Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Light Weights Are Just as Good for Building Muscle, Getting Stronger, Resea

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Originally posted by RichMahogany View Post
    I followed what you said. I'm talking about relating it to the article. If you think about 30% of your estimated/projected 1RM, I bet you can rep it out way more than 15-20 times. In fact, if you really want to make yourself see stars and feel like you might hurl, you can probably rep out 70 or 75% of your 1RM for a set of 20.
    Yeah I agree but I think it depends on which body part your working (all things being equal and assuming everyone has the same basic genetics). For example, my delts fatigue pretty quickly so I can't do 20 reps with 70-75% on those. To work my delt muscles to deep failure I either have to cheat or strip weight off/down.

    From reading this study they focused on hypertrophy in the legs using higher reps with less weight. From my own experience I can see that being true. However, what about the pecs? Striping the bench press down to 30% 1RM is basically doing pushups (for someone already in condition). I have a tough time believing that pushups for higher reps is as effective at building the pecs as heavy barbell bench presses.
    Would I be putting a grain-feed cow on a fad diet if I took it out of the feedlot and put it on pasture eating the grass nature intended?

    Comment


    • #32
      The reason why you Starting Strength evangelists and the main bulk of uneducated gym rats in general get almost everything wrong about strength is that they don’t know the fundamentals of human physiology! You can lift more without becoming stronger, in a physiological sense, but if you got physiological strength adaptions(i.e. myofibrillar hyperthrophy) then you de facto became stronger, no matter how much you can bench or squat! Try reading some of the articles that I linked to above again, not that I think it ever will sink in though…
      Last edited by Gorbag; 09-10-2013, 08:19 AM.
      "All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident."

      - Schopenhauer

      Comment


      • #33
        Originally posted by Scott F View Post
        Yeah I agree but I think it depends on which body part your working (all things being equal and assuming everyone has the same basic genetics). For example, my delts fatigue pretty quickly so I can't do 20 reps with 70-75% on those. To work my delt muscles to deep failure I either have to cheat or strip weight off/down.
        What, assisted pullups? Unless you are hanging a couple times your bodyweight off your dip belt, even an unweighted pullup is >30% of your 1RM.

        Originally posted by Scott F View Post
        From reading this study they focused on hypertrophy in the legs using higher reps with less weight. From my own experience I can see that being true. However, what about the pecs? Striping the bench press down to 30% 1RM is basically doing pushups (for someone already in condition). I have a tough time believing that pushups for higher reps is as effective at building the pecs as heavy barbell bench presses.
        Maybe for a short time in untrained individuals. Which is the other problem with this study. It's too short-term to determine anything and detrained/untrained young males are not an appropriate population from which to extrapolate data to the general population.
        The Champagne of Beards

        Comment


        • #34
          Originally posted by Gorbag View Post
          Real hypertrophy IS strength, the only way to become stronger in a physiological sense is to grow it! A more muscled up you is a stronger you, even if you could bench or squat more before becoming larger...
          No it's not. When I first got into serious bodybuilding (at age 20) I was following Franco Columbu's Winning Bodybuilding (Winning bodybuilding (Open Library)). I was lifting each bodypart 3 days per week, Monday through Saturday, on a split routine for 2 hours each workout. Needless to say I ended up getting way over trained because I was so damn determined...but my biceps got big (I have long bicep muscle bellies similar to Larry Scott's Larry Scott (bodybuilder) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia). People I knew began commenting to me on the size of my arms. But a beer drinking buddy I ran around with (he was a distance runner) would say "yeah but they're soft like a water balloon," and he was right. I noticed that too. They were gorged with blood from all the high volume sets I'd been following.

          Well following Franco's stuff I got my first back injury that had me laid up on my pickup set at times in pain. It's been an issue ever since. I had to lay off for a year and a half. When I finally got back into lifting Mike Mentzer was writing to Muscle and Fitness and preaching 4 days on a split routine for a 40 minute workout. By then the average "Joe" was beginning to hear about steroids. All the same I wondering how he became a Mr Universe working out no more then he was. So I ordered his stuff and learned about HIT. I worked. Where my Franco's overtraining caused my gains to stop I begain gaining again doing a HIT. I was using heavy weights to failure with forced reps and got a lot stronger. My arms got back to the size they were but they were denser/harder and I could handle more weight. By my mid 20's I was doing underhand 10 rep pullups for my biceps and lats with a 100lb plate hanging from my waist.
          Would I be putting a grain-feed cow on a fad diet if I took it out of the feedlot and put it on pasture eating the grass nature intended?

