Getbig Bodybuilding, Figure and Fitness Forums
July 26, 2014, 02:13:42 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
 
   Home   Help Calendar Login Register  
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Do bodybuilders really need supplements and drugs to get big?  (Read 11719 times)
Vince Basile
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 8683


Mr Canada 1970


View Profile
« Reply #25 on: July 15, 2008, 08:05:02 PM »

The din of the flotsam resonates like recess in primary school. I forgot that everyone is an expert here so I will tolerate some scepticism.

I can't humour you people all day long as I have to go to my gym to do an installation.

In the meantime, here are some new handles I made for the cross over pulleys at my gym. We have three stations and I am putting handles on the Cybex station. This design helps prevent discomfort when the handles contact the forearms. The polyurethane grips rotate and are 1 1/8" in diameter. Stainless steel is used throughout for all handles in Vince's Gym.


* 2008 07 16 G9 007 (Custom).jpg (97.98 KB, 1200x900 - viewed 484 times.)

* 2008 07 16 G9 004 (Custom).jpg (233.42 KB, 1200x900 - viewed 491 times.)
Report to moderator   Logged
Chick
Moderator
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 12901

sometimes you get the elevator, somtimes the shaft


View Profile
« Reply #26 on: July 15, 2008, 08:13:35 PM »

The din of the flotsam resonates like recess in primary school. I forgot that everyone is an expert here so I will tolerate some scepticism.

I can't humour you people all day long as I have to go to my gym to do an installation.

In the meantime, here are some new handles I made for the cross over pulleys at my gym. We have three stations and I am putting handles on the Cybex station. This design helps prevent discomfort when the handles contact the forearms. The polyurethane grips rotate and are 1 1/8" in diameter. Stainless steel is used throughout for all handles in Vince's Gym.


Awesome...first you re-invented the wheel....now....


the HANDLE!!
Report to moderator   Logged
TechnoViking
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 4537

Too weird to live, too rare to die...----HST


View Profile
« Reply #27 on: July 15, 2008, 08:18:40 PM »

Awesome...first you re-invented the wheel....now....


the HANDLE!!


Thats nothing...You should see what he has in the vault awaiting final approvel...I won't give it up completely but you will be amazed at what the new Vince Basile SEA SAW for kids is going to look like...
Report to moderator   Logged
Vince Basile
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 8683


Mr Canada 1970


View Profile
« Reply #28 on: July 15, 2008, 08:33:05 PM »

That is what is sad in bodybuilding. A new handle can be designed even in 2008. I don't expect anything as simple as this from any of the flotsam and pumpkin heads here!


* Hack machine 1. 1991..jpg (44.02 KB, 934x616 - viewed 444 times.)

* Hack squat. 1991..jpg (193.65 KB, 1200x796 - viewed 474 times.)

* 2006 08 30 P1 058 (Custom).jpg (119.67 KB, 1200x900 - viewed 448 times.)
Report to moderator   Logged
Chick
Moderator
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 12901

sometimes you get the elevator, somtimes the shaft


View Profile
« Reply #29 on: July 15, 2008, 09:08:16 PM »

That is what is sad in bodybuilding. A new handle can be designed even in 2008. I don't expect anything as simple as this from any of the flotsam and pumpkin heads here!

Yeah, Basile....I suppose a new spoon can be designed as well, just isn't necessary, like your "handle".
Report to moderator   Logged
mass 04
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 11054


View Profile
« Reply #30 on: July 15, 2008, 09:11:55 PM »

Poor Vince has to stay locked in the garage taking apart gym equipment and looking at funeral photos because his 478 lb girlfriend took away internet access.
Report to moderator   Logged
candidizzle
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 9052


Trueprotein.com 5% discount code= TRB953


View Profile
« Reply #31 on: July 15, 2008, 11:12:44 PM »

Praise and blame will fall off me like rain from an umbrella.

