Are these people you see online trying to get views or likes, or is it people you see in your gym. I don’t see any bodybuilders maxing out or talking about the weight they lift. I do agree that there are lots of people who train at a gym who want to talk about how strong they are, But I don’t specifically see them as bodybuilders or see it as a bad thing.
3 Likes
I also wonder how many actual bodybuilders are too focused on strength.
OP has a point, but I have no idea if it is a real problem (most people in the gym need to get bigger and stronger anyway, no matter the goal).
2 Likes
I think it’s more around advice like “chin-ups are all you need for biceps,” which we certainly do see.
I’m kind of in the camp that all roads lead to Rome, more or less, but I do like this.
Good point. I think that’s what @simo74 is saying too.
3 Likes
Just catching up in here.
5 Likes
Let’s talk box squats for raw lifters. 
3 Likes
Im not even sure what this debate thread is about now.
I mean is it about hypertrophy or just Bodybuilding?
If I am an actual bodybuilder, I suppose I fall into this category. When I cut for a contest it was extremely important to me to have a “strength metric” which was used to adjust carbohydrates and cardio time. I made every effort to lose no strength on an upper body compound exercise that I could do 8 reps at the start of my diet. I felt if I dropped to 7 reps that I lost strength and therefore I lost muscle.
Yes, I was extremely focused on strength.
3 Likes
If the title was “How and why I use the 9-12 Reps to Failure Method for bodybuilding” and the tone of the post was more informative and less accusatory, would anyone have even commented?
4 Likes
How about a little history lesson on the intertwining of competitive bodybuilding and powerlifting? It was almost a forced intertwining. The blame can be fully placed on the AAU.
The AAU scoring for bodybuilding at some place in time before 1970 consisted of four sections:
- Symmetry - 25 points max
- Muscularity - 25 points max
- Presentation - 25 points max
- Athletic component - 5 points max
The ranking of the places fell according to the number of points the competitors were awarded by the judges.
So, you ask, “What is this athletic component?” My guess it started from the old adage of a bodybuilder’s muscle are all show, no go. The AAU had various sports that could contribute to your athletic component score. One of them was Powerlifting.
So, you might guess when most AAU bodybuilding contests were held (even some during the 1970’s). Yes, after an AAU Powerlifting Meet. Back in the 1960’s the competitor could get his athletic component points just before the show. The bodybuilding contests that I did that were at the end of a Powerlifting meet, were lucky to start before 11:00pm.
It was nice to see the end of the marriage between Powerlifting and Bodybuilding.
2 Likes
Hypertrophy=bodybuilding
Bodybuilding is more about progressive overload through quality, rather than quantity. Since quality is much harder to quantify, focusing on the amount of weight moved or reps done becomes counterproductive. Many people are sacrificing hypertrophy by throwing on weight too fast or introducing some momentum to get to that last rep in their double progression so that they can then add weight.
For example, “Add 5lbs when 5 reps become 7” is not good advice for bodybuilding because chasing reps becomes just as bad as chasing weight, you’re only delaying the chase in weight by chasing reps instead. This is why in bodybuilding, the primary focus is stimulus or failure of the targeted muscle. The weight and reps will come automatically. There’s no point in trying to quantify something as subtle as rep speed. Progressive overload is an outcome.
Don’t force progress in order to overload, overload in order to force progress.
IMO, OP does promote this pathway. But on this thread, instead of addressing both pure strength and training to failure, he addressed, primarily, that 1 rep max is not an assurance of maximum hypertrophy. It seems they are two distinctly different battlegrounds. He addressed the pure strength battleground.
Most here agreed with some subtle variations. I am one of those.
Had he also insisted on the “necessity” of training to failure, I would greatly oppose that, if only based on what I have seen of others with my own eyes, not to mention the success I had with thigh development that never included training to failure.
4 Likes
So you’re saying bodybuilders should focus on muscular fatigue and not increase weights/reps in the expense of form? I think nobody disagrees.
I feel your claims are alright, but you throw untrue/weirdly angled premises to support them.
I’m sure when @RT_Nomad used strength as a metric when competing in bodybuilding, he did not push the incline benches (or any other movement) with shitty form just to get needed reps in.
Chasing strength (numbers, reps, quality, speed) doesn’t mean you couldn’t focus also on quality or muscular fatigue.
The Op seems hyper focused on Starting Strength. Which no one one here would ever consider a “ Body Builder “ program.
You also nailed it on the head regarding the whole 1 Rm comment imo
1 Like
Bodybuilding is more about progressive overload through quality, rather than quantity. Since quality is much harder to quantify, focusing on the amount of weight moved or reps done becomes counterproductive. Many people are sacrificing hypertrophy by throwing on weight too fast or introducing some momentum to get to that last rep in their double progression so that they can then add weight.
For example, “Add 5lbs when 5 reps become 7” is not good advice for bodybuilding because chasing reps becomes just as bad as chasing weight, you’re only delaying the chase in weight by chasing reps instead. This is why in bodybuilding, the primary focus is stimulus or failure of the targeted muscle. Theweight and reps will come automatically. There’s no point in trying to quantify something as subtle as rep speed. Progressive overload is an outcome.
Don’t force progress in order to overload, overload in order to force progress.
1 Like
Training to failure rather than 1-2RM is just more efficient and won’t require as much weekly volume when training with that kind of quality. However there are instances where failure wouldn’t be a good idea such as good mornings or Romanian deadlifts. But a curl for example..I see no reason why it shouldn’t be taken all the way to failure. I see many people actually half assing their isolations because to them it’s just “supplemental”. They knocked out their heavy bench presses and now they can “chill out” and do some “fluff and pump” on the flies.
Not at all
2 Likes
I’m a hypertrophy purist and bodybuilding is the most efficient way to do it. You can get hypertrophy doing olympics lifts but I wouldn’t consider that bodybuilding. If you take someone doing nothing but olympics lifts vs. someone doing nothing but bodybuilding, the one doing bodybuilding will have more hypertrophy. The more keen you are on something or experienced, the more specialized and precise you have to be.
If for example my obsession is forearms, I’m going to say that forearm training=wrist curls but for someone who isn’t obsessed with forearms, they could argue that forearm training=deadlifting.
@T3hPwnisher probably did not excactly mean that. He meant that if somebody is doing hypertrophy training he/she is not necessarily a bodybuilder.
I do PL training currently and it involves a fair bit hypertrophy training, even with isolation movements. But I’m not a bodybuilder.
@RT_Nomad is, since he has competed in bodybuilding and trained spesifically for BB competitions.
1 Like