walt
DuffProteinMan
I think it was the 50's or 60's when bodybuilding wasn't really a sport and was performed after the weightlifting, so the bodybuilders at that time all were quite strong because they had to be for competition.
Lets be clear here, Some of them may have done powerlifting style training very early on and everything else in between however, their physiques were built with bodybuilding.
Arnold didn't get the pump by doing 3 reps
I think it was the 50's or 60's when bodybuilding wasn't really a sport and was performed after the weightlifting, so the bodybuilders at that time all were quite strong because they had to be for competition.
So that is everything? Have you read said studies in entirety? Do you know how to critically dissect a study? Have you looked for studies that run contrary to your hypothesis? If not don't use studies to back your statement.
I am not against the point (besides you thinking you can't gain significant mass when still training for strength as a primary goal) i am against you using someone else's knowledge as the be all and end all and then thinking and acting like you know the details behind it.
Volume (which in turn means time under tension) builds mass when sufficient calories and nutrients are present. Smaller volume normally means less size. Getting more TUT normally means more size. Not revolutionary, but you have to remember not everyone wants to be a competitive bodybuilder and a lot do it for overall function (size, strength, looks, health etc).
I'm pretty much a complete novice, but i've been training for just under a year now. And from my experience so far on a strength program, i've grown quite alot. i've put on around 20kg in 8 months and all of my lifts have skyrocketed, i know that either way this would of all probably happened if i stuck to it, but i feel that it does depend on the person doing the program. And it would be lie to say my muscles haven't developed. I've built a fairly decent chest from bench and dips. I doubt it would of made much difference if i had a full chest day, same with legs with squats and back with deads.
Its well known that higher reps at a higher intensity produces greater hypertrophy results. Even powerlifters recognise this and apply the knowledge appropriately in their assistance training, so I am wondering what you're trying to imply with this post.
I totaly agree with you about not everyone wants to be*just a bodybuilder* and have a bit of everything *size,str,development* im just saying for someone that does wanna look there best or be a bodybuilder the innervation style is the way to get there quicker.
As for beginners, obviouslly its where they start out that needs to be adressed if there skinny they need to build the foundation first with alot of compound movements........ Like they say you cant sculpt a pebble.
RONNIE COLEMAN - 360 kls (800 pounds) - YouTube
Here is Ronnie Coleman training for strength? kind of contradicts what you're saying doesnt it?
you just contradicted yourself completely there.
Saying train the "bodybuilding" way, then saying beginners need to train differently????
ps - Learn to multi quote
Ok i think i need to clear everything and kind of start from the beginning, cause i feel people have misunderstood me. Obviouslly if lifts go from 50 kilo bench to 100 kilo bench, 100kg squat to 150kg squat and so on, is going to lead to muscle built.
Im talking about development, definition wise. Look at mark bell, can bench over 250 kilos...... How do you think he would do in a bodybuilding comp if he dieted down to the body fat levels most competition bodybuilders are at? Honest question, have a think about it.
How much of it has absolutely nothing to do with training however and everything to do with genetics?, if the power lifters trained like body builders, might they still end up with similar strength and muscular definition as they have now?
Mark bell before powerlifting was signed to the wwe and trained to look good and conditioning *he looked like a bodybuilder* he gave that up and trained for powerlifting, as seen in the documentary> bigger , faster, stronger. At the end of the movie with his shirt off *after he benched 700 pounds* he didnt look developed in the slightest.
Whats harder to do, squat with 5 reps to failure or a squat 15 reps to failure?
Whats harder to do, squat with 5 reps to failure or a squat 15 reps to failure?
Mark bell before powerlifting was signed to the wwe and trained to look good and conditioning *he looked like a bodybuilder* he gave that up and trained for powerlifting, as seen in the documentary> bigger , faster, stronger. At the end of the movie with his shirt off *after he benched 700 pounds* he didnt look developed in the slightest.
Is this just because having built 'non vanity' muscles bigger the muscles no longer look proportionally large?, or potentially look less developed due to higher bodyfat?
Was his chest actually smaller?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?