Author Topic: Was Ronnie Coleman a pumper or a hit'er ?  (Read 3717 times)

Fatpanda

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 9676
  • One getbigger to rule them all.
Was Ronnie Coleman a pumper or a hit'er ?
« on: April 11, 2009, 05:25:37 AM »
i always believed ronnie was a pumper, 3 sets of 12-15, however on closer inspection of his workouts he actually is a hit'er IMO because he increases the weight on every set till his last.

thoughts?
175lbs by 31st July

Mr.1derful

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 4943
Re: was ronnie a pumper or a hit'er ?
« Reply #1 on: April 11, 2009, 05:52:28 AM »
i always believed ronnie was a pumper, 3 sets of 12-15, however on closer inspection of his workouts he actually is a hit'er IMO because he increases the weight on every set till his last.

thoughts?

I'm a firm believer that he used this as his secret weapon.


Fatpanda

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 9676
  • One getbigger to rule them all.
Re: was ronnie a pumper or a hit'er ?
« Reply #2 on: April 11, 2009, 06:31:03 AM »
I'm a firm believer that he used this as his secret weapon.



which video did he use that ? the invincible ?
175lbs by 31st July

pillowtalk

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 3674
  • Sent on my BlackBerry® from Vodafone
Re: was ronnie a pumper or a hit'er ?
« Reply #3 on: April 11, 2009, 06:39:31 AM »
i always believed ronnie was a pumper, 3 sets of 12-15, however on closer inspection of his workouts he actually is a hit'er IMO because he increases the weight on every set till his last.

thoughts?

I have been doing this since 'Doz Yates' & (warriors story).

Pyramid up to a working set.
NEXT.
Growth/noob loves me

EL Mariachi

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 6019
Re: was ronnie a pumper or a hit'er ?
« Reply #4 on: April 11, 2009, 06:52:06 AM »
i always believed ronnie was a pumper, 3 sets of 12-15, however on closer inspection of his workouts he actually is a hit'er IMO because he increases the weight on every set till his last.

thoughts?


he does both some movements he does big reps, other movements he goes 2 to 6 reps like deadlift and squats. thats the way i like to train too, for triceps i never go below 15 reps, for biceps i never go more than 8 reps. deadlift i keep it in the range 3 to 6 reps to build strength

Mr.1derful

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 4943
Re: was ronnie a pumper or a hit'er ?
« Reply #5 on: April 11, 2009, 08:00:35 AM »
which video did he use that ? the invincible ?

He would never use it in his videos.  He doesn't want the secret to get out.  Which is why you haven't seen any other serious trainers use it.   ;)

Fatpanda

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 9676
  • One getbigger to rule them all.
Re: was ronnie a pumper or a hit'er ?
« Reply #6 on: April 11, 2009, 08:34:21 AM »
ahhh  ;D
175lbs by 31st July

YoungBlood

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 6777
  • Weee!
Re: was ronnie a pumper or a hit'er ?
« Reply #7 on: April 11, 2009, 08:44:01 AM »

Pumper, for sure.
Just because he increases "intensity" on every set, does not mean he's an HIT'er.
His volume is too high, too many reps, and from what I've seen in his vid's, he doesn't really do any drop sets or too many "shocking techniques."
Just heavy ass weight that nobody else wants (or humanely are able) to lift.

Fatpanda

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 9676
  • One getbigger to rule them all.
Re: was ronnie a pumper or a hit'er ?
« Reply #8 on: April 11, 2009, 09:03:21 AM »
Pumper, for sure.
Just because he increases "intensity" on every set, does not mean he's an HIT'er.
His volume is too high, too many reps, and from what I've seen in his vid's, he doesn't really do any drop sets or too many "shocking techniques."
Just heavy ass weight that nobody else wants (or humanely are able) to lift.

yes but the weight he uses means he has to do more sets as warmups - before doing a final all out set at his max weight. dorian and mentzer would probably have used more sets if they ever lifted such max poundages too.
175lbs by 31st July

YoungBlood

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 6777
  • Weee!
Re: was ronnie a pumper or a hit'er ?
« Reply #9 on: April 11, 2009, 09:22:58 AM »
yes but the weight he uses means he has to do more sets as warmups - before doing a final all out set at his max weight. dorian and mentzer would probably have used more sets if they ever lifted such max poundages too.

