Why I, BODYBUILDER Isn't as Important as You Think

[quote]Christian Thibaudeau wrote:
Invictica wrote:
Aren’t the supplements that accompany the I BB program designed to allow you to recover faster so you can work harder, more frequently?

Or am I missing something?

Yep, that’s a big part of it. Right now I am training 3 times a day.[/quote]

That being said, would you say it would be intelligent to apply the same peri nutrional principles (via the supplementation) to other high intensity training protocols, say training O-lifts 2x a day, peaking for a meet?

That is what I would personally like to get out of the nutritional protocols you have/will prescribe.

Hello CT,

I have a general question concerning the IBB-project, a personal estimation would be great! At the moment I’m on a “oldschool-trip”, I like especially Girondas methods and his philosophy of adding size, where it counts. Can this philosophy be combined with the “philosophy” of HTH, building as much size as possible?

[quote]Germanbadenglish wrote:
Hello CT,

I have a general question concerning the IBB-project, a personal estimation would be great! At the moment I’m on a “oldschool-trip”, I like especially Girondas methods and his philosophy of adding size, where it counts. Can this philosophy be combined with the “philosophy” of HTH, building as much size as possible?[/quote]

I’m all about old-school. Guys from the 20s up to the early 60s knew way more about build strength and size than most modern coaches.

One of my biggest influence is Doug Hepburn. I, of course, adapted the style to what we currently know about the CNS and recovery.

[quote]Christian Thibaudeau wrote:
Germanbadenglish wrote:
Hello CT,

I have a general question concerning the IBB-project, a personal estimation would be great! At the moment I’m on a “oldschool-trip”, I like especially Girondas methods and his philosophy of adding size, where it counts. Can this philosophy be combined with the “philosophy” of HTH, building as much size as possible?

I’m all about old-school. Guys from the 20s up to the early 60s knew way more about build strength and size than most modern coaches.

One of my biggest influence is Doug Hepburn. I, of course, adapted the style to what we currently know about the CNS and recovery.[/quote]

I’m assuming you read his book then, or rather, the book that someone else wrote I think? Regardless, Doug Hepburn is the shit, sad that things never quite went his way.

Sounds great! Thanks.

Now another question came to my mind: You say that a controlled eccentric and a high acceleration during the concentric part of a movement is essential. In one of your books (don’t know which one) you write about the effect that your body slows a movement at the end of the way automatically down to prevent joint injuries.
Wouldn’t it be advisable for the HTH-training to use bands and similar stuff to avoid this effect and guarantee maximum acceleration?

Thats funny in the county I live in they say the school system failed all the minorites and got rid of all the honor classes. The goal is to get everyone at the same level by bringing down the smarter people. Maybe we could take all guys with 18" inch arms and make them lose muslce so the 14" guys dont feel bad. Well call it obamadizing.

The reason there aren’t more brain surgeons isn’t because the school system failed everyone else.

Beyond I, BODYBUILDER, and all of this stuff… It really makes me think. When I was in University, I had been training before that for about 5 years straight with a mixture of weights in my basement and martial arts. Quite intensley as well.

I was in the best shape of my life, and had trained anywhere from 3-5 times per day. Ate a lot more obviously to compensate, never really worried about amounts but made sure I was eating a hell of a lot of protein and healthy foods. With the random entire box of fruitloops after what I’d call a hell session which would come once every other week or so.

I was leaner then ever and had no problem recovering.

With this though in mind, I really do believe training multiple times per day can really change the playing field quickly for anyone, so long as they are doing it right. Luckly for me I was following my instincts and it happened to work for me.

Now that I train once a day, I do find I have to focus much more on my diet then ever before. If I were to adapt this protocol as best I could, and went back to training multiple times per day with weights, think I would beable to maintain a much lower level of lean then usual?

I love Charles’ article on Hepburn

Five Things I Learned from Doug Hepburn
Great advice from a strongman legend

by Charles Poliquin
Long before anabolic steroids became a common shortcut in the Iron Game, there were several amazing athletes who achieved Herculean levels of maximal strength. Their formula for success contained the optimal mix of principle-based training, sound nutrition, adequate recovery and a drive to improve. One such athlete was Doug Ivan Hepburn.

Hepburn was born in Vancouver, Canada, on September 16, 1926. Born with a clubfoot and cross-eyed, Hepburn took up weight training when he was 15 and overcame his disabilities to become incredibly strong - by age 18 he could squat 340 pounds, bench press 260 and curl 140. Many strength historians argue that at his peak Hepburn was the strongest man in the world. Here’s why.

