Getbig.com: American Bodybuilding, Fitness and Figure
Getbig Main Boards => Gossip & Opinions => Topic started by: Al Doggity on May 08, 2017, 12:27:33 PM
-
I am :-\ Been lifting for at least 20 years and still coming up with new routines, theories every couple of months. Part of me feels like just consistently working out is all anybody needs, no matter their goals. Still, I can't get past the idea of finding some new, improved magical combination of exercises>
-
I am :-\ Been lifting for at least 20 years and still coming up with new routines, theories every couple of months. Part of me feels like just consistently working out is all anybody needs, no matter their goals. Still, I can't get past the idea of finding some new, improved magical combination of exercises>
Depends on your body and genetic make up.
-
I am :-\ Been lifting for at least 20 years and still coming up with new routines, theories every couple of months. Part of me feels like just consistently working out is all anybody needs, no matter their goals. Still, I can't get past the idea of finding some new, improved magical combination of exercises>
SC just posted a good one on the Y board.
-
I am :-\ Been lifting for at least 20 years and still coming up with new routines, theories every couple of months. Part of me feels like just consistently working out is all anybody needs, no matter their goals. Still, I can't get past the idea of finding some new, improved magical combination of exercises>
Been training for 40 plus years and I feel the same way. Always searching and always reading. Working out consistently is a major part of the game. I workout to the ragged edge with low sets but after all these years I'm beginning to think I would get more stimulation with more sets and moderate weights.
-
Depends on your body and genetic make up.
What do you mean by this? You think for some people, just consistently working out is fine, but for others, they have to have a particular set of exercises/sets to advance?
-
I go to the state CEU courses for the NSCA
Being a certified strength and conditioning specialist (CSCS)
Can't stand how no one ever goes over bench press or a proper squat technique
2 weeks ago we had to listen to this woman who had sandbags?
That's great and they were pretty and she said 'people in Asia love em' 'bars scare people'
Well getting under a bar and getting under a 'sandbag' illicit 2 totally different responses
I always say Bread and butter - what makes people big , will always make people big
It's like everyone has to have some new fangled workout so they can call it 'there own' when in actuallilty your just doing modified bidyweight shit , off balanced
-
SC just posted a good one on the Y board.
I took a look at it just now, and I've done similar things in the recent past. I just moved off of a routine where I spend an hour alternating between push/pull for a minute at a time with light weights. Then 15 min of legs and 15 min abs, every day. I've gone through some of my
"innovative" routines here in the past.
I always go through periods where my body is rock hard the day after a workout, then i'll reach a point where it feels more mortal and then I'll start worrying that I'm just wasting my time. I always feel like at the start of a new routine, I see all this amazing progress, but some of that is just in my head, I'm sure. Then, I always choose new routines based on them being more difficult than what I was already doing, but when you change your training style, you don't always keep your strength gains from other styles.
-
It's like everyone has to have some new fangled workout so they can call it 'there own' when in actuallilty your just doing modified bidyweight shit , off balanced
LOL Yeah. The thing is, I'm sure anyone in decent shape can attest to this, when you do one of your special snowflake routines, sometimes people will copy you and it makes you feel like you're on to something! I remember I belonged to a gym that didn't have a preacher curl station, so I used the seated row machine with my elbows on my knees and other guys in the gym started doing it too. Then another time, I did a routine with lying triceps extensions angled a bunch of different ways and I noticed that this dude who had way better arm development than I had a the time had started doing the same routine.
It's ridiculous to some degree. When I see these fitness gurus I can't help but roll my eyes, but at the same time, you do need to stay motivated.
-
just lift heavy stuff up then put it down, then lift it up again then put it down. do this for each body part.
HTH
-
I just show up at 7am and do exactly what my trainer says
pretty much same shit i used to do, just better form, more weight, accountability etc, someone to bullshit with, someone who can hook me up with chics etc etc
-
just lift heavy stuff up then put it down, then lift it up again then put it down. do this for each body part.
HTH
Yep.
-
just lift heavy stuff up then put it down, then lift it up again then put it down. do this for each body part.
HTH
And take steroids, stay consistent and hope you grow, that's it
-
Dunno but @ 30 I always pick the minds of the older guys who seem to still maintain good shape and always pay attention to certain posters here... most guys my age and younger are busy spinning their tires getting pulled in every direction by reading too much crap online or obsessing over drugs.
-
Things that do NOT work for me as a Lifetime Natural:
High Volume, High Reps, Lengthy Workout Sessions, More than 3 or 4 days of lifting, Short Rest Periods Between Sets, Lighter Training, Pump Training, Explosive Training, varying exercises frequently (Muscle Confusion).
Things that DO work:
Low Volume 12 sets or so per workout usually Push in one session and Pull with Legs in the other, Lower to Mid Rep Range, 30- 1 hr max Workout Length, 3 Days a Week Lifting, Resting as long as needed to get the rep/weight range, Continual Progression with Weight, HEAVY training, sticking to the SAME exercises for long periods increasing weight or reps, increasing weight on exercises in small increments .5 to 1 lb
I wasted way too much time doing stupid routines that were regressive.
Current and best Routine is this:
Monday:Bench Press-3 sets Reps=5, 6, 8 Reverse Pyramid first set Heaviest then reduce each by 10 percent in weight
Dumbbell Shoulder Pres=5,6,8 Reverse Pyramid
Barbell Front Raise= 3 sets of 12- Add weight once all 12 reps can be completed with given weight.
Reverse Tricep Cable Pushdowns-3 Sets of 10- Add weight once all 10 reps are completed with given weight.
Wednesday: Squat-3 sets Reps=5, 6, 8 Reverse Pyramid first set Heaviest then reduce each by 10 percent in weight
Lying Leg Curl-3 sets of 12- Add weight once all 12 reps can be completed with given weight.
Barbell Row- 5, 6, 8 Reverse Pyramid first set Heaviest then reduce each by 10 percent in weight
Underhand Lat Pulldown- 3 sets of 12- Add weight once all 12 reps can be completed with given weight.
Barbell Bicep Curl- 3 Sets of 10- Add weight once all 10 reps are completed with given weight.
Friday:Repeat Monday
Then on the next Monday you will start with Squats and repeat the same M,W,F
Progression on the Reverse Pyramid sets are as follows: Only one set is moved up in weight each session. For instance, 5,6,8 on your 8 rep set next session increase the weight. On the session after that, increase the weight on the 6 rep set. After that session, increase the weight on the 5 rep session. Repeat.
Wish I would have been training this way since starting.
-
I am :-\ Been lifting for at least 20 years and still coming up with new routines, theories every couple of months. Part of me feels like just consistently working out is all anybody needs, no matter their goals. Still, I can't get past the idea of finding some new, improved magical combination of exercises>
Shrimp tails are the key.
-
Things that do NOT work for me as a Lifetime Natural:
High Volume, High Reps, Lengthy Workout Sessions, More than 3 or 4 days of lifting, Short Rest Periods Between Sets, Lighter Training, Pump Training, Explosive Training, varying exercises frequently (Muscle Confusion).
Things that DO work:
Low Volume 12 sets or so per workout usually Push in one session and Pull with Legs in the other, Lower to Mid Rep Range, 30- 1 hr max Workout Length, 3 Days a Week Lifting, Resting as long as needed to get the rep/weight range, Continual Progression with Weight, HEAVY training, sticking to the SAME exercises for long periods increasing weight or reps, increasing weight on exercises in small increments .5 to 1 lb
I wasted way too much time doing stupid routines that were regressive.
Current and best Routine is this:
Monday:Bench Press-3 sets Reps=5, 6, 8 Reverse Pyramid first set Heaviest then reduce each by 10 percent in weight
Dumbbell Shoulder Pres=5,6,8 Reverse Pyramid
Barbell Front Raise= 3 sets of 12- Add weight once all 12 reps can be completed with given weight.
Reverse Tricep Cable Pushdowns-3 Sets of 10- Add weight once all 10 reps are completed with given weight.
Wednesday: Squat-3 sets Reps=5, 6, 8 Reverse Pyramid first set Heaviest then reduce each by 10 percent in weight
Lying Leg Curl-3 sets of 12- Add weight once all 12 reps can be completed with given weight.
Barbell Row- 5, 6, 8 Reverse Pyramid first set Heaviest then reduce each by 10 percent in weight
Underhand Lat Pulldown- 3 sets of 12- Add weight once all 12 reps can be completed with given weight.
Barbell Bicep Curl- 3 Sets of 10- Add weight once all 10 reps are completed with given weight.
Friday:Repeat Monday
Then on the next Monday you will start with Squats and repeat the same M,W,F
g this way since starting.
^This is an excellent program- similar to one I've ended up using after years of little progress. Works well!
-
Things that do NOT work for me as a Lifetime Natural:
High Volume, High Reps, Lengthy Workout Sessions, More than 3 or 4 days of lifting, Short Rest Periods Between Sets, Lighter Training, Pump Training, Explosive Training, varying exercises frequently (Muscle Confusion).
Things that DO work:
Low Volume 12 sets or so per workout usually Push in one session and Pull with Legs in the other, Lower to Mid Rep Range, 30- 1 hr max Workout Length, 3 Days a Week Lifting, Resting as long as needed to get the rep/weight range, Continual Progression with Weight, HEAVY training, sticking to the SAME exercises for long periods increasing weight or reps, increasing weight on exercises in small increments .5 to 1 lb
I wasted way too much time doing stupid routines that were regressive.
Current and best Routine is this:
Monday:Bench Press-3 sets Reps=5, 6, 8 Reverse Pyramid first set Heaviest then reduce each by 10 percent in weight
Dumbbell Shoulder Pres=5,6,8 Reverse Pyramid
Barbell Front Raise= 3 sets of 12- Add weight once all 12 reps can be completed with given weight.
Reverse Tricep Cable Pushdowns-3 Sets of 10- Add weight once all 10 reps are completed with given weight.
Wednesday: Squat-3 sets Reps=5, 6, 8 Reverse Pyramid first set Heaviest then reduce each by 10 percent in weight
Lying Leg Curl-3 sets of 12- Add weight once all 12 reps can be completed with given weight.
Barbell Row- 5, 6, 8 Reverse Pyramid first set Heaviest then reduce each by 10 percent in weight
Underhand Lat Pulldown- 3 sets of 12- Add weight once all 12 reps can be completed with given weight.
Barbell Bicep Curl- 3 Sets of 10- Add weight once all 10 reps are completed with given weight.
Friday:Repeat Monday
Then on the next Monday you will start with Squats and repeat the same M,W,F
Progression on the Reverse Pyramid sets are as follows: Only one set is moved up in weight each session. For instance, 5,6,8 on your 8 rep set next session increase the weight. On the session after that, increase the weight on the 6 rep set. After that session, increase the weight on the 5 rep session. Repeat.
Wish I would have been training this way since starting.
Lance Dreher gave a seminar where he advocated doing the heaviest weight first. He changed his mind later when I pointed out this was lunacy for many exercises and guaranteed to destroy connective tissue.
Looking at your current programs I shake my head. You do too many similar movements for the same muscle groups. Reverse triceps pressdowns? You can't use much weight in that exercise.
-
I think it's important to form check, I've been doing same exercises since jump street but often fall comfortable into my form, I'd say have some form check you just to realign
-
Lance Dreher gave a seminar where he advocated doing the heaviest weight first. He changed his mind later when I pointed out this was lunacy for many exercises and guaranteed to destroy connective tissue.
Looking at your current programs I shake my head. You do too many similar movements for the same muscle groups. Reverse triceps pressdowns? You can't use much weight in that exercise.
Give me a routine that you would recommend. I am always open to info.
-
Give me a routine that you would recommend. I am always open to info.
Just do regular tri pushdowns. Why would you want your fingers supporting/pulling the weight instead of your palms pushing down?
-
at 46 with 30 years in the gym and a number of injuries im just training well within myself these days, just upped the intensity last weekend, not the weight and can hardly walk or make the next leg day 5 days later, just no recovery, so there's no point really,better off just doing the 80% I have been doing its more about muscle retention these days other than growth but im there 5-6 mornings a week at 4.30am and still love training and eating good the majority of the time.
-
I am :-\ Been lifting for at least 20 years and still coming up with new routines, theories every couple of months. Part of me feels like just consistently working out is all anybody needs, no matter their goals. Still, I can't get past the idea of finding some new, improved magical combination of exercises>
What you write here = no idea at all re the correct theory of hypertrophy.
The theory should be simple. Applying it effectively might require more experience.
Since most people are on plateaus or growing too slow to notice they literally have no idea what causes more growth.
They keep training hard just to stay the same.
-
Give me a routine that you would recommend. I am always open to info.
If you know the correct theory of hypertrophy you will know what NOT to do. Knowing what to do re exercises, etc., is the application of theory and where most people get lost.
People get confused because there are so many factors involved in body movements with resistance. Nutrition is also involved with growth.
If you do not grow rapidly then what feedback do you have to indicate that growth is occurring? How do you measure the effectiveness of protocols?
I have written prescriptions in my other thread but few appreciate what I have posted.
-
i have a different theory why the above average gym type never makes gains.... my 2 cents
most regular gym bros have nothing to train for. no accountability,
they just show up and do some shit in the gym over and over. and kind of sort of eat "sorta" healthy cuz it is just "good enough" you dont have to compete, or do schmoe photo shoots but something that is a challenge with some hard nose goals where failure kinda sucks.
it is pretty fucking simple actually. train hard/eat right and dont lie to yourself.
this hobby and sport sucks if you half ass it... ive seen both sides of the coin
-
i have a different theory why the above average gym type never makes gains.... my 2 cents
most regular gym bros have nothing to train for. no accountability,
they just show up and do some shit in the gym over and over. and kind of sort of eat "sorta" healthy cuz it is just "good enough" you dont have to compete, or do schmoe photo shoots but something that is a challenge with some hard nose goals where failure kinda sucks.
it is pretty fucking simple actually. train hard/eat right and dont lie to yourself.
this hobby and sport sucks if you half ass it... ive seen both sides of the coin
Yes, motivation is paramount. Why? Because you have to keep doing something extraordinary to keep the muscles growing. Sooner, rather than later, it becomes brutally hard to sustain.
Therefore most people end up in the intermediate level on plateaus and then have no idea what to do. Try drugs? If that fails they assume they don't have the genetics.
-
Yes, motivation is paramount. Why? Because you have to keep doing something extraordinary to keep the muscles growing. Sooner, rather than later, it becomes brutally hard to sustain.
Therefore most people end up in the intermediate level on plateaus and then have no idea what to do. Try drugs? If that fails they assume they don't have the genetics.
i am far from the motivation soap box stuff, but most gym going types just dont train hard or eat clean enough. i think most ppl just jump to program to program all the time.
-
i am far from the motivation soap box stuff, but most gym going types just dont train hard or eat clean enough. i think most ppl just jump to program to program all the time.
Goal-less is soul-less. You need a real goal that matters to you to work towards. Otherwise you are just treading water.
-
Goal-less is soul-less. You need a real goal that matters to you to work towards. Otherwise you are just treading water.
agreed totally.
need a goal and have something where failure sucks
-
agreed totally.
need a goal and have something where failure sucks
Like training to show 'em on Getbig!
-
If you know the correct theory of hypertrophy you will know what NOT to do. Knowing what to do re exercises, etc., is the application of theory and where most people get lost.
People get confused because there are so many factors involved in body movements with resistance. Nutrition is also involved with growth.
If you do not grow rapidly then what feedback do you have to indicate that growth is occurring? How do you measure the effectiveness of protocols?
I have written prescriptions in my other thread but few appreciate what I have posted.
The reason why few appreciate what you have written is because you have never proven or demonstrated that your theories on hypertrophy are valid. You have trained no one, including yourself, that have proven and demonstrated the effectiveness of your "prescriptions". There are many real world examples where people who have train using volume or HIT have built incredible physiques. There is no one that is currently known to have achieved anything using the DOMS principle. Not a single example. Even your own attempts using yourself as a test subject has failed.
A peer reviewed study in a scientific journal has shown that while in DOMS you are losing both muscle and strength. A study you blithely reject because you feel it is wanting while never once providing anything close that can refute it.
-
Just do regular tri pushdowns. Why would you want your fingers supporting/pulling the weight instead of your palms pushing down?
