[quote]Dirty Tiger wrote:
Ooops! My mistake.
This thread has warped my fragile little mind.[/quote]
don’t you know by now not to assume that the thread had anything to do with actual bodybuilding?
[quote]kelleyb wrote:
Uh…
What’s a pyramid? (non Egyptian) [/quote]
A pyramid is a type of training, nothing more or less. It can be used with body weight, cables or weights. So X’s comments are incorrect, it is a method of BB. Just like splits, TBT, GVT or whatever. It is not the end all to be all, it is simply a method.
As an example, I’ll use a BW method. Lets say for sake of example we are talking a full BW squat and a Hindu Pushup (also called a divebomber pushup, Hind etc):
Perform 1 squat, drop and do 1 pushup. Repeat with 2 and 2 then 3 and 3 etc. Go up to the desired number then back down to 1. As an example, going 1-5-1 = 25. 1-10-1 = 100 and 1-20-1 = 400 of each. Ideally there is no rest period between the sets other than what it takes to get back into position.
As I mentioned, you can use the same principle for cables, tubing, or weights. Simply insert the specific exercises that you wish to use. It has some built in advantages such as a warm up and cool down. If using weights, the poundage can vary as well in the sets. For example, in the very low rep set, heavy weight can be used. As the reps get higher the poundage can be decreased and vice-versa.
BW can be used throughout the week, weights perhaps infrequently because it can be quite a workout depending on the number of exercises in the pyramid and the goal number you’re using. It also has a cardio element to it, so bring a towel.
[quote]TRAJJ wrote:
kelleyb wrote:
Uh…
What’s a pyramid? (non Egyptian)
A pyramid is a type of training, nothing more or less. It can be used with body weight, cables or weights. So X’s comments are incorrect, it is a method of BB. Just like splits, TBT, GVT or whatever. It is not the end all to be all, it is simply a method.
As an example, I’ll use a BW method. Lets say for sake of example we are talking a full BW squat and a Hindu Pushup (also called a divebomber pushup, Hind etc):
Perform 1 squat, drop and do 1 pushup. Repeat with 2 and 2 then 3 and 3 etc. Go up to the desired number then back down to 1. As an example, going 1-5-1 = 25. 1-10-1 = 100 and 1-20-1 = 400 of each. Ideally there is no rest period between the sets other than what it takes to get back into position.
As I mentioned, you can use the same principle for cables, tubing, or weights. Simply insert the specific exercises that you wish to use. It has some built in advantages such as a warm up and cool down. If using weights, the poundage can vary as well in the sets. For example, in the very low rep set, heavy weight can be used. As the reps get higher the poundage can be decreased and vice-versa.
BW can be used throughout the week, weights perhaps infrequently because it can be quite a workout depending on the number of exercises in the pyramid and the goal number you’re using. It also has a cardio element to it, so bring a towel.
[/quote]
Yes, the term you are looking for is CALISTHENICS.
I am still not sure why shoe-horning calisthenics into a bodybuilding forum makes much sense unless this is 1955 and Charles Atlas is selling pamphlets in the back of comics.
It might help it you’d actually read a post before making an idiotic comment X.
Seems that the method can be used with body weight, cables, tubing and WEIGHTS.
All can be used to build muscle mass, reduce body fat and gain strength. Seems like those are ingredients for something we’ve all been talking about…what was that…oh yes, BB.
The other poster is very correct, you’re arrogant and a know-it-all. Problem is, you don’t know it all. You’re very one-dimensional and argumentative. Go back to the first page and you’ll see you’re the first poster in the thread to post off-topic and be antagonistic. Thats a real shame as the thread really had a lot of potential. Unless that was your agenda? Troll the threads and take them off track if they don’t subscribe to your particular view? Reading other threads you’ve jaw-jacked in, I see a pattern.
Oh well. Maybe building muscle mass, reducing body fat and gaining strength isn’t in your definition of BB. But it is mine.