Hepburn broke eight world records in weightlifting and won the gold medal at the 1953 World Weightlifting Championships as a superheavyweight. This performance garnered international attention because Hepburn defeated US phenom John Davis, who had won the gold medal the previous year in Helsinki. Hepburn’s best performances in weightlifting included a press of 381, a snatch of 300, and a clean and jerk of 383. But Hepburn had many other impressive lifts.

Hepburn, a split-style lifter, was the first man to bench press 500 pounds (eventually lifting 545), and his record-breaking success in such basic strength exercises helped earn him the title “Grandfather of Modern Powerlifting.” Among his other notable lifts are a 445-pound Olympic press, 445 push press, 750 squat and a 705 deadlift. Note that these lifts were performed a half century ago and without the aid of steroids - in fact Hepburn was an outspoken critic of both drug use and supportive equipment. Hepburn was also as strong as he looked, weighing 300 pounds at a height of only 5’8-1/2?.

As I also am a native Canadian, Hepburn has been one of my heroes. If it were not for the strength phenom Paul Anderson, who appeared on the lifting scene a few years after Hepburn retired, Hepburn’s accomplishments would have become even more legendary in the strength community.

I studied Hepburn’s training methods and use much of his advice in practice to this day. Here are five lessons he taught me that I’ve found especially valuable.

  1. Concentrate on two lifts per day

This is the same type of philosophy as the “put the big rocks first in the jar” analogy that Steven Covey uses in his book First Things First. If you get strong on two basic lifts per workout, plenty of strength gains will transfer over to smaller muscles from what is known as the irradiation effect. For this reason, as often as permissible I set up antagonistic pairs together, such as pull-ups and overhead presses.

  1. Perform lots of sets for maximal strength

If you ever have a chance to look into the details of Doug Hepburn’s methodology to increase maximal strength, you’ll see it centers on doing lots of basic work. One of the main reasons I have stayed ahead of the game is this: doing lots of sets. Do only a few things, but do them extremely well. Ask any REAL expert on strength training and they will tell you that this is a very basic success principle.

Last January I gave an invitation-only seminar - Sport Specific Strength Training -at Level 5 PICP coach Roberto Sabatini’s gym in St-Bruno, Quebec. I asked Pierre Roy, the best lifting coach in North America, to give a guest lecture. Dr. Espen Arntzen, soon to be the first European coach to achieve Level 5 PICP, asked Pierre what he thought were the three most important keys to success in strength training. Pierre’s answer: “One: hard work. Two: hard work. Three: hard work.” And it’s true: The strongest athletes always have the biggest work capacity.

  1. Excite the nervous system first, and then do functional hypertrophy

Many of my successful colleagues use a variation of this approach. Whether they are from Hungary or Romania, the principle they use is the same: Excite high-threshold motor units first, and then do functional hypertrophy work.

A sample torso workout would look like this:

Relative-Strength Work

A-1: narrow pull-ups (4-inch/10-cm grip), 8 x 1 @ 50X0 tempo, rest 100 seconds.

A-2: Seated 80-degree BB military presses (4-inch grip), 8 x 1 @ 50X0 tempo, rest 100 seconds.

Functional Hypertrophy Work

B-1: narrow pull-ups (6-inch grip), 4 x 5 @ 40X0 tempo, rest 90 seconds. The grip is changed for varied stimulus - trust me, it will increase results.

B-2: Seated 70-degree BB military presses (4-inch grip), 4 x 5 @ 40X0 tempo, rest 90 seconds. Again, the change of angle will provide even better results, as you will tap into a slightly different motor-unit pool.

A sample lower body workout would look like this:

Relative Strength Work

Power cleans from the block

3,2,1,3,2,1,3,2,1 @ X0X0 tempo, rest 180 seconds

Functional hypertrophy work

Mid-grip pulls on podium, 4 x 6 @ 20X0 tempo, rest 180 seconds. Grip is between a snatch grip and a clean grip.

  1. Use Split Routines

I always found that total-body workouts were just too draining to allow quick recovery. I only started to make progress myself once I split up my training following Doug Hepburn’s (and Anthony Dittilo’s) methodology. What I added to the fundamentals of the Hepburn system were standardized rest intervals, and tempo; hence, making it even better.

By using two key lifts per day and multiple training sessions per week, I was able to train a host of Olympic medalists. Whether they were summer Olympians such as Adam Nelson or winter Olympians such as Pierre Lueders, they all used split routines.