I'm going to have to ask you to clarify what you believe to be HIT....

Fatpanda

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 9676
  • One getbigger to rule them all.
Re: was ronnie a pumper or a hit'er ?
« Reply #10 on: April 11, 2009, 09:30:10 AM »
I'm going to have to ask you to clarify what you believe to be HIT....

however many warm ups needed untill the final 1 set of maximum intensity i.e. failure at whatever rep range you are using.

mentzer and dorian were slightly different, as mentzer used 1 exercise per bodypart, but dorian are ronnie are identical with 3 exercises per bodypart.
175lbs by 31st July

ASJChaotic

  • Guest
Re: was ronnie a pumper or a hit'er ?
« Reply #11 on: April 11, 2009, 09:39:20 AM »
i always believed ronnie was a pumper, 3 sets of 12-15, however on closer inspection of his workouts he actually is a hit'er IMO because he increases the weight on every set till his last.

thoughts?

Ronnie was a pumpster.....no doubt about it

YoungBlood

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 6777
  • Weee!
Re: was ronnie a pumper or a hit'er ?
« Reply #12 on: April 11, 2009, 09:41:15 AM »
however many warm ups needed untill the final 1 set of maximum intensity i.e. failure at whatever rep range you are using.

mentzer and dorian were slightly different, as mentzer used 1 exercise per bodypart, but dorian are ronnie are identical with 3 exercises per bodypart.

This is where the fine line of defining HIT becomes grey matter. How many sets are you considering warm-ups? Does Ronnie doing 275 on the shoulder press mean he's not working hard, or just not to failure so it does not count as a working set?
Tom Platz was never an HIT'er by Metzner's definition. He'd do 20 sets of squats, but he would admit (in an Ironman interview) that on his heavy day, he wouldn't count his warm up sets. But on his "light weight, high rep day" he would count the "warm ups." I think his quote was "I'd do 10 sets total, but that's on my heavy day where I don't count my warm-up sets. On my high rep day I do 10 sets including my warm-up sets."

Dorian never once claimed he did HIT, he said he did "a variation of HIT." Even though he trained with Metzner for a spell. And he trained with Charles Poliquin, who while advocating small amounts of HIT in his phases, is vehemently opposed to anything that Metzner refers to as HIT.

FREAKgeek

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 5722
  • Fan of the Golden Era
Re: was ronnie a pumper or a hit'er ?
« Reply #13 on: April 11, 2009, 09:43:21 AM »
A true pumper only does biceps curls and bench presses, and does tanning as a finisher.

Fatpanda

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 9676
  • One getbigger to rule them all.
Re: was ronnie a pumper or a hit'er ?
« Reply #14 on: April 11, 2009, 09:45:04 AM »
This is where the fine line of defining HIT becomes grey matter. How many sets are you considering warm-ups? Does Ronnie doing 275 on the shoulder press mean he's not working hard, or just not to failure so it does not count as a working set?
Tom Platz was never an HIT'er by Metzner's definition. He'd do 20 sets of squats, but he would admit (in an Ironman interview) that on his heavy day, he wouldn't count his warm up sets. But on his "light weight, high rep day" he would count the "warm ups." I think his quote was "I'd do 10 sets total, but that's on my heavy day where I don't count my warm-up sets. On my high rep day I do 10 sets including my warm-up sets."