[quote]TRAJJ wrote:
It might help it you’d actually read a post before making an idiotic comment X.
Seems that the method can be used with body weight, cables, tubing and WEIGHTS.
All can be used to build muscle mass, reduce body fat and gain strength. Seems like those are ingredients for something we’ve all been talking about…what was that…oh yes, BB.
The other poster is very correct, you’re arrogant and a know-it-all. Problem is, you don’t know it all. You’re very one-dimensional and argumentative. Go back to the first page and you’ll see you’re the first poster in the thread to post off-topic and be antagonistic. Thats a real shame as the thread really had a lot of potential. Unless that was your agenda? Troll the threads and take them off track if they don’t subscribe to your particular view? Reading other threads you’ve jaw-jacked in, I see a pattern.
Oh well. Maybe building muscle mass, reducing body fat and gaining strength isn’t in your definition of BB. But it is mine.[/quote]
But gaining muscle mass and reducing body fat IS my definition of bodybuilding. Making claims that no one is a full bodybuilder unless they can do “strength pyramids” is what YOU stated, not me.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
TRAJJ wrote:
It might help it you’d actually read a post before making an idiotic comment X.
Seems that the method can be used with body weight, cables, tubing and WEIGHTS.
All can be used to build muscle mass, reduce body fat and gain strength. Seems like those are ingredients for something we’ve all been talking about…what was that…oh yes, BB.
The other poster is very correct, you’re arrogant and a know-it-all. Problem is, you don’t know it all. You’re very one-dimensional and argumentative. Go back to the first page and you’ll see you’re the first poster in the thread to post off-topic and be antagonistic. Thats a real shame as the thread really had a lot of potential. Unless that was your agenda? Troll the threads and take them off track if they don’t subscribe to your particular view? Reading other threads you’ve jaw-jacked in, I see a pattern.
Oh well. Maybe building muscle mass, reducing body fat and gaining strength isn’t in your definition of BB. But it is mine.
But gaining muscle mass and reducing body fat IS my definition of bodybuilding. Making claims that no one is a full bodybuilder unless they can do “strength pyramids” is what YOU stated, not me.[/quote]
A ‘strength pyramid’? Those are your words not mine. I stated a complete BB. Or ‘multi-dimensional’ i.e. using what works.
Your stated was ‘CALISTHENICS’. This is incorrect and shows your lack of knowledge. It also shows your incomplete reading of another’s post. It also shows your argumentative nature. You’ve got issues dude, post less and maybe you can work on them.
Start with this; there are multiple ways to increase muscle mass, reduce bf and gain strength. There are ways you don’t do that are effective. There are ways you don’t know that are effective. And they are all a part of BB. Close your mouth, open your mind and you may just actually…learn something new you didn’t know before. Novel thought.
[quote]TRAJJ wrote:
Professor X wrote:
TRAJJ wrote:
It might help it you’d actually read a post before making an idiotic comment X.
Seems that the method can be used with body weight, cables, tubing and WEIGHTS.
All can be used to build muscle mass, reduce body fat and gain strength. Seems like those are ingredients for something we’ve all been talking about…what was that…oh yes, BB.
The other poster is very correct, you’re arrogant and a know-it-all. Problem is, you don’t know it all. You’re very one-dimensional and argumentative. Go back to the first page and you’ll see you’re the first poster in the thread to post off-topic and be antagonistic. Thats a real shame as the thread really had a lot of potential. Unless that was your agenda? Troll the threads and take them off track if they don’t subscribe to your particular view? Reading other threads you’ve jaw-jacked in, I see a pattern.
Oh well. Maybe building muscle mass, reducing body fat and gaining strength isn’t in your definition of BB. But it is mine.
But gaining muscle mass and reducing body fat IS my definition of bodybuilding. Making claims that no one is a full bodybuilder unless they can do “strength pyramids” is what YOU stated, not me.
