All the debate over the new CW article has me a bit confused. I have been training with the assumption that hitting my strength goals will lead to hitting my aesthetic goals. I have been working toward deadlifting 2x bodyweight; is this conflicting with my desire for a smaller waist? Should I reevaluate? I would like to be able to pick up heavy things and have that .7 ratio.
well in all honesty yes consistant heavy DLing will add inches to your waist measurement. you wont hit big numbers without some lower back growth etc.
I like to think of this as functional strength versus appearance. The difference is that when I think of functional strength, I think of the required strength to make it through your day easier.
If you are sitting in a cube all day, your functional requirements is different then if you are a mover. I think the first place to start is to bring yourself up to your required functional strength.
If you are cop, and you know your average criminal has a body fat of 9% and a relatively high VO2 max, then I would hope that before you start worrying about having cut abs, that you bring yourself in line with what best helps you survive your job.
Besides work, we also have to look at family health history. Is there anything I can do to reduce my health risks? Let’s work on those first.
What would help me right now through my day is being able to endure stress throughout the day and remain attentive to detail, so I am working pretty hard on the endurance side of things.
Where do you really need to be?
I’ve thought about this before, and came to the conclusion that maybe the focus shouldn’t be keeping the waist small, but beefing up upper body width to the point that the effect is still conserved. I dunno ,that’s my take on it.
I personally wouldn’t worry about a little bit thicker waist. IMO you can still keep a pretty good ratio between upper body width and waist measurement but hey that’s just me.
You just need to prioritize what you want and go from there.
There are lots of ways to overload the legs without stimulating much growth in the waist. If maximum strength in the deadlift and squat is more important then expect and train for a stronger larger waist.
You can always change your goals and training if you later decide whatever you gave up wasn’t worth it.
[quote]pch2 wrote:
All the debate over the new CW article has me a bit confused. I have been training with the assumption that hitting my strength goals will lead to hitting my aesthetic goals. I
have been working toward deadlifting 2x bodyweight; is this conflicting with my desire for a smaller waist? Should I reevaluate? I would like to be able to pick up heavy things and have that .7 ratio. [/quote]
There’s an implication that lifting X amount will make you look and be better than everyone else.
Accomplishing goals like squatting or deadlifting a certain amount doesn’t neccessarily transfer to the appearance you want. I’ve seen severely hypertrophied waists, but you need to take into account what your body is doing as it adapts to the exercises. I squatted and did heavy ab work and my waist looked the same to me. Paul Chek on the other hand has a huge torso.
As for the poster who said functional strength…your average person who bodybuilds is not going to become overly big, lack of steroids and genetics is a large part of this. To maintain good bodyfat levels (a bodybuilding goal) most people have to do cardio, so your VO2 max should be decent. And if you have phases like high-reps, moderate-reps and low-reps you should develop strength and fitness across the spectrum.
I think the only disadvantages of bodybuilding are:
-
it’s not that great for building maximal strength or power. Though there are a lot of strong people who lift like bodybuilders, it’s just not a streamlined or focused program for maximal strength. Same for power
-
it’s not that great for building maximal strength-endurance. That’s been my experience from surfing and training jiu-jitsu, doing more high-rep full-body stuff with short rests gives me a bigger gas tank and keeps me moving faster.
Sorry for the long post 
[quote]pch2 wrote:
All the debate over the new CW article has me a bit confused. I have been training with the assumption that hitting my strength goals will lead to hitting my aesthetic goals. I
have been working toward deadlifting 2x bodyweight; is this conflicting with my desire for a smaller waist? Should I reevaluate? I would like to be able to pick up heavy things and have that .7 ratio. [/quote]
Unless you are getting into powerlifting, deadlifting as an exercise in and of itself is highly overrated. It is not necessary for great strength or great physical development. It is simply the “thing to say” for most people who think it is the cornerstone of all things strength related. It isn’t.
If I were you, I would be more concerned with increasing the weight you squat, bench and overhead press with. That is what will translate more directly to strength and muscular development equally.
I don’t deadlift. I’m bigger than many lifters who do and stronger on those other lifts as well.
[quote]tweaker wrote:
I think the first place to start is to bring yourself up to your required functional strength.
Where do you really need to be? [/quote]
I am a molecular biologist. I can see, that is really the only physical requirement.
I think this is what I’m going to do; see where my current goals will lead me. Losing muscle cannot be nearly as difficult as losing fat.
I have goals regarding all of these lifts, but I like deadlifting. It is a fun lift (which I guess answers all of my questions).
To anyone that has bothered to read to the end of this long post. What is a good resource for: this movement will work these muscles in this way resulting in them looking like this.
[quote]pch2 wrote:
Losing muscle cannot be nearly as difficult as losing fat.[/quote]
I am not sure what you mean by this exactly, but to clarify, muscle is extremely EASY to lose. It takes knowledge and a lot of hard work to maintain and build muscle while losing body fat. Anyone can lose fat if they don’t care about losing lean muscle with it. All they have to do is not eat.
[quote]
To anyone that has bothered to read to the end of this long post. What is a good resource for: this movement will work these muscles in this way resulting in them looking like this.[/quote]
You seem confused by the massive proliferation of terms like “functional” or the false belief that large bodybuilders aren’t also strong because they are big. Biceps exercises result in biceps growth resulting in larger biceps. Yes, it is that simple. That means the answer to your statement is, “movements that work specific muscle groups will be very likely to increase the size and strength of those muscle groups.”
