So Wendler, a powerlifter, created 5/3/1 as a hypertrophy program from the getgo then? Come on now
You say I have Dunning Kruger but you are relying on a program label that is so elastic it can be modified to mean whatever you want it to mean. In that instance I can say my hypertrophy routine is actually for powerlifting because I heavily modified it as such.
BBB was in the first edition and the very first article he published, yeah.
Because he created a programming system, based around principles.
Learning is awesome 
I actually just looked that up and I can say what you’re saying isn’t true. In 2009 Jim Wendler released the original 5/3/1 program in his book 5/3/1: The Simplest and Most Effective Training System to Increase Raw Strength
BBB didn’t come until 2013
So 5/3/1 was originally geared towards powerlifting principles and then BBB was a later variation. And my point is that 5/3/1 had to be heavily configured, it was never inherently for hypertrophy.
If you go to his own blog for BBB, Boring But Big, 3 Month Challenge, he says in 2017 " Since I released the first edition of [5/3/1] The Simplest and Most Effective Training System for Building Raw Strength in 2009, I’ve been asked many questions about supplemental and assistance work." Then further down when you click on the hyperlink for BBB, it takes you to an older blog on BBB in 2013.
So how could BBB come out in 2009, when the very first thing we ever saw regarding BBB was a blog from 2013?
My instigator ass can’t help it.
Westside. Go.
My copy of first edition says otherwise. Same with the article you linked from this very site earlier (which you didn’t read)
IMO, one is much worse than the other. One is you have yet to know how to train. Who hasn’t been there. We all started there.
The other is that you know how to train, but don’t have the discipline to do so. I have never been there. If you are speaking for yourself, you have the right to confess that.
If you don’t have discipline, competitive bodybuilding is much more challenging than someone with discipline.
I am totally opposed to hyperbolic nonsense in order to emphasis a point. Keep your presentation based on research or your experience, whether it is observational or personal.
I meant that hypertrophy habits vs. powerlifting habits aren’t better or worse than each other
I see. Perhaps BBB didn’t gain much greater attention until 2013 because that’s when the first blog appeared about it on his own site.
At this point, my only argument would be that while BBB introduces more hypertrophy work, it’s not a pure hypertrophy program. A lot of those sets are still sandbagged. Here’s Natural Hypertrophy’s assessment of BBB:
Excellent: I am glad you admit that 5/3/1 is not a powerlifting program. It is good we have reached this agreement
It’s not a hypertrophy program either. BBB is neither pure powerlifting or pure hypertrophy. So while it’s cool that BBB has more hypertrophy work than a powerlifting variation of 5/3/1, in my eyes I see +30% or so hypertrophy gains being left on the table in BBB.
That actually leads me to something else I mentioned before. Powerbuilding is an abomination:
Yes, exactly
This is great. Reg Park cared more about hypertrophy than strength, using strength as a tool. Powerbuilding today is often a diluted hybrid that sacrifices both strength and size for “general awesomeness,” which is not what Park’s training philosophy represented. I don’t think he would fall into the power building trap of today
How does that say anything? I cannot think of a person who competed in bodybuilding or wanted to compete in bodybuilding who didn’t care more about hypertrophy than strength.
What is classified as “pure hypertrophy” program? Like an example. My only experience with bodybuilding style programs were in my teens reading muscle and fitness, doing “bro splits.” I’m just curious since I’ve never really looked into it.
I assumed he posted a photo of Reg Park to promote powerbuilding in response to me criticizing BBB because it incorporated hypertrophy training but wasn’t “pure” enough
Nope.
Glad you asked.
A pure hypertrophy program would have no sandbagging sets, moderate rep ranges (no heavy low reps), more weekly volume, isolations are “precise” movements rather than “accessory” movements (meaning they’re not optional and must be taken to failure). There would also be no deloads or “blocks”. It’s always a perpetual hypertrophy block.
There would also be no focus on progression because all the focus is on the muscle, to failure, every rep is controlled. You don’t try to progress in order to overload, you overload in order to progress. I stop counting reps after about 10 and keep going until I can’t anymore. Sometimes I’ll add some weight and then forget to add that same weight back the next time and end up doing more reps instead. Either way, the muscle is taken to complete failure. Chasing reps is just as bad as chasing weight because when you introduce momentum, you’re postponing failure. The only time I do intensity techniques like drop sets is only after hitting failure because if you start doing it earlier, you end up postponing failure again.
Exercise selection would include exercises allowing for greater stretch and ROM. For example a seated leg curl puts the hamstring in a stretched position compared to a lying leg curl. A machine press or dumbbell press would allow a deeper stretch and ROM than barbell bench.
I’m not beholden to barbell movements. I don’t squat, bench, or even incline press. I do hack squats, plate loaded machine chest press, and low to high cable flyes for upper chest+regular cable flyes. The idea that you need to have the big barbell movements in your routine or else you’re not a “real lifter” is costing a lot of people gains. Those big barbell movements are not only much more fatiguing, but there’s better alternatives for hypertrophy. For example, RDL is superior to DL for hypertrophy. I would argue that cable isolation movements are superior to fixed lever isolations due to the constant tension. I don’t even curl dumbbells or barbells, I do Bayesian cable curls because of the stretch and constant tension unlike free weighted curls.
Everything is optimized for hypertrophy, the ego goes completely out the door.
Are there any good examples of pre written programs to fit that template? Would Mentzer style HIT fit that template?