There is a trend among many strength journalists to push for total-body workouts; but I’ll just point out that few Internet writers have physiques with strength to match; my colleague Christian Thibaudeau - whose strength does match his physique - is a split-routine user. Success leaves clues.

  1. Take your time

Doug Hepburn preached taking your time to adjust the load upwards, an approach I also strongly endorse. Pierre Roy taught me the same thing. For example, want to increase your squat? Select a weight where your spleen will come out of your left eye socket to complete 8 sets of 2. Then, every workout try to add to the total number of reps by adding only one rep per set. Once you can complete 8 x 3, only then is it time to increase the weight.

You can’t get a more solid formula for strength training than Doug Hepburn’s. These steps are still used by the best of the best. Hepburn died in 2000, but his legacy is proving that the human body has not dramatically evolved in the last 50 years and that basic hard work still prevails. There are no shortcuts - that’s the Doug Hepburn way.

[quote]MEYMZ wrote:
Professor X wrote:
First, I don’t even follow most of these threads and have no idea what “HTH” is.

I assume it’s head to head X, have you made modifications to your training?[/quote]

High Threshold Hypertrophy

[quote]Christian Thibaudeau wrote:
pflifter wrote:
Nate/CT,

Using bench press as an example. Do you employ a slight chest bounce to accelerate in the stretched position? In essence are you starting off the negative slow and controlled and then speeding it up once you get closer to your chest (say 4-5 inches or so)?

No bounce… an explosive turnaround means switching from eccentric to concentric action as fast as you can. A bounce is not a contraction.[/quote]
myotatic reflex? Steve Holman et al raved about this type of training years ago and employing stretch based exercises and exploding from those positions. Is this part of what you’re getting at in your explanations?

[quote]humble wrote:
Christian Thibaudeau wrote:
pflifter wrote:
Nate/CT,

Using bench press as an example. Do you employ a slight chest bounce to accelerate in the stretched position? In essence are you starting off the negative slow and controlled and then speeding it up once you get closer to your chest (say 4-5 inches or so)?

No bounce… an explosive turnaround means switching from eccentric to concentric action as fast as you can. A bounce is not a contraction.
myotatic reflex? Steve Holman et al raved about this type of training years ago and employing stretch based exercises and exploding from those positions. Is this part of what you’re getting at in your explanations?
[/quote]

Yes it is, although I have not read all of their work. I have come to the same conclusion as they apparently have, that the stretched position WITHOUT OVERACTIVATING the myotatic reflex is where the magic happens.

Thanks CT.

Funny how some things stick. I remember being excited about this when we studied it at University and lecturers just brushing it off as just course material.

This has subconsciously been ingrained into me when I train from back in those days and came across Holman et al and I can verify what you say in that you seem to get a LOT more out of a rep when you can properly activate the specific body part. Once you can do that, although certain movements trump others, pretty much all movements become that much more fruitful.

I’m no mass monster nor even look it but even when I have not trained for a long time, it takes minimal effort to pick up where I left off and I suspect unknowingly training like this has some effect.

I do also suspect that some people are gifted with naturally being able to do this better than others.

Would you say athletic activities such as Gymnastics etc which children perform from a young age primes the person with an ability unknowingly be able to activate muscle/ attain that ‘perfect rep’ quite easily whilst others struggle to get through the movements?

CT.
So I read your interview with Nate Green, and there was a part in it that said “They don’t adjust their workout according to their physiological state for that day.” Well that changed everything for me, Since hearing that, I’ve added more weight, and sets onto the days where im feeling “invincible”. And cut it short when im not “feelin it”. Since that article has came out, i’ve improved vastly on every lift! So I thank you. I can’t wait to see what the rest of the program has to offer!

[quote]humble wrote:
Thanks CT.
Would you say athletic activities such as Gymnastics etc which children perform from a young age primes the person with an ability unknowingly be able to activate muscle/ attain that ‘perfect rep’ quite easily whilst others struggle to get through the movements?[/quote]

Oh there is absolutely no question that it does!

I started training at 12, only training legs for the first 2 years that I trained (5 days a week)… I played receiver at the time and figured that this is all that I needed. When I played football for 8 years I would still train legs 2-3 times a week. Then I switched to olympic lifting and squatted 6 days a week, sometimes twice a day.

Now my legs pretty much grow from just thinking about them.

My ex-girlfriend worked on a farm for years. As a bodybuilder her arms, shoulders and back grew like crazy (I have rarely a guy or girl gain mass so easily in those body parts) but had trouble making her pecs and legs grow.