A ‘strength pyramid’? Those are your words not mine. I stated a complete BB. Or ‘multi-dimensional’ i.e. using what works.
Your stated was ‘CALISTHENICS’. This is incorrect and shows your lack of knowledge. It also shows your incomplete reading of another’s post. It also shows your argumentative nature. You’ve got issues dude, post less and maybe you can work on them.
Start with this; there are multiple ways to increase muscle mass, reduce bf and gain strength. There are ways you don’t do that are effective. There are ways you don’t know that are effective. And they are all a part of BB. Close your mouth, open your mind and you may just actually…learn something new you didn’t know before. Novel thought.
[/quote]
You could also learn that speaking about what works best in bodybuilding from your own experience when you haven’t built much muscle mass on your frame makes you a little less than qualified to speak on it.
Asking people who don’t have appreciable muscle mass about bodybuilding is like asking a homeless person for investment advice.
Trajj wrote:
"All can be used to build muscle mass, reduce body fat and gain strength. Seems like those are ingredients for something we’ve all been talking about…what was that…oh yes, BB. "
No that does not equate to bodybuilding. Building muscle, reducing fat, and gaining strength equate to GETTING FIT. Bodybuilding is something a little less broad than your definition. Just stating a claim does not make it true. The claim requires supporting evidence. If you wish to disprove decades of established doctrine and data then you’ll need a little more than your personal anecdotes to do so. And from an evidentiary point of view your physique is certainly lacking.
You are trying to associate certain types of athleticism with BBing. However, this is misleading since athletics are often sport-specific. How many NBA centers can perform a back-flip? How many Olympic swimmers have single digit body fat? How many heavyweight Greco-Roman wrestlers can run a marathon? How many lightweight ones can clean and press 100Kg?
Are these folks no longer athletes because they don’t measure up to the arbitrary metrics that I have assigned them? Or maybe, just maybe, they train to excel at their given sport.
Excelling at BBing means building the most muscular, well developed, symmetrical physique possible. Their are a lot of other things that good BBuilders do to increase their overall fitness and quality of life. But that does not mean that those things are necessary for everyone, nor do they constitute BBing.
I don’t post in this forum often because I don’t consider myself a BBuilder, YET. Another year of consistent, and I hope to fit the part. Or at least be on the right path.
[quote]kelleyb wrote:
Asking people who don’t have appreciable muscle mass about bodybuilding is like asking a homeless person for investment advice. [/quote]
Unless that person became homeless through bad investment practice; then one could learn from his/her wisdom.
[quote]MC sp3 wrote:
Trajj wrote:
"All can be used to build muscle mass, reduce body fat and gain strength. Seems like those are ingredients for something we’ve all been talking about…what was that…oh yes, BB. "
No that does not equate to bodybuilding. Building muscle, reducing fat, and gaining strength equate to GETTING FIT. Bodybuilding is something a little less broad than your definition. Just stating a claim does not make it true. The claim requires supporting evidence. If you wish to disprove decades of established doctrine and data then you’ll need a little more than your personal anecdotes to do so. And from an evidentiary point of view your physique is certainly lacking.
You are trying to associate certain types of athleticism with BBing. However, this is misleading since athletics are often sport-specific. How many NBA centers can perform a back-flip? How many Olympic swimmers have single digit body fat? How many heavyweight Greco-Roman wrestlers can run a marathon? How many lightweight ones can clean and press 100Kg?
Are these folks no longer athletes because they don’t measure up to the arbitrary metrics that I have assigned them? Or maybe, just maybe, they train to excel at their given sport.
Excelling at BBing means building the most muscular, well developed, symmetrical physique possible. Their are a lot of other things that good BBuilders do to increase their overall fitness and quality of life. But that does not mean that those things are necessary for everyone, nor do they constitute BBing.