Dorian never once claimed he did HIT, he said he did "a variation of HIT." Even though he trained with Metzner for a spell. And he trained with Charles Poliquin, who while advocating small amounts of HIT in his phases, is vehemently opposed to anything that Metzner refers to as HIT.

ronnie is working the muscles at 275, no doubt. but he could probably get 20+ reps with that weight before he fails if he maxes out at 315ish for 12-15.

now to me a 20 rep max is easy in all bar squats and deads.
175lbs by 31st July

YoungBlood

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 6777
  • Weee!
Re: was ronnie a pumper or a hit'er ?
« Reply #15 on: April 11, 2009, 09:49:54 AM »
ronnie is working the muscles at 275, no doubt. but he could probably get 20+ reps with that weight before he fails if he maxes out at 315ish for 12-15.

now to me a 20 rep max is easy in all bar squats and deads.

At what point is the delineation made between 275 being a working set (for Ronnie? Yet I can't even unrack that weight for a shoulder press!) versus just a warm-up?

You think doing 20 reps on squats with a weight you could only do 10 for is easy? Again, the definition becomes a little fuzzy.

Fatpanda

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 9676
  • One getbigger to rule them all.
Re: was ronnie a pumper or a hit'er ?
« Reply #16 on: April 11, 2009, 09:57:00 AM »
At what point is the delineation made between 275 being a working set (for Ronnie? Yet I can't even unrack that weight for a shoulder press!) versus just a warm-up?

You think doing 20 reps on squats with a weight you could only do 10 for is easy? Again, the definition becomes a little fuzzy.
but ronnie doesn't do 20 reps with a weight he can only get 10 with.

he gets 12-15 with a weight he could get 20- 25 with - thats what a 60% max ?
175lbs by 31st July

YoungBlood

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 6777
  • Weee!
Re: was ronnie a pumper or a hit'er ?
« Reply #17 on: April 11, 2009, 10:05:10 AM »
but ronnie doesn't do 20 reps with a weight he can only get 10 with.

he gets 12-15 with a weight he could get 20- 25 with - thats what a 60% max ?

So what about Ronnie doing the 12 reps on the Flat DB Press, where on rep 10 with the 200#, he's starting to tire and struggle, but musters out 2 more?

Fatpanda

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 9676
  • One getbigger to rule them all.
Re: was ronnie a pumper or a hit'er ?
« Reply #18 on: April 11, 2009, 10:08:04 AM »
So what about Ronnie doing the 12 reps on the Flat DB Press, where on rep 10 with the 200#, he's starting to tire and struggle, but musters out 2 more?

the 2 more were still in good form - i would class that as maximum intensity.

wouldn't you?
175lbs by 31st July

YoungBlood

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 6777
  • Weee!
Re: was ronnie a pumper or a hit'er ?
« Reply #19 on: April 11, 2009, 10:25:33 AM »

I think that even if you're not working to failure, you are still stimulating a muscle sufficiently enough for it to grow. So that to me qualifies as a working set. I don't care for constantly working to failure anyhow. It has it's place and time, but I don't think you need it every set, every workout to achieve your goal. There are many schools of thought on this subject.
Dorian feels that you should get blood in the muscle, then hit that nail hard as possible and that's that. Charles Poiliquin feels that you need a few sets, and for a specific period to keep sending your muscles/body that signal to adapt and grow. Pavel Tsaoulintewhateverthefuc khisnameis feels the volume should be low and NEVER to failure.
All methods work.
I feel that overall, you need all these methods, only how you put them together is your make or break piece of the puzzle.

Pet shop boys

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 11614
  • Getbig!
Re: was ronnie a pumper or a hit'er ?
« Reply #20 on: April 11, 2009, 08:36:53 PM »
They have one machine like this one at Chilli's so he doesnt have to leave and come back for meal # 5!!!




YIP YIP

WOOOSSSHHHHHHHHHH  !!

MuscleMcMannus

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 6236
Re: was ronnie a pumper or a hit'er ?
« Reply #21 on: April 11, 2009, 08:47:57 PM »
Fatpand do you really think it matters?  Honestly bro.......do you think that Ronnie Coleman is the size he is due to his amazing experience and knowledge regarding training and nutrition?   ::)  You can't train HIT exclusively nor can you train volume exclusively.  The body adapts to everything. 