I have worked with A LOT of figure skaters. And no class of athlete were better at performing the olympic lifts properly. Heck, on of my skaters won 3 medals in olympic lifting (provincial championships), from doing the lifts twice a week for 3 months… she beat girls that have been doing this for 2-3 years 4-5 times a week.

Muscle activation is a motor skill… and the more often you practice a motor skill, the better you become at it. So someone who has had a lot of experience activating a muscle group (in a gym setting or not) will be better at that… especially if he started at an early age.

[quote]Christian Thibaudeau wrote:
humble wrote:
Thanks CT.
Would you say athletic activities such as Gymnastics etc which children perform from a young age primes the person with an ability unknowingly be able to activate muscle/ attain that ‘perfect rep’ quite easily whilst others struggle to get through the movements?

Oh there is absolutely no question that it does!

I started training at 12, only training legs for the first 2 years that I trained (5 days a week)… I played receiver at the time and figured that this is all that I needed. When I played football for 8 years I would still train legs 2-3 times a week. Then I switched to olympic lifting and squatted 6 days a week, sometimes twice a day.

Now my legs pretty much grow from just thinking about them.

My ex-girlfriend worked on a farm for years. As a bodybuilder her arms, shoulders and back grew like crazy (I have rarely a guy or girl gain mass so easily in those body parts) but had trouble making her pecs and legs grow.

I have worked with A LOT of figure skaters. And no class of athlete were better at performing the olympic lifts properly. Heck, on of my skaters won 3 medals in olympic lifting (provincial championships), from doing the lifts twice a week for 3 months… she beat girls that have been doing this for 2-3 years 4-5 times a week.

Muscle activation is a motor skill… and the more often you practice a motor skill, the better you become at it. So someone who has had a lot of experience activating a muscle group (in a gym setting or not) will be better at that… especially if he started at an early age.[/quote]

Once again, much appreciation for the replies.

I have all three of my sons in Gymnastics in that hope, ie so that they can prime themselves neuro-motor wise for their later ages. Not only that but it’s been well researched that prior to 7-8 years of age children ‘learn’ better through activity.

It opens the brain pathways and allows for more synapses and cross-hemispherical connection/communication too for later in life. This effect somewhat diminishes after this age but is still possible. All the neuro-plasticity research points to this.

Whilst I can see definite improvements in them all, it’s fascinating to also see the natural innate abilities in them all.

My eldest son has an absolute hard time kicking a ball. He is almost 6 and still struggles with the motor patterns involved. My middle son is a physical monster. At only 1 year of age, he could soccer kick, drop kick, boot up in the air and basically do anything with a ball with near perfect motor coordination.

At 3 years of age now it’s a regular occurrence for him to be climbing up on the house roof and grabbing his balls that he kicked up there or knocking on the neighbors doors.

Not trying to bore you with kiddie stories but I believe having children and watching them at work makes you appreciate this field even more.

At Gymnastics, the first one just gets through the tasks, the second son hammers everything with ease and learns it all himself. He just ‘knows’ how to use his body and activate certain parts when needed.

The third son, only a year old is like the second, has much physical ability.

The first though, suffered a lot from vaccinations and post these his motor skill went down. The other two are not vaccinated.

Vaccination or not, I would also suspect ones toxicity levels would affect their motor abilities.

I fight professionally and have been in the sport for about 17 years and can attest to what you say, ie you just have to keep grooving your movements non stop to get good at them and finally be able to activate the relevant muscles properly.

Funny you should mention the figure skaters. Charles Poliquin also say’s the same. Would you say the balance involved in skating activates all their lower limbs far more than the average person and hence their innate ability to ‘switch on’ when it comes to performing a gym movement?

Would this also suggest that all those movements we kinda snide at ie one legged wobble board squats etc may be beneficial for children who are still developing as opposed to the current crop of funky trainers recommending it for 40 year old’s who’ve never lifted a bar before?

Just a very short question…

is I, BODYBUILDER an add-on like the FST-7, or a full program?
In some ways you describe it as more of an add on, but articles persist to call it more of a program.

When is the release date on this, or an estimation of what you think is a reasonable timeline for this program to come out?

It should have been out over a month ago. I think the issue now is that the training/nutrition protocol was too complex and/or costly, so now they’re re-doing it. I’m not sure why it’s still on the front page though after so many months of nothing.

I thought the point of this thread was to kind of get away from the idea of a program.
Maybe a hint that there won’t be an actual program when all is said and done.

how much more longer is it going to be until I, BODYBUILDER Anaconda stuff comes out Christian???