[quote]gregron wrote:
Bone size, frame, insertions, muscle bellies and natural strength levels are obviously big time factors but I was interested in hopefully getting a good discussion going about what everyone thinks of when they hear “good genetics”[/quote]
In the context of lifting, “good genetics” makes me think of favorable tendon lengths/limb leverages that encourage heavy weights to be lifted “easier” and longer muscle bellies/insertions/origins that make muscles look more full when developed. I don’t automatically associate “good genetics” with higher natural Test levels, but it’s an interesting point and would make sense.
None really. I’m not dismissing the role of genetics, but on some level, it’s just the hand you were dealt and there’s no changing it. It’s up to the individual to chase results, regardless of how easy or difficult it’s going to be.
When you sit down with a new personal training client, one of the first things you do is get their exercise history and their personal health history. If they’re an 55-hour a week desk jockey, It’s not very relevant if their father was an Olympic decathlete and their mother was a two-time Ms. Olympia.
Work ethic isn’t genetic. The ability to study training and determine, through trial and error, what methods do and don’t work for your body isn’t genetic. Deciding what and when to eat isn’t genetic. Over the long-term, those are going to be your best bets in seeing results whether you won the genetic lottery or were born with three fingers on each hand and two club feet.
Pretty good article from Contreras, citing a ton of studies that looked into different aspects of genetics and training. Doesn’t really mention Test specifically, but gets into some other hormonal/genetic markers: