Why Would Someone NOT Get Bigger?

Bigger Stronger Leaner Competitive Bodybuilding
21

Also relevant,

“Bodybuilding-type training utilizes very high-volume repetition and set configurations that cause an increase in metabolic substrate stores in the muscle. The addition of glycogen and high-energy phosphates to the cell causes additional water to be stored. This effect, combined with minor accumulations of fat droplets, enzymes relevant to the additional activity, and a moderate increase in contractile proteins, causes the cell volume to increase. It is also quite likely, although not well supported in the literature, that an increase in mitochondria will also contribute to this type of hypertrophy. Indirect support of this concept comes from the fact that the slow-twitch fibers of bodybuilders are the most hypertrophied of all the fiber types measured among weight trainees, or of any athletic group investigated, and that slow-twitch fibers have the highest mitochondrial density of all the fiber types. This indicates that bodybuilding training is sufficiently endurance-based in nature to drive changes in mitochondria-rich slow-twitch muscles and thus may result in increased mitochondrial biogenesis in the relevant fiber types. However, since this type of hypertrophy lacks a significant force-production component, it explains why some individuals with smaller muscle mass can out-lift individuals with much more extensive muscular development derived from bodybuilding.”

– Practical Programming for Strength Training p.92

22

[quote]elano wrote:
Also relevant,

“Bodybuilding-type training utilizes very high-volume repetition and set configurations that cause an increase in metabolic substrate stores in the muscle. The addition of glycogen and high-energy phosphates to the cell causes additional water to be stored. This effect, combined with minor accumulations of fat droplets, enzymes relevant to the additional activity, and a moderate increase in contractile proteins, causes the cell volume to increase. It is also quite likely, although not well supported in the literature, that an increase in mitochondria will also contribute to this type of hypertrophy. Indirect support of this concept comes from the fact that the slow-twitch fibers of bodybuilders are the most hypertrophied of all the fiber types measured among weight trainees, or of any athletic group investigated, and that slow-twitch fibers have the highest mitochondrial density of all the fiber types. This indicates that bodybuilding training is sufficiently endurance-based in nature to drive changes in mitochondria-rich slow-twitch muscles and thus may result in increased mitochondrial biogenesis in the relevant fiber types. However, since this type of hypertrophy lacks a significant force-production component, it explains why some individuals with smaller muscle mass can out-lift individuals with much more extensive muscular development derived from bodybuilding.”

– Practical Programming for Strength Training p.92[/quote]

Ya know, I’ve always liked “do 3 to 4 sets of 6 to 12 reps” better than this sort of stuff.

23

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]Sarev0k wrote:
Theres way more variables than jsut being in the “HYP” range.

Formidible Intensity + Surplus Nutrients(Optimal Nutrient Timing) + Sufficient Recovery Time = Growth.

At least in my experience, that is. I had 16 inch arms and 24 inch legs $when i first started reading T-Nation 2 years ago. My arms are above 18 after working out even know when dieting down, and my legs are now 26, down from 27 when i weighed 252.

I personally think that sarcoplasmic hypertrophy concepts are a scientifically irrelevant and were originally created to just get people to do Higher or lower reps instead of sticking in the 6-12 range for the rest of their lives.

Clever, but causes a mess.[/quote]

It wasn’t clever at all. When these personal trainers do shit like create scientific mountains out of theoretical ant hills, all they cause is confusion in the long run. That is why these newbs actually believe that the muscle you build doing a certain number of reps is somehow structurally different than the muscle built in another rep range.

That is why they are confused enough to believe that you either train for STRENGTH or SIZE but that both are so different than they need special attention for each.

98% of the people reading these articles need to shut the fucking computer off and would be far better suited by getting a gym membership that gets used daily, a college level biology and A&P book, and following what the really big guys are doing.

Sadly, because of this personal trainer promoted confusion, there are far fewer big guys even around lately.[/quote]

Lerning more about the nervous system this year helped me discard the Myo/Sarco Myth. Getting bigger and stronger come hand in hand, not one or the other. IMHO.

