Getbig.com: American Bodybuilding, Fitness and Figure
Getbig Main Boards => Gossip & Opinions => Topic started by: Rami on October 18, 2009, 05:20:30 PM
-
This year I have experienced suddenly increased strength, but not in size, what could be a reason for this? Even when I regularly do cardio, undercutting calories, cutting carbs or sometimes not sleeping very much, my strength hold at the same level. This has never happened before.
-
neurological adaptation
-
Let's discuss Classical music instead.... ::)
-
same thing here....my strenght is increasing but I am not growing much...probably because I had to cut calories to lose fat
-
think of it this way... two ways to adapt to strength training... neurological adaptations (recruitment of muscle fibers, increased efficency) or hypertrophy (sacroplasmic, myofibrillar) now... which of these mechanisms will the body take preference of in a surplus and which one in a deficit? simple...
-
The maximum tension (Fmax) exerted by the contractile machinery of the muscle is the product of (1) its physiological cross-sectional area (PCSA) and (2) its specific tension (ST). The actual muscle force developed by a muscle is a (nonlinear) function of its Fmax, its active state (i.e. the proportion of bound and unbound actomyosin crossbridges, the number and type of recruited motor units, the firing frequency of those motor units) and its kinematic state (i.e. the length and velocity of the contractile elements).
Specific tension it theoretically constant, so we will presume you have not changed it through training. You have gained no size so we will presume PCSA has also not changed. We will also assume the kinematics of your lifting technique have not changed substantially, so the muscle's kinematic states have not changed (although there is some evidence that resistance training can enhance the force-velocity characteristics of muscle without concurrent increases in muscle mass). This leaves a change in the active state (i.e. neurological factors) as the only explanation for your enhanced muscular capabilities :)
In addition, your ability to move weight is most directly a function of the net moments your muscles develop at your joints. Forces in protagonist muscles (e.g. the biceps during a curl) will increase the moment while forces in antagonist muscles (e.g. the triceps) will decrease the moment. So it is possible that the actual strength of your individual muscles have not increased, but your degree of antagonistic coactivation has decreased. This possibility could also be placed under the "neural factors" umbrella.
-
Let's discuss Classical music instead.... ::)
What's wrong with that? It's relaxing after a busy day. I thought it was a good idea when I first saw the post. It's not like music is an off topic on this board?
Classical music, nice n' relaxing in the afternoon.
[/youtube]
-
The maximum tension (Fmax) exerted by the contractile machinery of the muscle is the product of (1) its physiological cross-sectional area (PCSA) and (2) its specific tension (ST). The actual muscle force developed by a muscle is a (nonlinear) function of its Fmax, its active state (i.e. the proportion of bound and unbound actomyosin crossbridges, the number and type of recruited motor units, the firing frequency of those motor units) and its kinematic state (i.e. the length and velocity of the contractile elements).
Specific tension it theoretically constant, so we will presume you have not changed it through training. You have gained no size so we will presume PCSA has also not changed. We will also assume the kinematics of your lifting technique have not changed substantially, so the muscle's kinematic states have not changed (although there is some evidence that resistance training can enhance the force-velocity characteristics of muscle without concurrent increases in muscle mass). This leaves a change in the active state (i.e. neurological factors) as the only explanation for your enhanced muscular capabilities :)
In addition, your ability to move weight is most directly a function of the net moments your muscles develop at your joints. Forces in protagonist muscles (e.g. the biceps during a curl) will increase the moment while forces in antagonist muscles (e.g. the triceps) will decrease the moment. So it is possible that the actual strength of your individual has not increased, but your degree of antagonistic coactivation has decreased. This possibility could also be placed under the "neural factors" umbrella.
epic knowledge. Thanks.
-
neurological adaptation
bingo...
-
same thing here....my strenght is increasing but I am not growing much...probably because I had to cut calories to lose fat
Interesting. I'm starting to suspect genetic alteration of mankind due to energies of the galactic center lining up with our solar system. Maybe everyone is going through something similar right now.
-
be careful though, what you dont want is too much neuro adaptation. it ends up meaning less fibre recruitment.
the biggest mistake BBs make is to change routines too much, and too frequently. believing that this "tricks" the muscles. in reality it doesnt force adaptation to any specific demand so you end up making crap gains in strength and size...or even get smaller.
-
Interesting. I'm starting to suspect genetic alteration of mankind due to energies of the galactic center lining up with our solar system. Maybe everyone is going through something similar right now.
nope not me. have you thought that perhaps this is all a part of your psychological condition?...paranoia, suspicion, generalisation, narcissism...do you hear voices?