Works better that way for me because of my arm length and at the point where my tricep contracts. The other way I get less Tris involved, basically a shoulder exercise with a little Tri at the end.
-
Like training to show 'em on Getbig!
if it works, it works. 8)
#getbigfamous
-
Works better that way for me because of my arm length and at the point where my tricep contracts. The other way I get less Tris involved, basically a shoulder exercise with a little Tri at the end.
Buy an old Nautilus Triceps machine and convert it. Should work your triceps better than what you are doing. Pressdowns don't work for me after a certain arm size.
You remove the back rest and use it for your knee rest. Easy modification. Then shift the arm rest back 2 inches towards the user so that elbows don't contact the pads.
This exercise allows the user to do a karate chop position and avoid too much pronation under heavy loads that can damage connective tissue in the forearms. You can position the machine
so that your extended leg rests up against some solid object. You don't need to make a special foot rest like in the photo.
-
Buy an old Nautilus Triceps machine and convert it. Should work your triceps better than what you are doing. Pressdowns don't work for me after a certain arm size.
You remove the back rest and use it for your knee rest. Easy modification. Then shift the arm rest back 2 inches towards the user so that elbows don't contact the pads.
This exercise allows the user to do a karate chop position and avoid too much pronation under heavy loads that can damage connective tissue in the forearms. You can position the machine
so that your extended leg rests up against some solid object. You don't need to make a special foot rest like in the photo.
So after all the posts posturing how your an expert on hypertrophy, this is the shitty advice you give?...
You arms are fat by the way, that's why you dont feel anything in other movements
-
So after all the posts posturing how your an expert on hypertrophy, this is the shitty advice you give?...
You arms are fat by the way, that's why you dont feel anything in other movements
:D
-
So after all the posts posturing how your an expert on hypertrophy, this is the shitty advice you give?...
You arms are fat by the way, that's why you dont feel anything in other movements
;D
;D
;D
-
I am :-\ Been lifting for at least 20 years and still coming up with new routines, theories every couple of months. Part of me feels like just consistently working out is all anybody needs, no matter their goals. Still, I can't get past the idea of finding some new, improved magical combination of exercises>
If one has been training for decades properly and drug free there are no more significant muscular gains to be made. So after that, it's a matter of maintaining or desperately trying to gain grams of muscle.
Strength is a different story.
-
:D
Lol
-
If one has been training for decades properly and drug free there are no more significant muscular gains to be made. So after that, it's a matter of maintaining or desperately trying to gain grams of muscle.
Strength is a different story.
Why can an older person get stronger but cause little or no hypertrophy?
My argument is that hypertrophy can and must be the result of effective training for older men.
-
Why can an older person get stronger but cause little or no hypertrophy?
My argument is that hypertrophy can and must be the result of effective training for older men.
It's extremely hard because the training requirements for that to occur present high risk of injury
-
Why can an older person get stronger but cause little or no hypertrophy?
My argument is that hypertrophy can and must be the result of effective training for older men.
Can you provide an example of a drug free man who has made significant muscular gains after the first decade of proper bodybuilding training?
-
i have a different theory why the above average gym type never makes gains.... my 2 cents
most regular gym bros have nothing to train for. no accountability,
they just show up and do some shit in the gym over and over. and kind of sort of eat "sorta" healthy cuz it is just "good enough" you dont have to compete, or do schmoe photo shoots but something that is a challenge with some hard nose goals where failure kinda sucks.
it is pretty fucking simple actually. train hard/eat right and dont lie to yourself.
this hobby and sport sucks if you half ass it... ive seen both sides of the coin
good post.
-
Buy an old Nautilus Triceps machine and convert it. Should work your triceps better than what you are doing. Pressdowns don't work for me after a certain arm size.
You remove the back rest and use it for your knee rest. Easy modification. Then shift the arm rest back 2 inches towards the user so that elbows don't contact the pads.
This exercise allows the user to do a karate chop position and avoid too much pronation under heavy loads that can damage connective tissue in the forearms. You can position the machine
so that your extended leg rests up against some solid object. You don't need to make a special foot rest like in the photo.
This is the biggest heap of shit I've ever heard in my fucking life.
Let's track down a used nautilus tri ext and hack the fucker to bits, creating a ridiculous looking pile of scrap that takes up half your typical home gym just to do some fancy tri extensions.
Senile fat old fool
-
This is the biggest heap of shit I've ever heard in my fucking life.
Let's track down a used nautilus tri ext and hack the fucker to bits, creating a ridiculous looking pile of scrap that takes up half your typical home gym just to do some fancy tri extensions.
Senile fat old fool
You know you are not talking to vince basile right. This is a hacked account. Hacked by josh.
-
You arms are fat by the way,
No, you are mistaken. My arms are solid. Photos taken in recent years were after being pumped. I have always had cuts in my biceps.
My flexed forearms are hard like steel.
-
asshat basile. people end up on a "plateau" because thats the max for a natural body. period. BB body requires drugs. Always has.
Stop talking like you are some kind of guru. you were never a real BB and never managed anything past a swimmers build and then fat old man. You are a non-entity.
-
just lift heavy stuff up then put it down, then lift it up again then put it down. do this for each body part.
HTH
-
asshat basile. people end up on a "plateau" because thats the max for a natural body. period. BB body requires drugs. Always has.
Stop talking like you are some kind of guru. you were never a real BB and never managed anything past a swimmers build and then fat old man. You are a non-entity.
Lol, at the non-entities judging people who actually have something different to say.
If they knew more about hypertrophy and how to apply that knowledge effectively they would grow some more.
All we see here are excuses for those who can't keep growing.
-
I am :-\ Been lifting for at least 20 years and still coming up with new routines, theories every couple of months. Part of me feels like just consistently working out is all anybody needs, no matter their goals. Still, I can't get past the idea of finding some new, improved magical combination of exercises>
Been craning everyday for 24 years now. Looking my best ever. Lean cardiovaskular hard and almost strong for my weight/shape/natty status.
If your up for new things please try this: Increase arm training volume slowly ...do them fucking arms 2hours/dag 5 dags per week and Ill guarantee your arms will be the best ever. Every muscle I up the volume is getting better every moth. The more I train the less sore I get.
Training volume is the shit for further progress. Want a better back, take photos and learn what excersice hit different parts of the back and then do the shit 1-2 hours everyday. Soon u will not feel your muscles anymore, they just do what u tell them to do without any protest.
When your up for 10-15 hours/week for one muscle I think your near the limit for your natural potential.
I just did 50 set of back yesterday, docent feel jack shit today. That once a week kill your muscles is just plain stupid shit make u sore without progress. Cant believe how many people still do this shit in the gym.
-
Been craning everyday for 24 years now. Looking my best ever. Lean cardiovaskular hard and almost strong for my weight/shape/natty status.
If your up for new things please try this: Increase arm training volume slowly ...do them fucking arms 2hours/dag 5 dags per week and Ill guarantee your arms will be the best ever. Every muscle I up the volume is getting better every moth. The more I train the less sore I get.
Training volume is the shit for further progress. Want a better back, take photos and learn what excersice hit different parts of the back and then do the shit 1-2 hours everyday. Soon u will not feel your muscles anymore, they just do what u tell them to do without any protest.
When your up for 10-15 hours/week for one muscle I think your near the limit for your natural potential.
I just did 50 set of back yesterday, docent feel jack shit today. That once a week kill your muscles is just plain stupid shit make u sore without progress. Cant believe how many people still do this shit in the gym.
There's next to no additional growth after your 1st few years if you are training hard, only growth from there is drug gains which will run out and have be took to death stack levels to carry on growing
There's no disputing this, everything else is delusion and fairy tales ...
-
Vince, Dr. Walczak told me himself that if you are training and eating properly and natural you will max out in about three years with about 80% of those gains coming within the first year. You can play with body composition and gain a bit or lose it bit just by eating by overall real qualitative and quantitative gains comes to a halt.
Your body does not want large muscles and for good reason. Muscles, even at rest, require constant metabolic support. Unlike fat, which is just stored energy and something your body always wants and has a seemingly limitless capacity to store, supporting muscle is a cost to the body and given the slightest reason it will get rid of it straight away. Put your arm in a cast and your muscles shrivel away. The fat will stay or even increase depending on caloric expenditure but muscle is gone. And you start to lose it as you get older no matter what you do. You talk such nonsense when you say age doesn't matter. Every human being that has ever existed that continues lifetime serious bbing has proven that. Robby Robinson and Tony Pearson are gifted bberings that have never lost the desire to train and have incredible, mindblowing, physiques FOR THEIR AGE. They are nothing like how they were when they were in their twenties and thirties.
You knew Dr. Walczak. This was his world. He worked with all the top bbers including supplying anabolic hormones right out of his office. I saw his cabinet with rows of ciba dbols tabs and vials of Organon Deca.
Again, he was a real, legit medical doctor and knew the human body very well and how it responds to training, nutrition, and anabolic hormones. And he knew bodybuilding and real bodybuilders and what it took to get on stage and win. Arnold and Franco went to him for a reason.
He even said he could make you a champ. Who knows what would have happened if you took him up on his offer.
-
The good doctor to the stars knew about anabolic steroids but was not an expert in hypertrophy.
Explain this: why does a muscle get sore in a bodybuilder already training very hard.....he does something different and experiences DOMS the next few days. How come that happens?
-
::)
The good doctor to the stars knew about anabolic steroids but was not an expert in hypertrophy.
Explain this: why does a muscle get sore in a bodybuilder already training very hard.....he does something different and experiences DOMS the next few days. How come that happens?
I'm in the Queensland area looking to hook up.
This was posted by 1 of admins who loves Basil , OBW I am in Sydney ;D
-
There's next to no additional growth after your 1st few years if you are training hard, only growth from there is drug gains which will run out and have be took to death stack levels to carry on growing
There's no disputing this, everything else is delusion and fairy tales ...
There is. Its just incredibly slow. You can make gains after 10 years of hard training if you use progressive overload. Obviously those gains wont be really noticeable.
-
Regarding arms, i recently came to the conclusion that using
shitty partial range of motion and big weights gives you real size. Full range of motion and minor poundages will only get you so far.
-
it's awesome to once again read big man
imbasille's delusional ravings again ;D
once you've been training a decade+, it's better just to train three times a week with just enough volume/intensity to maintain without messing up your joints.
injury prevention is better than going ott with excessive volume and intensity. the loss of consistency of training from injury will be worse in the long run than training at a comfortable level. I realised this when one of my elbows got effed. The cure was cutting down from 5 days a week to 3, keeping reps in the 8-12 range by lowering the weight, and replacing rest pause/low rest sets with 2-3 minute rest periods between sets. Also sticking to the exercises that are better for my body and not trying to do every exercise in existence to "hit the muscle from all angles".
plus one should do his best to stay lean and focus more on health.
-
There is. Its just incredibly slow. You can make gains after 10 years of hard training if you use progressive overload. Obviously those gains wont be really noticeable.
Well obviously... ::)
That's the point im making, grind your joints into dust or release that's the size that your going to be, maintain what you've got for as long as possible is the best goal...
-
If one has been training for decades properly and drug free there are no more significant muscular gains to be made. So after that, it's a matter of maintaining or desperately trying to gain grams of muscle.
Strength is a different story.
I didn't really say anything about training "gains" being limited to weight gain, though. Strength is important, but I don't agree that you're only in maintenance mode after year 3 or 5 or whatever. I'm at about year 20 in my weightlifting habit, and even without a dramatic change in weight, my arms are much larger and more defined than they were 5 years ago. Last year I started working out legs twice a week- obsessively and consistently, whereas it used to be the workout I would skip if I just didn't have the the time or inclination- and they look much better than they ever have. My wife has a pic of us on vacation 6 years ago on her facebook page and so many people have commented on how different I look, even though I think I weighed more in that pic and was pretty muscular. My upper body taper is noticeably more dramatic and my shoulders have changed a lot. I'm not exactly Phil Heath, but they have that rounder, cannon ball look now as well as an improved upper chest and that didn't start to happen until recently. They used to look more like this:
(http://www.bodybuilding-pics.com/43/images/Arnold_Schwarzenegger_2065.jpg)
Even without dramatic changes in weight, your body still changes.
-
I didn't really say anything about training "gains" being limited to weight gain, though. Strength is important, but I don't agree that you're only in maintenance mode after year 3 or 5 or whatever. I'm at about year 20 in my weightlifting habit, and even without a dramatic change in weight, my arms are much larger and more defined than they were 5 years ago. Last year I started working out legs twice a week- obsessively and consistently, whereas it used to be the workout I would skip if I just didn't have the the time or inclination- and they look much better than they ever have. My wife has a pic of us on vacation 6 years ago on her facebook page and so many people have commented on how different I look, even though I think I weighed more in that pic and was pretty muscular. My upper body taper is noticeably more dramatic and my shoulders have changed a lot. I'm not exactly Phil Heath, but they have that rounder, cannon ball look now as well as an improved upper chest and that didn't start to happen until recently. They used to look more like this:
(http://www.bodybuilding-pics.com/43/images/Arnold_Schwarzenegger_2065.jpg)
Even without dramatic changes in weight, your body still changes.
what you're saying is true. but I think the point is that past a certain stage it's needless to go all out like in the beginning stage. the look will change and improve but very slowly. being able to maintain a consistent training routine over the years will reap more reward than going extra hard and risking joint damage.
edit: maybe when you're hit with joint problems/niggles like i've been, it changes your outlook on things :-\
-
what you're saying is true. but I think the point is that past a certain stage it's needless to go all out like in the beginning stage. the look will change and improve but very slowly. being able to maintain a consistent training routine over the years will reap more reward than going extra hard and risking joint damage.
edit: maybe when you're hit with joint problems/niggles like i've been, it changes your outlook on things :-\
In my first post I said this:
Part of me feels like just consistently working out is all anybody needs, no matter their goals.
:D Threads evolve on their own, but my initial point wasn't that you should be killing yourself with each workout. It was more or less about constantly trying new stuff even after years in the gym. Crazy stuff like buying a nautilus machine and converting it to do triceps exercises.
-
In my first post I said this:
:D Threads evolve on their own, but my initial point wasn't that you should be killing yourself with each workout. It was more or less about constantly trying new stuff even after years in the gym. Crazy stuff like buying a nautilus machine and converting it to do triceps exercises.
Logic insists that muscles must have a reason to grow larger. Providing the reason is what bodybuilding is all about. Things get difficult when the intermediate stage is reached: 16 to 17 1/2 inch arms. After a certain amount of hypertrophy is obtained how does one generate more? Therein lies the question. Most trainees don't go beyond plateaus to any impressive degree. So gains will slow to a stop. What then? What triggers more hypertrophy? Well, broscience suggests to train harder. What exactly is that? We end up with platitudes instead of good information. That is why the pros are always in demand for seminars. The same questions get asked over and over. What is so difficult about maximum hypertrophy? Clearly we have to keep doing something extraordinary to progress in the size game. Eventually this pursuit becomes too difficult or time consuming so is abandoned. Cries of no drugs or no genetics are heard all around the world by hapless trainees on plateaus. Even if good information is given it can't be accepted because of pre-existing beliefs and practices. Therefore these discussions are literally a waste of time. No one will change anything they are doing. Obviously, repeating the same thing over and over and expecting a different result is the stuff of lunacy.
-
All I know is that I take training advice from champs with the advisement that most look like crap without drugs. Where is their training knowledge without the drugs? Apparently their guru training knowledge and work ethic is of no use without the syringe.
-
Yes I have wasted all this time being a natural twink, tho I look very young for age
-
Logic insists that muscles must have a reason to grow larger. Providing the reason is what bodybuilding is all about. Things get difficult when the intermediate stage is reached: 16 to 17 1/2 inch arms. After a certain amount of hypertrophy is obtained how does one generate more? Therein lies the question. Most trainees don't go beyond plateaus to any impressive degree. So gains will slow to a stop. What then? What triggers more hypertrophy? Well, broscience suggests to train harder. What exactly is that? We end up with platitudes instead of good information. That is why the pros are always in demand for seminars. The same questions get asked over and over. What is so difficult about maximum hypertrophy? Clearly we have to keep doing something extraordinary to progress in the size game. Eventually this pursuit becomes too difficult or time consuming so is abandoned. Cries of no drugs or no genetics are heard all around the world by hapless trainees on plateaus. Even if good information is given it can't be accepted because of pre-existing beliefs and practices. Therefore these discussions are literally a waste of time. No one will change anything they are doing. Obviously, repeating the same thing over and over and expecting a different result is the stuff of lunacy.
