To Professor X

Training Bodybuilding
641

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]xilinx wrote:
Thib explained it well in one of the spills: the prowler is huge total work, but against resistance, which makes the body keep the muscle. Before prowler became popular, complexes were all the rage for the same reason.[/quote]

When you say “complexes” are you just referring to moving between exercises quickly in the gym?[/quote]

Kinda, basically it is a list of movements usually around 6-8 that you perform 6-8 reps on quickly without ever putting the barbell down. Performing each circuit 3-4 times with 60-90 seconds between circuits.

642

[quote]Mateus wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]xilinx wrote:
Thib explained it well in one of the spills: the prowler is huge total work, but against resistance, which makes the body keep the muscle. Before prowler became popular, complexes were all the rage for the same reason.[/quote]

When you say “complexes” are you just referring to moving between exercises quickly in the gym?[/quote]

Kinda, basically it is a list of movements usually around 6-8 that you perform 6-8 reps on quickly without ever putting the barbell down. Performing each circuit 3-4 times with 60-90 seconds between circuits.[/quote]

Complexes are fun!

643

Nice overview of complexes:

Complexes 2.0 ? Optimize Your Fat-Loss Workouts

644

[quote]austin_bicep wrote:

[quote]Mateus wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]xilinx wrote:
Thib explained it well in one of the spills: the prowler is huge total work, but against resistance, which makes the body keep the muscle. Before prowler became popular, complexes were all the rage for the same reason.[/quote]

When you say “complexes” are you just referring to moving between exercises quickly in the gym?[/quote]

Kinda, basically it is a list of movements usually around 6-8 that you perform 6-8 reps on quickly without ever putting the barbell down. Performing each circuit 3-4 times with 60-90 seconds between circuits.[/quote]

Complexes are fun!
[/quote]

You should bring a kettlebell to the club with you when you go dancing! win/win!

645

I understand there seems to be a big trend or fad so to say with all this prowler and sled work for conditioning and body composition…now having tried both myself and from a “bodybuilding” not performance point of view, nothing ever beat fasted steady state cardio in the morning followed later on in the evening with an intense weight session…

low intense cardio just enough to burn the excess fat combined with heavy weight training seems to work well for many other bodybuilders as well (both enhanced and natural)…To each his own however there is many ways to skin a cat.

646

[quote]Mateus wrote:

[quote]austin_bicep wrote:

[quote]Mateus wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]xilinx wrote:
Thib explained it well in one of the spills: the prowler is huge total work, but against resistance, which makes the body keep the muscle. Before prowler became popular, complexes were all the rage for the same reason.[/quote]

When you say “complexes” are you just referring to moving between exercises quickly in the gym?[/quote]

Kinda, basically it is a list of movements usually around 6-8 that you perform 6-8 reps on quickly without ever putting the barbell down. Performing each circuit 3-4 times with 60-90 seconds between circuits.[/quote]

Complexes are fun!
[/quote]

You should bring a kettlebell to the club with you when you go dancing! win/win![/quote]

Until someone dies or winds up with a broken foot. Haha

647

Right! the clip Goodfellow brought is a good example. Just a string of big movements , done with non-challenging weight, in a row. Gets me winded! But I love them, certainly more than steady.

CT’s spill on them:
http://www.T-Nation.com/strength-training-topics/1160

Romaniello:

Dan John:

But didnt CT offer you a prowler? its usefulness goes further than conditioning.

648

If were talking about complexes here is the original
http://istvanjavorek.com/page2.html

And I think that the prowler is a great tool, but car pushes,running hills,complexes and stadium steps all can achieve the same effect.

649

[quote]Matt Szwarz wrote:
I understand there seems to be a big trend or fad so to say with all this prowler and sled work for conditioning and body composition…now having tried both myself and from a “bodybuilding” not performance point of view, nothing ever beat fasted steady state cardio in the morning followed later on in the evening with an intense weight session…

low intense cardio just enough to burn the excess fat combined with heavy weight training seems to work well for many other bodybuilders as well (both enhanced and natural)…To each his own however there is many ways to skin a cat.[/quote]

Good post…and overall, I agree. However, I think the reason it was focused on with me is that I have never been leaned down to sub-10% levels as that was never a goal. For someone like that who already has the size, I can see how conditioning training by itself can have a large effect…and trust me, I do think some are missing how important the nutrition aspect is to having this work in a BODYBUILDING sense.