          Comment


          • #35
            Originally posted by RichMahogany View Post
            What, assisted pullups? Unless you are hanging a couple times your bodyweight off your dip belt, even an unweighted pullup is >30% of your 1RM.



            Maybe for a short time in untrained individuals. Which is the other problem with this study. It's too short-term to determine anything and detrained/untrained young males are not an appropriate population from which to extrapolate data to the general population.
            That's the problem I see with this study, too. How trained were the participants. For myself, before doing the 15-20 rep squats I had been training with 10-12 reps on my legs. I wasn't untrained. My friend/training partner doing the Darden's HIT workout was the gym owner.
            Would I be putting a grain-feed cow on a fad diet if I took it out of the feedlot and put it on pasture eating the grass nature intended?

            Comment


            • #36
              Originally posted by Scott F View Post
              No it's not. When I first got into serious bodybuilding (at age 20) I was following Franco Columbu's Winning Bodybuilding (Winning bodybuilding (Open Library)). I was lifting each bodypart 3 days per week, Monday through Saturday, on a split routine for 2 hours each workout. Needless to say I ended up getting way over trained because I was so damn determined...but my biceps got big (I have long bicep muscle bellies similar to Larry Scott's Larry Scott (bodybuilder) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia). People I knew began commenting to me on the size of my arms. But a beer drinking buddy I ran around with (he was a distance runner) would say "yeah but they're soft like a water balloon," and he was right. I noticed that too. They were gorged with blood from all the high volume sets I'd been following.

              Well following Franco's stuff I got my first back injury that had me laid up on my pickup set at times in pain. It's been an issue ever since. I had to lay off for a year and a half. When I finally got back into lifting Mike Mentzer was writing to Muscle and Fitness and preaching 4 days on a split routine for a 40 minute workout. By then the average "Joe" was beginning to hear about steroids. All the same I wondering how he became a Mr Universe working out no more then he was. So I ordered his stuff and learned about HIT. I worked. Where my Franco's overtraining caused my gains to stop I begain gaining again doing a HIT. I was using heavy weights to failure with forced reps and got a lot stronger. My arms got back to the size they were but they were denser/harder and I could handle more weight. By my mid 20's I was doing underhand 10 rep pullups for my biceps and lats with a 100lb plate hanging from my waist.
              False hypertrophy or sarcoplasmic hypertrophy is not what I am talking about here. A muscle can appear larger for various reasons, blood, water, glycogen, minerals, shortening of tendons etc., to get accurate measurement whether growth actually happened you need biopsy samples from the cells. Did they grow more myosin/actin? Well then they actually became stronger, if not then your lifting numbers are just due to neurological adaptation such as skill, change of leverage etc…
              "All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident."

              - Schopenhauer

              Comment


              • #37
                Originally posted by Gorbag View Post
                False hypertrophy or sarcoplasmic hypertrophy is not what I am talking about here. A muscle can appear larger for various reasons, blood, water, glycogen, minerals, shortening of tendons etc., to get accurate measurement whether growth actually happened you need biopsy samples from the cells. Did they grow more myosin/actin? Well then they actually became stronger, if not then your lifting numbers are just due to neurological adaptation such as skill, change of leverage etc…
                Wait, wait...wait: "shortening of tendons"? Are you saying you can change the tendon length which should cause a change in the muscle belly's length?
                Would I be putting a grain-feed cow on a fad diet if I took it out of the feedlot and put it on pasture eating the grass nature intended?

                Comment


                • #38
                  Originally posted by Scott F View Post
                  Wait, wait...wait: "shortening of tendons"? Are you saying you can change the tendon length which should cause a change in the muscle belly's length?
                  Strength training is notoriously known to shorten the whole muscle facia, including tendons, thats what we try to avoid somehow by doing stretching...
                  "All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident."