Personal trainers nowadays have people doing the DUMBEST shit. The Myo/Sarco Myth is no more than a theoretical Bosu Ball.

Gets more people to ask and become clients.

24

BTW Prof, did you ever get my PM?

25

I didn’t make much progress at all my first year of training.

I was a prime case of paralysis of (over) analysis. I refused to eat anything that I didn’t think was “clean” (white bread was evil, couldn’t touch it) and despite eating religiously 6 times a day on the minute wasn’t taking in many calories at all as a result.

I also had an unpredictable job schedule and a gym that was only open from 5pm-9pm on weekdays so on some weeks I only made it 2 days. Did I spend the money I earned on a home gym so I could train anytime I wanted? Of course not, had to buy $200 worth of supplements every month.

All this on top of spending as much time as I could on the forums putting more effort into learning about training than I actually was training, using advanced training programs when I hadn’t done the basics, switching programs constantly, etc.

Result? I got leaner and a bit stronger, but I was still 150 lbs. It was a good thing that I got my head screwed on right when I got to college.

26

[quote]IronAbrams wrote:
I didn’t make much progress at all my first year of training.

I was a prime case of paralysis of (over) analysis. I refused to eat anything that I didn’t think was “clean” (white bread was evil, couldn’t touch it) and despite eating religiously 6 times a day on the minute wasn’t taking in many calories at all as a result.

I also had an unpredictable job schedule and a gym that was only open from 5pm-9pm on weekdays so on some weeks I only made it 2 days. Did I spend the money I earned on a home gym so I could train anytime I wanted? Of course not, had to buy $200 worth of supplements every month.

All this on top of spending as much time as I could on the forums putting more effort into learning about training than I actually was training, using advanced training programs when I hadn’t done the basics, switching programs constantly, etc.

Result? I got leaner and a bit stronger, but I was still 150 lbs. It was a good thing that I got my head screwed on right when I got to college.[/quote]

You basically just told my story, except I did all that for 4 years :S

27

Strength depends on:

physiological section of muscle
-If you were to add all involved muscle fiber diameters up, you get the physiological section
(size related)

intermuscular coordination → CNS
-ability, how well does your body fire the involved movers together
(NOT size related)

intramuscular coordination → CNS
-ability, how well does your body fire the muscle fibers
(many factors play into this, NOT size related)

fiber composition
-fast twitch or slow twitch, how many % of the section?
(NOT size related)

-fiber length

willpower, motivation (, skill)

Bottomline:
You can easily get stronger without involving Hypertrophy.
Of course, in reality this is not easy to attain. (but sought after by many fighters, strength athletes and others)

28

[quote]spongechris wrote:

Bottomline:
You can easily get stronger without involving Hypertrophy.
Of course, in reality this is not easy to attain. (but sought after by many fighters, strength athletes and others)[/quote]

Overly simplistic and also a part of the confusion. You will only get stronger to a point before more size is needed to get even stronger. Someone who never gains any muscle size will not be able to continually get stronger over time like someone who gains muscle mass.

29

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]spongechris wrote:

Bottomline:
You can easily get stronger without involving Hypertrophy.
Of course, in reality this is not easy to attain. (but sought after by many fighters, strength athletes and others)[/quote]

Overly simplistic and also a part of the confusion. You will only get stronger to a point before more size is needed to get even stronger. Someone who never gains any muscle size will not be able to continually get stronger over time like someone who gains muscle mass.[/quote]

you are not getting the point. the op asked for explanations how strength gains can happen without “size” gains. and if you criticise my post, can you please add about how it is overly simplistic in relation to the question asked? it would be cool if i might actually get something out of your critique.

