Why the mantra "get stronger to get bigger" is bad advice and how strength training infiltrated bodybuilding

Training
305

The principles that define powerlifting methodology, and which 5/3/1 follows would be: specificity, progressive overload, submaximal periodization, accessory work for weak points

5/3/1 applies all of these principles, which is why, despite being accessible to anyone, it is fundamentally a powerlifting-style program, not just generic strength training.

When Wendler said it’s not a powerlifting program, he’s distinguishing 5/3/1 from a classic meet-peaking routine, not denying that it is built on powerlifting principles.

306

Why not use “strength training” in your argument? How does that weaken your case? It doesn’t.

Have you got some axe to grind against Powerlifting? You would come off more even handed if you kept “Powerlifting” out of you mouth. You sure seem determined to hammer that word at every opportunity.

You have competed in bodybuilding, though only once. You have some idea of the atmosphere during a competition. Try competing in Powerlifting. It is at least ten times a better experience.

1 Like
307

That actually supports my point. The terms ‘cook’ and ‘chef’ describe different aspects: one is about practice, the other about commercial application. Similarly, powerlifting describes a training methodology (lifting with the squat, bench, and deadlift in a structured, progressive way), while competing is about sport participation. You don’t need to compete to be doing powerlifting; you only need to be following the methodology. The existence of a more specialized label chef/competitive powerlifter doesn’t negate the broader category of practice, it just adds a subset.

1 Like
308

Nope disagree

309

Who defined this ?

310

I see what you’re saying, but the distinction matters. “Strength training” is a broad category, it can include almost anything from kettlebells to calisthenics. “Powerlifting” on the other hand, refers to a specific methodology: structured progressive overload, focus on the squat, bench, and deadlift, submaximal periodization, and accessory work for weak points. Using the term isn’t an axe to grind, it’s about clarity. If I said only “strength training” I’d lose the connection to the historical lineage and principles that make programs like 5/3/1 distinctly powerlifting-style.

311

Early lifters like Reg Park, Bill Starr as well as modern coaches like Wendler and Sheiko, all emphasize these same elements: focusing on the main lifts and their variations (specificity), systematically increasing intensity (progressive overload), cycling intensity to manage fatigue (submaximal periodization), and addressing weaknesses with accessory work. These are the core methods that define the approach, not a single individual’s invention

312

By your logic, would a person lifting with powerlifting methodology for years suddenly stop doing powerlifting if they never competed in a single meet? If not, what exactly makes the methodology lose its identity without competition?

313

Yes they define strength training in general. These principles are used by multiple sports or disciplines to build strength. I don’t believe they are specific to only powerlifting though.

314

If I recall correctly you earlier said differently.

The discussion is clearly about do the training methodology or end goal define the label we use.

Arnold is doing strength focused training. SS, then 5/3/1, then he moves on to programs/methods done for PL, like RTS or Sheiko. He tests his maxes once a year and tries to improve them. But he does not do powerlifting meets.

Mike is only interested by his looks. He does various hypertrophy splits and has nice physique. But he never competes in BB, does not practice posing and does not cut his weight under 12-15% BF.

Donald signs up to a bodybuilding comp. But he’s not very smart and trains to to the comp. with Bulgarian method.

Joe signs up to a PL meet, but he’s not smart either. He trains to the meet only with isolation excersises and body part splits and does not even touch barbell.

Alan wants to train holistically. He trains strength with barbells, does some O-lifts, does isolation stuff with hogh intensity and improves his running. He of course periodises a little, but these things are present in his training and goals.

Which is which? Who’s a powerlifter, bodybuilder, weightlifter and who’s not?

This is why I like to separate strength and hypertrophy -training from being a PL or BB. It has less hazy boundaries.

You can of course say that you need to ”bodybuild” your upper body for bigger 1RM bench, but you’re not bodybuilder then. Like improving your rep strength in squats won’t turn a bodybuilder to a powerlifter, even if they both do it in their training.

And the division is not so rigid. Most people still do a mix of strength and hypertrophy training even if they’re powerlifters, weightlifters,strongman or just dudes who want to be bigger and stronger.

2 Likes
315

You’re right that these principles are foundational to strength training in general. The key difference is in their application: in powerlifting, specificity, overload, periodization, and accessory work are all deliberately structured around the squat, bench, and deadlift, with the goal of maximizing performance in those lifts. It’s this intentional focus and application that makes a program powerlifting-style, even though the principles themselves are used broadly.

316

Ok and if I read your original post correctly
You think there are people using this style of training or being told to use this style of training to become a bodybuilder ?

317

The label comes from methodology and focus, not competition alone. A powerlifter is someone training specifically to improve the squat, bench, and deadlift using powerlifting principles, even if they never compete. Arnold following 5/3/1 or RTS is powerlifting-style training; Mike’s physique-focused splits are bodybuilding; Donald competing in BB doesn’t automatically make him a bodybuilder if his training ignores the principles; Joe entering a meet but ignoring the big lifts isn’t a powerlifter. It’s about what you train and how, not just what you sign up for.

318

Bingo

There are many people who are applying powerlifting methodology to train for pure hypertrophy because they are told that getting their lifts up will give them all the muscle they want. The obfuscation comes from blurring the distinction between methodology, intent, and outcome. This creates confusion because someone could be following powerlifting principles but not training optimally for hypertrophy, yet the sentence “get stronger to get bigger” implies the methods are sufficient for muscle growth.

319

I think I’ll disagree on here.

Terms like bodybuilding -style or powerlifting -style training are used though. And they’re handy, but very unspesific.

I’m not expert in BB, but I’ve known a fair bit of powerlifters, and they do use various different training methods. Only common nominator is that gaining strength from barbell work is a part of their training.

But if we use that metric, we notice that many very succesful bodybuilders use barbells too.

Therefore I like to refer only people who compete at sport. Donald is a bodybuilder who uses a weightlifting method in his training. He’s not probably succesful one, but he’s a bodybuilder.

320

If the only criterion for being a powerlifter is competition, then by your logic someone could spend decades training exclusively with the squat, bench, and deadlift using progressive overload and periodization, perfectly following all powerlifting principles, but still not be a powerlifter until they sign up for a meet. Doesn’t that seem arbitrary? How does simply entering a competition suddenly change the methodology they were following all along?

321

This is the bit I don’t see in person. I see powerlifters and strongmen using strength training concepts and programming and I see bodybuilders training completely differently. Maybe it’s just the gym you go to, but down here in OZ this is not a thing mate.

2 Likes
322

You’re not necessarily wrong, specially of you refer to maximal strength (1-3 rep range).

But guess what? Majority on population should not train much max. strength anyway. Even powerlifters tend to use limited time in max strength area.

Get strong to get big refers usually getting strong in reps (5-12 or so). And that will definitely get you big. I’ve said it over an over again, but most people aren’t strong and big enough. No matter the goal.

1 Like
323

I used to see it on the bodybuilding forums all over the place before they got shut down and I see it all over YouTube fitness and in my gym.

324

It does not. Methology does not define this like I said.

It’s too murky, since most programs do use strength and hypertrophy anyway.