^The guy on the far left (Kirill) there weighs 400. Koklyaev on the far right is over 350.
The increased strength you may see from adding pure fat is a much more complicated issue than most people give it credit for. It’s not even much to do with leverages. At a cellular level, your body literally has more mass on which to disperse the weight. This has appreciable neurological and physiological effects. I wish I could remember all the info on this, my training partner can probably recall a lot more of it than I can. Anyway, there are legitimate, scientific explanations as to how adding only fat can result in certain increased bar lifts.
[quote]LoRez wrote:
[quote]Bull_Scientist wrote:
Rippetoe said in one of his articles that beginners should put on 40 to 50 lbs. of weight in one year. This would mean that Rippetoe would expect that approx. 20-35 lbs. of that total weight gained would be fat and water because no matter how flawless a novice’s nutrition and training program is it’s really not possible for most beginners to gain more than 12-15 lbs. of dry muscle in one year (you’d lucky to put on about 20lbs. of dry muscle. at the most if you are blessed with good genetics for building muscle). [/quote]
Ok so what’s your point here?
If you put on 12-15 (or even 20) pounds of “dry muscle” in one year, that will definitely help you be stronger.
Just because it came with 20-35 lbs of fat doesn’t mean the fat contributed to the strength.[/quote]
Well, then if the only real purpose to gaining so much bodyweight was to build a lot of muscle, then why doesn’t Rippetoe instead suggest beginners to do a cleaner bulk such as gaining 20-30 lbs. of mostly muscle in a year? Bodybuilders such as Thibaudeau and Prof X have implied that gaining 20-30 lbs. of bodyweight in one year is the optimal amount of weight to put on for a novice whose main goal is muscular hypertrophy. For a beginner, gaining anymore than 20-30 lbs. of weight, even throughout a whole year, will not produce more dry or real muscle mass.
[quote]Bull_Scientist wrote:
[quote]LoRez wrote:
[quote]Bull_Scientist wrote:
Rippetoe said in one of his articles that beginners should put on 40 to 50 lbs. of weight in one year. This would mean that Rippetoe would expect that approx. 20-35 lbs. of that total weight gained would be fat and water because no matter how flawless a novice’s nutrition and training program is it’s really not possible for most beginners to gain more than 12-15 lbs. of dry muscle in one year (you’d lucky to put on about 20lbs. of dry muscle. at the most if you are blessed with good genetics for building muscle). [/quote]
Ok so what’s your point here?
If you put on 12-15 (or even 20) pounds of “dry muscle” in one year, that will definitely help you be stronger.
Just because it came with 20-35 lbs of fat doesn’t mean the fat contributed to the strength.[/quote]
Well, then if the only real purpose to gaining so much bodyweight was to build a lot of muscle, then why doesn’t Rippetoe instead suggest beginners to do a cleaner bulk such as gaining 20-30 lbs. of mostly muscle in a year? Bodybuilders such as Thibaudeau and Prof X have implied that gaining 20-30 lbs. of bodyweight in one year is the optimal amount of weight to put on for a novice whose main goal is muscular hypertrophy. For a beginner, gaining anymore than 20-30 lbs. of weight, even throughout a whole year, will not produce more dry or real muscle mass. [/quote]
Why don’t you ask Rippetoe this question directly? He is very active on his forum.
Let us know what he says! I’m very curious.
[quote]Bull_Scientist wrote:
Well, then if the only real purpose to gaining so much bodyweight was to build a lot of muscle, then why doesn’t Rippetoe instead suggest beginners to do a cleaner bulk such as gaining 20-30 lbs. of mostly muscle in a year? Bodybuilders such as Thibaudeau and Prof X have implied that gaining 20-30 lbs. of bodyweight in one year is the optimal amount of weight to put on for a novice whose main goal is muscular hypertrophy. For a beginner, gaining anymore than 20-30 lbs. of weight, even throughout a whole year, will not produce more dry or real muscle mass. [/quote]
Lol don’t take things so literally. If you went and told Rippetoe you gained 20 lbs, he would tell you that you did a good job. The main point is to push yourself and make a change for the better. What will you do with this information? Continue to decide whether putting on 20 or 50 lbs is better? Going out and putting on 10 lbs of weight will teach you more than you debating with others what Rippetoe means. Rippetoe doesn’t give a shit if one athlete gains 20 lbs and another 50 lbs. He just wants them both to make progress and reach their goals.
[quote]Bull_Scientist wrote:
[quote]LoRez wrote:
[quote]Bull_Scientist wrote:
Rippetoe said in one of his articles that beginners should put on 40 to 50 lbs. of weight in one year. This would mean that Rippetoe would expect that approx. 20-35 lbs. of that total weight gained would be fat and water because no matter how flawless a novice’s nutrition and training program is it’s really not possible for most beginners to gain more than 12-15 lbs. of dry muscle in one year (you’d lucky to put on about 20lbs. of dry muscle. at the most if you are blessed with good genetics for building muscle). [/quote]
Ok so what’s your point here?
If you put on 12-15 (or even 20) pounds of “dry muscle” in one year, that will definitely help you be stronger.
Just because it came with 20-35 lbs of fat doesn’t mean the fat contributed to the strength.[/quote]
Well, then if the only real purpose to gaining so much bodyweight was to build a lot of muscle, then why doesn’t Rippetoe instead suggest beginners to do a cleaner bulk such as gaining 20-30 lbs. of mostly muscle in a year? Bodybuilders such as Thibaudeau and Prof X have implied that gaining 20-30 lbs. of bodyweight in one year is the optimal amount of weight to put on for a novice whose main goal is muscular hypertrophy. For a beginner, gaining anymore than 20-30 lbs. of weight, even throughout a whole year, will not produce more dry or real muscle mass. [/quote]
Pwnisher’s right, you should ask him directly. That being said, I’ll give my opinion on the subject.
The idea, I believe, is that you don’t want to leave any muscular gains on the table. If you maintain a very low bodyfat percentage, and are new to lifting, there’s a good chance you’re not eating enough to gain as much muscle as you could have, had you eaten more. Basically, it’s the belief that erring on the side of over-eating is better than under-eating. Putting on SOME fat while also gaining muscle is superior to putting on no fat and limiting muscular growth at the same time.
They are ‘fuscular’; muscular with a bit of cushion (fat/water). While its true that mass moves mass, at the end of the day, its the muscle that is lifting the weight, not the fat. Look at pro bodybuilders. When they are on stage, at their leanest, they are at their weakest. Much stronger in the off season. Why? because they are carrying a little bit more fat and a lot more water which drastically helps lift more weight and buffer fatigue.