As a superior alternative to reverse grip pushdowns, you suggested buying a used nautilus machine and converting it. Ignore the surface lunacy of this for a moment and look at the meat of the matter: what is the fundamental difference between the two that's supposed to trigger maximum hypertrophy? The movements aren't drastically different and there are any number of exercises you can do with prefab gym equipment that mimics your "superior" version even more closely. So what is supposed to be the groundbreaking principal here that is supposed to trigger maximum hypertrophy?
-
As a superior alternative to reverse grip pushdowns, you suggested buying a used nautilus machine and converting it. Ignore the surface lunacy of this for a moment and look at the meat of the matter: what is the fundamental difference between the two that's supposed to trigger maximum hypertrophy? The movements aren't drastically different and there are any number of exercises you can do with prefab gym equipment that mimics your "superior" version even more closely. So what is supposed to be the groundbreaking principal here that is supposed to trigger maximum hypertrophy?
I have found that pressdowns are not effective after a certain arm size is reached. Can't say this is true for everyone else.
The original Nautilus Triceps machine has the user in a weak seated position. By modifying the machine it becomes more effective.
First the elbows are adjacent to the head and cause pre-stretching in the triceps which is a benefit.
Second, a straight body position is used which allows much more force to be used.
Third, the karate chop hand position isn't as hard on the forearm connective tissue.
Fourth, the upper arms cannot move outward or downward so provide more tension to the triceps than other movements.
There are not many excellent triceps machines out there. Perhaps Medx made the best one. It provided increased resistance near the end of the movement.
-
The good doctor to the stars knew about anabolic steroids but was not an expert in hypertrophy.
Explain this: why does a muscle get sore in a bodybuilder already training very hard.....he does something different and experiences DOMS the next few days. How come that happens?
That's the answer. Doing something different that your body is not accustom to.
Re., Dr. Walckzak: that's why people don't accept you as an expert. Whenever someone disagrees with you, you just dismiss the source. No evidence or proof needed. The study which shows you can't grow in DOMS and presents evidence and empirical proof of this claim is just dismissed with you offering nothing, no rebuttal in return. You have never conducted a scientific study on anything.
Dr. Walczak made his living working with bodybuilders and has countless examples of success with some of the best bodybuilders in the era -- including Arnold. But you just blithely dismiss him as not being an expert om hypertrophy. How do you know this? And what success do you have compared to Walczak? In fact, what success do you have in grooming a champion compared to bigmc do you have?
I know first hand a person who was trying to make his way in the bbing world and training at our gym and was already on hormones before he saw Walczak. Dr. Walczak prescribed less hormones to this person than he was taking on his own and tweaked both his diet and training and the gains started coming. This person, J.J. Marsh, never made it to the top of the top but he did improve into a very advance bber. I think he even made it to the Olympia stage.
Don't you see why people see you as arrogant and condescending. Compare you to Dr. Walczak. One a medical doctor who made his living developing successful bbers. Again, I want to emphasize "medical doctor" who specialize by his own interest and choosing the science, in so far as you can call it a science, of bbing. Then there's you who has never ever been successful in producing one advance bber using your theory of DOMS. You've even tried and fail on yourself. Yet you just dismiss the doctor with your bias opinion.
JJ Marsh:
(http://media-cache-ec0.pinimg.com/736x/69/ba/9c/69ba9c95ab857cd3042467824473b648.jpg)
-
That's the answer. Doing something different that your body is not accustom to.
Re., Dr. Walckzak: that's why people don't accept you as an expert. Whenever someone disagrees with you, you just dismiss the source. No evidence or proof needed. The study which shows you can't grow in DOMS and presents evidence and empirical proof of this claim is just dismissed with you offering nothing, no rebuttal in return. You have never conducted a scientific study on anything.
Dr. Walczak made his living working with bodybuilders and has countless examples of success with some of the best bodybuilders in the era -- including Arnold. But you just blithely dismiss him as not being an expert om hypertrophy. How do you know this? And what success do you have compared to Walczak? In fact, what success do you have in grooming a champion compared to bigmc do you have?
I know first hand a person who was trying to make his way in the bbing world and training at our gym and was already on hormones before he saw Walczak. Dr. Walczak prescribed less hormones to this person than he was taking on his own and tweaked both his diet and training and the gains started coming. This person, J.J. Marsh, never made it to the top of the top but he did improve into a very advance bber. I think he even made it to the Olympia stage.
Don't you see why people see you as arrogant and condescending. Compare you to Dr. Walczak. One a medical doctor who made his living developing successful bbers. Again, I want to emphasize "medical doctor" who specialize by his own interest and choosing the science, in so far as you can call it a science, of bbing. Then there's you who has never ever been successful in producing one advance bber using your theory of DOMS. You've even tried and fail on yourself. Yet you just dismiss the doctor with your bias opinion.
JJ Marsh:
(http://media-cache-ec0.pinimg.com/736x/69/ba/9c/69ba9c95ab857cd3042467824473b648.jpg)
You've got nothing there, Pellius. Why not do an experiment with your body and test my theory? You might be surprised.
I can dismiss that study because it doesn't seem relevant to the population of serious bodybuilders.
Walczak was an expert in bodybuilding hormones but wasn't a bodybuilder himself that I recall. I doubt someone who isn't a BB
would know what to do re training. Of course, he could have hung around gyms and learned that way. So let us give him the benefit
of the doubt but I don't recall he had a new theory of hypertrophy.
-
The muscle responds to intensity not weight and it doesn't matter what exercise you do just do things you like doing and feel good
-
The muscle responds to intensity not weight and it doesn't matter what exercise you do just do things you like doing and feel good
Check Hypertrophy Specific Training. They claim the muscles respond to changes in resistance as well.
When I have had a hard workout I don't feel good at all! But it feels good to feel that bad. :)
http://hypertrophyspecific.com/hst_index.html
-
I didn't really say anything about training "gains" being limited to weight gain, though. Strength is important, but I don't agree that you're only in maintenance mode after year 3 or 5 or whatever. I'm at about year 20 in my weightlifting habit, and even without a dramatic change in weight, my arms are much larger and more defined than they were 5 years ago. Last year I started working out legs twice a week- obsessively and consistently, whereas it used to be the workout I would skip if I just didn't have the the time or inclination- and they look much better than they ever have. My wife has a pic of us on vacation 6 years ago on her facebook page and so many people have commented on how different I look, even though I think I weighed more in that pic and was pretty muscular. My upper body taper is noticeably more dramatic and my shoulders have changed a lot. I'm not exactly Phil Heath, but they have that rounder, cannon ball look now as well as an improved upper chest and that didn't start to happen until recently. They used to look more like this:
Even without dramatic changes in weight, your body still changes.
Most of the research I've seen says the natural can gain around 30 pounds of muscle over their lifetime, most of it coming in the first 3 years. So if you gained 25 pounds in the first 3 years, you still have 5 in the tank that you have to grind out over the rest of your life. Perhaps you have just slowly gained that 5.
-
Check Hypertrophy Specific Training. They claim the muscles respond to changes in resistance as well.
When I have had a hard workout I don't feel good at all! But it feels good to feel that bad. :)
http://hypertrophyspecific.com/hst_index.html
stfu gimmick
-
That's the answer. Doing something different that your body is not accustom to.
Re., Dr. Walckzak: that's why people don't accept you as an expert. Whenever someone disagrees with you, you just dismiss the source. No evidence or proof needed. The study which shows you can't grow in DOMS and presents evidence and empirical proof of this claim is just dismissed with you offering nothing, no rebuttal in return. You have never conducted a scientific study on anything.
Dr. Walczak made his living working with bodybuilders and has countless examples of success with some of the best bodybuilders in the era -- including Arnold. But you just blithely dismiss him as not being an expert om hypertrophy. How do you know this? And what success do you have compared to Walczak? In fact, what success do you have in grooming a champion compared to bigmc do you have?
I know first hand a person who was trying to make his way in the bbing world and training at our gym and was already on hormones before he saw Walczak. Dr. Walczak prescribed less hormones to this person than he was taking on his own and tweaked both his diet and training and the gains started coming. This person, J.J. Marsh, never made it to the top of the top but he did improve into a very advance bber. I think he even made it to the Olympia stage.
Don't you see why people see you as arrogant and condescending. Compare you to Dr. Walczak. One a medical doctor who made his living developing successful bbers. Again, I want to emphasize "medical doctor" who specialize by his own interest and choosing the science, in so far as you can call it a science, of bbing. Then there's you who has never ever been successful in producing one advance bber using your theory of DOMS. You've even tried and fail on yourself. Yet you just dismiss the doctor with your bias opinion.
JJ Marsh:
(http://media-cache-ec0.pinimg.com/736x/69/ba/9c/69ba9c95ab857cd3042467824473b648.jpg)
Hey Pellius,
Interesting about Dr. Walczak. Do you have any idea of the training routines he advocated?
-
The muscle responds to intensity not weight and it doesn't matter what exercise you do just do things you like doing and feel good
Not for me and I have done some of the most intense workouts I have found, 20 sets of 20 on squats for many sets, German Volume Training, Smolov, Routines from books, Arnolds laborious routine, and on and on.
And I would find that I would actually regress in terms of strength, gain, etc. I would get weaker and weaker. For me, its all about LOW sets, HEAVY weight. Its crazy when I start doing that, while eating the same calories as previous training, what happens. Bodyweight goes up, bodyfat goes down, strength goes up.
Volume is pure shit for me. Could be because I am lifetime natural, who knows, but your style of training does not work for me at all if you are advocating light weight, higher sets, multiple exercises.
-
JJ Marsh 1991, (16") :
-
Pellius tries to be fair dinkum in this discussion. Unfortunately he misses the mark. Let me explain.
Bodybuilding seems to be a simple thing. You lift weights and over time your muscles get bigger.
This happens to almost everyone. Many train hard but few succeed in winning titles or getting big.
There seems to be many paths to size because even today there is no agreement. Not even in
basic principles.
Pellius is capable of reading studies done in exercise science. He embraces the results of one small
study and uses it to criticize my theory of hypertrophy. Another 'test' he uses is to demand who has
built more muscle using my method? He fails to consider the long experience I have had both in the gym
and reading about bodybuilding and exercise science. I just didn't stumble upon what I propose. No, I saw
the light by doing things in the gym. My own experiment. I was astonished by what I found. I wanted to
share my insight so wrote two articles for IronMan magazine that were published in 2000 and 2001.
I call my theory the DOMS method. Not a single person on Getbig has tried this method. That would be
an easy way to test the theory. Train one calf conventionally and the other using the DOMS method. After a few
weeks measure them and see if there is any difference.
The other thing that perplexes me in how come no one else can see what I see re training? Well, we all hang
onto our hallowed theories and will take them to our graves instead of changing or abandoning them.
I ask Pellius: Are your muscles huge and have you tried to get them huge? If not then you are not a real
bodybuilder. Cast off doing all manner of crazy things like martial arts. Let your bigger muscles ward off any
aggressive behaviour. Fear no man!
I took the photo of Kai in Melbourne in 2009.
-
You've got nothing there, Pellius. Why not do an experiment with your body and test my theory? You might be surprised.
Really? Nothing? You think anybody believes that? I know that doesn't matter to you because your arrogance easily accepts the notion that the entire world is simply wrong and will suffer because they are too dumb to recognize your genius.
Why don't I experiment on my body? Why should I? It's not my theory. Why don't you experiment on your body -- wait you did and failed. And if you remember I am no stranger to trying different protocols and experimenting on myself. Have you forgotten my calf experiment? Where I went from 13 inches to up to 17 inches. And that's on a muscle that few have been able to improve substantially. I don't think you, or anybody on this board, knows anyone who such dramatically improved his calves in about a year and went from looking like I had polio to being the only bodypart that people comment on how developed they are. I outlined the principles I used in minute detail on the IronAge site. A protocol that you also dismissed. Imagine that. Dismissing a protocol that actually worked dramatically on a muscle notorious to being unresponsive to training. Certainly unresponsive to the various types of training I had been doing for decades before. And I didn't use an ounce of weight or any machine. Just a dictionary, door jam and bare feet. You dismissed a successful experiment while still promoting your failed and unproven DOMS theory. What does that say about you? Who is the closed minded one?
I can dismiss that study because it doesn't seem relevant to the population of serious bodybuilders.
Why? Why isn't it relevant? You studiously avoided that question I put to you. Bbers may look very different from the average Joe but biologically and physiologically they are not just similar but identical. Carbon based life forms that uses oxygen, processes macro/micro nutrients, have a liver and kidneys and a heart all operating in the exact same way the difference being only in degrees.
High levels of creatine kinase indicates that your muscles are in a damaged state and in this case the damage state existed while in DOMS. NO GROWTH can occur while the muscles are in a damage state meaning no growth can occur while the muscles are in DOMS. This was established by real scientist not a gym owner who won a mid level bb contest nearly fifty years ago.
Walczak was an expert in bodybuilding hormones but wasn't a bodybuilder himself that I recall. I doubt someone who isn't a Bodybuilder would know what to do re training. Of course, he could have hung around gyms and learned that way. So let us give him the benefit of the doubt but I don't recall he had a new theory of hypertrophy.
So what? Was Arthur Jones a bodybuilder? Was Hany Rambod a bodybuilder? They all worked with and help improve the greatest bbers that ever lived. You've produce no one. Not even yourself.
Answer this one question: Since you dismiss every other authority, some of the greatest minds like Arthur Jones; and you dismiss scientific studies, tells us, give us, one reason, just one reason, why anybody should listen to you?
You tell me I have nothing. Well, what do you have?
I'll let the readers come to their own conclusions.
-
i would like to try out your calves routine pellius.
i got access to a seated calf machine and a calf-block at home.
-
i would like to try out your calves routine pellius.
i got access to a seated calf machine and a calf-block at home.
I don't know what Pellius is on about re myself, but Ironage was impressed with his calf routine. If a routine works then it must be doing something right.
-
ironage isnt around any longer is it? so i dont think i can access those old threads
-
Pellius, your argument and assumptions are mistaken. Here is what I know. My theory hasn't been refuted by you or anyone else. Therefore the cited study must be irrelevant or mistaken. I am currently setting up my personal arm gym so will be able to get some results. My 75th is in September so we will see what is possible.
I might build myself a new triceps machine.
-
where's the link to your calves routine, pellius? I'll try it out
-
Really? Nothing? You think anybody believes that? I know that doesn't matter to you because your arrogance easily accepts the notion that the entire world is simply wrong and will suffer because they are too dumb to recognize your genius.
Why don't I experiment on my body? Why should I? It's not my theory. Why don't you experiment on your body -- wait you did and failed. And if you remember I am no stranger to trying different protocols and experimenting on myself. Have you forgotten my calf experiment? Where I went from 13 inches to up to 17 inches. And that's on a muscle that few have been able to improve substantially. I don't think you, or anybody on this board, knows anyone who such dramatically improved his calves in about a year and went from looking like I had polio to being the only bodypart that people comment on how developed they are. I outlined the principles I used in minute detail on the IronAge site. A protocol that you also dismissed. Imagine that. Dismissing a protocol that actually worked dramatically on a muscle notorious to being unresponsive to training. Certainly unresponsive to the various types of training I had been doing for decades before. And I didn't use an ounce of weight or any machine. Just a dictionary, door jam and bare feet. You dismissed a successful experiment while still promoting your failed and unproven DOMS theory. What does that say about you? Who is the closed minded one?
Why? Why isn't it relevant? You studiously avoided that question I put to you. Bbers may look very different from the average Joe but biologically and physiologically they are not just similar but identical. Carbon based life forms that uses oxygen, processes macro/micro nutrients, have a liver and kidneys and a heart all operating in the exact same way the difference being only in degrees.
High levels of creatine kinase indicates that your muscles are in a damaged state and in this case the damage state existed while in DOMS. NO GROWTH can occur while the muscles are in a damage state meaning no growth can occur while the muscles are in DOMS. This was established by real scientist not a gym owner who won a mid level bb contest nearly fifty years ago.