I don’t post in this forum often because I don’t consider myself a BBuilder, YET. Another year of consistent, and I hope to fit the part. Or at least be on the right path.[/quote]
Good post. The bottom line is, I would like to hear from people who have actually made significant progress BEYOND “average weight for your height as goes for sedentary people”. That was the original point and after several pages, we are finally back where we started.
Some of these debates ONLY exist because some of the people arguing avoid mentioning their own physical progress specifically.
I am not sure why that concept is so hard to accept for some on a bodybuilding forum but it sure as hell does happen a lot.
[quote]MC sp3 wrote:
Trajj wrote:
"All can be used to build muscle mass, reduce body fat and gain strength. Seems like those are ingredients for something we’ve all been talking about…what was that…oh yes, BB. "
No that does not equate to bodybuilding. Building muscle, reducing fat, and gaining strength equate to GETTING FIT. Bodybuilding is something a little less broad than your definition. Just stating a claim does not make it true. The claim requires supporting evidence. If you wish to disprove decades of established doctrine and data then you’ll need a little more than your personal anecdotes to do so. And from an evidentiary point of view your physique is certainly lacking.
You are trying to associate certain types of athleticism with BBing. However, this is misleading since athletics are often sport-specific. How many NBA centers can perform a back-flip? How many Olympic swimmers have single digit body fat? How many heavyweight Greco-Roman wrestlers can run a marathon? How many lightweight ones can clean and press 100Kg?
Are these folks no longer athletes because they don’t measure up to the arbitrary metrics that I have assigned them? Or maybe, just maybe, they train to excel at their given sport.
Excelling at BBing means building the most muscular, well developed, symmetrical physique possible. Their are a lot of other things that good BBuilders do to increase their overall fitness and quality of life. But that does not mean that those things are necessary for everyone, nor do they constitute BBing.
I don’t post in this forum often because I don’t consider myself a BBuilder, YET. Another year of consistent, and I hope to fit the part. Or at least be on the right path.[/quote]
I totally hear you.
TRAJJ, go to strength sports. This is bodybuilding, meaning getting as big as possible and as lean as possible. Not doing 1-20-1 Hindu squats, pushup pyramid ( which I would have to question your fitness if you thought that is a challenge).
Also most bodybuilders do sets in the 8-20 range, so couldnt they do a 1-20-1 bicep curl pyramid with like 75 lbs. Then most(I would be surprised if it wasnt all) pros would get past #3 on the pyramid, and complete it.
Anyways, strength sports is were martial arts, conditioning as it pertains to not getting gassed climbing stairs, etc is discussed.
I guess I could be a living, breathing experiment subject for this perennial debate.
Last year I started lifting seriously. The plan was to add as much muscle as possible as quickly as possible w/out the aid of drugs. The strategy I used was basically: Madcow 5x5 full-body 3days/wk, heavy compounds, lots of Kcals and protein, and some extra isolation (delts, bis, calf). I gained strength as well as muscle. I also gained some fat.
I started a little sloppy with my eating. Bodyweight increased from 182 to 207. At 207 I was carrying a little extra fat. I took a month to diet down slowly while still increasing my lifts. Of course the rate of progression was slower while dieting.
Current weight is 198 and I look much leaner than I did at 182. All my basic lifts have increased between 100-150%. Remarkable, no I don’t think so. I think I could have done better.
After a year I felt it was time to change things up a bit. My workouts had begun to stagnate. I could not maintain maximal intensity through the entire workout. Instead, I would have to pick one compound movement per session to focus on and the rest of my lifts would suffer for it. Two weeks ago I began a body-part split routine. It’s a basic chest/tris, back/bis, shoulders, legs, split hitting each group every six days with abs and HIIT on off days. I know I was in a rut because this new routine has shocked me out of it. All my compounds are improving rapidly again.
Now I must give credit where it is due. The full body routine definitely increased my work capacity. It also drilled in the importance of heavy compounds as the “meat and potatoes” of a solid routine. But it also eventually led to diminishing returns for me.
