I am not all over the place. What I advocate is clear and distinct. What is confusing are the minds of the flotsam experts here on Getbig who cannot grasp that my theory is reverse engineered. I start with whatever causes growth and work backwards. Therefore my theory has to be right. My main fault is being unable to communicate what I have to say in simple enough terms that some of the select intellects here can grasp. HIT isn't false because I say so but because it simply doesn't work. It it did work for everyone Darden, and formerly Mentzer, wouldn't still be writing books trying to convince everyone. There is a certain intellectual dishonesty about most of the theories of hypertrophy seen on the internet. I abandon false theories. The test is simple. See if they work. If not, and you are doing them properly, then abandon them and try something else.
vince, tbh, i think you have
some good ideas, but you are far too dismissive of other concepts and ideas. and for that reason i have the impression that your mind is closed just like jones' was. also, as pointed out, you have not done proper experimentation either on yourself or anyone else to verify what, at the end of the day, is your
opinion.
imo what donkey kong says is most correct.
i feel i'm in a better position than most in that i don't care how big my muscles are. in fact, for a long time i have actively tried not to get too big for my sport, but i love strength and i love lifting weights, so i have some time and i've just said 'fuck it' and recently just trained as hard and as focused with the weights as i can with the intention of just continually moving more weight for more reps, everything more, which has worked great.
the advantage i have is that i haven't been concerned with hypertrophy, just loving the challenge of getting stronger and because i haven't relied on hypertrophy i have achieved good results with it.
let me explain: there is no current science that gives an absolute clear guideline to creating hypertrophy ie nobody actually knows. yes, people surmise and have theories but what causes hypertrophy is not clear cut by any means, probably because there are so many variables ie drugs, genetics, sex, environment, nutrition, body mass/fat, motivation, tolerance to pain, etc etc (seriously, i could go on all day) so specifically relying on feedback from something that is not clear cut is obviously going to be very frustrating especially if you are natural.
so, imo, if what your doing is making you stronger (and that has variables too like skill/efficiency of movement which gives a false indicator ie powerlifter/weightlifter/strongman) and increasing your muscular capacity to cope with fatigue (but that also is only my opinion, just like so many others)
i approach strength training differently to what i see from most athletes. most amateur and professional athletes see weight training as something they need to do as part of their strength and conditioning and simply do what their told with mixed results depending on the aforementioned variables.
i have realised that actual strength progression requires extremely dedicated focus and is not something you just go through the motions with, but then i probably enjoy it more than most athletes.
i am sympathetic to the dedicated recreational bber. this poor animal has got to somehow be coach, motivator and trainee all in one. his goal (hypertrophy) has not even been clarified yet so it's no wonder he exists in a state of perpetual confusion. add to that the spectre of drugs, genetics, etc and how the hell is this poor animal supposed to know exactly
what to do in the gym.
