Science is how we can keep training objective. 1RM and triples are bad for hypertrophy, bar none. There’s a reason why bodybuilding training works well for hypertrophy and powerlifting training works well for the big 3. Science. It’s not ambiguous, it’s not confusing
Allow me to ask you a question. When you decided to compete in the only bodybuilding contest that you competed, did you happen to have a copy of the rule book? Did you ask for a copy of the rule book, or the location of a web page with the rules?
If not, why not?
But this is just a minor part of powerlifting training. Some powerlifters do 1-3 rep ranges very rarely, some do singles only in competition.
Hell even look at 5/3/1. The 1 has always been a plus set usually aiming for more than 3 reps if you run it correctly. An OP claims this to be a powerlifting program
1 Like
Yeah.
There have been PLs who’ve done 5-10 rep sets with loads of “bodybuilding” (hypertrophy) isolation work right up to the meet.
I know a case where a powerlifter could not do volume in deads. So he rowed, did leg presses, back extensions and abs. All high reps. He did deadlifts only on a meet day. And performed alright.
1 Like
If I took your approach to bodybuilding, I wouldn’t be where I am now physique-wise. I would just approach my training with a mixed-bag of ideas that’s not grounded in science or anything
A quick Google search defines 5/3/1 as powerlifting lol. It’s ran on powerlifting principles, you can nitpick all you want
I don’t know enough from bodybuilding, but I know a fair bit about powerlifting and science behind it.
And if we leave the science out, we can just look the empirical evidence of powerlifters succeeding with various different approaches.
Often the traditional powerlifting training is the best, but not always. This has been said by probably one of the most successful modern PL coach. Don’t exclude options.
But this is kinda sidelined from the original topic anyway.
I’m glad we are appealing to the academic authority of a quick google search and not the text of the man who wrote it
3 Likes
The man who wrote it as in the powerlifter? I’m glad you can ignore the elephant in the room that the author was a powerlifter LOL
Why do I feel like you failed or would fail these logic classes you talk about
2 Likes
I have a feeling this is one of those cases when “science” or “doing a research” means Googling it for a 5 minutes.
I’m borrowing Dave Tate here, just for the record.
2 Likes
You just accused me of appealing to a Google search and not the man who wrote 5/3/1 while not acknowledging the fact that the man who wrote it was a powerlifter. Can’t make this up
To that, for some reason I feel like these “coaches” OP talks about are influencer coaches
1 Like
No, they’re professional coaches. Louie Simmons, Greg Nuckols, Wendler, etc. I’m able to distinguish between bs influencer coaches and actual coaches lol
2 Likes
Would you say a book written by a communist is communist propaganda even if there’s nothing like that in the text?
Ok good! I mean that’s a valid question and you ignoring it didn’t help anything
I had one extra thought. I wonder why someone with no intention of going to a meet would train very specific powerlifting training.
It’s not the most fun way of training, not even close. 
Usually even powerlifters don’t end up training very specifically for PL until they have to (as the meet gets closer).
This is hilarious. 5/3/1 is grounded in powerlifting principles because it centers on the big lifts: squat, bench, deadlift, and press: while using progressive overload with percentages of your max to build strength. The program emphasizes low-rep, heavy lifts for maximal strength.
Is that not a part of powerlifting?
If I remember correctly Jim writes in the preface of the first book something like this: this is not a powerlifting program.
2 Likes