So what? Was Arthur Jones a bodybuilder? Was Hany Rambod a bodybuilder? They all worked with and help improve the greatest bbers that ever lived. You've produce no one. Not even yourself.
Answer this one question: Since you dismiss every other authority, some of the greatest minds like Arthur Jones; and you dismiss scientific studies, tells us, give us, one reason, just one reason, why anybody should listen to you?
You tell me I have nothing. Well, what do you have?
I'll let the readers come to their own conclusions.
There is no need to descend to personal attacks when discussing a theory.
-
Hey Vince did you know that your gym is being closed down?
https://www.facebook.com/realgymau/
It's a shame it was one of the best gyms in Sydney (especially before you moved it).
-
You never stop learning in the world.
-
I didn't really say anything about training "gains" being limited to weight gain, though. Strength is important, but I don't agree that you're only in maintenance mode after year 3 or 5 or whatever. I'm at about year 20 in my weightlifting habit, and even without a dramatic change in weight, my arms are much larger and more defined than they were 5 years ago. Last year I started working out legs twice a week- obsessively and consistently, whereas it used to be the workout I would skip if I just didn't have the the time or inclination- and they look much better than they ever have. My wife has a pic of us on vacation 6 years ago on her facebook page and so many people have commented on how different I look, even though I think I weighed more in that pic and was pretty muscular. My upper body taper is noticeably more dramatic and my shoulders have changed a lot. I'm not exactly Phil Heath, but they have that rounder, cannon ball look now as well as an improved upper chest and that didn't start to happen until recently. They used to look more like this:
(http://www.bodybuilding-pics.com/43/images/Arnold_Schwarzenegger_2065.jpg)
Even without dramatic changes in weight, your body still changes.
Just curious if you had a concurrent increase in strength in the BP's that improved or do you think the improvement was due to more volume/frequency
Christian Thibaudeau wrote an article earlier this year noting how his body comp had changed over the years with various changes to his workout (and I'm sure diet) but that his bodyweight always seemed to remain about 215lbs
https://www.t-nation.com/training/genetic-limits-and-muscle-migration
-
Hey Vince did you know that your gym is being closed down?
https://www.facebook.com/realgymau/
It's a shame it was one of the best gyms in Sydney (especially before you moved it).
He didn't because this isn't Vince. :D
-
There is no need to descend to personal attacks when discussing a theory.
What personal attack? Or is it just a way to avoid addressing the points I made?
-
Pellius, your argument and assumptions are mistaken. Here is what I know. My theory hasn't been refuted by you or anyone else. Therefore the cited study must be irrelevant or mistaken. I am currently setting up my personal arm gym so will be able to get some results. My 75th is in September so we will see what is possible.
I might build myself a new triceps machine.
You don't seem to understand basic logic and once again you have the board shaking their heads. You proposed a theory, the onus is not for us to refute it but for you to prove it. This has been pointed out to you for years but you just ignore it.
And your theory has been refuted. It has been show in a scientific study that muscle growth does not, cannot, occur while the muscle is in DOMS. But you just reject the study.
-
ironage isnt around any longer is it? so i dont think i can access those old threads
Part of it is on the training board. No way at this time I can describe the protocol. It's not like I can just say 3 sets of 10 with a drop set and some forced reps here and there. There was a lot to it and something I would not be able to duplicate today.
-
Pellius, your argument and assumptions are mistaken. Here is what I know. My theory hasn't been refuted by you or anyone else. Therefore the cited study must be irrelevant or mistaken. I am currently setting up my personal arm gym so will be able to get some results. My 75th is in September so we will see what is possible.
I might build myself a new triceps machine.
You don't have a "theory." By scientific standards, you have a HYPOTHESIS.
You have to prove your hypothesis. We don't have to refute anything. And you said you have a Masters in Philosophy of Science, yet you cannot even differentiate between the terms "theory" and "hypothesis."
-
what the hell is doms theory anyway? i've never seen a proper description of his training program anywhere. just long walls of text, talking about nothing.
his time would have been better spent learning how to communicate effectively and concisely instead of all those years spent on bodybuilding forums flame posting about arnold, his "training theories" and failed gym equipment inventions.
-
Part of it is on the training board. No way at this time I can describe the protocol. It's not like I can just say 3 sets of 10 with a drop set and some forced reps here and there. There was a lot to it and something I would not be able to duplicate today.
ok, but lets say we dont follow it to the extreme, and do not look for 4 inches growth, ill be happy with 2 inches ;)
what would the key components of the routine be like? i suspect something like one leg at a time, all the way up, all the way down, squeeze at the top? maybe a hold at a top for a no of seconds? since it didnt require gym machines i assume it was something you did every day or even several times a day?
-
ok i think i found part of the ironage calf post, re-posted on getbig here
http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?topic=156877.0
-
ok, but lets say we dont follow it to the extreme, and do not look for 4 inches growth, ill be happy with 2 inches ;)
what would the key components of the routine be like? i suspect something like one leg at a time, all the way up, all the way down, squeeze at the top? maybe a hold at a top for a no of seconds? since it didnt require gym machines i assume it was something you did every day or even several times a day?
it involves nuclear codes
-
ok i think i found part of the ironage calf post, re-posted on getbig here
http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?topic=156877.0
Yes, that's it. I use to post as Mtwain here before I got put into time out and never freed so I started this Pellius account. I also posted as Mtwain on Ironage and everything is there but lost forever. Too bad because I would not be able to duplicate the info there. Even then when I was writing it I had trouble recalling everything because I kept trying to find new, even subtle ways, to stimulate my calves. And I was referring to a time that was ten years ago from when I wrote that. And that was in 2007. Now another ten years have passed so I'll have to go back twenty years.
-
ok, but lets say we dont follow it to the extreme, and do not look for 4 inches growth, ill be happy with 2 inches ;)
what would the key components of the routine be like? i suspect something like one leg at a time, all the way up, all the way down, squeeze at the top? maybe a hold at a top for a no of seconds? since it didnt require gym machines i assume it was something you did every day or even several times a day?
I don't think that is sound reasoning. That if you do something and gain 4 inches then you can do a less extreme version and get 2 inches. It doesn't work that way.
It's meaningless to talk in terms of a workout routine. Sets, reps, intensity variables. various movements.... It was following basic principles that I first learned when I was introduced to Arthur Jones by Hank Grundman (founder of the Iron Man Triathlon) who lived in the condo that I worked as a security guard when I was 18 years old. Hank Grundman opened up the first and only fully stocked commercial Nautilus Training Center. We would have long talks while he relaxed in the Jacuzzi and he offered me a huge discount to train at his gym and gave me a very plain looking paper back red book with a lady wearing a white, modest, full body leotard doing the Nautilus pullover machine saying, "If you read this you will know more about Nautilus equipment and it's training methods than most anybody."
I was mesmerized by that book. It just made so much logical sense. There were a few principles that really stuck out in my mind and really made an impression. This one basic principle stated by Arthur Jones was my guiding principle.
"Below a certain threshold of intensity exercise will do little or nothing by way of increasing muscular size, strength and functional ability."
"A long as you are working within your functional ability, doing things that are already easy, exercise will do little or nothing by way of increasing muscular size, strength and functional ability."
Now were talking late seventies early eighties when it was all about achieving a pump and 60 set squats in the mountains that Arnold claimed in his first autobiography. So this was new stuff. And it made so much logical sense. I mean, if you could do 8 pull ups then as long as you kept doing 8, never trying for 9, 10, or 11 -- how could this possibly stimulate an adaptive response?
So that was the constant challenge. Trying to find ways to challenge the body and stimulate an adaptive response. Your body seems to adapt quite quickly to a new stress so I had to continually figure out ways to subject my calves to a new and unaccustomed stress and that's why I can't just write out a routine.
So my goal was to try and make my calves as sore as possible the next day. If I didn't experience any soreness then I considered the workout wasted effort and a needless drain on my limited recovery ability.
But unlike Basile's DOMS theory I made absolutely sure that I would not touch my calves until it was fully recover. All soreness was gone. It worked out to something like this: I found that it usually took three days for the soreness to disappear. I took that to mean that the muscle damage has been repaired. Then I would wait a couple of more days for the "adaptive response", i.e., muscle growth to occur. So I would generally train my calves every five to six days, sometimes seven or eight if the DOMS was especially severe, but never less than five.
DOMS is an indication of muscle damage. Pain serves a purpose to the human body. It is a signal that damage has occurred and the pain is the body's way of telling you to back off. Give it a rest. It made absolutely no sense at all to continual to train a damaged muscle. It's like to continue sitting out in the sun when you have a sun burn.
Now compare my reasoning to Basile's, if he has even given a coherent reason other than that absurd prehistoric hunter scenario which has already been disproven in the wild using cheetahs as an example. Every time a cheetah fails making a kill, after about the second or third attempt, it grows noticeably weaker and each subsequent failed attempt reduces it's chance of success even more as it's functional ability continues to decline and weaken.
And, of course, unlike Basile, I also did an experiment on myself and was actually successful with before and after pictures as evidence. I also put myself out there on IronAge and accepted any and all challenges to my reasoning gaining the acceptance and understanding. It was well received because logically it made sense and, more importantly, it worked.
As an aside there was zero change in diet and zero change in bodyweight during that muscle gain. But that's only because calves are a small muscle group. I can't imagine anyone could gain any appreciable amount of muscle in the legs and back without an increase in body weight.
So why didn't I try this protocol with other muscle groups? If it worked for calves, the most stubborn of all muscle groups, it should be a shoo in for arms, chest, delts....
That is another very involved long story that I am not up to telling at the moment only to say that it deals with one's mental health, what kind of person you strive to be, your priorities in life and why I believe that anyone who has achieved greatest in anything is by definition not a normal person and that also includes having a screw lost. They are mentally stable. Someone like GSP seems like a normal human being but those close to him will attest that he is a mental. Coleman with his happy go lucky southern charm -- always happy, always living the dream -- had more than a few screws loose considering what he was willing to do to himself. I mean, look at him now. Does he seem all there?
I got so obsessed with my calves that I was going crazy. And I'm not kidding. Others noticed a change in me. That I was described as getting kooky. And it's all because I was always obsessing about my calves.
Calves? A fucking muscle on the back of your shin that most people don't give a shit about. Can you begin to see why that when it was all over that I had some qualms? That a little fucking muscle group and how it looked could so dominate my life. Unless you're a pro bber and your living depends on these things what kind of moron gets so preoccupied with the look of his lower legs.
Resistance training is the best type of activity by far for one to maintain health, looks and quality of life but serious bbing really attracts some strange people and makes them even stranger.
-
but is DOMS the only thing that tells us to back off? a delayed reaction of sorts, whatabout the pain you went through while doing the training, isnt that too a way of the body to tell you that youre taking it too far, and with that there's risk of injury? this we're suppose to ignore and 'fight through' no matter what.
as for pullups always doing 8 and not doing 9 or 10 or 11 that doesnt make sense, UNLESS, the body grows for other reasons, maybe the accumulating effect of doing something regularly over a longer period of time, time under tension or other protocols.
very few seems to keep increasing in no of pullups or start wearing a weight belt, would it be correct to say theyre wasting their time?
-
Well Pellius, your strategy isn't much different from mine. I stated that various methods can stimulate hypertrophy and they all have the same 'symptoms' after the workout. Trainee is exhausted, muscles fully pumped and body shaking. There is no easy way.
Interesting you used DOMS to guide you re the effectiveness of your workouts. I advocate retraining after resting the muscle for two days. You rested for at least three days. The price you paid was to require a novel workout each time. I found I could avoid that except I always tried to do more reps or resistance or both.
I also made good gains in one month: 1 inch on both arms and calves.
-
but is DOMS the only thing that tells us to back off? a delayed reaction of sorts, whatabout the pain you went through while doing the training, isnt that too a way of the body to tell you that youre taking it too far, and with that there's risk of injury? this we're suppose to ignore and 'fight through' no matter what.
as for pullups always doing 8 and not doing 9 or 10 or 11 that doesnt make sense, UNLESS, the body grows for other reasons, maybe the accumulating effect of doing something regularly over a longer period of time, time under tension or other protocols.
very few seems to keep increasing in no of pullups or start wearing a weight belt, would it be correct to say theyre wasting their time?
No, I don't think a trainee just "going through the motions" is wasting his time. Jones was very precise with his language. He said that always operating WITHIN your functional ability will do little or nothing by way of INCREASING muscle size, strength and functional ability.
You won't progress but certainly getting the blood flowing and muscles moving has a positive effect in regard to maintaining over all health and fitness. I mean, if people have improved and maintained their physical fitness by just walking imagine what an overall body routine would do?
And you bring up a good point about whether it is necessary to achieve DOMS, muscle damage, to progress. I don't know. What I do know is the muscles have to be subjected to a stress it is not accustom to. Maybe one rep less than what will trigger DOMS is enough. Maybe even less intensity. Mike Mentzer put it this way: he admitted that maybe it isn't necessary to produce 100% intensity of effort. Maybe all you really need was 95%, 90%, even 80% of intensity of effort to trigger an adaptive response. But how do you measure this? You can only accurately measure zero % effort and 100% effort indicated when you can't budge that bar another inch. Intensity is a necessary condition for muscle hypertrophy. 100% insures that condition.
You also being up another point that I think is almost universally misunderstood. The idea that hard training -- intensity of effort -- puts one more at risk to injury. This is simply not true and indeed it is quite the opposite. As intensity increases your risk of injury goes down. Now I am talking about injury to the muscles caused by exceeding the muscle's tensile strength and integrity. It's a different situation when you are talking about injury caused by poor form or movements requiring great skill and stabilization abilities such as squatting on a Swiss ball. Many new age exercises today are about developing a certain skill in movement than trying to develop strength under the guise that it's harder. Sure, squatting on a Swiss ball is way harder than a traditional squat. But so what? You can't possibly put the same load on the muscle doing a Swiss Ball squat than a traditional squat. It's obvious by the amount of weight you're able to use. Doing a Swiss Ball squat does help you develop the skill for squatting on a Swiss ball. Congratulations.
With the exception of doing a one rep max where you are demonstrating strength rather than developing strength it seems counter intuitive to say that, as force being generated is high, intensity is low. And as intensity increases the force generated decreases.
Let take as an example doing a set of barbell curls of 80 lbs for 8 reps failing to complete a 9th rep. When you perform the first rep your ability to generate force is high. You could easily do 90, 100, 110 lbs. So because you are still fresh and strong that first rep is easy therefore intensity is low. As you progress through the set, your strength starts to diminish as your ability to generate force goes down. And because it gets harder with each succeeding rep your intensity increases. This goes on until you no longer have the ability to generate 80lbs of force despite your best effort. Generating your highest intensity.
As your muscles get weaker with each succeeding rep it becomes more and more unlikely that you will exceed that muscles tensile strength and integrity. You are simply too weak to hurt yourself. And if you do hurt yourself it will come at the beginning on the set when you are at your strongest and you use explosive movements which greatly magnify the force generated on your muscles and joints. But HIT advocates are very adamant on performing reps in a slow and deliberate fashion emphasizing the negative portion of the movement.
So when I talk about being at the end of calf raise where I can't complete a full rep on my own and
just blasting up in real life I ain't blasting anywhere. My calf muscle is just too weak and exhausted. I am not exploding up but the actual movement is very slow and deliberate despite my best effort. Just like when you see someone trying to lock out on that final rep on bench. Despite pushing as hard as he possibly can the weight is barely moving inch by inch.
-
Well Pellius, your strategy isn't much different from mine. I stated that various methods can stimulate hypertrophy and they all have the same 'symptoms' after the workout. Trainee is exhausted, muscles fully pumped and body shaking. There is no easy way.
Interesting you used DOMS to guide you re the effectiveness of your workouts. I advocate retraining after resting the muscle for two days. You rested for at least three days. The price you paid was to require a novel workout each time. I found I could avoid that except I always tried to do more reps or resistance or both.
I also made good gains in one month: 1 inch on both arms and calves.