Without that nutrition strategy, I would not expect to see the same results.

CT flat out said in CO that you won’t see the same effect without it. I don’t know if they taped him saying it.

650

[quote]Malaka79 wrote:
If were talking about complexes here is the original
http://istvanjavorek.com/page2.html

And I think that the prowler is a great tool, but car pushes,running hills,complexes and stadium steps all can achieve the same effect.[/quote]

I have trained like that more in the past. I remember pushing a truck and yeah, it is tough…but it is also not usually the way most bodybuilders have trained over the years as the goal was to build and keep the most muscle possible. I do think all of the “peri-workout nutrition” ideas have changed that…and only recently.

651

[quote]Professor X wrote:
CT flat out said in CO that you won’t see the same effect without it. I don’t know if they taped him saying it.[/quote]

Has the assessment video been posted yet?

652

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]Matt Szwarz wrote:
I understand there seems to be a big trend or fad so to say with all this prowler and sled work for conditioning and body composition…now having tried both myself and from a “bodybuilding” not performance point of view, nothing ever beat fasted steady state cardio in the morning followed later on in the evening with an intense weight session…

low intense cardio just enough to burn the excess fat combined with heavy weight training seems to work well for many other bodybuilders as well (both enhanced and natural)…To each his own however there is many ways to skin a cat.[/quote]

Good post…and overall, I agree. However, I think the reason it was focused on with me is that I have never been leaned down to sub-10% levels as that was never a goal. For someone like that who already has the size, I can see how conditioning training by itself can have a large effect…and trust me, I do think some are missing how important the nutrition aspect is to having this work in a BODYBUILDING sense.

Without that nutrition strategy, I would not expect to see the same results.

CT flat out said in CO that you won’t see the same effect without it. I don’t know if they taped him saying it.[/quote]

  1. I suspect non-steady state methods rose since many people hate steady state
  2. Could it be that to cut large amounts of fat, high-output methods are more efficient, but as one approaches single-digit fat, less brutal methods work as good? At any rate, CT prepared more than one BBer to win competitions with his training/nutrition methods.
653

[quote]Professor X wrote:
I do think all of the “peri-workout nutrition” ideas have changed that…and only recently.[/quote]

Bingo.

654

[quote]waylanderxx wrote:

[quote]heavythrower wrote:

[quote]detazathoth wrote:

[quote]heavythrower wrote:

[quote]detazathoth wrote:

[quote]heavythrower wrote:
a few thoughts

the only video I have watched in its entirety is the “shoulder strength” one, the amount of volume used was typical for me…difference I would have done more sets with less reps though…

point being for the people who are thinking that that is a “insane” amount of volume need to seriously look at there work ethic in the gym.

as far as all the jaw dropping outrage concerning all the “prof x hate” going on…I think you would have had to be member of this site for as long as I have to realize that what is happening is severe backlash /blowback form all the years X has been dishing out shit on this board.

I am surprised it took this long.

also, what a cool opportunity for all those guys to get a training vacation like that.

I would love to be there just to get some coaching from CT on Olympic lifting, as my numbers (up until my most recent neck injury) put me in the thick of things in actual competition, for my age and weight class. this even though I have never had any real coaching in the OL’s.
[/quote]

This x2[/quote]

sorry…x
“x2” on the x -backlash, or the opportunity to train with a good coach?[/quote]

Most certainly on the X Backlash[/quote]

glad somebody realizes this besides me. people who do not see this either have not been on the site as long as I have, or have very selective memories.

the site has grown, and now their are a few “trolls” for lack of a better word, who are willing to bicker and go back and forth with X all day if need be.

I will also reiterate what I said on the other “haters” thread:

If you perceive you have “haters” you probably are giving yourself much more credit than you deserve.

really?

I know there are a lot of guys on this site who are bigger and stronger than me, but really?

how many TOP level competitive BBers, powerlifters, strongmen, olympic lifters post on this site.

I think there are a few WPO level PL here, but that is about it. I am talking about regular habitual posters who get into all the internet bickering.

how many of these people have really accomplished anything in the iron game?

If you are flinging your shit aimlessly on this site and think you have “haters” then trust me, you have a very exaggerated sense of self worth.

