Page 4 of 7 FirstFirst ... 23456 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 64

Thread: Light Weights Are Just as Good for Building Muscle, Getting Stronger, Resea page 4

  1. #31
    Scott F's Avatar
    Scott F is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    930
    Primal Fuel
    Quote 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?

  2. #32
    Gorbag's Avatar
    Gorbag is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Ecuador
    Posts
    3,600
    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 at 08:19 AM.
    Whoever fights trolls should see to it that in the process he does not become a troll - for when you gaze long enough into the computer screen, the computer screen will gaze back into you!
    - Gorbag Nietzsche

  3. #33
    RichMahogany's Avatar
    RichMahogany is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    6,998
    Quote 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.

    Quote 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.

  4. #34
    Scott F's Avatar
    Scott F is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    930
    Quote 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?

  5. #35
    Scott F's Avatar
    Scott F is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    930
    Quote 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?

  6. #36
    Gorbag's Avatar
    Gorbag is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Ecuador
    Posts
    3,600
    Quote 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…
    Whoever fights trolls should see to it that in the process he does not become a troll - for when you gaze long enough into the computer screen, the computer screen will gaze back into you!
    - Gorbag Nietzsche

  7. #37
    Scott F's Avatar
    Scott F is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    930
    Quote 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?

  8. #38
    Gorbag's Avatar
    Gorbag is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Ecuador
    Posts
    3,600
    Quote 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...
    Whoever fights trolls should see to it that in the process he does not become a troll - for when you gaze long enough into the computer screen, the computer screen will gaze back into you!
    - Gorbag Nietzsche

  9. #39
    RichMahogany's Avatar
    RichMahogany is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    6,998
    Quote 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.

  10. #40
    Gorbag's Avatar
    Gorbag is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Ecuador
    Posts
    3,600
    Quote 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...
    Whoever fights trolls should see to it that in the process he does not become a troll - for when you gaze long enough into the computer screen, the computer screen will gaze back into you!
    - Gorbag Nietzsche

Page 4 of 7 FirstFirst ... 23456 ... 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
  •