So now I’m heading down the split route for a while. I’m maintaining a log (all the additional new exercises necessitate it)and I know I will make even better gains over the next year.
[quote]Scrotus wrote:
TRAJJ, go to strength sports. This is bodybuilding, meaning getting as big as possible and as lean as possible. Not doing 1-20-1 Hindu squats, pushup pyramid ( which I would have to question your fitness if you thought that is a challenge).
Also most bodybuilders do sets in the 8-20 range, so couldnt they do a 1-20-1 bicep curl pyramid with like 75 lbs. Then most(I would be surprised if it wasnt all) pros would get past #3 on the pyramid, and complete it.
Anyways, strength sports is were martial arts, conditioning as it pertains to not getting gassed climbing stairs, etc is discussed.[/quote]
Body building does NOT necessarily mean getting as big as possible. That ‘may’ be the goal for some, but not all BB’ers. Gaining muscle mass in symetric proportions, combined with correct BF, definition, muscularity etc are goals as well. And I would say more primary than just getting ‘big’.
As far as X, I’d still like to know how you equate pyramids with calisthenics? That is exactly the same as saying GVT is calisthenics. So please explain your statement. I’d really like to hear this one.
And I’m sorry, I’m not going to subscribe to any of your comfort zones. If your happy doing what your doing, great. But DO NOT try to impose your limitations on me. I’ll say it again, BB is MORE than just getting big. If that is your goal, wonderful, but it isn’t complete BB. It’s one dimensional thinking/training. A complete BB works on building muscle mass in coordination with lowering BF to a healthy level. Increasing strength, health and vitality. That is the complete package. And one can have ‘average’ weight (whatever that means) and have an impressive physique. I’ve seen lots of pros and non-pros of ‘average’ weight for their height that look fantastic. You don’t have to be ‘huuuggeee’ to be muscular.
And since I’m really rilling up the natives, a true, complete BB should be functional in all of these goals. I know that is a taboo word here for many…thats why I’m using it. Functional, FUNCTIONAL!!! A legs that are so damn big they rub together and chaff when you walk are in MY opinion not very functional. They don’t run faster, jump higher or walk farther which is the primary function of a leg. In fact, legs that huge might even run, jump or walk to a lesser degree due to the bulk. Now if you want legs that chaff when you walk, have at it. I’ll go for the legs that have sufficient mass, good definition and strength, look good and are usable for life.
I’m willing to bet that a picture of TRAJJ’s physique would resolve this whole argument.
[quote]Scotacus wrote:
kelleyb wrote:
Asking people who don’t have appreciable muscle mass about bodybuilding is like asking a homeless person for investment advice.
Unless that person became homeless through bad investment practice; then one could learn from his/her wisdom.[/quote]
You mean his/her stupidity. Plus you would only discover one particular way of screwing up, the opposite of which might still be screwing up.
[quote]mr popular wrote:
I’m willing to bet that a picture of TRAJJ’s physique would resolve this whole argument.[/quote]
I’m betting you will be in your 90’s before we see that. But hey, at least I have now been schooled that all of these years of lifting have made me “unfunctional” for random arbitrary “functions” even though I seem to function just fine at everything I have trained for.
I’ll get right on giving a shit and stopping that immediately.
I can’t help but notice he skipped "MC sp3"s post completely. One can only wonder why. It was a good one.
This thread is ridiculous. Pyramid this and that, LOL. Little rascals are internet bodybuilding gurus in this era.
[quote]Natural Nate wrote:
Scotacus wrote:
kelleyb wrote:
Asking people who don’t have appreciable muscle mass about bodybuilding is like asking a homeless person for investment advice.
Unless that person became homeless through bad investment practice; then one could learn from his/her wisdom.
You mean his/her stupidity. Plus you would only discover one particular way of screwing up, the opposite of which might still be screwing up.[/quote]
Failure is always more fascinating than success, provided its on a grand enough scale. Being homeless sounds fairly spectacular in that sense.