It is indeed quite similar. DOMS was the only way I could tell that I pushed my muscles beyond what it was used to. But there's one glaring and exceedingly important difference. Being fully recovered
before training that muscle again is an absolute necessity. The number of days was arbitrary. What mattered was that all soreness was gone and then adding a couple of more days for compensation. I've gone as long as 8 days before training again. Also, there is a huge and exceeding important difference in frequency and duration. You've advocated training 8 hours a day if it were possible. I trained at most every five days and I only did one set. Admittedly some of those "one set" took as long as ten minutes to complete but none of this set after set, day after day.
And it is unfortunate that you are not able to prove the gains that you made. But if you did it before, and you believe age is not a hinderance to muscle hypertrophy, you should be able to do it again. This would really put the matter to rest and shut the mouths, including mine, of your detractors.
-
1. im not sure intensity is necessary for growth. like i said, its possible the muscle grow, over time, because of being trained over and over and over again. somebody doing pullups 3 sets of 10 3 times a week at home over a 6 month period might very well build his back even though he not once went over 3 sets of 10 or added weight around his waist.
maybe that just works to a limit and after that, for additional growth, changes has to be made.
2. as for intensity being dangerous, the problems is that when youre sapped of strength and mental energy, form goes out the window and that is where the danger lies when youre no longer able to perform an exercise properly but rather is struggling to lift at any cost.
3. biggest i feel doms is doing something i havent done before (it doesnt even have to be intense) or doing something i havent done in a long time (again, doesnt have to be intense) so doms doesnt say anything about level of intensity. and then i get doms in legs, but not so much in back, even though i pushed myself very hard to failure in my back training. add to that that i feel doms in legs, but not more than last time even though i lifted more than last time.
doms is a very poor indicator IMO.
-
i used to think i was crazy with all the blank stares i would get while talking about training. now i have a little more respect for myself.
-
but is DOMS the only thing that tells us to back off? a delayed reaction of sorts, whatabout the pain you went through while doing the training, isnt that too a way of the body to tell you that youre taking it too far, and with that there's risk of injury? this we're suppose to ignore and 'fight through' no matter what.
as for pullups always doing 8 and not doing 9 or 10 or 11 that doesnt make sense, UNLESS, the body grows for other reasons, maybe the accumulating effect of doing something regularly over a longer period of time, time under tension or other protocols.
very few seems to keep increasing in no of pullups or start wearing a weight belt, would it be correct to say theyre wasting their time?
I forgot to address the very important point you brought up in your first sentence. What about the pain you experience while doing the actual activity?
Remember what your body tend to. Why is it easy for us to store an almost unlimited amount of fat yet so hard to build muscles. Because your body wants to save energy and storing energy and reducing your body's demand for energy is your body's strategy. Muscle, even at rest, has a metabolic cost. Blood supply, nutrients, oxygen.... Fat is just stored energy. Something your body likes. And another strategy is that it is much more comfortable to lay on the couch than do wind sprints. When you start making great physical demands on your body you better have a damn good reason. And your body is going to exact a price for that reason. Now if you convince your body that it will enhance your survival or do you some good then there are mechanism for that. You want to look attractive and alpha for the females. This motivates you and you get that drive and high, the adrenaline rush, that make you ignore the pain. But taken to far, when you are taking yourself to the absolute limit, then your body rebels.
The pain, the discomfort, your body experiences when performing an activity is simply a reaction to your body's propensity to remain at rest. The pain you experience after an activity is an indication that you pushed your body beyond what it is normally use to. This may stimulate an adaptive response. To prepare itself for future stress. But like anything, like the difference between getting a tan and getting sunburned, or developing a callous or a blister, you can exceed you body's ability to adapt to the new stress.
Just like in life. Some stress is good. Keeps you motivated and alive. Too much stress is bad and probably one of the main killers in our society today.
-
1. im not sure intensity is necessary for growth. like i said, its possible the muscle grow, over time, because of being trained over and over and over again. somebody doing pullups 3 sets of 10 3 times a week at home over a 6 month period might very well build his back even though he not once went over 3 sets of 10 or added weight around his waist.
maybe that just works to a limit and after that, for additional growth, changes has to be made.
2. as for intensity being dangerous, the problems is that when youre sapped of strength and mental energy, form goes out the window and that is where the danger lies when youre no longer able to perform an exercise properly but rather is struggling to lift at any cost.
3. biggest i feel doms is doing something i havent done before (it doesnt even have to be intense) or doing something i havent done in a long time (again, doesnt have to be intense) so doms doesnt say anything about level of intensity. and then i get doms in legs, but not so much in back, even though i pushed myself very hard to failure in my back training. add to that that i feel doms in legs, but not more than last time even though i lifted more than last time.
doms is a very poor indicator IMO.
1. It just doesn't make sense. Doing something that's already easy over and over again isn't going to stimulate an adaptive response. Why should it?
2. Again, the problem is with form and not intensity. And your workouts should be brief so that you are not so physically exhausted that your can't perform relatively simple movements. Also, that's one of the reasons that, in general, machines are superior to free weights. You don't have to worry about stabilizing the weight or getting out of you groove.
3. Like Jones, I also try to be precise with my language. I was very specific to say that my intention was to subject my muscles to a stress it was UNACCUSTOMED to. I remember getting DOMS from bowling for the first time all night. These were movements my body was not accustomed to despite lifting for years. Problem with calves is that the movement is fixed. Raising my heels up and down. I can't change that. All I could manipulate was the intensity in which I raised my heels up and down.
It's not that DOMS doesn't say anything about intensity. It's DOMS doesn't say everything about intensity.
-
It is indeed quite similar. DOMS was the only way I could tell that I pushed my muscles beyond what it was used to. But there's one glaring and exceedingly important difference. Being fully recovered
before training that muscle again is an absolute necessity. The number of days was arbitrary. What mattered was that all soreness was gone and then adding a couple of more days for compensation. I've gone as long as 8 days before training again. Also, there is a huge and exceeding important difference in frequency and duration. You've advocated training 8 hours a day if it were possible. I trained at most every five days and I only did one set. Admittedly some of those "one set" took as long as ten minutes to complete but none of this set after set, day after day.
And it is unfortunate that you are not able to prove the gains that you made. But if you did it before, and you believe age is not a hinderance to muscle hypertrophy, you should be able to do it again. This would really put the matter to rest and shut the mouths, including mine, of your detractors.
All bobybuilders have to deal with the repeated bout effect. This happens when they wait for recovery and adaptation. My idea was to avoid that effect by retraining earlier. The people at Hypertrophy Specific Training state that research shows that protein synthesis doesn't continue after 48 hours. They advocate retraining after 36 to 48 hours. This is where I used my experience with pinch gripping. If I trained with only one rest day or more than two I didn't increase what I could lift. Using that protocol I set a new world record in one-handed pinch gripping hoisting 92.5kg or 203 pounds. I have a video of that competition.Training every third day was necessary to keep the muscle growing.
By the way, there is a threshold that one must exceed to cause hypertrophy. It is a pity that the word intensity
is used both for percentage of a maximum resistance lifted and the amount of effort expended. Even if only 80% intensity is required the effort required is still extreme to generate further hypertrophy.
-
You don't have a "theory." By scientific standards, you have a HYPOTHESIS.
You have to prove your hypothesis. We don't have to refute anything. And you said you have a Masters in Philosophy of Science, yet you cannot even differentiate between the terms "theory" and "hypothesis."
Is this your contribution to this debate? Semantics.😴
-
. It just doesn't make sense. Doing something that's already easy over and over again isn't going to stimulate an adaptive response. Why should it?
well it still requires effort, just not maximum effort. maybe enough effort x number of times = accumulated effect over time.
isnt there numerous thoughts on how to make a muscle grow? time under tension. slow reps. low intensity but more sets. training for the pump etc etc why should we assume intensity is the only thing?
2. Again, the problem is with form and not intensity. And your workouts should be brief so that you are not so physically exhausted that your can't perform relatively simple movements. Also, that's one of the reasons that, in general, machines are superior to free weights. You don't have to worry about stabilizing the weight or getting out of you groove.
didnt you use to bounce while training calves? not sure how wise that is.
Raising my heels up and down. I can't change that. All I could manipulate was the intensity in which I raised my heels up and down.
i think there's a lot that can be done and i wouldnt sort them all under intensity. stretching during or after the movement. holding on top or bottom. explosive reps vs slow controlled reps. time under tension. rest between sets. no of sets or reps. progressive load.
-
well it still requires effort, just not maximum effort. maybe enough effort x number of times = accumulated effect over time.
isnt there numerous thoughts on how to make a muscle grow? time under tension. slow reps. low intensity but more sets. training for the pump etc etc why should we assume intensity is the only thing?
didnt you use to bounce while training calves? not sure how wise that is.
i think there's a lot that can be done and i wouldnt sort them all under intensity. stretching during or after the movement. holding on top or bottom. explosive reps vs slow controlled reps. time under tension. rest between sets. no of sets or reps. progressive load.
In logic something can be a necessary but not sufficient condition. Above a threshold re intensity is probably a necessary requirement for hypertrophy but it may not be sufficient for growth to occur. More time under severe tension is required. Lots of hard sets satisfies this requirement.
-
Vince, Dr. Walczak told me himself that if you are training and eating properly and natural you will max out in about three years with about 80% of those gains coming within the first year. You can play with body composition and gain a bit or lose it bit just by eating by overall real qualitative and quantitative gains comes to a halt.
Your body does not want large muscles and for good reason. Muscles, even at rest, require constant metabolic support. Unlike fat, which is just stored energy and something your body always wants and has a seemingly limitless capacity to store, supporting muscle is a cost to the body and given the slightest reason it will get rid of it straight away. Put your arm in a cast and your muscles shrivel away. The fat will stay or even increase depending on caloric expenditure but muscle is gone. And you start to lose it as you get older no matter what you do. You talk such nonsense when you say age doesn't matter. Every human being that has ever existed that continues lifetime serious bbing has proven that. Robby Robinson and Tony Pearson are gifted bberings that have never lost the desire to train and have incredible, mindblowing, physiques FOR THEIR AGE. They are nothing like how they were when they were in their twenties and thirties.
You knew Dr. Walczak. This was his world. He worked with all the top bbers including supplying anabolic hormones right out of his office. I saw his cabinet with rows of ciba dbols tabs and vials of Organon Deca.
Again, he was a real, legit medical doctor and knew the human body very well and how it responds to training, nutrition, and anabolic hormones. And he knew bodybuilding and real bodybuilders and what it took to get on stage and win. Arnold and Franco went to him for a reason.
He even said he could make you a champ. Who knows what would have happened if you took him up on his offer.
This has been my experience. I just train in a way that feels intense yet very safe. I don't care if I'm slightly bigger or smaller than some other nobody in the gym so no need to compile injuries.
-
This has been my experience. I just train in a way that feels intense yet very safe. I don't care if I'm slightly bigger or smaller than some other nobody in the gym so no need to compile injuries.
Have you ever tried the Bicep Supination Machine?
-
Vince, Dr. Walczak told me himself that if you are training and eating properly and natural you will max out in about three years with about 80% of those gains coming within the first year. You can play with body composition and gain a bit or lose it bit just by eating by overall real qualitative and quantitative gains comes to a halt.
Your body does not want large muscles and for good reason. Muscles, even at rest, require constant metabolic support. Unlike fat, which is just stored energy and something your body always wants and has a seemingly limitless capacity to store, supporting muscle is a cost to the body and given the slightest reason it will get rid of it straight away. Put your arm in a cast and your muscles shrivel away. The fat will stay or even increase depending on caloric expenditure but muscle is gone. And you start to lose it as you get older no matter what you do. You talk such nonsense when you say age doesn't matter. Every human being that has ever existed that continues lifetime serious bbing has proven that. Robby Robinson and Tony Pearson are gifted bberings that have never lost the desire to train and have incredible, mindblowing, physiques FOR THEIR AGE. They are nothing like how they were when they were in their twenties and thirties.
You knew Dr. Walczak. This was his world. He worked with all the top bbers including supplying anabolic hormones right out of his office. I saw his cabinet with rows of ciba dbols tabs and vials of Organon Deca.
Again, he was a real, legit medical doctor and knew the human body very well and how it responds to training, nutrition, and anabolic hormones. And he knew bodybuilding and real bodybuilders and what it took to get on stage and win. Arnold and Franco went to him for a reason.
He even said he could make you a champ. Who knows what would have happened if you took him up on his offer.
lots of blah blah here with no pictorial proof of anything
curious what you will say once you see my 4 week lat progress
p.s. I'm waaaaayyyyyy past my prime and I will do this gear free
-
Have you ever tried the Bicep Supination Machine?
Would travel thousands of miles to kiss it and cry in it's presence.
-
Stimmelate, don't annallate.
-
i used to think i was crazy with all the blank stares i would get while talking about training. now i have a little more respect for myself.
lol.
-
Things that do NOT work for me as a Lifetime Natural:
High Volume, High Reps, Lengthy Workout Sessions, More than 3 or 4 days of lifting, Short Rest Periods Between Sets, Lighter Training, Pump Training, Explosive Training, varying exercises frequently (Muscle Confusion).
Things that DO work:
Low Volume 12 sets or so per workout usually Push in one session and Pull with Legs in the other, Lower to Mid Rep Range, 30- 1 hr max Workout Length, 3 Days a Week Lifting, Resting as long as needed to get the rep/weight range, Continual Progression with Weight, HEAVY training, sticking to the SAME exercises for long periods increasing weight or reps, increasing weight on exercises in small increments .5 to 1 lb
I wasted way too much time doing stupid routines that were regressive.
Current and best Routine is this:
Monday:Bench Press-3 sets Reps=5, 6, 8 Reverse Pyramid first set Heaviest then reduce each by 10 percent in weight
Dumbbell Shoulder Pres=5,6,8 Reverse Pyramid
Barbell Front Raise= 3 sets of 12- Add weight once all 12 reps can be completed with given weight.
Reverse Tricep Cable Pushdowns-3 Sets of 10- Add weight once all 10 reps are completed with given weight.
Wednesday: Squat-3 sets Reps=5, 6, 8 Reverse Pyramid first set Heaviest then reduce each by 10 percent in weight
Lying Leg Curl-3 sets of 12- Add weight once all 12 reps can be completed with given weight.
Barbell Row- 5, 6, 8 Reverse Pyramid first set Heaviest then reduce each by 10 percent in weight
Underhand Lat Pulldown- 3 sets of 12- Add weight once all 12 reps can be completed with given weight.
Barbell Bicep Curl- 3 Sets of 10- Add weight once all 10 reps are completed with given weight.
Friday:Repeat Monday
Then on the next Monday you will start with Squats and repeat the same M,W,F
Progression on the Reverse Pyramid sets are as follows: Only one set is moved up in weight each session. For instance, 5,6,8 on your 8 rep set next session increase the weight. On the session after that, increase the weight on the 6 rep set. After that session, increase the weight on the 5 rep session. Repeat.
Wish I would have been training this way since starting.
Thanks for your post. Clearly, one of the few people willing to talk honestly. I recently cut back to three days as well. Similar to you I alternate between just two workouts.
Been giving up a lot of the training principles I was too proud to let go of earlier. I would think be surprised if my training moves even further in the direction you outlined.
-
Things that do NOT work for me as a Lifetime Natural:
High Volume, High Reps, Lengthy Workout Sessions, More than 3 or 4 days of lifting, Short Rest Periods Between Sets, Lighter Training, Pump Training, Explosive Training, varying exercises frequently (Muscle Confusion).
Things that DO work:
Low Volume 12 sets or so per workout usually Push in one session and Pull with Legs in the other, Lower to Mid Rep Range, 30- 1 hr max Workout Length, 3 Days a Week Lifting, Resting as long as needed to get the rep/weight range, Continual Progression with Weight, HEAVY training, sticking to the SAME exercises for long periods increasing weight or reps, increasing weight on exercises in small increments .5 to 1 lb
I wasted way too much time doing stupid routines that were regressive.
Current and best Routine is this:
Monday:Bench Press-3 sets Reps=5, 6, 8 Reverse Pyramid first set Heaviest then reduce each by 10 percent in weight
Dumbbell Shoulder Pres=5,6,8 Reverse Pyramid
Barbell Front Raise= 3 sets of 12- Add weight once all 12 reps can be completed with given weight.
Reverse Tricep Cable Pushdowns-3 Sets of 10- Add weight once all 10 reps are completed with given weight.
