At this point, I’m completely confused… and irritated.
I have no idea why trainers and trainees say jagoff shit like, “Train for performance and size will follow.” This sounds so dumb.
I have a genius idea - as usual: if you want size, train for size.
I would ask to define how to “train for strength” and “train for size”. Exclusively.
Define how to “train for strength” and “train for size”. Exclusively.
You can’t train for either exclusively. But we now have people following strength routines when size is their primary goal.
for example
wendler’s 5,3,1 may help get you stronger, and a little bigger if your eating right
but it will not a bodybuilder make
My best guess is that it would have something to do with the whole recent(?) “functional” thing. If you train for strength, your muscles will be big AND strong, not just big and unfunctionally weak with arms that only curl 35’s!
Or maybe it’s because plenty of people say that if you train for strength, you’ll get bigger (though not as fast or as much as possible), and so they want to straddle two horses with one ass? Though if what I’m told from the people on this site is correct, then the reverse works as well.
Oh well.
To hell with size and strength; let’s all get functional!
[quote]ayork90 wrote:
for example
wendler’s 5,3,1 may help get you stronger, and a little bigger if your eating right
but it will not a bodybuilder make[/quote]
Correct!
It certainly has validity from the standpoint of the relatively-novice trainer plaintively crying, “But why isn’t my chest HYUUUGE yet? I’ve been working hard and doing the right things for a solid year now!” while having 1RM’s of 185/185/don’t-do-DL’s.
The size is not going to come without getting some very substantial strength.
Whether strength is increasing or not is not only easy to be known within a few percent, but it’s glaringly obvious.
In contrast, “my arms are looking better” is not so precise.
Thus he could be fooling himself into thinking he’s progressing – the arms are always getting better yet somehow are not actually better than 6 months ago – whereas it’s hard to fool oneself into thinking one has gotten 25% stronger or what-have-you.
[quote]Bricknyce wrote:
[quote]ayork90 wrote:
for example
wendler’s 5,3,1 may help get you stronger, and a little bigger if your eating right
but it will not a bodybuilder make[/quote]
Correct![/quote]
I tried training for size using pretty much the same principles as you outlined in an older thread (not sure what it was named exactly) and it really didn’t work for me. I found I couldnt get a response from my body without squat, bench, and deadlift. Now training for strength (using 531) I’ve added more size than I did when training for size.
I’m guessing everybody is different and responds differently to different methods. So to answer the question a person’s experience of themselves get bigger through strength training could cause them to recommend it to someone else wanting to get big
[quote]Bricknyce wrote:
You can’t train for either exclusively. But we now have people following strength routines when size is their primary goal. [/quote]
Ah, I see. You were questioning, more specifically, why people who pursue the addictive drug that is bodybuilding want to follow programs such as Starting Strength, Smolov, 5/3/1, instead of 3-5 way bodypart splits.
[quote]CGspot wrote:
[quote]Bricknyce wrote:
[quote]ayork90 wrote:
for example
wendler’s 5,3,1 may help get you stronger, and a little bigger if your eating right
but it will not a bodybuilder make[/quote]
Correct![/quote]
I tried training for size using pretty much the same principles as you outlined in an older thread (not sure what it was named exactly) and it really didn’t work for me. I found I couldnt get a response from my body without squat, bench, and deadlift. Now training for strength (using 531) I’ve added more size than I did when training for size.
I’m guessing everybody is different and responds differently to different methods.[/quote]
What person in their right mind, including myself in that thread, NOT recommend using some variation of the deadlift, bench press, and squat? I didn’t reach a bodyweight of 250 at 5’10" several years ago by avoiding these exercises.
Nearly all top bodybuilders did some variation of those exercises at some time in their careers.
And I’m not against training for strength specifically at some times during the year either for recreation, fun, and variety (considering none of us has to specialize because we don’t earn a living from either powerlifting or bodybuilding) or to blast through strength (and maybe size) plateaus. As I wrote in that thread, several times, I followed a Westside programs for half the year for several years.
And also in that thread, I wrote “large muscle groups get 2 COMPOUND exercises and 1 or 2 isolation exercises” and “small muscle groups get 1 or 2 COMPOUND exercises (eg, BENCH, SQUAT, DEADLIFT) and 1 or 2 isolation exercises”.
One Guy: Correct!
Well, there can be a good reason to do that.
Yes, I know that everyone who knows what they are doing in bb’ing and are working seriously at it adds at least 2 lb of muscle a month, or at least 20 lb a year, and for example those who 5 years ago were already experienced and skilled have all added 100 lb of muscle since then.