[/quote]

You beat me to it. I like this post.[/quote]

Exactly. No one is saying X is small and made no progress. But with all the shit he’s talked over the years (I’ve read a lot longer than I’ve been a memeber) you would be expecting more. There are plenty of guys here with much better physiques who are also very nice and helpful.

As for that whole deal about his contest weight, it’s ridiculous. If he is 257 now there is no way he’d be competing at 225. He probably has 30lb of fat alone to lose not even accounting for water and glycogen. Look how lean Waylander himself is and even he would have to cut more weight than that to be contest ready. And to think PX was at 300lb at one time…I can’t see being that overweight helping with more muscle gains. Overall point being, if you’re gonna talk a lot of shit you shouldn’t be surprised at the backlash

655

[quote]Professor X wrote:

I have no immediate plans of addding a normal “30-45min cardio session” like I have done in the past. My biceps shrink faster than my waist.[/quote]

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]Matt Szwarz wrote:
I understand there seems to be a big trend or fad so to say with all this prowler and sled work for conditioning and body composition…now having tried both myself and from a “bodybuilding” not performance point of view, nothing ever beat fasted steady state cardio in the morning followed later on in the evening with an intense weight session…

low intense cardio just enough to burn the excess fat combined with heavy weight training seems to work well for many other bodybuilders as well (both enhanced and natural)…To each his own however there is many ways to skin a cat.[/quote]

Good post…and overall, I agree.[/quote]

lol

656

[quote]pumped340 wrote:
As for that whole deal about his contest weight, it’s ridiculous. If he is 257 now there is no way he’d be competing at 225. He probably has 30lb of fat alone to lose not even accounting for water and glycogen.
[/quote]

I 100% agree on why X gets so much shit - he gives out plenty, so he gets it back. How that escapes people amazes me…

But, that said - that’s 227 lbs right there if he drops 30 - and I get what you’re saying about water and glycogen, but he won’t be glycogen depleted once he carbs up. So if he wrings out a few pounds of water he may well compete at 225…maybe 218 - 220 - which is fucking huge at average height and low single digit bodyfat.

I belive CT said 40 lbs to contest shape, which still puts him at 217 onstage…

657

[quote]SkyNett wrote:

[quote]pumped340 wrote:
As for that whole deal about his contest weight, it’s ridiculous. If he is 257 now there is no way he’d be competing at 225. He probably has 30lb of fat alone to lose not even accounting for water and glycogen.
[/quote]

I 100% agree on why X gets so much shit - he gives out plenty, so he gets it back. How that escapes people amazes me…

But, that said - that’s 227 lbs right there if he drops 30 - and I get what you’re saying about water and glycogen, but he won’t be glycogen depleted once he carbs up. So if he wrings out a few pounds of water he may well compete at 225…maybe 218 - 220 - which is fucking huge at average height and low single digit bodyfat.

I belive CT said 40 lbs to contest shape, which still puts him at 217 onstage…[/quote]

I’m not sure what CT said about PX but he did say he himself would have to lose at least 25lb. PX easily has twice as much fat on his body as CT in those videos.

As for that 30lb, I was pretty much just throwing that number out there. Doing actual calculations…I don’t think anyone would argue that PX is under 20% right now based on his gut, face, etc… If they do they’re retarded and don’t know what a real 10%, 15%, 20%, etc… looks like (and anyone who’s done BodPod measurements knows even what most people think is too forgiving).

So 257*.20 = 51.4lb of fat. If he were to lose 30lb of pure fat that would put him at 9.4%. Losing 40lb of pure fat would put him at 5.25%…maybe just barely acceptable to compete at. And that may seem extreme but I know when doing these types of calculations for myself the amount I have to lose to get to that percent is always WAY more than the estimate. For example at 200lb and 15% body fat I may think OK I can be at 8% by the time I hit 185 but in reality it would be more like 10-11% probably.

So anyway that’s with 100% pure fat loss, no glycogen loss, no water loss, no muscle loss. My bet would be ~210 on stage. VERY impressive…but that doesn’t negate the point.

658

EDIT: nevermind

659

[quote]gregron wrote:
EDIT: nevermind[/quote]

Best post.

660

[quote]SkyNett wrote:
I 100% agree on why X gets so much shit - he gives out plenty, so he gets it back. How that escapes people amazes me…
[/quote]

People ignore it because they realize that he has noble intentions, and that he wants to do his bit to ensure at least a few of the forum posters don’t end up like you did.

Thats also why HE went to Colorado.