Wednesday: Squat-3 sets Reps=5, 6, 8 Reverse Pyramid first set Heaviest then reduce each by 10 percent in weight
Lying Leg Curl-3 sets of 12- Add weight once all 12 reps can be completed with given weight.
Barbell Row- 5, 6, 8 Reverse Pyramid first set Heaviest then reduce each by 10 percent in weight
Underhand Lat Pulldown- 3 sets of 12- Add weight once all 12 reps can be completed with given weight.
Barbell Bicep Curl- 3 Sets of 10- Add weight once all 10 reps are completed with given weight.
Friday:Repeat Monday
Then on the next Monday you will start with Squats and repeat the same M,W,F
Progression on the Reverse Pyramid sets are as follows: Only one set is moved up in weight each session. For instance, 5,6,8 on your 8 rep set next session increase the weight. On the session after that, increase the weight on the 6 rep set. After that session, increase the weight on the 5 rep session. Repeat.
Wish I would have been training this way since starting.
looks like you're endowed with more fast twitch fibers than slow
-
well it still requires effort, just not maximum effort. maybe enough effort x number of times = accumulated effect over time.
isnt there numerous thoughts on how to make a muscle grow? time under tension. slow reps. low intensity but more sets. training for the pump etc etc why should we assume intensity is the only thing?
didnt you use to bounce while training calves? not sure how wise that is.
i think there's a lot that can be done and i wouldnt sort them all under intensity. stretching during or after the movement. holding on top or bottom. explosive reps vs slow controlled reps. time under tension. rest between sets. no of sets or reps. progressive load.
Well, you seem pretty determined to make an argument against the importance of intensity for muscle hypertrophy. Of the three factors in training: frequency, duration and intensity; I believe that intensity is by far the most neglected factor. I presented my reasoning and will leave it at there.
You asked me what I did to put on four inches (3 permanent inches) on my calves in just under a year. I tried to give the best and most thorough response I could given the limitations posting on a message board. I did so reluctantly because it does get pretty involved and I consider it a dark period in my life. I was 37 years old, a grown ass adult, and the most important thing in the world to me at that time was building my calves. I was always self conscious about how skinny my calves were and was always trying to find new ways to improve them. But it didn't occupy my thoughts 24/7 like it did during that calf period. Something seemed to have snapped in me. I'm not sure what to make of it but I do have some qualms and really don't like to think about it. I was contacted by a writer from a major muscle mag about eight years ago who read my posts on IronAge to do an article on my calf training. I declined. I did reconsider and said I would do it only if my real name wasn't used. I think if I could do it then anybody could. There's nothing special about me and I was born with small calves and nothing I did before made zero difference. And I've been training formally nonstop since I was 12 years old. I really believed I could have help other people with the same problem. I just didn't want to be publicly associated with it. But that wasn't acceptable to the writer. Looking back it did indicate to me that in way I'm kind of ashamed at the immense effort I invested in such a trivial pursuit.
Anyway, I haven't looked at the link regarding my postings on IronAge and don't intend to but I think it will give you some ideal of the approach I took. I also tried to answer all your questions. It's pointless for me to continue to argue why I did what I did. I think I was pretty clear on my reasoning. But when all is said and done I did achieve something that few ever have. Trivial as it is.
Take it for what it's worth.
“Absorb what is useful, discard what is useless and add what is specifically your own”
― Bruce Lee, Bruce Lee's Wisdom for the Way
-
In logic something can be a necessary but not sufficient condition. Above a threshold re intensity is probably a necessary requirement for hypertrophy but it may not be sufficient for growth to occur. More time under severe tension is required. Lots of hard sets satisfies this requirement.
Yes, I believe that completely. Intensity is a necessary but insufficient requirement to optimize muscle hypertrophy. Mentzer just went over board on intensity diminishing the importance of frequency and duration. The rub is how much? Three days a week? Six days? Two a days? One set? Ten sets? Fifty sets?
-
thats fine.
i dont think its uncommon that people obsess, some over a lagging bodypart, grip strength, increasing their bench or just gaining as much mass as possible including going up in the middle of the night to drink shakes...
me personally i dont, but i do have an interest especially for parts of training others could care less about - grip strength, forearms, neck, calves...
-
What Pellius did to get his calves to grow:
"I wrote this long post on the Mentzer thread about how I was able to transform my calves after twenty years of fruitless training using every conceivable combination with various calf machines using just the one-legged calf raise that Jones said was perfect enough and why he never developed a calf machine.
Anyway, I didn't want the post to go to waste because it took me so long to write and might give some practical credibility to Jones' and HIT by an ordinary guy who had 13 7/8 inch calves until his mid thirties. I can email you a pic because I can't attach it here. I just got my first digital camera last week and have been photographing everything. I have a pic of my calves on my dsktop but it won't attach here. I think it exceeds the limit. The pic is of normal size but uses 1MB of space whereas the limit here is only 110KB.
Anyway here's the post that didn't make the locked thread deadline:
Quote from: Max_Rep on August 07, 2006, 03:05:12 pm
Okay dude I'll try them. Do you hold the dumbell in the same hand as the leg you're training or the opposite hand?
Actually, to this day I can't do one strict rep with just my meager bodyweight of 195-200lbs so dumbells have never been necessary. I would do them at home with this huge dictionary that's about 8 inches thick. I put it between a doorway and use the frame edges to both balance and pull myself up for force reps and then push myself down (like doing an over head press) for negatives. I could write a book on all the variations but you really got to make them hurt. I'd just do one or two sets for each leg but each set would take almost five minutes. A typical set would start out with just the typical full range movement. All the way down but do a prestretch (as you slowly lower, just controlled not any of this super slow stuff, just before the full stretch you kind of do a bounce before coming back up. This is similar to throwing you hips out first before following with your arms when throwing a baseball. It's suppose to activate more fibers.) Then you do the whole force reps thing before you have to start pulling up your whole body but then push down against the top of the door frame for the negatives. When you can't control the downward portion of the movement you get to rest. Which means you do burns at the end. Just keep bouncing up and down at the bottom trying not to cry while psyching yourself up for the next rep. It's kind of rest pause except the rest part is the burns. So I would do positive failure, forced reps, negatives (pushing against the door frame) then maybe ten burns before I explode back up which requires an assisted forced rep and then pushing back down for a negative and then repeat. I'd try to get about 10 of these burn/rest pause reps. Sometimes I couldn't do any more burns but would just stay in that stretched position wimpering like a girly-girl (not even a girl-man) before exploding back up. I was in the privacy of my own home so I didn't have to worry about how insane I looked. And I was free to say, "F**k, f**k, f**k, as I was in the stretching portion. And it's not just about doing forced reps, negatives, burns... you really have to make a concerted volitional effort. To take my mind off the pain of the burns I would use it to psyche myself up so I could explode for the rest pause reps. I looked at it as sort of when you hyper ventilate before extreme exertion. My hyper ventilation would be the burns. Burn, burn, burn, up and down, up and down, and then BOOM! explode to the top like your life depended on it. Forget about form at this point. Your muscles are too weak and exhausted to exceed tensile strength.
The thing is that the whole reason I started doing this was because I just gave up on calves. I wasn't going to waste my time at the gym doing them. I would just do a couple of one-legged sets at home just to keep tone and conditioning. It's only when I started to notice some change that it inspired me to take it more seriously. I first noticed veins before I started to measure them and found that they grew.
Don't be afraid to use your other feet for balance and to help you push up for forced reps and steady yourself for negatives. Eighty per cent of the time I 'd do just one set each because it just took so much out of me and since I didn't think I could duplicate that level of intensity for the next set I figure why bother.
Right now I just piddle with the seated calf machine at the gym and do one leg raises on the stairs leading to the stretching room at the 24HR on Crenshaw/PCH. I just do 15 reps for each leg and leave it at that. I don't train my calves with that intensity anymore because I don't want them to grow anymore because they're a bit out of porportion and people comment of them regularly. I can't tell you how odd it is to say that especially since I use to be so self-conscious of how skinny they were before. I measure them at 13 7/8 inches.
Now if I can only figure out a practical way to work with that type of intensity for the rest of my body.
Are you saying that with those monsters you can't do a one legged calf raise with you bodyweight? I must be confused here or the sentence is off. I would think after 3 inches of growth your strength would be through the roof compared to when they were under 14 inches.
Actually, that calf on the right in the picture looks like you stole it from Arnold.
I mean that I can't lock out fully, i.e., the full contracted position where you feel squeeze. I'm talking maybe the last quarter or even eighth of an inch. I certainly got stronger because I always kept track of reps and always strived for progression. When I first started I could only do about 5 strict reps without help. This surprised me because I would use the stack of the standing calf machine. But for some reason I could never get that full contraction when you are up on your toes like a ballerina. I had to help myself.
As I mentioned in a previous post I'm a bit under 6'2" and weigh 195-200lbs. I compete (Jiu-Jitsu) at 187.
I would train them twice a week. One set for each leg sometimes two (maybe twenty percent of the time). I would do toes slightly out one day and toes slightly in the other. Remember, the only reason I started training this way was because I decided to just give up on calves because if I couldn't make any improvement and after 20 years it was never going to happen. I did the one legged raise because Jones' said it was the perfect movement for calves and there was nothing he could do to improve upon it. Hence, he developed no calf machines. Also, I could do it at home at my convenience and not take away from valuable gym time.
Having work on machines my whole life I was surprised at the difference bodyweight raises were. It did seem perfect. When I would go to the gym and do one leg raises on the standing calf it just wasn't the same. I don't know why. Anyway, I started to take it more seriously when I noticed a difference. I don't know how long it took because I really didn't pay much attention. I was just doing it for tone and conditioning and the feeling that even if a muscle doesn't respond you still should exercise it. I just remember once putting on my shoes and noticing a vein I never saw before. Im like, "What's the dealio-oh?" I then rummaged through my place to find a measuring tape and found that they grew almost a 1/4 inch.
If I get a chance I try to post some more things I did as I progressed. It's been a while since I've "bombed" them, at least two-three years, so I've forgotten a lot. But because of this thread some of the stuff are starting to come back. I think this might be helpful because nobody can say I had good genes for calves (13 7/8 inches after 20 years of training), or steroids (look at all the pros with bad calves) or implants (they're too bulgy and uneven) or synthol (ouch! plus you can see veins and it doesn't look like a balloon.)
Again, measurement wise they're really not that big. It's an illusion because of my skinny long ankles. A friend of mine use to say my calves were bigger than his but his measure 18 1/2 inches. Looked at alone they seem big but when you compare with someone else then it becomes obvious that though they appear more developed, size wise they're not that big.
Because so many factors are considered it's hard to tell if a certain variation, style or technique makes much of difference or not. One thing I started doing simply because I gave up on any hope of making progress (I figured, like Sisyphus, since I spent so much effort accomplishing nothing I decided that I'll devote a minimal amount of effort to accomplish the same thing -- namely nothing) was to start doing calves bare foot. After all, why bother "suiting up" with shoes for something that now became a low priority. This gave me a noticeable difference in both the feel and application. One thing was that by kind of curling my toes it gave me more of a feeling of spreading out my calves outward instead of just the typical up and down contraction. This really made a difference doing burns. I remember Arnold once said that when standing on stage with his back to the audience he would try to grip the floor with his toes and spread his calves apart. Try to just stand on a level surface with both feet on the ground and then try to put most of the weight on one foot and grip the floor. Try to raise yourself but don't go into a full calf raise. Just raise yourself so that your heel is barely off the floor. Grip the floor with your toes and kind of play with the tension on your calves. Spread your toes as far apart as possible and really grip the floor and spread your calf apart. Hopefully you'll feel that sweet spot.
This really helped when doing the burns. Don't just mindlessly bounce up and down but try to grip the book, block, stair-step or whatever your standing on with your toes and spread your calves apart and keep the tension on as it burns."
-
After re-reading what Pellius did to gain several inches on his calves a question or two emerges.
First, he never mentioned Doms in that post. Now he tells us he used Doms as a way to tell if hypertrophy was stimulated. He used one of the DOMS principles! He might be a disciple afterall.
The second thing is Pellius accepted what Arthur Jones and Mike Mentzer wrote about recovery. So he waited for the muscle to stop being sore before retraining them. He literally never tried training them on every 3rd day as recommended by the DOMS method. So he has no clue if what I claim is true or not. All he knows is his method worked. Alas, he embraced the results of a small study indicating that the lads didn't grow until they became accustomed to training. That study 'proved' his protocols were correct and therefore my frequency was 'mistaken'. He said many unflattering things about me because he felt he was right and my method was wrong.
Very impressive result by anyone's standard. One wonders why he refuses to publish his story under his own name. Why not?
-
Just curious if you had a concurrent increase in strength in the BP's that improved or do you think the improvement was due to more volume/frequency
Christian Thibaudeau wrote an article earlier this year noting how his body comp had changed over the years with various changes to his workout (and I'm sure diet) but that his bodyweight always seemed to remain about 215lbs
https://www.t-nation.com/training/genetic-limits-and-muscle-migration
Um...I guess I'll stick to the theme of the thread and try to make this answer as long and boring as possible. I'll have to explain where I was coming from in my training.
First, I'll talk legs.
I had tried to replace high volume with strength-focused training in previous stages (for diff bodyparts) and there was always a clear decline in strength for me. So, I never anticipated to be at my strongest if I wasn't essentially strength training. My legs and calves are stronger bodyparts (yes, black guy with strong calves! Who knew?), so that's part of the reason I always felt okay about skipping them if I had to. When I started my "no excuses leg training" twice a week, I had two goals: improve shape while minimizing glutes and also to be able to chase someone (like someone who attacked my family) for up to a mile. The latter one would be more beneficial than having a big ORM on squats. I cut out squats and extensions. I do timed sets of lunges, leg presses (since there usually isn't a wait for the leg press and I can monopolize it all I want), 5 minute high speed intervals on the treadmill, and on the second workout on friday I incorporate alternating between a minute of standing calf raises with a minute of stiff-legged deadlifts.No more than 30 seconds rest between each set with the exception of the treadmill portions (75 seconds rest). Each workout lasts approx an hour. Since each set is timed, I don't use heavy weights for anything.
How did it effect my strength?: Like I said, I didn't expect it to increase strength, but it did. However, to gauge how much, you have to keep in mind that my leg training had been spotty up until last year. I actually found a thread I started here just shortly before I started doing this routine. I do squats periodically, just to see what's going on and on my most recent test, I was able to do 405 for 10 clean reps. That's not the highest weight, but considering I cut out power movements for legs, that's pretty decent. It's on the higher end of where I would squat when I was focusing on strength, but like I said, I never trained legs consistently, so it's not really an apples to apples comparison.
Now, shoulders/chest:
I always felt like my shoulder development was a weak area and my bench press had not really progressed much for years. My max was 365 for 4 or 5 clean reps. It would fluctuate slightly depending on what I was doing. None of my shoulder lifts were anything to write home about, except for maybe dumbbell shoulder press. Throughout the time I've been weightlifting, I usually worked shoulders and chest on the same day and I always prioritized chest. I agreed with the theories that any pushing movement will benefit shoulders and that since shoulders are so small and involved in other upper body exercises, you could easily overwork them. Maybe about a year and a half ago, I started prioritizing shoulders. Twice a week, my workout looks like this: heavy shoulder press with dumbbells, heavy machine shoulder press, heavy/moderate barbell raise, heavy/moderate flat bench, then pushing out 250 reverse grip shoulder presses and 250 lateral raises, regardless of how low I have to go in weight.
How did it effect my strength?:My weight on shoulder exercises increased significantly. I was able to get to two plates on seated military press and when I do lateral raises, my max weight is 65-70. The thing that is probably most interesting is that this did help me get past my bench press plateau, even though I hadn't been focusing on bench. I have a 1rm of 405 on
bench press, but another interesting thing is that I temporarily started focusing on bench presses and it seemed like my entire upper body sort of rejected it. My strength on chest exercises fluctuated workout to workout and I was getting easily fatigued on shoulder exercises.
-
After re-reading what Pellius did to gain several inches on his calves a question or two emerges.
First, he never mentioned Doms in that post. Now he tells us he used Doms as a way to tell if hypertrophy was stimulated. He used one of the DOMS principles! He might be a disciple afterall.