You are making this way more complicated than it has to be.
[quote]pch2 wrote:
To anyone that has bothered to read to the end of this long post. What is a good resource for: this movement will work these muscles in this way resulting in them looking like this.[/quote]
I’m not sure it really gets put together like that. I mean, the lifts and the muscles, yes, but the “resulting look” is a lot more subjective and varied.
On a different note, somewhere, in the back of my mind, is the notion that if I ever do get to big enough numbers, I would like to get into powerlifting. I’ll be in the geezer category by the time it happens, but hey, that means most of the competition will be dropping off as well.
As far as aesthetics, I think most guys who at least worry about proportionate development to some degree will look good when they get lean. I mean, if you can build a massive torso, you should be able to put on some lats and delts while you are at it.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
pch2 wrote:
Losing muscle cannot be nearly as difficult as losing fat.
I am not sure what you mean by this exactly, but to clarify, muscle is extremely EASY to lose. It takes knowledge and a lot of hard work to maintain and build muscle while losing body fat. Anyone can lose fat if they don’t care about losing lean muscle with it. All they have to do is not eat. [/quote]
That was actually meant to be a sardonic, sorry.
[quote] You seem confused by the massive proliferation of terms like “functional” or the false belief that large bodybuilders aren’t also strong because they are big. Biceps exercises result in biceps growth resulting in larger biceps. Yes, it is that simple. That means the answer to your statement is, “movements that work specific muscle groups will be very likely to increase the size and strength of those muscle groups.”
You are making this way more complicated than it has to be.
[/quote]
I seemed to have phrased this wrong as well. I was looking for something along the lines of: curling targets your biceps, your biceps are in the upper part of your arm. So what are the movements, what do they target and where are those muscles, but for more complex movements. I realize front squats work quads, but what else?
I cannot seem to find a convenient resource for compound movements. It has been a while since human anatomy; I no longer have these things memorized.
[quote]vroom wrote:
I’m not sure it really gets put together like that. I mean, the lifts and the muscles, yes, but the “resulting look” is a lot more subjective and varied.[/quote]
So what do people mean when they say a movement adds width to a muscle rather than height?
Are you currently working toward those bigger numbers or are you going for the look?
[quote]pch2 wrote:
It has been a while since human anatomy; I no longer have these things memorized.
[/quote]
Then you need to relearn that basic anatomy instead of looking for someone to walk you through this. You should be able to look at a machine or a movement and tell what muscles it works before you ever even do it.
You may need to learn how to do it correctly, but if you are truly walking past lat pulldown machines and are clueless as to whether it works your lats and biceps, there is a lot of learning you have to do and THE BASICS OF ANATOMY is exactly where you start. Buy an anatomy and physiology book. That will do you more good than some simple half put together list made by someone else.
The rest of your education comes from GETTING INSIDE OF A GYM AND ACTUALLY BUILDING SOME MUSCLE.
[quote]pch2 wrote:
So what do people mean when they say a movement adds width to a muscle rather than height?
[/quote]
That is ebonics for “this mutherfucker doesn’t know what the hell he is talking about”. Muscles get bigger. They can get smaller. Any other plastic deformations and amazing inflations people make up are simply different ways of saying “bigger” or “smaller”.
You sound like you just set foot in a gym today and were never even exposed to a high school football team. Your lessons begin in a biology book. Fuck everything else.
Something I found illustrative was this book:
Strength Training Anatomy
Your illustrated guide to muscles at work.
Frederic Delavier
It’s not a discussion on training in any way, but it has drawings (the body without skin so to speak) that highlight muscles used in many common lifts.
Use the link on my profile page and I’ll earn a buck if you buy it off Amazon… 
[quote]Professor X wrote:
pch2 wrote:
It has been a while since human anatomy; I no longer have these things memorized.
Then you need to relearn that basic anatomy instead of looking for someeone to walk you through this. You should be able to look at a machine or a movement and tell what muscles it works before you ever even do it.
You may need to learn how to do it correctly, but if you are truly walking past lat pulldown machines and are cluelss as to whether it works your lats and biceps, there is a lot of learning you have to do and THE BASICS OF ANATOMY is exactly where you start. Buy an anatomy and physiology book. That will do you more good than some simple half put together list made by someone else.
The rest of your education comes from GETTING INSIDE OF A GYM AND ACTUALLY BUILDING SOME MUSCLE.[/quote]
I can look at movements and tell you the major muscle groups worked, but I am not at the level where I can list the secondary muscles worked. I am in the gym building muscle but I’d like to be able to pick movements to build muscle where I want. Picking a program and just doing it has worked, but I’m finding that I need to the tailor the programs to my needs.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
You sound like you just set foot in a gym today and were never even exposed to a high school football team. Your lessons begin in a biology book. Fuck everything else.[/quote]
I saw the football team in the halls in high school. That’s my exposure.
[quote]t-ha wrote:
http://www.exrx.net/Lists/WtMale.html[/quote]
Magical
[quote]vroom wrote:
Something I found illustrative was this book:
Strength Training Anatomy
Your illustrated guide to muscles at work.
Frederic Delavier
It’s not a discussion on training in any way, but it has drawings (the body without skin so to speak) that highlight muscles used in many common lifts.
Use the link on my profile page and I’ll earn a buck if you buy it off Amazon… ;)[/quote]
I picked up that book at the BodyWorlds exhibit. It’s a nice reference for anyone who wants to refresh their anatomy, and know exactly which muscles are used in atleast 100 different exercises.