30

[quote]spongechris wrote:
Strength depends on:

physiological section of muscle
-If you were to add all involved muscle fiber diameters up, you get the physiological section
(size related)

intermuscular coordination → CNS
-ability, how well does your body fire the involved movers together
(NOT size related)

intramuscular coordination → CNS
-ability, how well does your body fire the muscle fibers
(many factors play into this, NOT size related)

fiber composition
-fast twitch or slow twitch, how many % of the section?
(NOT size related)

-fiber length

willpower, motivation (, skill)

Bottomline:
You can easily get stronger without involving Hypertrophy.
Of course, in reality this is not easy to attain. (but sought after by many fighters, strength athletes and others)[/quote]

Ya know, I’ve always liked the old-fasioned formula for getting big - 3 to 4 sets of 8 to 12 reps.

Ya know, I’ve always liked the old-fashioned formula for getting strong - work up to a 1 to 5 rep max…

… and never having to think of this physiology textbook shit ever again!

31

[quote]Professor X wrote:
98% of the people reading these articles need to shut the fucking computer off and would be far better suited by getting a gym membership that gets used daily, a college level biology and A&P book, and following what the really big guys are doing.

[/quote]

Agreed except drop the A&P book - that would just confuse them, or cause them to attempt to read all 1500 pages before daring to actually set foot in a gym…

32

[quote]spongechris wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]spongechris wrote:

Bottomline:
You can easily get stronger without involving Hypertrophy.
Of course, in reality this is not easy to attain. (but sought after by many fighters, strength athletes and others)[/quote]

Overly simplistic and also a part of the confusion. You will only get stronger to a point before more size is needed to get even stronger. Someone who never gains any muscle size will not be able to continually get stronger over time like someone who gains muscle mass.[/quote]

you are not getting the point. the op asked for explanations how strength gains can happen without “size” gains. and if you criticise my post, can you please add about how it is overly simplistic in relation to the question asked? it would be cool if i might actually get something out of your critique.[/quote]

I already did point it out. The reasons so many of these guys think they can just work on strength without ever gaining any weight is because of people writing sentences like you did before.

I guarantee a great number of people on this site didn’t understand that their muscles ultimately NEED to get bigger for them to continually get stronger.

33

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]spongechris wrote:

Bottomline:
You can easily get stronger without involving Hypertrophy.
Of course, in reality this is not easy to attain. (but sought after by many fighters, strength athletes and others)[/quote]

Overly simplistic and also a part of the confusion. You will only get stronger to a point before more size is needed to get even stronger. Someone who never gains any muscle size will not be able to continually get stronger over time like someone who gains muscle mass.[/quote]

As I am sure you are aware and realize there are very good reasons why people would NOT WANT to get bigger (maintain a weight class, etc). However I think one can get stronger without gaining any muscle at all…especially in the untrained population.

In the trained population this would be more difficult to do but it would usually be done by increasing coordination in a movement, learning to do a certain movement more efficiently. If you take a guy that can bench 135 and then teach him how to do it more efficiently and then he can bench 225, he is stronger is he not?

If a guy runs a 100 meters in 10 seconds and you teach him how to run better and he runs it in 8 seconds…we says he is faster. So why wouldn’t the guy benching be stronger?

34

Well, i agree with your point Professor X.
But you are still arguing on what you think the op really wants, instead of what he asked for IF i am not mistaken.

The thing that bothers me is not your statement itself, but that you imply you know better than the op what he wants - as you are answering a question he did not ask. Or are you not answering him? my english still leaves room for mistakes.

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]spongechris wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]spongechris wrote:

Bottomline:
You can easily get stronger without involving Hypertrophy.
Of course, in reality this is not easy to attain. (but sought after by many fighters, strength athletes and others)[/quote]

Overly simplistic and also a part of the confusion. You will only get stronger to a point before more size is needed to get even stronger. Someone who never gains any muscle size will not be able to continually get stronger over time like someone who gains muscle mass.[/quote]

you are not getting the point. the op asked for explanations how strength gains can happen without “size” gains. and if you criticise my post, can you please add about how it is overly simplistic in relation to the question asked? it would be cool if i might actually get something out of your critique.[/quote]

I already did point it out. The reasons so many of these guys think they can just work on strength without ever gaining any weight is because of people writing sentences like you did before.