The second thing is Pellius accepted what Arthur Jones and Mike Mentzer wrote about recovery. So he waited for the muscle to stop being sore before retraining them. He literally never tried training them on every 3rd day as recommended by the DOMS method. So he has no clue if what I claim is true or not. All he knows is his method worked. Alas, he embraced the results of a small study indicating that the lads didn't grow until they became accustomed to training. That study 'proved' his protocols were correct and therefore my frequency was 'mistaken'. He said many unflattering things about me because he felt he was right and my method was wrong.
Very impressive result by anyone's standard. One wonders why he refuses to publish his story under his own name. Why not?
Hah! Well, I wasn't going to click on the link and didn't but if you are going to stick in my face... lol! What was I suppose to do? Close my eyes and scroll through it? Sure brought back memories. That was ten years ago talking about a time ten years previous. Good times then -- lol!
A couple of things I want to clarify: In subsequence post (you may recall, Vince, that the discussion went on for pages and pages) I did indeed talk about DOMS. I related how on some occasions I couldn't even walk and had to take off work. The only way I could objectively determine that I had truly cause muscular damage which I believe at the time was the way to stimulate an adaptive response (why would the body adapt to a non stimulus?). Now this does not necessary mean that DOMS is the only way. It's just the only way I could actually feel empirically and objectively. Pain is pain and I can't fake it.
Also, when I talk about bouncing at the bottom stretch position I meant burns, partials, x-reps - whatever terminology is now in vogue. And unlike when I was doing full range movement: maximum stretch at the bottom, full contraction at the top; the partials were done in the stretch position but not the full stretch position. This is the portion of the set that went beyond the normal burn you feel when knocking out the reps. I had to really dig deep and just grit my teeth and burn away.
Also, the term "explode" to the top is a bit misleading. In actual practice there was no exploding. My muscles were far too weak and I couldn't raise my heel pass the flat footed position. I had to pull myself up gripping the top door frame to get to the top. The actual movement was very slow and deliberate.
And I already address the issue why I didn't want my real name associated with the article. After I had achieved my "goal" of developing my calves I didn't feel a sense of accomplishment. I had some serious qualms about the whole "journey". I questioned what kind of person I am. What kind of grown man gets so obsessed about the look of his lower leg muscle. I would be beyond embarrassed and humiliated if my father, mother; my brothers and sisters, knew about this. If they saw me alone at night in my apartment in complete darkness doing calf raises on a dictionary straining, moaning and groaning like a mad man. How vain, insecure and obsessed can a person be? Calves. I was dedicating my life to my calves. Jesus fucking Christ!
If an article came out and I actually was truthful as to what I did and the emotional commitment I made I couldn't bear the thought of someone in my real life discovering this dark secret about me.
That I was so obsessed with my calves. This episode made a lasting impression on me that one must not take his sanity for granted. That you can easily -- slowly but surely -- slip into deeper and deeper degrees of madness. You have to always have the ability to step out of yourself and just look at you and say, "What the hell are you doing?"
-
Pellius, when I gained an inch on my calves and arms in one month I was running to the gym. It was exciting to be growing that fast trying something new. What you achieved in your quest was something to be proud of. Each 1/4 inch gain would have made the extreme effort worth it. No more chicken legs. I don't know of anyone else who achieved what you did. Get it documented to inspire others. Your hypertrophy journey is relevant to all bodybuilders.
-
Although I don't really consider myself a bber in the strictest sense as I am not trying to get bigger. I am not trying to build my body. But after training consistently going on 45 years I do have some interest in my physique. I'm constant checking out my shoulder to waist ratio in clothes and constantly monitor my chest, delt and abs when shirtless. I never really look at my calves. It's not like I intentionally ignore them but more like I am indifferent to them. It's like a relationship in which one has grown apart and gone their separate ways. No anger or resentment. It just faded away.
I no longer train calves anymore. Well, I do do the seated calf machine. A movement that I think is absolutely worthless in developing the calves. But even that exercise I don't consider training my calves. It's just that since I am more concerned about physical conditioning than muscle and don't do cardio I like to keep moving constantly when training. So I do supersets on everything and walk back and forth across the gym floor between sets. After doing leg press movements I am so exhausted and out of breath that I need a break before I do stiff leg dead lifts. The seated calf just happens to be positioned in front of the barbell that I am going to use for deads. So I use the calf machine as sort of an active rest period. I just have one plate on and do half ass reps as I catch my breath. Also, I do a lot of stretching, but again, it's not for calves. I have heel spurs so I am constantly stretching the tendon at the bottom of my feet where the arch is.
Anyway, I was doing abs today at the gym and there is a mirror right there and in between the sets I looked in the mirror and noticed my calves. I guess all this calf talk brought it back to my mind. I looked at my calves and kind of chuckled and said to myself, "So there you are old friend. It's been a while."
In Franco Columbo's book, "Coming on Strong" written in the late 1970s (trying again to follow Arnold) he related how he use to talk to his muscles. He specifically mentioned his conversations with his calves. How he tried to egg them one. To encourage them to grow. I remember how strange I thought that was. I guess it isn't that strange at all -- wait a minute! It is strange!
Anyway, I realize it's been a full twenty years since my calves were once the most important thing in my life and occupied practically every waking hour and I even use to dream about them. I looked at them thinking about how they have fared over the last two decades.
The gym wasn't crowded today and my part of the gym was especially sparse so I decided to snap a pic for posterity. As an aside, I measured them when I got home and my left calf clocked in at 16 inches on the dot and my right calf stood at just a couple of notches under 16 and 1/4 inch.
So here it is, 5/13/2017, twenty years later in all it's glory. The Pellius calves twenty years later.
-
The goal of training/bodybuilding should be to do as little as possible yet yielding the optimum result.
Taking a Conservative approach to training is best in my opinion.
-
some people enjoy training.
-
The goal of training/bodybuilding should be to do as little as possible yet yielding the optimum result.
Taking a Conservative approach to training is best in my opinion.
I agree. The problem is the requirements for maximum hypertrophy are staggering. The larger you are the harder it is to stimulate more growth. Doing the extraordinary is hardly taking a conservative path.
-
I agree. The problem is the requirements for maximum hypertrophy are staggering. The larger you are the harder it is to stimulate more growth. Doing the extraordinary is hardly taking a conservative path.
Ms. Basile, how do I build a beautiful belly like yours?
(http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=146902.0;attach=163489;image)
-
Jesus!
talk about an extended set
10 non stop min on one calf
I'm curious, did your bw go up after adding 4 inches to each calf?
btw, respect for making real proof of progress with pics to back it up
A J'S lat cycle back in the day was basically a long ass extended set
my lats will grow very well but I won't do any extended set work
-
Ms. Basile, how do I build a beautiful belly like yours?
(http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=146902.0;attach=163489;image)
dat der safety fat
-
so on one hand we have basile who once was in great shape.
on the other hand we have people making fun of him now, who never was in as great shape. ever.
-
by the way, pellius, i used to do your calf routine. i was seriously impressed by your posts... i could only stick with it for a few sessions at a time before something gave out, much like any intense calf routine i ever tried.
i wonder how closely my interpretation of your routine matched the real thing.
-
by the way, pellius, i used to do your calf routine. i was seriously impressed by your posts... i could only stick with it for a few sessions at a time before something gave out, much like any intense calf routine i ever tried.
i wonder how closely my interpretation of your routine matched the real thing.
Results?
-
Jesus!
talk about an extended set
10 non stop min on one calf
I'm curious, did your bw go up after adding 4 inches to each calf?
btw, respect for making real proof of progress with pics to back it up
A J'S lat cycle back in the day was basically a long ass extended set
my lats will grow very well but I won't do any extended set work
Well, a ten minute set might be a bit misleading. It's not like I was doing rep after rep for ten minutes. But if a set is defined by TUT then, yes, my calves were under tension for 10 minutes. For example, one of the things I would do is after the "set" where I did negatives and rest pause/burns, I would then just stand on the floor leaning all my weight on the working calf. I would have to use a wall for balance because I'm practically standing on one foot. My heel would be slightly off the ground and I would try to grip the floor with my toes and just sort of play with the position. Sort of like a static hold but just doing slight movements though sometimes I would go for full contraction. I was just keeping the muscle under tension and it made a big difference that everything was done with bare feet and on a flat floor. I tried it using the dictionary I recruited for the stretch but it wasn't the same. Doing it on a flat floor was better.
Try it. Just lean on one foot and sightly raise your heel and then try to spread your toes and grip the floor and play with different positions. Sometimes I would hold the static hold but slightly bounce up and down using my knees trying to stimulate running.
Also, reading the post that Vince put up I see that as time went on I did overstate my progress. I said here that I started out at 13 inches and got as high as 17 inches. Actually it was more like 13 and 7/8 inches so we're talking just a tad under 14 inches and settled in to a permanent 16 inches. So when all is said and done I put on a legit two inches on my calves.
And I had mentioned before here that there was no change in body weight. Calves are a small muscle so I don't think that would be the case in muscle groups like quads.
-
Well, a ten minute set might be a bit misleading. It's not like I was doing rep after rep for ten minutes. But if a set is defined by TUT then, yes, my calves were under tension for 10 minutes. For example, one of the things I would do is after the "set" where I did negatives and rest pause/burns, I would then just stand on the floor leaning all my weight on the working calf. I would have to use a wall for balance because I'm practically standing on one foot. My heel would be slightly off the ground and I would try to grip the floor with my toes and just sort of play with the position. Sort of like a static hold but just doing slight movements though sometimes I would go for full contraction. I was just keeping the muscle under tension and it made a big difference that everything was done with bare feet and on a flat floor. I tried it using the dictionary I recruited for the stretch but it wasn't the same. Doing it on a flat floor was better.
Try it. Just lean on one foot and sightly raise your heel and then try to spread your toes and grip the floor and play with different positions. Sometimes I would hold the static hold but slightly bounce up and down using my knees trying to stimulate running.
Also, reading the post that Vince put up I see that as time went on I did overstate my progress. I said here that I started out at 13 inches and got as high as 17 inches. Actually it was more like 13 and 7/8 inches so we're talking just a tad under 14 inches and settled in to a permanent 16 inches. So when all is said and done I put on a legit two inches on my calves.
And I had mentioned before here that there was no change in body weight. Calves are a small muscle so I don't think that would be the case in muscle groups like quads.
What if it was just the steroids that did it?
-
Also, reading the post that Vince put up I see that as time went on I did overstate my progress. I said here that I started out at 13 inches and got as high as 17 inches. Actually it was more like 13 and 7/8 inches so we're talking just a tad under 14 inches and settled in to a permanent 16 inches. So when all is said and done I put on a legit two inches on my calves.
And I had mentioned before here that there was no change in body weight. Calves are a small muscle so I don't think that would be the case in muscle groups like quads.
Looking at your photos they look 18 inches. If you started at under 14 inches and ended up over 17 that is an amazing result. Your knees and ankles are small which makes the calves look bigger. Not using any machines or dumbbells makes this an extraordinary achievement.
-
What if it was just the steroids that did it?
I rather doubt that steroids will cause growth in small calves without the brutal and sustained training protocols.
-
did you only use bw as resistance for your calf training or did you add rresistance with a db in hand?
-
sounds too painfull to try out myself. hard to know how much of it was excessive. maybe half that would be enough.
anyways, myself i still have plenty of options as i never trained my calves that much...
im curious about things like steep walks with a backpack for example.
from observation nearly everyone at the gym trains calves the wrong way. everyone at the end of their routine. nearly everyone wearing shoes. they hardly ever go all the way up all the way down, and most of the time there's just a lot of bouncing.
people just treat calves training as something to get over with as quick as possible. no wonder they never get any result.
-
did you only use bw as resistance for your calf training or did you add rresistance with a db in hand?
Just body weight. People think that's odd but I weighed 195 lbs at the time. That's a lot of weight to do on one calf. It cracks me up when I see people use the stack and then pile plates all over the machine and do these lame calf raises with knees bent and pushing off with the quads. The fact that they have stick calfs should tell them it's not working. Try doing them bare feet and with your knees locked straight. Reminds me of those tools that also pile plates all over the leg press and just do quarter inch reps.
I did push on the door frame for negatives.
-
Looking at your photos they look 18 inches. If you started at under 14 inches and ended up over 17 that is an amazing result. Your knees and ankles are small which makes the calves look bigger. Not using any machines or dumbbells makes this an extraordinary achievement.
Their at 16 inches now. People have commented on how skinny my ankles are even before I had calves. I measure them this morning and they were a bit under 8 1/2 inches.
-
Their at 16 inches now. People have commented on how skinny my ankles are even before I had calves. I measure them this morning and they were a bit under 8 1/2 inches.
Can you summarize the training routine without the lengthy bullshit? Just sets, reps, time etc... I don`t want to plow through all of that above.
-
Can you summarize the training routine without the lengthy bullshit? Just sets, reps, time etc... I don`t want to plow through all of that above.
True story. Ken Waller was at Robert Nailon's gym in Sydney in 1980. Robert always trained hard whenever champs were around. Anyway, one day Waller was doing legs. Robert loved training his upper body but not so much his legs. So Robert declined training legs with Ken. Ken said, "People want to know the secrets but they won't do the exercises!"
TA if you are keen on learning how Pellius transformed his chicken legs you should reread his posts several times.
-
Just body weight. People think that's odd but I weighed 195 lbs at the time. That's a lot of weight to do on one calf. It cracks me up when I see people use the stack and then pile plates all over the machine and do these lame calf raises with knees bent and pushing off with the quads. The fact that they have stick calfs should tell them it's not working. Try doing them bare feet and with your knees locked straight. Reminds me of those tools that also pile plates all over the leg press and just do quarter inch reps.
I did push on the door frame for negatives.
When I was training at Golds Gym in October 1968 Dave Draper used to come in early in the morning. I made sure I got there before him and worked my calves a bit. He would load up the calf machine and do those cheating movements and got very little stimulation for his calves. I used to smile when I saw him blasting away.
Nice guy, that Dave.
-
True story. Ken Waller was at Robert Nailon's gym in Sydney in 1980. Robert always trained hard whenever champs were around. Anyway, one day Waller was doing legs. Robert loved training his upper body but not so much his legs. So Robert declined training legs with Ken. Ken said, "People want to know the secrets but they won't do the exercises!"
TA if you are keen on learning how Pellius transformed his chicken legs you should reread his posts several times.
I skimmed it and here is what I got.
Do one set for 10-30 minutes, reps until burn and repeat until you can no longer even move.
That it?
-
I skimmed it and here is what I got.
Do one set for 10-30 minutes, reps until burn and repeat until you can no longer even move.
That it?
He was following the principles of Arthur Jones. Did whatever it took to make his calves sore after each workout.
Did negatives, full range reps, statics, stretching, etc. Over a period of a year his workouts would be agonizing. He would have had
to do something more intense, etc., each and every workout to get growth like that.
Very impressive results period. Very intense, totally focused and motivated guy.
-
He was following the principles of Arthur Jones. Did whatever it took to make his calves sore after each workout.
Did negatives, full range reps, statics, stretching, etc. Over a period of a year his workouts would be agonizing. He would have had
to do something more intense, etc., each and every workout to get growth like that.
Very impressive results period. Very intense, totally focused and motivated guy.
I am not so sure the same can be applied to someone who does not take steroids.
-
I am not so sure the same can be applied to someone who does not take steroids.
I didn't take any steroids or even any supplements for the month when I gained an inch on both arms and calves.
I haven't taken any steroids or anything else since 1975. Two Dianabol was all I took in those days. Very conservative.
Can be done naturally. Of course, if you truly believe it can't be done naturally I doubt you will exert enough effort to make it happen.
Pellius was motivated beyond what is normal. He made that a goal for a whole year. Nothing else mattered as much.
I can tell you once he saw his puny calves growing he became obsessed and the gains spurred him on to more effort.
Got to hand it to Pellius...during that year he was no ordinary mortal! :)
-
Big calves look like shit though, at least from an aesthetic/artistic perspective. Should aim for mid-size balanced with a larger focus on arms.
-
Big calves look like shit though, at least from an aesthetic/artistic perspective. Should aim for mid-size balanced with a larger focus on arms.
Depends. I have always been impressed with great calves whether on a male or female.
-
Can you summarize the training routine without the lengthy bullshit? Just sets, reps, time etc... I don`t want to plow through all of that above.
No.
-
No.