Or at any rate to hear the talk of many, they are gaining all the time and at a good clip, yet – unless there was a change in drug usage – in fact it is not so unusual for say 3 or 6 months to go by without all that much change.
(If anyone denies this, refer to the previous paragraph: if each 3 or 6 months produced all that much change, then there would have to be cumulatively a gigantic increase over 5 years previously, this being referenced to a point of already having been training for years. I’m not comparing to just starting out, where of course there ought to be a really big increase over 5 years.)
So, if someone has noticed that in fact what he’s been doing seems to not be giving much progress, what in the world is wrong with trying something that is shockingly different and is reported to get one substantially stronger, and rapidly?
Anyone think there is no chance that a size increase will come with that? And given that progress hasn’t been so good lately, in our example, for them with ordinary bb’ing methods, why is it necessarily stupid to try Smolov for example?
Personally, Smolov Jr gave me a real improvement in the chest and rapidly, and that at age 47 and with considerably less PED’s than I’ve used before. Regardless of whether strength was a goal, it improved size. Probably out of being so different than anything I’d done before, and so intensively targeted to a given bodypart.
One thing that helps is increasing all your lift 50 %. With that kind of strength increase, it’s suberbly difficult to have no size increases. With that stress to go through all that to increase strength that substantially the body will be forced to bigger and larger, regardless.
[quote]CGspot wrote:
[quote]Bricknyce wrote:
[quote]ayork90 wrote:
for example
wendler’s 5,3,1 may help get you stronger, and a little bigger if your eating right
but it will not a bodybuilder make[/quote]
Correct![/quote]
I tried training for size using pretty much the same principles as you outlined in an older thread (not sure what it was named exactly) and it really didn’t work for me. I found I couldnt get a response from my body without squat, bench, and deadlift. Now training for strength (using 531) I’ve added more size than I did when training for size.
I’m guessing everybody is different and responds differently to different methods. So to answer the question a person’s experience of themselves get bigger through strength training could cause them to recommend it to someone else wanting to get big[/quote]
You did no squat / bench / dead variations? Huh?
What did your routine consist of, flyes, leg extensions and reverse pec deck only?
Wendler 5/3/1 is ultimately just a set/rep and progression scheme (two actually, as you have two different loading parameter tables to choose from). The 10% table is very close to regular bodybuilding… The only difference being that you cycle your intensity over 4 workouts.
Of course I wouldn’t do the “boring but big” assistance template with 5/3/1 if bodybuilding is my goal.
I would stay the fuck away from it. Or the “bodybuilder” template… None of them are all that great for bbing…
But 5/3/1 as such is quite useful for the main lifts… You won’t need it per se, but it can be used just fine with your regular 4-6 -way split. Rep out on the last set like Wendler says.
It doesn’t violate any bodybuilding principles I know of… You ramp up to a top set… You get stronger… It’s up to you to chose a proper exercise to use it on, i.e. flat bench may not be all that useful for a bodybuilder by comparison. HS bench or incline or so is better in most cases for the chest (at least if you bench with proper setup) and cgp/in-human/SWRGB are all better for the tris… HS machines, SHIPs, Seated militaries etc are better for the delts usually than st. OHP… Etc.
I used to do this for a while and it worked just fine:
Mon - Chest (light tri work sometimes)
Tue - Back (5/3/1 rack pulls)
Wed - Delts (5/3/1 Seated OHP, or at least I think that’s what I chose, was some time ago)
Thur - off
Fri - Arms (5/3/1 close-grip press, PL style)
Sat - Legs (No 5/3/1 I think… Or did I do it on the hack machine or sumo DL? Don’t remember)
Sun - off
In retrospect I would have trained some combination of bodyparts twice per week though.
Used other routines with 5/3/1 as well… Shit, you could even just say “hm, I’m stuck on EZ curls at xxx times x, so I’ll do 5/3/1 EZ curls for a few months and see how it goes”.
Wasn’t there a great quote that explained this phenomena before… You can’t put your ass on two Horses… Size and strength can (mingle) together but you can’t get much mass outta strength
[quote]Bricknyce wrote:
[quote]CGspot wrote:
[quote]Bricknyce wrote:
[quote]ayork90 wrote:
for example
wendler’s 5,3,1 may help get you stronger, and a little bigger if your eating right
but it will not a bodybuilder make[/quote]
Correct![/quote]
I tried training for size using pretty much the same principles as you outlined in an older thread (not sure what it was named exactly) and it really didn’t work for me. I found I couldnt get a response from my body without squat, bench, and deadlift. Now training for strength (using 531) I’ve added more size than I did when training for size.
