Bodybuilding training: "Heavy weights" or "stimulate, don't annihilate"?

[cephissus]

Heavy weight school of thought:

1.  More weight = more muscle size.  Aim to get more reps or add weight to the bar every workout.
2.  Go to failure.  The muscle won't grow if you don't push it beyond its limits.
3.  Often sets and reps are very important for those subscribing to this mentality.  They tend to focus on the 5-8 rep range and may even record their workouts in a log book.

"Stimulate, don't annihilate" school of thought:

1.  Use as little weight as you can while still fatiguing the muscles.
2.  You don't have to go to failure, doing so can lead to injury / "overtraining."
3.  Reps should be very smooth.  The last rep in the set won't look much different from the first (no grinding it out).
4.  Use a weight you can control.  The positive portion of a rep should be explosive, while the negative should be controlled.  Yes, even the last rep of a set (no grinding).
5.  Reps and sets are less important.  Getting a pump, and feeling the muscle on every rep is more important.  If you stop feeling the muscle, then you should end your exercise or workout.

Which is better?

It seems like most bodybuilders and bodybuilding media sites say heavy weights are king, but is this really what they believe?  Sure there is the occasional ronnie coleman who lifts very, very heavy weights, but people seem to overlook the fact that he's also very strong, and doesn't struggle with these weights that much.

I was just looking at this video of lee haney today,

who of course is known for coining the phrase "stimulate, don't annihilate" and was surprised at some of the weights he was using: 115 (?) for barbell curls, 200 for lat pulldowns, 125 for preacher curls, maybe low 100s for leg extension? GH15 repeatedly tells us that bodybuilders usually lift much heavier for their videos than for their everyday training.

how about this one of nasser and jay?

Bench press with two plates?  And what were those dumbbells?  90 lbs, 100, 110?  Flyes with 60 lbs dumbbells?

Shawn ray... squatting with 3.5 plates, every rep SUPER SMOOTH, doesn't even look like a problem at all for him.  If he can build the legs he had with just 3.5 plates on the bar, what business do all the gymrats have putting on 3-4 plates and killing themselves, only to end up with little twig legs?

How about this one?

I assume this video shows every consecutive set of lat pulldowns he did for the workout.  I don't know about your gym, but I routinely see kids looking like they put twice the effort into their sets, and probably using more weight too!

Is the whole "heavy weights" strategy just another brainwashing tool to sell legal, non-steroid muscle building "solutions" (in the form of training books, personal training, supplements, and the like)?  Is it a ploy used by bodybuilders to further enhance their image (as hardworking, strong athletes)?

Or is there something to be said for all those kids deadlifting four plates, struggling like crazy on each rep, huffing and puffing only to end up with the back thickness of their little sister?

[apply85]

I get a pump and go home

[g101]

I think you're complicating it too much with the training 

[Hulkotron]

When you're on enough drugs to sterilize a large bear it doesn't really matter.

[Ex Coelis]

lower the reps

up the dosage

[Obvious Gimmick]

When you're on enough drugs to sterilize a large bear it doesn't really matter.

[tbombz]

Heavy weight school of thought:

1.  More weight = more muscle size.  Aim to get more reps or add weight to the bar every workout.
2.  Go to failure.  The muscle won't grow if you don't push it beyond its limits.
3.  Often sets and reps are very important for those subscribing to this mentality.  They tend to focus on the 5-8 rep range and may even record their workouts in a log book.

"Stimulate, don't annihilate" school of thought:

1.  Use as little weight as you can while still fatiguing the muscles.
2.  You don't have to go to failure, doing so can lead to injury / "overtraining."
3.  Reps should be very smooth.  The last rep in the set won't look much different from the first (no grinding it out).
4.  Use a weight you can control.  The positive portion of a rep should be explosive, while the negative should be controlled.  Yes, even the last rep of a set (no grinding).
5.  Reps and sets are less important.  Getting a pump, and feeling the muscle on every rep is more important.  If you stop feeling the muscle, then you should end your exercise or workout.

Which is better?

both schools of thought are correct you have to find the right balance between them.

stay away from failure, lift as heavy as you can while keeping good form, do a mixture of sets in the lower rep range and in the higher rep range.

some key points=
-a bigger muscle is always a stronger muscle, but you dont necessarily have to lift heavier to get bigger.
-low reps provide what high reps dont, and vice versa
-staying away from failure ensures you consistant progress as you wont be overtraining
-good form, controlling the weight ensures proper muscle development and prevents injury
-lifting as heavy as you can is good but only so long as its done with proper form

[Arnold jr]

both schools of thought are correct you have to find the right balance between them.

stay away from failure, lift as heavy as you can while keeping good form, do a mixture of sets in the lower rep range and in the higher rep range.

some key points=
-a bigger muscle is always a stronger muscle, but you dont necessarily have to lift heavier to get bigger.
-low reps provide what high reps dont, and vice versa
-staying away from failure ensures you consistant progress as you wont be overtraining
-good form, controlling the weight ensures proper muscle development and prevents injury
-lifting as heavy as you can is good but only so long as its done with proper form

Good post, I agree.