I am going to have another go at both arms and calves to see what happens. Have plenty of great equipment to use.
I made a special block for donkey raises. I can use it in a doorway! Will rename it the Pellius block.
Maybe you can try to get them over 17 again...but train every 3rd day and see.
-
Can you summarize the training routine without the lengthy bullshit? Just sets, reps, time etc... I don`t want to plow through all of that above.
Pretty funny.
Pellius, amazing calves - any before pics? (Or are they already up and I'm just not seeing?)
-
(https://aockl.files.wordpress.com/2015/06/muay-thai-women-calves-1.jpg?w=240)
-
Results?
my calves are just as pathetic as ever
but like i said, i could only ever do his program for 3-4 consecutive sessions before i'd have to give up. no muscle sensation, joint pain, etc.
-
Pretty funny.
Pellius, amazing calves - any before pics? (Or are they already up and I'm just not seeing?)
Obviously being so self-conscious about my skinny calves I have very few pictures. In fact, I only have one. It wasn't suppose to include my legs but it did. I posted it on IronAge but can't locate it now. I had to take a picture of the picture to down load on my computer and post it on the site.
-
Big calves look like shit though, at least from an aesthetic/artistic perspective. Should aim for mid-size balanced with a larger focus on arms.
Only if they are out of proportion or seem too thick like the Franken-something guy with the f-up teeth. Arnold's looked perfect. Mine really aren't that big circumference wise but they are still out of proportion to my quads. I actually would rather they be say a half an inch smaller.
-
(https://minhassomethingtosay.files.wordpress.com/2012/08/calves.jpg)
-
Just body weight. People think that's odd but I weighed 195 lbs at the time. That's a lot of weight to do on one calf. It cracks me up when I see people use the stack and then pile plates all over the machine and do these lame calf raises with knees bent and pushing off with the quads. The fact that they have stick calfs should tell them it's not working. Try doing them bare feet and with your knees locked straight. Reminds me of those tools that also pile plates all over the leg press and just do quarter inch reps.
I did push on the door frame for negatives.
i wouldn't do it on calves coz quite frankly I don't give a fuck aboit em
maybe ill give it a try on side laterals but it would b difficult to figure out how to work that particular exercise as hard as you did the 1 legged calf
-
my calves are just as pathetic as ever
but like i said, i could only ever do his program for 3-4 consecutive sessions before i'd have to give up. no muscle sensation, joint pain, etc.
Pellius is avoiding a summary on the program.
Is this correct: Do one set for 10-30 minutes, reps until burn and repeat until you can no longer even move.
That it?
-
Only if they are out of proportion or seem too thick like the Franken-something guy with the f-up teeth. Arnold's looked perfect. Mine really aren't that big circumference wise but they are still out of proportion to my quads. I actually would rather they be say a half an inch smaller.
I`d say yours are in proportion and very good. I like how you also see it the way I do when it comes to calves. It really looks doofussy to walk around with large calves like a fat person.
-
i wouldn't do it on calves coz quite frankly I don't give a fuck aboit em
maybe ill give it a try on side laterals but it would b difficult to figure out how to work that particular exercise as hard as you did the 1 legged calf
Can you maybe give me a brief summary on what or how to do it?
-
Can you maybe give me a brief summary on what or how to do it?
with side laterals I'm not really sure
I would guess that you'd do it 1 arm at a time with a moderately heavy db in hand and go to failure and then once you hit failure use yout other hand to get out some forced reps with slow negatives but I really can't see being able to keep that up for 10 min
the other way would be to use your free hand for manual resistance to fail after around 20 reps and then just use your free hand to give negative resistance only, with this you'd also work your free hand quite hard with what I would guess would be hardcore work for your pec and front delt work on the free hand
lastly you could get a partner to manually apply the resistance but I'd say it wouldn't be so easy to find somebody to do that
-
with side laterals I'm not really sure
I would guess that you'd do it 1 arm at a time with a moderately heavy db in hand and go to failure and then once you hit failure use yout other hand to get out some forced reps with slow negatives but I really can't see being able to keep that up for 10 min
the other way would be to use your free hand for manual resistance to fail after around 20 reps and then just use your free hand to give negative resistance only, with this you'd also work your free hand quite hard with what I would guess would be hardcore work for your pec and front delt work on the free hand
lastly you could get a partner to manually apply the resistance but I'd say it wouldn't be so easy to find somebody to do that
I would go as far as to say in your case it would be impossible.
-
Obviously being so self-conscious about my skinny calves I have very few pictures. In fact, I only have one. It wasn't suppose to include my legs but it did. I posted it on IronAge but can't locate it now. I had to take a picture of the picture to down load on my computer and post it on the site.
Ok, then.
Rarely see such a thing - with calves, I mean. Impressive.
-
Pellius is avoiding a summary on the program.
Is this correct: Do one set for 10-30 minutes, reps until burn and repeat until you can no longer even move.
That it?
Not avoiding just not able to describe because there was a strong mental component to it. Basile is right when he says that you have to think up news ways to get your muscles sore because they adapt rather quickly. If I wasn't sore the next day I knew I hadn't done much to stimulate an adaptive response. After I would do standard raises, the force reps, then negatives that would be enough. And when I say negatives I mean I would slowly lower my heel while pushing with both hands under the door frame. That lasted a while and I would get pretty sore the next day. But soon it wasn't enough. That's when I did rest pause after the negs. Holding the stretch position until I recovered enough to blast through a few more reps. Did this maybe three or four times. Then that stopped so instead of just resting during the stretch phase I would do burns. That really put the intensity factor up another level. While doing the burns I would be psyching myself for the big explosion for the full rep of the rep/pause phase (with help of course by pulling myself up -- a forced rep). When I say explosion again I wasn't blasting up. I was too weak and fatigue for that. It was just a way to concentrate so I can recruit as much fibers as possible. Jones talked about this. It was the pre stretch principle. As you are lower the weight just before full stretch you do a little bounce in the stretch position. It recruits more fibers that way. In Bruce Lee's "Return of the Dragon" he spoke about how the hips precedes the punch. You don't move them in unison like closing a door. Your hips pops out first so your elbow starts behind the hip and then springs out while pushing forward with your rear foot. Just like throwing a baseball or swinging a bat. The batter doesn't just swing the bat with hips and bat rotating simultaneously. He takes a short step forward, rotates and throws his hips out first which builds tension in the pecs, rear delts, back; then the bat comes swinging.
I had to just keep adding intensity variables as my body adapted. That's when the "set" would go about ten minutes. It got to the point when after the rest pause/burns that's when I would say to myself, "OK, now it begins." Only at that point, after all those reps and burns, would I consider the real productive part coming. All that other stuff was almost like a warm up to get ready for the real heavy duty part.
So it kept going on and on like that. Figuring out new ways to get sore. Even when I was first writing about it on IronAge ten years ago I had trouble recalling the variables I used. Now it's been twenty years. But at that point I did know the feeling I would get in the muscle when I knew it would be sore the next day. It wasn't just that burning feeling we all get when we push ourselves. It almost felt like the the individual fibers were expanding. I'm not talking about the pump where your muscles get larger from the added blood supply, although I got that too, but a feeling of my muscle fibers straining and expanding. Until I got that super pump and near cramping feeling I would just keep going. After all that I did previously during that set I wasn't going to let it go all to waste by stopping before I reached DOMS territory. It was very taxing mentally and sometimes I had to take as much as 8 days off to be in the right frame of mind to put myself through this. But generally it was 5-7 days.
It's really not something I could write out as a routine. The individual really has to develop some kind of mind/muscle connection which is considered silly by most today.
It's certainly a bit silly to think that with all of this I still talking about the calf muscle. Maybe with Dennis Wolf I can understand. I don't think he'll ever win with those calves. Almost an anti calf now since they was regresses even more over the years.
-
About ballistic movements for the calves. Bodyweight bouncing might be fine. If you are using heavy weights then beware.
During the month I gained an inch on my calves I got really strong doing heel raises. I ended up using 600 hundred pounds
and would do as many reps as possible then bounced until no more movement was possible. Boy was that painful. Then I
would walk around in a small circle for about 10 seconds. Then another set ending in bounces. Maybe up to 70 or more bouncing reps.
I would repeat this heel raise for up to 10 sets. I got a good pump doing this.
The problem was I ended up with sore Achilles tendons. I had to stop training calves. Luckily they recovered after a couple of weeks.
So now I don't recommend ballistic training. Perhaps if I rested longer they might have not got injured. The muscles kept growing
but the connective tissue didn't repair itself to keep up. Understand that I wasn't using anywhere near that weight at the start. More like
200 pounds. Bouncing with 600 pounds over and over isn't safe.
-
About ballistic movements for the calves. Bodyweight bouncing might be fine. If you are using heavy weights then beware.
During the month I gained an inch on my calves I got really strong doing heel raises. I ended up using 600 hundred pounds
and would do as many reps as possible then bounced until no more movement was possible. Boy was that painful. Then I
would walk around in a small circle for about 10 seconds. Then another set ending in bounces. Maybe up to 70 or more bouncing reps.
I would repeat this heel raise for up to 10 sets. I got a good pump doing this.
The problem was I ended up with sore Achilles tendons. I had to stop training calves. Luckily they recovered after a couple of weeks.
So now I don't recommend ballistic training. Perhaps if I rested longer they might have not got injured. The muscles kept growing
but the connective tissue didn't repair itself to keep up. Understand that I wasn't using anywhere near that weight at the start. More like
200 pounds. Bouncing with 600 pounds over and over isn't safe.
you're over analysing what in essence is very simple. put down the fork and you may actually look like you train.
-
Not avoiding just not able to describe because there was a strong mental component to it. Basile is right when he says that you have to think up news ways to get your muscles sore because they adapt rather quickly. If I wasn't sore the next day I knew I hadn't done much to stimulate an adaptive response. After I would do standard raises, the force reps, then negatives that would be enough. And when I say negatives I mean I would slowly lower my heel while pushing with both hands under the door frame. That lasted a while and I would get pretty sore the next day. But soon it wasn't enough. That's when I did rest pause after the negs. Holding the stretch position until I recovered enough to blast through a few more reps. Did this maybe three or four times. Then that stopped so instead of just resting during the stretch phase I would do burns. That really put the intensity factor up another level. While doing the burns I would be psyching myself for the big explosion for the full rep of the rep/pause phase (with help of course by pulling myself up -- a forced rep). When I say explosion again I wasn't blasting up. I was too weak and fatigue for that. It was just a way to concentrate so I can recruit as much fibers as possible. Jones talked about this. It was the pre stretch principle. As you are lower the weight just before full stretch you do a little bounce in the stretch position. It recruits more fibers that way. In Bruce Lee's "Return of the Dragon" he spoke about how the hips precedes the punch. You don't move them in unison like closing a door. Your hips pops out first so your elbow starts behind the hip and then springs out while pushing forward with your rear foot. Just like throwing a baseball or swinging a bat. The batter doesn't just swing the bat with hips and bat rotating simultaneously. He takes a short step forward, rotates and throws his hips out first which builds tension in the pecs, rear delts, back; then the bat comes swinging.
I had to just keep adding intensity variables as my body adapted. That's when the "set" would go about ten minutes. It got to the point when after the rest pause/burns that's when I would say to myself, "OK, now it begins." Only at that point, after all those reps and burns, would I consider the real productive part coming. All that other stuff was almost like a warm up to get ready for the real heavy duty part.
So it kept going on and on like that. Figuring out new ways to get sore. Even when I was first writing about it on IronAge ten years ago I had trouble recalling the variables I used. Now it's been twenty years. But at that point I did know the feeling I would get in the muscle when I knew it would be sore the next day. It wasn't just that burning feeling we all get when we push ourselves. It almost felt like the the individual fibers were expanding. I'm not talking about the pump where your muscles get larger from the added blood supply, although I got that too, but a feeling of my muscle fibers straining and expanding. Until I got that super pump and near cramping feeling I would just keep going. After all that I did previously during that set I wasn't going to let it go all to waste by stopping before I reached DOMS territory. It was very taxing mentally and sometimes I had to take as much as 8 days off to be in the right frame of mind to put myself through this. But generally it was 5-7 days.
It's really not something I could write out as a routine. The individual really has to develop some kind of mind/muscle connection which is considered silly by most today.
It's certainly a bit silly to think that with all of this I still talking about the calf muscle. Maybe with Dennis Wolf I can understand. I don't think he'll ever win with those calves. Almost an anti calf now since they was regresses even more over the years.
I just don`t think I have those kind of muscle fibers because I have tried things similar to that concept. I made up a workout called "The 500" once. The 500 referred to 500 reps you were going to do per bodypart that day. It went like this: You start with a weight you can get around 10 reps with. You do that weight until you can`t do anymore reps, then immediately lower the weight a few lbs and continue. You do this all the way to 500 but the trick is you DO NOT rest if possible. Only rest as much as you can breathe and hoist a rep up.
I did it for a short while and it did not work at all for me. Although I do admit that I probably should have been consuming a shit load more protein than I was at the time for that workout. Who knows, maybe I would have had a better result. I do think in cases where you are doing extreme workouts one may need to adjust protein up over normal or moderate levels.
I was so sore I really did not want to do anything. Not fun.
-
My calves didn't budge until I started rucking.
Just tons of walking miles under moderate weight.
-
(http://www.cc-chapman.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/ruckingtogether.jpg)
-
Awesome calf development pellius......props my brother! ;)
-
Pellius is avoiding a summary on the program.
Is this correct: Do one set for 10-30 minutes, reps until burn and repeat until you can no longer even move.
That it?
It was years ago, here's what I remember:
1. One leg calf raises
2. Force the negative on every rep, resisting as much as possible
3. Assisted positive as necessary
4. When you can't control control the negative whatsoever start bouncing slightly in the stretched position to "recover", for 10 or so seconds.
5. Repeat 3-5 times, or as much as you can handle.
Repeat with second leg. That's one set. I can't remember if he recommended doing multiple sets, I think I only ever did one.
He recommended doing it in a door frame while standing on a dictionary. You can use the door frame to assist the positive (pull up on trim) and force the negative (push down on top of frame).
I always did it on an incline bench, standing on the spotting platform. I used the bar to assist the positive and force the negative.
-
I just don`t think I have those kind of muscle fibers because I have tried things similar to that concept. I made up a workout called "The 500" once. The 500 referred to 500 reps you were going to do per bodypart that day. It went like this: You start with a weight you can get around 10 reps with. You do that weight until you can`t do anymore reps, then immediately lower the weight a few lbs and continue. You do this all the way to 500 but the trick is you DO NOT rest if possible. Only rest as much as you can breathe and hoist a rep up.
I did it for a short while and it did not work at all for me. Although I do admit that I probably should have been consuming a shit load more protein than I was at the time for that workout. Who knows, maybe I would have had a better result. I do think in cases where you are doing extreme workouts one may need to adjust protein up over normal or moderate levels.
I was so sore I really did not want to do anything. Not fun.
I doubt you needed more protein to grow. Probably more calories! I tell young bodybuilders to try to weigh more every week....even workout if at the same time.
-
I consider Larry Scott and Vince Gironda the two best exercise technicians we have seen. Both knew the body well and how to do the best exercises.
Larry is particularly interesting because he was an ordinary kid with narrow shoulders and became Mr Olympia. Maybe he couldn't do it today but in
the sixties he was amazing....especially those well proportioned arms.
Larry had to invent methods to keep his large muscles growing. He used various techniques and equipment and had very painful protocols.
Up and down the rack for shoulders and biceps.
Well, I can recommend a variation on the calf machine guaranteed to generate DOMS in most of you guys....even Adonis!
Use a standing calf machine. Start with 100 pounds for 5 reps, then add 10 pounds and do another 5 reps. No rest, just change the pin.
Keep adding 10 pounds until you can't do 5 reps. Then rest for about 15 seconds and do the maximum you got to but try to get 10 reps.
Then reduce 10 pounds and do another 5 and so on until you are down to 100 pounds. Very painful and just one giant set.
I recall a young couple wanting me to train them. I assumed they had done calf work before. So I gave them one long up and down on the
machine. The woman was so sore the next day she couldn't walk. The next day her husband had to carry her to the car then to her work!
So beware of doing this protocol. Naturally, once you are used to it you can try 2 sets up and down.