There is a theory of hypertrophy and it should be shared by everyone. That is the duty of all students of hypertrophy. Some acquire good information then keep it to themselves or promote courses and training to profit themselves. That is fine with me. Everyone should benefit if they have acquired knowledge in anything important.

One fruitful path would be to inspect successful trainers and see what their theories are. If enough information is assembled then perhaps an outline of the basic theory can be formed. I suspect there are too many egos involved and competition and jealousy will impede our quest. We may have to abandon the experts because they are hardly open and enthusisatic about sharing what they know.



  Huh
Report to moderator   Logged
honest
Competitors
Getbig IV
*****
Posts: 1544


View Profile
« Reply #32 on: July 15, 2008, 11:34:28 PM »

Bodybuilding needs drugs all sports need drugs, the problem is and always has been the amount of drugs, no one wants to see true natural guys on the olympia stage, they look like aids victims. Then at the other end of the spectrum you have the current pro look, i have said it before bodyweights and heights need to be capped, this would make the sport healthier, for example if your 6 feet tall the most you could weigh in at could be 240, 5 feet 10 220lbs, etc this would reduce drug abuse, not eliminate it but it would be a step in the right direction, 5 feet 9 and 263lbs is muscular obesity, The individuals would have to be a lot more creative with their training if they knew they couldnt just keep taking more gear and getting bigger, imagine Cutler having to try and bring his back up but not his bodyweight, at the moment everyone just takes more gear eats more protein and trains that bodypart harder, the other positive of this approach would be guys staying in the sport longer as they would be healthier.
Report to moderator   Logged
musclehedz
Getbig IV
****
Posts: 1841



View Profile
« Reply #33 on: July 16, 2008, 01:06:02 AM »

Bodybuilding needs drugs all sports need drugs, the problem is and always has been the amount of drugs, no one wants to see true natural guys on the olympia stage, they look like aids victims. Then at the other end of the spectrum you have the current pro look, i have said it before bodyweights and heights need to be capped, this would make the sport healthier, for example if your 6 feet tall the most you could weigh in at could be 240, 5 feet 10 220lbs, etc this would reduce drug abuse, not eliminate it but it would be a step in the right direction, 5 feet 9 and 263lbs is muscular obesity, The individuals would have to be a lot more creative with their training if they knew they couldnt just keep taking more gear and getting bigger, imagine Cutler having to try and bring his back up but not his bodyweight, at the moment everyone just takes more gear eats more protein and trains that bodypart harder, the other positive of this approach would be guys staying in the sport longer as they would be healthier.


Eaxactly, lifetime naturals have a very unhealthy look when they are onstage. Like concentration camp prisoners. Except this guy: http://contest.bodybuilding.com/gallery/contestant/7294/mode/jim/page/14

Report to moderator   Logged
io856
Competitors II
Getbig V
******
Posts: 9440


phill head


View Profile
« Reply #34 on: July 16, 2008, 01:42:59 AM »

Vince shut the fuck up, you tell everyone that they should go and do what they say e.g. "I'm going to bench 600lbs" You say well... go and do it right???

SO why don't you man the fuck up and prove your horseshit theories in the absence of supplements. Hell, find one of these "gullible muscleheads"  you talk about to do the work for you...  On that note, I bet you sell and advertise supplements in your gym. So you are all talk! You make money off the stuff!



GO SCREW! you are hypocritical to say the least. For the love of god, analyze yourself! "Everyone is an expert" right??? Yeah you are a CHUMP too... Prove otherwise, you have been spouting all this fucking bullshit for years. I'm sick OF IT you are NO better than any musclehead supplement user! You HAVE NOT distinguished yourself FROM ANYONE this century in the iron game.


YOU DON'T ACTIVELY respond to ANY post posted in here PERIOD. I expect you will continue your hypocritical ways ignorant of reason and a slave to the "philosophy of science". i.e. a pompous ass


Report to moderator   Logged
Ursus
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 11416

Getbig!


