Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 12

Thread: Are natural bodybuilders really any bigger than natural powerlifters? page

  1. #1
    Karooku's Avatar
    Karooku is offline Member
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    47

    Are natural bodybuilders really any bigger than natural powerlifters?

    They both look about the same size to me. I'm starting to think that the low reps of powerlifters creates the same physique as the high reps of bodybuilders and unnatural bodybuilders are big because of steroids. Powerlifters who are natural, like those who compete in the Olympics are smaller in muscle mass compared to unnatural bodybuilders, is that because steroids are banned to them? Or am I wrong?

  2. #2
    BushcraftAl's Avatar
    BushcraftAl is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Location
    N/A
    Posts
    154
    It really depends on the individual on whether who looks bigger or not.

    Powerlifters don't compete in the Olympics, are you thinking of Olympic weightlifting? You'll find steroids are still prevalent in the Olympics too despite rigorous testing too.

  3. #3
    OldSchhool's Avatar
    OldSchhool is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    British Columbia
    Posts
    3,421
    Where have you seen a natural bodybuilder that competes, they are as rare as Unicorns !

  4. #4
    Reventon's Avatar
    Reventon is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Sydney, Australia
    Posts
    1,234
    Quote Originally Posted by OldSchhool View Post
    Where have you seen a natural bodybuilder that competes, they are as rare as Unicorns !
    Word.

    The way I see it, putting the juice aside, raw mass and body composition is going to come down to nutrition and having some kind of stimulus for your muscles in appropriate volume. How it's proportioned over your body and what you can do with that muscle mass is where training methods will really vary in the results they produce.

    One thing I can say anecdotally for myself is that when I switch training emphasis between lifts, styles of lifts and apparatus is I can stay at the same weight and look rather different - mostly to myself, but people who see me regularly and/or see me naked notice the difference.

  5. #5
    Karooku's Avatar
    Karooku is offline Member
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    47
    I'm just wondering if training with moderate reps of 8 to 12 is really better for bulk than training with heavy reps of 1 to 5 when steroids are taken out of the picture. Has anyone here mixed up their training method and tried both rep ranges to confirm whether the two are the same in terms of bulking or not?

  6. #6
    Mr. Anthony's Avatar
    Mr. Anthony is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    2,736
    Quote Originally Posted by Karooku View Post
    I'm just wondering if training with moderate reps of 8 to 12 is really better for bulk than training with heavy reps of 1 to 5 when steroids are taken out of the picture. Has anyone here mixed up their training method and tried both rep ranges to confirm whether the two are the same in terms of bulking or not?
    I currently lift pretty much like a powerlifter, and I've done more of a bodybuilder split and rep scheme before (never competed in either one). I've probably been a just little bit bigger in the past, especially my "show" muscles, but I've probably never been stronger than I am now. Still look pretty good now, though.

    And for 2.5-3 hours per week in the gym vs 5-6 in the past, I'll take it.

    Sent via lightsaber

  7. #7
    OldSchhool's Avatar
    OldSchhool is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    British Columbia
    Posts
    3,421
    Quote Originally Posted by Karooku View Post
    I'm just wondering if training with moderate reps of 8 to 12 is really better for bulk than training with heavy reps of 1 to 5 when steroids are taken out of the picture. Has anyone here mixed up their training method and tried both rep ranges to confirm whether the two are the same in terms of bulking or not?
    I think that time under tension affects hypertrophy more than the number of reps. You could perform 6 slow reps at a 4/4 cadence with a slight squeeze at the top and your TUT would be over a minute, likewise you could perform 12 quick reps at a 1/1 cadence and the TUT would only be around 30 secs even with the squeezes !

  8. #8
    BushcraftAl's Avatar
    BushcraftAl is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Location
    N/A
    Posts
    154
    Quote Originally Posted by Karooku View Post
    I'm just wondering if training with moderate reps of 8 to 12 is really better for bulk than training with heavy reps of 1 to 5
    Depends on how many sets you're working with too. If you're working 3x8 for most of your exercises but 12x2 for say the snatch, you're still getting the same amount of reps in just with a heavier weight. Weightlifters also don't always stick with very low reps too, depending on the training cycle you can be squatting for higher (8+) reps as well. There's going to be strength and hypertrophy in any rep range, it's just some hit one area harder than the other.

  9. #9
    Michael S's Avatar
    Michael S is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Northern NM
    Posts
    129
    Quote Originally Posted by Karooku View Post
    I'm just wondering if training with moderate reps of 8 to 12 is really better for bulk than training with heavy reps of 1 to 5 when steroids are taken out of the picture. Has anyone here mixed up their training method and tried both rep ranges to confirm whether the two are the same in terms of bulking or not?
    Here are a couple of photos from my previous incarnation as a gym-rat. Both shots are from 1986 when I was 40. During this period (83 to 92) I was putting at least 2 hours a night in the gym with a primary focus on multiple set, high rep, isolation routines and very limited attention to compound movements. At 5.9 (I've shrunk an inch since then) and 154 pounds I was moderately bigger than I am today, but never HUGE, just thin skinned and ripped-up with enduro-strength to spare. I also ran 4 miles of cardio each night on beach sand.

    RightVCrack3_zps1959e247.jpg

    21641_10152538250377699_247441065_n.jpg


    Below is a selfie I took last month. Since returning to the gym in December last, my training is a mirror image of what it used to be. Essentially, low rep strength training with an emphasis on the multi-joint compound movements and minimal attention to accessory work. Body comp isn't quite what it was 3 decades ago (more fat/less lean mass) but I can bench, squat and DL more today.

    005.jpg



    You can file this post under Shameless Exhibitionism.
    Age: 68
    Ht: 5'8"
    Wt: 164
    BMI: 25
    BF: 11%

  10. #10
    RichMahogany's Avatar
    RichMahogany is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    8,470
    Primal Blueprint Expert Certification
    I've posted this around the forums before, but this is me while leaning out for my last powerlifting competition, at a hearty 151 lbs or so, having done no work to speak of above the 5-rep range:

    [/QUOTE]

    I've very recently added some 8-rep sets for squats and 6-rep backoff sets on bench, but that's mostly to force me to keep intensity a bit lower on certain training days since I've been known to let my medium work increase in weight until it becomes too taxing to allow recovery.
    The Champagne of Beards

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •