spartacus
Well-known member
this a good read on topic.
https://www.t-nation.com/training/why-bodybuilders-are-more-jacked-than-powerlifters
https://www.t-nation.com/training/why-bodybuilders-are-more-jacked-than-powerlifters
this a good read on topic.
https://www.t-nation.com/training/why-bodybuilders-are-more-jacked-than-powerlifters
Surely the bloke doing quicker reps will reach the short term goal sooner and be able to up the weight?
So then if in 3 months time one bloke is lifting 100 x 10 and the other is lifting 75 x 10 at the slower cadence, who is stronger?
I don't think I'm missing the point, it was a genuine question.
Who is stronger? And without them both testing a 1rm, how do you tell which is stronger?
Is a 1rm the only method of testing strength? Perhaps for a powerlifter but what if you're not?
No brainer there but the kips are primarily for speed... yeah?
this a good read on topic.
https://www.t-nation.com/training/why-bodybuilders-are-more-jacked-than-powerlifters
Sure, people naturally gravitate toward what they're good at.
In the world of strength training, those with a greater predisposition for strength will be more inclined to train like or become a powerlifter, while those with a greater predisposition for size will be more inclined to train like or become bodybuilders.
Powerlifting has more to do with leverages, the nervous system, and technique refinement, while bodybuilding has more to do with aesthetics, symmetry, muscularity, and conditioning.
Strength is dependent on plenty of factors, but tendon insertions play a huge role in the ability to exert maximal force.
Let's use a biceps curl as an example. Say you're curling a 60-pound dumbbell and you're halfway up at 90 degrees and moving very slowly.
To figure out a general estimate of muscle force requirements of the biceps, you divide the moment of the resistance arm by the length of the muscle arm.
This means that you multiply the resistance (60 pounds) by the resistance arm (say 15 inches from the elbow to the dumbbell) and then divide it by the muscle arm (say 1 inch from the elbow to the biceps insertion).
This would give us 900 inch-pounds, a measure of torque. In this example, the biceps must produce 900 inch-pounds of force.
What happens if the individual's biceps tendon inserts 2 inches away from the fulcrum? Now you divide by 2 instead of 1, which means that the biceps now only has to produce 450 inch-pounds of force to hold a 60-pound dumbbell at a 90-degree elbow angle.
This demonstrates just how advantageous tendon insertions are to external force production - two guys could have equal strength in their biceps but one can lift twice the amount of weight due to his leverages.
I've never seen any difference Alex.
The way I see it, is a muscle must becomes bigger to facilitate strength.
How that is achieved will vary from one person to another, if you're getting bigger and stronger, then something you are doing is right (for you).
This industry is fad based, the methods are quite simple, made complex by experts.
That is true, but when I am maximising just my ability to lift weight, I'm making the muscles work as little as possible that's for sure
Just because of my general higher than average strength, my strength goes down in off season phases but I am stronger at repping
Yes I see your point Andy. ?I think primarily to fit in as many rep's as possible in a given time.
but you see the point I'm trying to here don't you? Or not.