View Profile
« Reply #35 on: July 16, 2008, 02:46:05 AM »

Chick, did you suck penis to fuel your drug addiction when you competed?
Report to moderator   Logged
Tapeworm
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 18620


Still crazy after all these years


View Profile
« Reply #36 on: July 16, 2008, 02:58:09 AM »

Is this your excuse for postponing presenting your "wonderful theory" for 2 years+ ?  Roll Eyes

Was my Basile impersonation so convincing?  Grin
Report to moderator   Logged
LatsMcGee
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 7480


Getbig!


View Profile
« Reply #37 on: July 16, 2008, 03:19:02 AM »

Vince did Ray touch you?  It's okay.  We're not mad at you anymore.
Report to moderator   Logged
chainsaw
Getbig IV
****
Gender: Male
Posts: 3037


View Profile
« Reply #38 on: July 16, 2008, 03:24:18 AM »



I smile that some authorities in bodybuilding have succeeded by promoting false ideas. How is that possible in this enlightened age? How come something as simple as building muscles is not completely understood? How come the chemists have hijacked this sport and decreed that drugs are necessary for rapid growth?










More test = more and faster muscle.
age= less test most of the time

at 48, you'll probably need extra test
Report to moderator   Logged

Most are all show no go!
Vince Basile
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 8683


Mr Canada 1970


View Profile
« Reply #39 on: July 16, 2008, 05:35:11 AM »

Poor Ron, imagine being the owner of this site. It is worse than the wild west where everyone is trying to be the fastest or whatever in town. You ride into town and are met with bullets, arrows, tomatoes and pumpkins! Only the reckless and fearless dare proceed.

Well, it is a challenge to offer anything of value to the converted. They really have lost the capacity to accept new ideas. Instead, they cling to all that makes sense to them. I don't blame them, either, and that is why new knowledge has little chance of taking hold.

We saw Arthur Jones try to persuade millions to embrace his ideas. Heck, in 1970 everyone read his advertisments in Ironman that went on for many pages. The information was that good. Eventually the HIT methods lost favour because most people who tried it didn't progress like Arthur promised them. Neither were Nautilus machines superior to just lifting weights. That must have been a bitter pill for Arthur and it wasn't long before he abandoned his association with muscleheads. A few notables kept the flame burning but when Mike Mentzer died in 2001 there wasn't much reason to peddle that stuff anymore. Well, Ellington Darden has probably made a good living with HIT and at least the system tries to be both scientific and consistent.

The raw and vulgar truth is HIT doesn't work. Oh, there might be a few souls who swear that it does. It is a great way to get injured. You see, if Arthur was mistaken about basic things like how muscles contract then his whole theory comes crumbling down. Muscles don't contract like boxcars but slide into each other. The logic from Arthur was superb. Unfortunately, the theory is literally false. It isn't even a close approximation to the truth.

What is sad is the meagre amount of experiments done by scientists to settle debates about which method is most effective. It would be an easy thing to do. Arthur spent millions on experiments but I am not sure all that information is available to the public to study.

Anyway, let us do a simple experiment to see how theory applies to what we do in gyms. Suppose you are hired to design a leg extension machine. You have unlimited funds and can buy all the various leg extension machines made by different companies. That, in fact, is partly what happens in some big equipment companies. Then you can use yourself and even recruit other experts so that collectively you come up with what you feel is the best design.

What are the necessary things that must be right to make an effective machine? Well, it has to pivot in the right place and duplicate the movement of the leg extending itself. You would be surprised at how little agreement there is re something so essential. Surely all companies can get this pivot point right? Well, a clever engineer might be able to devise a self-locating pivot point that best suits each individual. I don't think this has been done yet but it is conceivable. The thing is the machine should be simple and not the most expensive design out there.

