your typical “curl monkey” and so they let the pendulum swing in the opposite direction, which is just as bad.

There are guys who follow starting strength and rippetoe’s programs religiously that have a 495 squat but 15 inch arms (not an exaggeration). Do you want to be that guy?

If I were going to recommend a routine to a beginner or intermediate lifter that wants to get bigger, it would be to do squats, bench, incline, barbell rows, pullups, seated press, deadlifts, barbell curls, and barbell extensions in whatever combination you want, as long as you do them all twice a week for 3-5 sets of 8-12 reps, and then one or two more freeweight exercises per muscle group for 3-4 sets. To keep progress going, eat 1.5lbs of meat every day, gain weight every month, and add at least 10lbs to the basics every month.[/quote]

This post is absolute gold[/quote]

You should edit this and submit it as an article. Everything you’re saying is true, not misleading, and not redirecting the average guy into a workout that won’t achieve the goals 95% of the guys in the gym have, which are all identical - feel full of energy, look good naked, and actually get strong.

495 squat with 15" arms? That’s kinda like a genius in a wheelchair. Admirable, but not what anyone I know is shooting for. Thanks for cutting through the crap.[/quote]

Ok - alternative opinion. IMHO it makes a lot of sense to direct absolute novices to starting strength. I would move on after a few months but its a great initiation.

“Starting strength” Book > program

The book is funny, well written with great advice. Great read for novice bb or strength athletes alike. I didn’t even notice “the program” that attrats so much attention first time I read it - its like a page or so out a couple of hundred.

Why do the program? Learn the compound lifts

This is a program where you start with an empty bar. Its as much about learning the technique of lifts from complete scratch as it is about building strength with them. For that alone, yes, squat three times a week so you actually learn to squat well. Its going to be a while before your form is good enough to move some challenging weight.

Arms? Your choice.

Years ago I did starting strength and moved on after a few months once I couldn’t recover from the 3x squatting. Without any awareness of the holy war and being more motivated by strength, I added curls and tri excersise from the start. Why wouldn’t you? Sure in SS terms its “accessory work” and not a money lift but its not a crime. There is a jokey comment in the book along some lines as “I could tell you not to curl but you will anyway so I might as well tell you do it properly” and then a discussion on curl variations and form.