The best gains come from consistent inconsistency so to speak.  Don't limit yourself to any one methodology, any one exercise is best, or whatever.  That will only hamper your progress.  The bottomline is it takes YEARS to build muscles naturally.  And that's with average genetics.  I find most people can't even fucking muster up the discipline and dedication to train and eat consistently for a few months.  You think most people can put in 5-10 years of consistent training?  Hell no.  Ronnie Coleman and most bodybuilders in general are all drugs. 

The guys that are truly natural and know how to build muscle naturally are not glossing the cover of magazines, turning heads in gym, breaking records etc.  50 years ago maybe.  But as rampant as drugs impressive natural physiques are few and far between.  Just look at the "Natural Bodybuilder" magazines......lol 3/4 of those guys are on drugs or have used drugs.  Look at Skip LaCour he's a fucking liar.  Look at The Rock.  "I only used steroids in college" sure fuckstick we believe you.   ::)

Fatpanda

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 9676
  • One getbigger to rule them all.
Re: was ronnie a pumper or a hit'er ?
« Reply #22 on: April 12, 2009, 02:00:22 AM »
Fatpand do you really think it matters?  Honestly bro.......do you think that Ronnie Coleman is the size he is due to his amazing experience and knowledge regarding training and nutrition?   ::)  You can't train HIT exclusively nor can you train volume exclusively.  The body adapts to everything.  The best gains come from consistent inconsistency so to speak.  Don't limit yourself to any one methodology, any one exercise is best, or whatever.  That will only hamper your progress.  The bottomline is it takes YEARS to build muscles naturally.  And that's with average genetics.  I find most people can't even fucking muster up the discipline and dedication to train and eat consistently for a few months.  You think most people can put in 5-10 years of consistent training?  Hell no.  Ronnie Coleman and most bodybuilders in general are all drugs.  The guys that are truly natural and know how to build muscle naturally are not glossing the cover of magazines, turning heads in gym, breaking records etc.  50 years ago maybe.  But as rampant as drugs impressive natural physiques are few and far between.  Just look at the "Natural Bodybuilder" magazines......lol 3/4 of those guys are on drugs or have used drugs.  Look at Skip LaCour he's a fucking liar.  Look at The Rock.  "I only used steroids in college" sure fuckstick we believe you.   ::)

i agree with what you are saying, i just thought coleman was a pumper thats all, but when i looked more closely at his workouts to me it falls under the hit umbrella more.

both will and do work with dedication, gear, food etc
175lbs by 31st July

Fatpanda

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 9676
  • One getbigger to rule them all.
Re: was ronnie a pumper or a hit'er ?
« Reply #23 on: April 12, 2009, 02:03:33 AM »
I think that even if you're not working to failure, you are still stimulating a muscle sufficiently enough for it to grow. So that to me qualifies as a working set. I don't care for constantly working to failure anyhow. It has it's place and time, but I don't think you need it every set, every workout to achieve your goal. There are many schools of thought on this subject.
Dorian feels that you should get blood in the muscle, then hit that nail hard as possible and that's that. Charles Poiliquin feels that you need a few sets, and for a specific period to keep sending your muscles/body that signal to adapt and grow. Pavel Tsaoulintewhateverthefuc khisnameis feels the volume should be low and NEVER to failure.
All methods work.
I feel that overall, you need all these methods, only how you put them together is your make or break piece of the puzzle.

i agree that ronie is still geting growth out of the other sets, but if you look at it from a hit view he is still building up to a maximum final set. ( and in 2 other movements per bodypart)

dorian used less warmup progressions, but still did a maximum final set ( and 2 other movements per bodypart) - maybe if he used more progressive sets like coleman he wouldn't have had so many injuries?

thoughts?
175lbs by 31st July

TRIX

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 3532
  • If you mess with me I'll have to fuck you up
Re: was ronnie a pumper or a hit'er ?
« Reply #24 on: April 12, 2009, 02:15:31 AM »
on roids... the weight seems heavy, you think you cant get more than 5 but you end up doing 10..