The one thing almost all leg extension machines agree about is the angle of the user when seated. Usually the user is tilted back a bit but not too much. The reason for this is to keep the body upright and make it easy to get on and off the machine. Over 25 years ago I believe Icarian came up with a design where the user actually leaned back while sitting. I remember that it felt good when I used this machine perhaps around 1980. Others said the same thing. Yet when Nautilus, Universal, Cybex and just about everyone else built their leg extension machines the angle while sitting was just a bit titled up. The idea was to keep long legs from hitting the floor. There is always a problem accommodating the exteme sizes in populations and the very tall and very short challenge designers. Usually compromises have to be made and equipment usually suits people from about 4-10 to 6-7 or so. Those shorter or taller will not feel comfortable on most pieces of gym equipment. The extremely obese will also have a problem accessing most equipment because they won't fit in or the machines won't handle the bodyweight.

What seems to happen in the design community is that designs become established and then this is the way those machines are made. The angle of seats on leg extensions vary by a few degrees but that is all. Well, I thought about the leg extension machines that I made and realised one problem was that users tend to rise off the seat when attempting heavy resistances. I wondered if there was a way to compensate for that. I didn't like the Nautilus solution of using belts to keep the user in position. I came up with a version that Icarian had used decades before but tried to see if I could go further re an angle than they did. The intention was to tilt the user's legs upward so that more of his bodyweight would be under the pivot point. So far the solution works and it feels very good. I doubt my design will affect the way leg extension machines are made in the future but there you are.

In a similar way many ideas that we absorb over the years re training seem to become what makes sense to us. That is our reality and we have kept these ideas because they seem to work. The trouble starts when we stop growing. How come all those ideas don't generate more growth? Surely they must work! Millions of believers cannot possibly be mistaken. Well, it seems that they can be and in fact are mistaken about lots of things. I will develop this idea in another post.
Report to moderator   Logged
d0nny2600
Getbig IV
****
Posts: 3677


http://i.imgur.com/mCzI3N5.jpg


View Profile WWW
« Reply #40 on: July 16, 2008, 09:22:05 AM »

Chick, did you suck penis to fuel your drug addiction when you competed?
Roll Eyes
Report to moderator   Logged
bigmc
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 17170


The Y board are the GET BIG ELITE


View Profile
« Reply #41 on: July 16, 2008, 10:39:26 AM »

vince basille talks shit

looks like shit

the end
Report to moderator   Logged

T
Seijuro
Getbig II
**
Posts: 159


View Profile
« Reply #42 on: July 16, 2008, 11:08:22 AM »

maybe haha
Report to moderator   Logged
dr.chimps
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 25764


Bunch Commander


View Profile
« Reply #43 on: July 16, 2008, 11:57:06 AM »




Haha. Tell me you didn't, really?  Cheesy
Report to moderator   Logged
jekyllisland
Getbig I
*
Posts: 9


View Profile
« Reply #44 on: July 16, 2008, 01:21:42 PM »

Awesome...first you re-invented the wheel....now....


the HANDLE!!

LMAO.....Jesus Christ how big is that handle?Huh? looks like the equivalent of what Forest Gump had on his legs but for your hands!! lololol
Report to moderator   Logged
io856
Competitors II
Getbig V
******
Posts: 9440


phill head


View Profile
« Reply #45 on: July 16, 2008, 01:26:47 PM »

Poor Ron, imagine being the owner of this site. It is worse than the wild west where everyone is trying to be the fastest or whatever in town. You ride into town and are met with bullets, arrows, tomatoes and pumpkins! Only the reckless and fearless dare proceed.

Well, it is a challenge to offer anything of value to the converted. They really have lost the capacity to accept new ideas. Instead, they cling to all that makes sense to them. I don't blame them, either, and that is why new knowledge has little chance of taking hold.

We saw Arthur Jones try to persuade millions to embrace his ideas. Heck, in 1970 everyone read his advertisments in Ironman that went on for many pages. The information was that good. Eventually the HIT methods lost favour because most people who tried it didn't progress like Arthur promised them. Neither were Nautilus machines superior to just lifting weights. That must have been a bitter pill for Arthur and it wasn't long before he abandoned his association with muscleheads. A few notables kept the flame burning but when Mike Mentzer died in 2001 there wasn't much reason to peddle that stuff anymore. Well, Ellington Darden has probably made a good living with HIT and at least the system tries to be both scientific and consistent.