I guarantee a great number of people on this site didn’t understand that their muscles ultimately NEED to get bigger for them to continually get stronger.[/quote]

35

It’s also relative.

Sure, it’s probably possible to go from curling the 15’s to curling the 35’s without a whole lot of increase in muscle mass for most people. But, I’ve never seen anyone who went from curling the 15’s to curling the 90’s who didn’t have to put on serious muscle in their upper arms.

To a certain degree improvements in skill (nervous system efficiency) will result in strength gains, but this is (like X pointed out) only going to take someone so far and isn’t going to result in big time strength gains.

36

I agree 100% with Prof. X. This has been my experience for the past 13 years or so. I think you can lean it one way or the other, but ultimately they are related. If you get bigger it is a hell of a lot easier to get a lot stronger. Also using the right exercises helps a lot too. On top of that, there are a lot of individual differences, some people are able to get very strong without putting on a lot of size due to genetics reasons. Then you have some freaks who get really big, but they don’t lift as much weight as you would think, just due to genetics, like leverages, fiber type, etc.

37

[quote]spongechris wrote:

you are not getting the point. the op asked for explanations how strength gains can happen without “size” gains. and if you criticise my post, can you please add about how it is overly simplistic in relation to the question asked? it would be cool if i might actually get something out of your critique.[/quote]

Actually the OP’s question was more specific than you quoted here. I interpreted him asking "how can you get stronger WHILE TRAINING FOR HYPERTROPHY and not get any size gains.

In my admittedly limited lifting experience, once I got past newbie gains I could not gain strength until I gained size along with it while I was training for hypertrophy (5-10 rep range for me). Any time I broke through a major strength plateau, it came with an increase in size.

38

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]spongechris wrote:

Bottomline:
You can easily get stronger without involving Hypertrophy.
Of course, in reality this is not easy to attain. (but sought after by many fighters, strength athletes and others)[/quote]

Overly simplistic and also a part of the confusion. You will only get stronger to a point before more size is needed to get even stronger. Someone who never gains any muscle size will not be able to continually get stronger over time like someone who gains muscle mass.[/quote]

This is true. I know personally that I cannot get stronger without gaining weight/eating enough calories. Your CNS can only get so efficient at recruiting fibers.

39

[quote]spongechris wrote:
Well, i agree with your point Professor X.
But you are still arguing on what you think the op really wants, instead of what he asked for IF i am not mistaken.

The thing that bothers me is not your statement itself, but that you imply you know better than the op what he wants - as you are answering a question he did not ask. Or are you not answering him? my english still leaves room for mistakes.

[/quote]

Uh, the OP had a very clear misunderstanding of whether you could gain STRENGTH while training for SIZE…yet you think I am answering questions he didn’t ask?

I seem to be one of the few actually responding to what he was asking.

40

[quote]mmllcc wrote:

As I am sure you are aware and realize there are very good reasons why people would NOT WANT to get bigger (maintain a weight class, etc).[/quote]

I am also well aware that most of the people here claiming they ONLY want strength are NOT involved in sports with weight classes but have been convinced by personal trainers that big muscles (like bodybuilders) are weak and structurally different. I think I addressed both issues.

[quote]
However I think one can get stronger without gaining any muscle at all…especially in the untrained population. [/quote]

Gee, not much past beginner gains. Who the hell have you known who goes from benching 150 to 405 without gaining muscle size?

Why the hell are we even discussing people with minor goals in muscle mass? If someone is just looking to go up 10lbs on their bench press from their currently massive 150lbs then they are in the wrong forum.

[quote]
In the trained population this would be more difficult to do but it would usually be done by increasing coordination in a movement, learning to do a certain movement more efficiently. If you take a guy that can bench 135 and then teach him how to do it more efficiently and then he can bench 225, he is stronger is he not? [/quote]

He would also be a very rare specimen to go from lifting 135 to 225 with NO gains in muscle mass at all. Has ANYONE here done that?