-
This year I have experienced suddenly increased strength, but not in size, what could be a reason for this? Even when I regularly do cardio, undercutting calories, cutting carbs or sometimes not sleeping very much, my strength hold at the same level. This has never happened before.
Reps low, weight heavy, not enough volume. Dispite the the HIT fad for size, it's BS. The only way to gain size is volume.
-
The maximum tension (Fmax) exerted by the contractile machinery of the muscle is the product of (1) its physiological cross-sectional area (PCSA) and (2) its specific tension (ST). The actual muscle force developed by a muscle is a (nonlinear) function of its Fmax, its active state (i.e. the proportion of bound and unbound actomyosin crossbridges, the number and type of recruited motor units, the firing frequency of those motor units) and its kinematic state (i.e. the length and velocity of the contractile elements).
Specific tension it theoretically constant, so we will presume you have not changed it through training. You have gained no size so we will presume PCSA has also not changed. We will also assume the kinematics of your lifting technique have not changed substantially, so the muscle's kinematic states have not changed (although there is some evidence that resistance training can enhance the force-velocity characteristics of muscle without concurrent increases in muscle mass). This leaves a change in the active state (i.e. neurological factors) as the only explanation for your enhanced muscular capabilities :)
In addition, your ability to move weight is most directly a function of the net moments your muscles develop at your joints. Forces in protagonist muscles (e.g. the biceps during a curl) will increase the moment while forces in antagonist muscles (e.g. the triceps) will decrease the moment. So it is possible that the actual strength of your individual muscles have not increased, but your degree of antagonistic coactivation has decreased. This possibility could also be placed under the "neural factors" umbrella.
Nice cut and paste!
-
Reps low, weight heavy, not enough volume. Dispite the the HIT fad for size, it's BS. The only way to gain size is volume.
omg you couldnt be more wrong.
the "HIT" as you and many others know it - i.e. dont have a clue...yes.. but HIT in the form that it is supposed to be conducted is the fundamental principle of muscular growth. dont complaina nd claim its BS just because you dont understand big words or can apply it correctly.
-
JME is an idiot disco_stu. Pay no regard to him.
-
JME is an idiot disco_stu. Pay no regard to him.
Yes, of course I am ::)
-
Yes, of course I am ::)
You've been married 5 times Coach.........you can't be all that bright. ;)
-
I'm rarely wrong on this subject. The only idiots are the ones who actually believe that crap.
-
I'm rarely wrong on this subject. The only idiots are the ones who actually believe that crap.
lover boy, how many time HAVE you been married?
-
total volume is important but total intensity/load is also very important now to avoid the "drop off" in strength after first sets one may see benefit from steering clear of American "once a week" training protocols
-
lover boy, how many time HAVE you been married?
Seems the attention span of this board is limited and can't stick to the subject at hand.
-
total volume is important but total intensity/load is also very important now to avoid the "drop off" in strength after first sets one may see benefit from steering clear of American "once a week" training protocols
io could you expand on this?
-
total volume is important but total intensity/load is also very important now to avoid the "drop off" in strength after first sets one may see benefit from steering clear of American "once a week" training protocols
I agree with this 100%. I for one, have NEVER baught into the theory from pseudo science that training one body part per week in a HIT protocol will cause hypertrophy. In short, it's BS.
-
I agree with this 100%. I for one, have NEVER baught into the theory from pseudo science that training one body part per week in a HIT protocol will cause hypertrophy. In short, it's BS.
good stuff
Nosaka K, Newton M. Repeated Eccentric Exercise Bouts Do Not Exacerbate Muscle Damage and Repair. Journal of Strength and Conditioning. 2002 Feb;16(1):117-122.
McLester JR., Bishop P., & Guilliams M. Comparison of 1 and 3 day per week of equal volume resistance training in experienced subjects. Med. Sci. Sports Exrc. 1999 31(5 Supp) pp.S117
-
good stuff
Nosaka K, Newton M. Repeated Eccentric Exercise Bouts Do Not Exacerbate Muscle Damage and Repair. Journal of Strength and Conditioning. 2002 Feb;16(1):117-122.
McLester JR., Bishop P., & Guilliams M. Comparison of 1 and 3 day per week of equal volume resistance training in experienced subjects. Med. Sci. Sports Exrc. 1999 31(5 Supp) pp.S117
If you get a chance, check out the June 09' S&C journal on "The use of occlusion training to produce muscle hypertrophy", I read the artical and I'm cross-referencing it with other studies. Good read.
-
If you get a chance, check out the June 09' S&C journal on "The use of occlusion training to produce muscle hypertrophy", I read the artical and I'm cross-referencing it with other studies. Good read.
will do thanks for that
have your clients had success with it?