The raw and vulgar truth is HIT doesn't work. Oh, there might be a few souls who swear that it does. It is a great way to get injured. You see, if Arthur was mistaken about basic things like how muscles contract then his whole theory comes crumbling down. Muscles don't contract like boxcars but slide into each other. The logic from Arthur was superb. Unfortunately, the theory is literally false. It isn't even a close approximation to the truth.

What is sad is the meagre amount of experiments done by scientists to settle debates about which method is most effective. It would be an easy thing to do. Arthur spent millions on experiments but I am not sure all that information is available to the public to study.

Anyway, let us do a simple experiment to see how theory applies to what we do in gyms. Suppose you are hired to design a leg extension machine. You have unlimited funds and can buy all the various leg extension machines made by different companies. That, in fact, is partly what happens in some big equipment companies. Then you can use yourself and even recruit other experts so that collectively you come up with what you feel is the best design.

What are the necessary things that must be right to make an effective machine? Well, it has to pivot in the right place and duplicate the movement of the leg extending itself. You would be surprised at how little agreement there is re something so essential. Surely all companies can get this pivot point right? Well, a clever engineer might be able to devise a self-locating pivot point that best suits each individual. I don't think this has been done yet but it is conceivable. The thing is the machine should be simple and not the most expensive design out there.

The one thing almost all leg extension machines agree about is the angle of the user when seated. Usually the user is tilted back a bit but not too much. The reason for this is to keep the body upright and make it easy to get on and off the machine. Over 25 years ago I believe Icarian came up with a design where the user actually leaned back while sitting. I remember that it felt good when I used this machine perhaps around 1980. Others said the same thing. Yet when Nautilus, Universal, Cybex and just about everyone else built their leg extension machines the angle while sitting was just a bit titled up. The idea was to keep long legs from hitting the floor. There is always a problem accommodating the exteme sizes in populations and the very tall and very short challenge designers. Usually compromises have to be made and equipment usually suits people from about 4-10 to 6-7 or so. Those shorter or taller will not feel comfortable on most pieces of gym equipment. The extremely obese will also have a problem accessing most equipment because they won't fit in or the machines won't handle the bodyweight.

What seems to happen in the design community is that designs become established and then this is the way those machines are made. The angle of seats on leg extensions vary by a few degrees but that is all. Well, I thought about the leg extension machines that I made and realised one problem was that users tend to rise off the seat when attempting heavy resistances. I wondered if there was a way to compensate for that. I didn't like the Nautilus solution of using belts to keep the user in position. I came up with a version that Icarian had used decades before but tried to see if I could go further re an angle than they did. The intention was to tilt the user's legs upward so that more of his bodyweight would be under the pivot point. So far the solution works and it feels very good. I doubt my design will affect the way leg extension machines are made in the future but there you are.

In a similar way many ideas that we absorb over the years re training seem to become what makes sense to us. That is our reality and we have kept these ideas because they seem to work. The trouble starts when we stop growing. How come all those ideas don't generate more growth? Surely they must work! Millions of believers cannot possibly be mistaken. Well, it seems that they can be and in fact are mistaken about lots of things. I will develop this idea in another post.


 Roll Eyes
Report to moderator   Logged
knny187
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 21925



View Profile
« Reply #46 on: July 16, 2008, 01:35:29 PM »

Vince invented bodybuilding but not d-bol

Report to moderator   Logged
turner98
Getbig II
**
Posts: 149


View Profile
« Reply #47 on: July 16, 2008, 03:08:08 PM »

Well, this is what I think. All the IFBB bodybuilders are strong. Kevin does at his max 500 for 3 or 4. That Dexter can do about 365 for 8. Dillett does machine shoulder presses with 360lb on BFTO '98, therefore can do 315 for 10 at least. So I think they can all do at least, at least 315 for 10 on bench press. And they're all good reps contracting the muscles real good. Even if they don't do 710lb deadlifts, like Arnold "did", the way they handle the lighter weights leads me to believe they could. But what they did worked for them, so they don't need to. I think anabolic steroids make you bigger because they allow person to train with heavier weights, and that's it.