I’m guessing everybody is different and responds differently to different methods.[/quote]
What person in their right mind, including myself in that thread, NOT recommend using some variation of the deadlift, bench press, and squat? I didn’t reach a bodyweight of 250 at 5’10" several years ago by avoiding these exercises.
Nearly all top bodybuilders did some variation of those exercises at some time in their careers.
And I’m not against training for strength specifically at some times during the year either for recreation, fun, and variety (considering none of us has to specialize because we don’t earn a living from either powerlifting or bodybuilding) or to blast through strength (and maybe size) plateaus. As I wrote in that thread, several times, I followed a Westside programs for half the year for several years.
And also in that thread, I wrote “large muscle groups get 2 COMPOUND exercises and 1 or 2 isolation exercises” and “small muscle groups get 1 or 2 COMPOUND exercises (eg, BENCH, SQUAT, DEADLIFT) and 1 or 2 isolation exercises”. [/quote]
Well from what I’ve seen in the bodybuilding gym I trained at none of the body builders did free weight bench, squat, or deadlift. Yes they used variations like hammer machine presses and leg press/machine squat(which are all compound lifts). When I stopped doing those three big lifts and moved to machines I got no where.
[quote]CGspot wrote:
[quote]Bricknyce wrote:
[quote]ayork90 wrote:
for example
wendler’s 5,3,1 may help get you stronger, and a little bigger if your eating right
but it will not a bodybuilder make[/quote]
Correct![/quote]
I tried training for size using pretty much the same principles as you outlined in an older thread (not sure what it was named exactly) and it really didn’t work for me. I found I couldnt get a response from my body without squat, bench, and deadlift. Now training for strength (using 531) I’ve added more size than I did when training for size.
I’m guessing everybody is different and responds differently to different methods. So to answer the question a person’s experience of themselves get bigger through strength training could cause them to recommend it to someone else wanting to get big[/quote]
Honestly…WHAT THE FUCK?
Why would someone throw out “squat, bench and deadlifts” yet consider themselves training like a bodybuilder?
Do you fuckers even watch the videos posted?
It looks like Ronnie avoided the benchpress and squat?
Branch Warren looks like he is only lifting light weights on machines?
if these guys use machines, they are MAXING THEM OUT 9 times out of ten.
If I use a hammer strength machine, you can bet the pins will be loaded by the last set with me trying to figure out how to get more weight on the thing.
[quote]CGspot wrote:
[quote]Bricknyce wrote:
[quote]CGspot wrote:
[quote]Bricknyce wrote:
[quote]ayork90 wrote:
for example
wendler’s 5,3,1 may help get you stronger, and a little bigger if your eating right
but it will not a bodybuilder make[/quote]
Correct![/quote]
I tried training for size using pretty much the same principles as you outlined in an older thread (not sure what it was named exactly) and it really didn’t work for me. I found I couldnt get a response from my body without squat, bench, and deadlift. Now training for strength (using 531) I’ve added more size than I did when training for size.
I’m guessing everybody is different and responds differently to different methods.[/quote]
What person in their right mind, including myself in that thread, NOT recommend using some variation of the deadlift, bench press, and squat? I didn’t reach a bodyweight of 250 at 5’10" several years ago by avoiding these exercises.
Nearly all top bodybuilders did some variation of those exercises at some time in their careers.
And I’m not against training for strength specifically at some times during the year either for recreation, fun, and variety (considering none of us has to specialize because we don’t earn a living from either powerlifting or bodybuilding) or to blast through strength (and maybe size) plateaus. As I wrote in that thread, several times, I followed a Westside programs for half the year for several years.
And also in that thread, I wrote “large muscle groups get 2 COMPOUND exercises and 1 or 2 isolation exercises” and “small muscle groups get 1 or 2 COMPOUND exercises (eg, BENCH, SQUAT, DEADLIFT) and 1 or 2 isolation exercises”. [/quote]
Well from what I’ve seen in the bodybuilding gym I trained at none of the body builders did free weight bench, squat, or deadlift. Yes they used variations like hammer machine presses and leg press/machine squat(which are all compound lifts). When I stopped doing those three big lifts and moved to machines I got no where.
[/quote]
First, what defines “bodybuilder” to you in terms of size…and why would you even look at someone much larger than you and assume they never did squats or bench press?
Do you even bother speaking to people?
I use more machines now also. That doesn’t erase the several years I spent doing other movements.