This Answers Everything

[quote]SevenDragons wrote:
Beginners are weak. Across the board. [/quote]

Completely incorrect/ignorant assumption.

It is likely you are thinking in terms of ‘internet world’ imbalances… like a right arm that is 1/2 inch larger than the left.

[quote]
Because they work the entire body, they will bring all the muscles along as required. And then worrying about ‘imbalances’ when they might be actually in the way of progress to the advanced lifter? [/quote]

Imbalances are what cause joint pains, tight hips, and shitty squats.

[quote]Jarvan wrote:
No, it’s part of training. And more advanced. Frankly, if you are a weakling your bigger concern should be getting stronger. That can happen even if you are doing it wrong. Plenty of guys lift heavy weight and do it with gawdawful form.[/quote]

Who’s the weakling you speak of? Just get a run through of the beginner questions and threads on the forum. Its guys that have been doing everything you mentioned and they are mostly still sitting in the same boat they were months ago. Perhaps you mean them?

What the fuck. LOL.

I genuinely feel like there is a fat 17 yr old on the other side.

[quote]nighthawkz wrote:

[quote]dt79 wrote:
Actually, I see his point more in reference to muscular activation, and it is quite valid.[/quote]

So do I. I hope that’s obvious. So do most reasonable people on here. But tying this to the techniques mentioned in the Boyce article and saying “if you agree to THIS, you also have to agree to THAT” is sloppy debating IMO. I’ll be honest, I’m much more upset about the sloppiness than I am about his opinion at this point.[/quote]

No need to be upset, just read through the thread and see that I constantly reiterate how my person program is not Lee’s.

[quote]nighthawkz wrote:
I’m sorry, but this isn’t a proper argument. I think anyone here will agree that form is important, but what you’re doing here is throwing good form in the same box as TUT, squeezing the muscle etc. and saying it’s all or nothing. Yeah, proper form is important; but this is a grey area. [/quote]

This doesn’t make sense. It’s proper form that allows ‘TUT, squeezing of muscles etc’.
You can’t do eccentrics, tempo training, TUT, if your spine can’t remain stabilized.

[quote]Jarvan wrote:

[quote]nighthawkz wrote:
I’m sorry, but this isn’t a proper argument. I think anyone here will agree that form is important, but what you’re doing here is throwing good form in the same box as TUT, squeezing the muscle etc. and saying it’s all or nothing. Yeah, proper form is important; but this is a grey area. [/quote]

This doesn’t make sense. It’s proper form that allows ‘TUT, squeezing of muscles etc’.
You can’t do eccentrics, tempo training, TUT, if your spine can’t remain stabilized.
[/quote]

I agree. You can, however, keep your spine stabilised without tempo training etc. This is what I was getting at - the techniques outlined by Boyce are not necessary to maintain good form. The opposite, however, is true and it means that most newbs will have to sacrifice a LOT of weight on the bar to implement these techniques.

Here’s where I’m coming from. I spent the first few years of my lifting life in a university gym where, VERY occasionally, you’d see someone try to squat heavy with bad form. What was more common, however, was to see really scrawny dudes (no offense intended, I was the scrawniest dude ever before I trained) squatting 80lbs while focussing on slow, controlled movements and what they considered good form - year after year, without going anywhere. For most of these guys, it would have been prudent to forget about their fancy TUT, tempo reps etc. and just focus on slapping weight on while maintaining decent (not perfect) form.

[quote]Jarvan wrote:

[quote]dagill2 wrote:
I also don’t like the attitude that so often comes out in these threads that “my way is right and your way will give you dick cancer”. We all know there’s plenty of ways to skin a cat, and we might all learn something useful if we start listening and stop trying to kneecap everyone who trains differently from us.
[/quote]

Which is why this thread flew over your head.

This thread was never about a KING template/method/tempo/etc. It was never about one way to train. It’s just that certain people started to call me out on my 95lbs squat weight… and the original topic/discussion was lost.

Certain people wanted to immediately dismiss the fact that adding weight wasn’t the only way to hypertrophy… I was sad that some people didn’t even read Lee Boyce’s article before responding. The defenses were up, bridges drawn, and ego’s raging.
[/quote]

Why does that mean the thread flew over my head? I assume you see the irony inherent in assuming I’m a noob and that the thread flew over my head, while in the same post calling me dismissive and judgmental.

For the record I did read Lee Boyce’s article, before I noticed the thread existed, and I haven’t at any point criticised either the article or your 95lb squat.

So, to summarise the good parts of the thread:

Improving strength may or may not be important
There are more ways of overloading than just adding weight
Many things work… For some people

Honestly, I don’t think anything productive will happen in here past this point.

[quote]dagill2 wrote:
While we wait for Jarvan to post so we can all stroke our egos by shitting on him, anyone care to read the article and comment?[/quote]

With that said. I’m done as well.

TL;DR

[quote]Chris Colucci wrote:

[quote]nighthawkz wrote:

[quote]Ecchastang wrote:

[quote]nighthawkz wrote:
Just because it pissed me off so much - does Rippetoe seriously think adding 20lbs to a climber to make him squat heavier will improve his climbing? He should really have a conversation with Mark Twight about that.[/quote]
I can assure you that adding weight, even if mostly muscle weight, negatively affects climbing. I peaked in my climbing at a bodyweight of 142 in the spring of 2012. That is the lightest I have ever weighed as an adult. I weigh 162 now, and am much stronger all the way around, but my climbing is down a couple grades. [/quote]
Exactly. I’m not a climber myself (I climb a few times a year at best) but all my friends who are tell me that getting heavier, even if it’s pure muscle, makes it harder. Rippetoe is just trying to sell his “barbell training makes everyone better” dogma.[/quote]
I definitely agree he took a hard left turn with that example and I was thrown off. Bodyweight always needs to be a consideration when we’re dealing with relative strength athletes/weight class athletes.

So for sure there is such thing as “too much muscle” for some athletes, even if it’s built with little to no effect on conditioning or skills. Just like there is such thing as “too strong” for some athletes. A 180-pound grappler who push presses, say, 225x5 won’t benefit much by getting that up to 275x5. A 165-pound climber who can deadlift 500 won’t benefit much by working towards 600. Identifying those fine lines is tricky, but that’s part of a S&C coach’s job.

The key point I would’ve liked Rip to have really driven home is the emphasis on using strength training to improve overall performance by avoiding a basic strength deficiency. I liked his line, “The weaker you are, the more radically important [general strength improvement] is for you to do.” Makes sense.

If we have a 165-pound fighter who’s only strong enough to front squat 115x3, bringing his front squat up to something like 185x6 (and other lifts accordingly) will improve his overall performance in the ring/cage. A beginner lifter should be able to build that strength increase without adding a ton of size (which is what we’re after in this example, since we’re still talking weight class athletes).

EDIT: tweaked the above example to avoid overfocusing on “the squat”.[/quote]

Good night, and dagill2, your passive aggressiveness is frightening.

[quote]Jarvan wrote:

[quote]dagill2 wrote:
While we wait for Jarvan to post so we can all stroke our egos by shitting on him, anyone care to read the article and comment?[/quote]
[/quote]

Reread that statement again lol. He was DEFENDING you.

[quote]nighthawkz wrote:
So, to summarise the good parts of the thread:

Improving strength may or may not be important
There are more ways of overloading than just adding weight
Many things work… For some people

Honestly, I don’t think anything productive will happen in here past this point.[/quote]

I tried this several pages ago. Didn’t work then either.

Four years ago…

Times sure have changed

You squat 100 now? :rofl:

95lbs

1 Like

#progress

Jk eh