Training for size, studys heavily supports training with higher intensity/reps.

[walt]

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.

 

[Goosey]

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.

Not's not it player.
in a nut shell;
From the 1900's to 1930 bodybiulding was quite obscure and exclusive to side shows and lifting competition

1930 to 1950, bodybiulding gained some popularity, it represented a healthy lifestyle and it was coined, "physical culture" and connected to homosexuality.

1960 to 1970
Enter weider and Hoffman and the splintering of strength exhibition and physique exhibition.
And supplements and drugs.

Steroids enabled athletes to train longer and more frequent, this is where the "split" program was born.

 

[pumpiniron]

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 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.

 

[pumpiniron]

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.

20kg in 8 months, Not to be a asshole but a shit load of that will be fat gain. 20kg of muscle in 8 months is impossible even on a heap of steroids.

 

[pumpiniron]

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.

Its just directed at beginners that are led to believe that you need to train heavy to build muscle, which leads to training there ego not the muscles.

 

[walt]

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.

you just contradicted yourself completely there.
Saying train the "bodybuilding" way, then saying beginners need to train differently????

ps - Learn to multi quote

 

[pumpiniron]

RONNIE COLEMAN - 360 kls (800 pounds) - YouTube
Here is Ronnie Coleman training for strength? kind of contradicts what you're saying doesnt it?

Ronnie coleman is like one of the strongest bodybuilders that ever lived..... Jay cutler was asked in a interview> are you going to train like ronnie..... Jay replied: are you crazy, ronnie is a genetically gifted freak when it comes to str, training like him would just lead to injury.

Like Tom platz said> my legs would grow if i ran up a hill............. some people are just genetically gifted and can get away with certain things, but for the majority of people that is not the case.

 

[pumpiniron]

you just contradicted yourself completely there.
Saying train the "bodybuilding" way, then saying beginners need to train differently????

ps - Learn to multi quote

IF a skinny beginner, you need to bulk up so you can Then sculpt the foundation. I think beginners just continue to try and work towards str even tho that foundation is built and 3 years down the track they wonder why they dont look developed.

 

[pumpiniron]

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.

 

[NightFallTech]

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?

 

[Darkoz]

I think the horse is dead

 

[sookie]

I reckon Danimal and sticky have very good physiques and are powerlifters

 

[pumpiniron]

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.

 

[pumpiniron]

Whats harder to do, squat with 5 reps to failure or a squat 15 reps to failure?

 

[NightFallTech]

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?

 

[NightFallTech]

Whats harder to do, squat with 5 reps to failure or a squat 15 reps to failure?

Depends on fitness imho.
A very fit person would probably prefer 15 reps to failure...

 

[Goosey]

Playing basketball made me 7 foot tall.

 

[dave]

Whats harder to do, squat with 5 reps to failure or a squat 15 reps to failure?

This just shows your lack of understanding of how to program properly. What if someone did 10 sets of 5 and someone did 5 sets of 10. Who has put more strain and tension on the muscle then?

 

[Brick]

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.

Your using a heavyweight as your example you nitwit, of course he's gonna look fat.

 

[pumpiniron]

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?

His chest look wide on the outside and no development in the middle.