Confession time - I’m secretly a single mom.
Did he punch drywall?
How did you know my childs name?
That is just wrong. It is never necessary to know scientifically why something works for it to work for many who apply it.
Bro-science becomes bro-science because there is much evidence that it does work. There is absolutely no irony in that. Bro-science applied insulin management before it became known to the medical community.
1 Like
This depends on how you define an impressive physique. The guy in Muscle & Fitness telling you his fake workout? The young dude at the gym with lots of suspiciously vascular muscle struggling to lift fifty pounds on the machine? Johnny Weissmuller as Tarzan genuinely impressing the masses with his 14” biceps?
Or is an impressive physique simply one which is balanced and in the top ten or twenty percent of muscularity? You can always make a definition which few can achieve, but to what end?
Unless you try to do something beyond what you have already mastered, you will never grow ~ Ralph Waldo Emerson
Be what you are. This is the first step toward becoming better than you are.
~ Julius Charles Hare
Tri Set Combos that work
Tri Sets one month, then Regular Sets the next month. One month you get all the benefits you mentioned from tri sets, then the next month you just get regular big and strong. Maybe you’re taking turns building sarcoplastic and the myofribular hypertrophy. Maybe it just keeps things fresh and exciting. Either way, it’s cool.
Some cool combos have been
DeFranco Shoulder Shocker
Front Plate Raise x 10
Side DB Raise x 10
DB Cuban Press x 10
For Triceps Long Head
Skull Crusher to forehead x 6 with 3 count eccentric
Skull Crusher to nose x 6 with 2 count eccentric
Skull Crusher to chin x AMRAP with 1 count eccentric
Triceps in General
Band Pushdown, v style grip
Overhead Band Extension
Neutral Grip Band Pushdown
round and round switching whenever you need, until you hit 100 reps
For my lagging forearms
Reverse barbell Curl, wide grip x 6 with 3 count eccentric
Zottman Curl or Hammer Curl x 6 with 2 count eccentric
Reverse Barbell Curl, medium width grip x 4 with 5 count eccentric
General Biceps
DB Spider Curl x 10ish
DB Incline Curl x 10ish
DB Hammer Curl x AMRAP
Hamstrings
Hamstring Curl x 10
Nordic Hinge x 6-8
Hamstring Curl x 10
3 Likes
I think you misunderstood that… You still have bro’s pushing the pump, burn-out sets, drop-sets, finishers, metabolic stress, Sarcoplasm, etc… all of which are junk per physiological studies / outcomes.
While it might not be necessary to know scientifically… don’t you think it would be wise to know why?? Otherwise, you don’t really know if your bro-science is actual science.
1 Like
Objectively speaking I think we’d all be in agreement an “impressive physique” is one that’s not very common at all and on the muscular, lean, aesthetic side or the freak side.
What bro applied his science regarding insulin management??
Google - What is bro science
Broscience involves sharing anecdotes or advice, presented as facts but with no scientific basis . The term is most common in the body-building community, associated with muscular men imparting unproven and untrue tactics about training and eating to bicep wannabes.
Had you been lifting during the 1970’s and ‘80’s you would know actually how stupid that sounded.
Science surrounding anything lifting weights was a total joke. Who would care what the scientific community thought?
Just know that you only have the best science today as your science. Tomorrow it may be antiquated science. I recall when the best science believed margarine was healthier than butter. And I have posted a pic from the PDR where there a warning that anabolic steroids do not enhance athletic ability. That is the science that I was lifting through.
1 Like
Frequent protein meals to maintain a fairly stable blood sugar, thus you minimize insulin spikes which can help store fat. Avoid all simple sugars which cause insulin spikes.
That is term that only used because it is what many on the site treat as bodybuilder trial and error knowledge. I never used it until 2019.
Maybe there is no sarcoplasmic hypertrophy. But putting the metabolic stress on the muscles increases mitochondria, capillaries and satellite cells that set you up for “real” myofribular hypertrophy when you return to normal training.
And if you don’t build any real mass, at least you’re all swollen up and not going backwards in size while not training super heavy.
2 Likes
I began lifting circa 1988. And was always looking at the old school magazines. You’re taking this way too personally.
You’re suggesting scientists weren’t aware of this until bro’s brought it to their attention??
No. I am suggesting that scientists didn’t care what the weight lifting community was doing
1 Like
The thing that changed to some degree was that scientists sometimes started lifting weights. Or lifters went to graduate school.
Bro-science can be very good, in the same way science can be very good. But you have to listen to the right bros. Just as some scientists publish better work in better journals. And some scientists do nothing meaningful or original. Or are wrong.
Most lifters want something that will work for them. Most scientists are studying a small group that may be quite different from you, and are trying to quantify things in search of statistical proof. But sometimes cannot see the trees for the forest. Where’s the evidence?
That’s where guys like Thibs really changed the lifting game. He understands the science, can explain complicated things well (and humorously) without condescension or leaving out important details, and has applied the science to thousands of people practicing over thirty sports. Supertraining was an impressive book at a time most books were just showing lots of pictures of drug-assisted lifters “who really know how to work the hamstrings!”. Simmons was a genius. But there wasn’t a real equivalent to Thibs or Contreras or Schoenfeld forty years ago.
I “learned” to lift after reading Gold’s Gym Strength Training For Athletes. A great book for the time. But it didn’t contain the deadlift, so I didn’t do that my first three years of lifting. Less of a loss than you’d think.
1 Like
It does fit the scientific method.
Volume and bro splits weren’t a thing until fairly recently as it were
Old school was full body which I’ve adopted recently and like it.
Ever try FB?
To be clear… This is bro science to me -
Broscience involves sharing anecdotes or advice, presented as facts but with no scientific basis . The term is most common in the body-building community, associated with muscular men imparting unproven and untrue tactics about training and eating to bicep wannabes.