Report to moderator   Logged
Method101
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 7808





View Profile
« Reply #48 on: July 16, 2008, 03:12:42 PM »

Vince looks like my grandfather Shocked
Report to moderator   Logged
Vince Basile
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 8683


Mr Canada 1970


View Profile
« Reply #49 on: July 16, 2008, 10:21:33 PM »

There is a relationship between size and strength but it is not a linear one. The biggest guys are very strong but the strongest guys are not always the biggest. We can conclude that larger muscles, for any individual, will usually be stronger but strength is but one factor in hypertrophy. The progression in strength is probably more important than the amount lifted.

To use a logical thought experiment it is easy to see that one cannot keep getting stronger because limits are there that the human body cannot exceed. Suppose a trainee can bench press 300 pounds for 1 rep. That is a pretty good performance for most guys who lift weights. Well, is it possible for a trainee to gain but 5 pounds a week on his bench press? That doesn't sound like it is anything to boast about. However, since there are 52 weeks in a year, our trainee would be lifting 260 more pounds at the end of a year. Add the 300 and this hero would be lifting 560 pounds. That would be unlikely but perhaps possible if drugs were used. At the end of two years this superman would be lifting 820 pounds. In 3 years he would be benching 1080 pounds. Clearly, no one can keep adding even 5 pounds a week to their bench 1rm. No one.

If it is true that there are limits to strength gains then gaining strength cannot be a necessity for hypertrophy. It may be sufficient most of the time but it is not a requirement. What else contributes to hypertrophy but isn't strength? The training factor seems to be some sort of muscular endurance. In a nutshell, big muscles are good at lifting heavy weights over and over again. To put that in gym language, big muscles can do set after set after set with a heavy weight. For example, for the bench press someone with large muscles should be able to do set after set with over 300 pounds, no worries at all. If we reverse engineer this process it means that if you can do set after set after set of 10 strict reps with 315 pounds you should have over 18 inch arms. If you can do the same with 405 pounds you should have over 19 inch arms. Beyond that it is not clear if there is a relationship. The examples given are just pulled out of the air but are probably accurate. Strength and muscular endurance varies among trainee populations so it is not possible to give exact formulas without extensive testing of large bodybuilders.

Arthur Jones warned bodybuilders to build size and not demonstrate strength. Therefore, it is foolish to see how much you can lift. Doing low reps is also a dangerous practice because you risk tearing the connective tissue. Once that happens your career might as well be over. I doubt many in the future will be given gifts like Dorian who won the Olympia with badly torn biceps.

Whatever the ultimate program for hypertrophy it had better be a safe one that avoids serious injuries.

So far, if we apply our test of truth then we find that what we have said corresponds with what we find in the gym. The big bodybuilders do set after set after set with fairly heavy weights. Well, isn't that what even laymen think is all that is required? Ah, how can something so simple be so difficult to achieve? If all we have to do is use a big volume and progress with heavier weights why isn't everyone who does that really big? It seems it is easier to explain acquiring big muscles than it is to account for why few attain really large size.

You can see that as soon as anyone mentions large bodybuilders we contaminate the hypertrophy process. Why? Well, we do not know what is responsible for their growth. If we have a group of strictly natural bodybuilders then the training protocols matter. That isn't so obvious when considering the users of AAS and other agents. I prefer to limit my discussion to purely natural training. I have no interest in chemical enhancement. Others can claim guru status for that enterprise.
Report to moderator   Logged
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Theme created by Egad Community. Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.16 | SMF © 2011, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!