-
I haven't had a chance to apply it yet, most of athletes are still in-season, I will for the offseason.
-
Intensity is far, far more important than volume. The issue of volume, is a negative! As long as you tax all levels of strength you will allow for full muscular adaption. This can explain why powerlifters are very STRONG in the lifting portion of a movement but don't have the muscle size to match these amazing feats, because they're goal is to move weight through the concentric portion of the movement and don't tax the muscles ability to hold or lower a weight. I have put on 40 plus pounds of lean muscle naturally in the space of two and a half years training once every seven days and believe me and my training partner will never go back to the notion that more is better. The keys to growth in my eyes are proper form, intensity of effort and correct application of these two taken to failure using the minimum amount of repetitions to maintain a safe, injury free body, so obviously the less reps you do, the heavier the weight, the higher the risk of injury on the working muscles. I try to combat this by finding a happy medium and fail with slightly higher reps and lower weight but still extremely low reps. You can't expect to keep failing or working to just prior to failure or anywhere inbetween for that matter with the exact same weight and limited intensity forever and expect a muscle a need or even want to grow. YES there is an upper limit you will get to and that is because there is only so big and strong a muscle can become as determined by your individual potential, the cross-sectional size of a muscle across a joint, i.e.the length of tendons e.t.c.
-
The key to growth is to take a shitload of drugs and hopefully you have great genetic response and you are set.
Also you have to lift consistent. Look at Heath, perfect example of this theory ;D
-
neurological adaptation
X2.
-
neurological adaptation
+1
-
I don't know what anything you guys are talking about but I do know about my strength. I have lost about 100 pounds since I started this shit. I am still about 150 over my normal weight i was when i competed. My bench since june has gone from benching 225 for 2 or 3 reps to now 315 for 5 reps 3 or 4 sets. Lately I have only been training 2 or 3 days a week. I also know that 90% of my bench increase is due to my tricep strength. My chest has become harder but not near as full and thick yet. My triceps however are hard as a rock and I can do 225 close grip easy for 8 to 10 reps. I get on the cable crossover which I was super strong at before and now I can't even do near the whole stack on a single pulley system. I spent the first month not lifting and barbells cause I was embarrassed the first day when I could only do 225 for a couple (barely squeezing out 3). So I only worked on the Hammer machines. After about a month I went on the bench and it didn't go up like I thought. So I decided to swallow some pride and start on the freeweights. And in about 2 weeks my strength went up dramatically. Anyway, my muscle memory seems to be very good still. I just wish my metabolism was higher. Any suggestion on how to increase that.
-
I don't know what anything you guys are talking about but I do know about my strength. I have lost about 100 pounds since I started this shit. I am still about 150 over my normal weight i was when i competed. My bench since june has gone from benching 225 for 2 or 3 reps to now 315 for 5 reps 3 or 4 sets. Lately I have only been training 2 or 3 days a week. I also know that 90% of my bench increase is due to my tricep strength. My chest has become harder but not near as full and thick yet. My triceps however are hard as a rock and I can do 225 close grip easy for 8 to 10 reps. I get on the cable crossover which I was super strong at before and now I can't even do near the whole stack on a single pulley system. I spent the first month not lifting and barbells cause I was embarrassed the first day when I could only do 225 for a couple (barely squeezing out 3). So I only worked on the Hammer machines. After about a month I went on the bench and it didn't go up like I thought. So I decided to swallow some pride and start on the freeweights. And in about 2 weeks my strength went up dramatically. Anyway, my muscle memory seems to be very good still. I just wish my metabolism was higher. Any suggestion on how to increase that.
Is the onlyme account gone forever?
-
Is the onlyme account gone forever?
I guess. Who knows though.
-
Noworries what is your triceps workout like? I think my triceps have become my "bottleneck" in my bench progress.
-
Noworries what is your triceps workout like? I think my triceps have become my "bottleneck" in my bench progress.
Always heavy. I always start with close grip benches. Heavy. No more than 6 to 8 reps 4 to to 5 sets. I do tri pushdowns heavy 6 to 8 reps then immediately (superset) do one arm reverse with lighter weight to get out 10 to 12 reps per arm. Do 4 to 5 sets. Then I finish off doing overhead tri ext. on the cable with heavy weight doing 6 to 8 reps 4 to 5 sets. Thats it. Always heavy and always after my chest day and shoulder day. I am a pusher and always have been. I just didn't realize how much my tri's have lifted in my bench. Another good tri exercise is taking two dumbbells on the incline bench and bringing them together at the top and keeping them together bring them down to the chest. It forces only your tri's to work. Again heavy weight.