                  - Schopenhauer

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Originally posted by Gorbag View Post
                    False hypertrophy or sarcoplasmic hypertrophy is not what I am talking about here. A muscle can appear larger for various reasons, blood, water, glycogen, minerals, shortening of tendons etc., to get accurate measurement whether growth actually happened you need biopsy samples from the cells. Did they grow more myosin/actin? Well then they actually became stronger, if not then your lifting numbers are just due to neurological adaptation such as skill, change of leverage etc…
                    Your point is a valid one, but the definition of strength is not how much myosin you have, but how much weight you can move. If bloat makes your leverages better and you can pull 500 lbs in a powerlifting meet, you're stronger that day than when you're unbloated and can only pull 475, actin/myosin notwithstanding.
                    The Champagne of Beards

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Originally posted by RichMahogany View Post
                      Your point is a valid one, but the definition of strength is not how much myosin you have, but how much weight you can move. If bloat makes your leverages better and you can pull 500 lbs in a powerlifting meet, you're stronger that day than when you're unbloated and can only pull 475, actin/myosin notwithstanding.
                      Except that how much you can bench is just that - how much you can bench! Doing other push movements, and you get carryover from the amount of contractible protein in musclefibers relevant for the other movement, not how much you can bench! True story bro, just ask Wendler, I am almost certain that he agrees...
                      "All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident."

                      - Schopenhauer

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Originally posted by Gorbag View Post
                        Strength training is notoriously known to shorten the whole muscle facia, including tendons, thats what we try to avoid somehow by doing stretching...
                        Can you prove that cuz I've never seen that to be true?

                        In all my lifting none of my tendons ever change their lengths, nor did my muscle bellies. Larry Scott, for example, had long bellies with very short tendons http://www.eigenkracht.nl/media/files/larry-scott.jpg. Those long bicep bellies allowed Larry to build really big biceps.

                        By contrast to Larry, Franco Columbu had short bicep bellies that never changed their tendon attachments from a time before he was lifting (when his was a boxer) http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_mC1TEdZ4gk...t.com+0023.jpg to when he became a bodybuilder http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_mC1TEdZ4gk...t.com+0024.JPG Franco's tendon and muscle bellies remained the same. It's Larry's and Franco's genetics. You can

                        Here's an article contrasting the difference in genetics between Larry Scott's biceps to that of Albert Beckles' How To Get Bigger Biceps
                        Would I be putting a grain-feed cow on a fad diet if I took it out of the feedlot and put it on pasture eating the grass nature intended?

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Originally posted by Scott F View Post
                          Can you prove that cuz I've never seen that to be true?

                          In all my lifting none of my tendons ever change their lengths, nor did my muscle bellies. Larry Scott, for example, had long bellies with very short tendons http://www.eigenkracht.nl/media/files/larry-scott.jpg. Those long bicep bellies allowed Larry to build really big biceps.

                          By contrast to Larry, Franco Columbu had short bicep bellies that never changed their tendon attachments from a time before he was lifting (when his was a boxer) http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_mC1TEdZ4gk...t.com+0023.jpg to when he became a bodybuilder http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_mC1TEdZ4gk...t.com+0024.JPG Franco's tendon and muscle bellies remained the same. It's Larry's and Franco's genetics. You can

                          Here's an article contrasting the difference in genetics between Larry Scott's biceps to that of Albert Beckles' How To Get Bigger Biceps
                          What do you think happens when people just train the agonist and not the antagonist? The fascia and tendons makes the agonist muscle shorter and tenser and you creates an imbalance, like those guys that always do pressing movements and too little pulling. The insertion point is what you are thinking about, and that’s not possible to change, but strength training may change the appearance of your muscle though, due to the shortening of tendons and muscle fascia…
                          "All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident."

                          - Schopenhauer

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Originally posted by Gorbag View Post
                            What do you think happens when people just train the agonist and not the antagonist? The fascia and tendons makes the agonist muscle shorter and tenser and you creates an imbalance, like those guys that always do pressing movements and too little pulling. The insertion point is what you are thinking about, and that’s not possible to change, but strength training may change the appearance of your muscle though, due to the shortening of tendons and muscle fascia…
                            I'm a skeptic....Prove what you're saying
                            Would I be putting a grain-feed cow on a fad diet if I took it out of the feedlot and put it on pasture eating the grass nature intended?

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Originally posted by Scott F View Post
                              I'm a skeptic....Prove what you're saying
                              Why do we stretch after exercise then?

                              What happens to guys sitting too much in front of the computer? Shortening of various fasicas and tendons that changes appearance of anatomy...
                              "All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident."

                              - Schopenhauer

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Originally posted by Scott F View Post
                                I'm a skeptic....Prove what you're saying
                                This is from Livestrong backing Gorbag's comments

                                What Are The Causes Of Tight Tendons? | LIVESTRONG.COM

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X