I'd also say "heavy" is a very relative term. When you're following a "stimulate don't annihilate" form that doesn't necessarily mean the weight is light. I think a key is finding a weight you can lift properly while still getting a good squeeze out of the movement....I know, sounds simply but so many assume just because they can move it this is the weight they should use.

[wild willie]

KIDS IN THE GYM BENCHING WITH 3-4 PLATES AND SQUATTING WITH 4-5 PLATES USUALLY HAVE PISS POOR MIND TO MUSCLE CONNECTION.


THEY ARE ONLY CONCERNED WITH HEAVING THE WEIGHT UP IN THE AIR.


IT TAKES A FEW YEARS OF TRAINING TO REALLY GET TO THE POINT WHERE YOUR BODY IS ABLE TO FEEL THE MUSCLE WORKING.

THE GUYS IN MY GYM WERE SO INTO SHOWING THE REST OF THE MEMBERS HOW ARE THEY WERE WORKING BY SCREAMING AND YELLING AND THROWING HEAVY POUNDAGES AROUND.

I BEGAN TRAINING AT THE AGE OF 14/15 AND TRULY NEVER GOT TO THE POINT WHERE I WAS FEELING WHAT I WAS SUPPOSED TO UNTIL AGE 20/21.

MOST NEOPHYTES ARE SO CONSUMED IN LIFTING HEAVY EGO TYPE WEIGHTS....THAT THEY PLACE NO EMPHASIS ON THE CONTRACTION...THE PUMP....THE FEEL OF THE WEIGHT GOING UP AND COMING DOWN UNDER CONTROL.

JUST MY TAKE...

[suckmymuscle]

Heavy weight school of thought:

1.  More weight = more muscle size.  Aim to get more reps or add weight to the bar every workout.
2.  Go to failure.  The muscle won't grow if you don't push it beyond its limits.
3.  Often sets and reps are very important for those subscribing to this mentality.  They tend to focus on the 5-8 rep range and may even record their workouts in a log book.

"Stimulate, don't annihilate" school of thought:

1.  Use as little weight as you can while still fatiguing the muscles.
2.  You don't have to go to failure, doing so can lead to injury / "overtraining."
3.  Reps should be very smooth.  The last rep in the set won't look much different from the first (no grinding it out).
4.  Use a weight you can control.  The positive portion of a rep should be explosive, while the negative should be controlled.  Yes, even the last rep of a set (no grinding).
5.  Reps and sets are less important.  Getting a pump, and feeling the muscle on every rep is more important.  If you stop feeling the muscle, then you should end your exercise or workout.

Which is better?

It seems like most bodybuilders and bodybuilding media sites say heavy weights are king, but is this really what they believe?  Sure there is the occasional ronnie coleman who lifts very, very heavy weights, but people seem to overlook the fact that he's also very strong, and doesn't struggle with these weights that much.

I was just looking at this video of lee haney today,

who of course is known for coining the phrase "stimulate, don't annihilate" and was surprised at some of the weights he was using: 115 (?) for barbell curls, 200 for lat pulldowns, 125 for preacher curls, maybe low 100s for leg extension? GH15 repeatedly tells us that bodybuilders usually lift much heavier for their videos than for their everyday training.

how about this one of nasser and jay?

Bench press with two plates?  And what were those dumbbells?  90 lbs, 100, 110?  Flyes with 60 lbs dumbbells?

Shawn ray... squatting with 3.5 plates, every rep SUPER SMOOTH, doesn't even look like a problem at all for him.  If he can build the legs he had with just 3.5 plates on the bar, what business do all the gymrats have putting on 3-4 plates and killing themselves, only to end up with little twig legs?

How about this one?

I assume this video shows every consecutive set of lat pulldowns he did for the workout.  I don't know about your gym, but I routinely see kids looking like they put twice the effort into their sets, and probably using more weight too!

Is the whole "heavy weights" strategy just another brainwashing tool to sell legal, non-steroid muscle building "solutions" (in the form of training books, personal training, supplements, and the like)?  Is it a ploy used by bodybuilders to further enhance their image (as hardworking, strong athletes)?

Or is there something to be said for all those kids deadlifting four plates, struggling like crazy on each rep, huffing and puffing only to end up with the back thickness of their little sister?

  They say that more sets and reps with lower weights are better for size than super-heavy weights for few sets, but all the drug-free powerlifters I've ever met were a hell bigger than all natural bodybuilders I've known. In fact, powerlifters are the only drug-free weigh trainers I've ever seen who had real size. They did nothing but bench presses, dedlifts, military presse and squats, and the few exercises they did besides this were triceps and shoulders exercises to support strength gains on those big exercises. And guess what? It works. They are all much, much bigger than guys who train in a traditional bodybuilding way doing 4 sets of 10 reps for 3-5 exercises for each bodypart.

SUCKMYMUSCLE

[GroinkTropin]

SMM has it dead on. Unless you are a strength and speed athlete, like an olympic lifter, the heavier the weight you lift the bigger you shall be.

The only real difference I see between a powerlifter vs a strong bodybuilder is that powerlifters do NOT accentuate the negative. They do this on purpose, BECAUSE IT SPURS MUSCLE GROWTH. They do not want this, they want the most neural adaptation possible with the least growth possible. The smallest (lightest) yet strongest powerlifters are the most successful. This should basically answer the volume vs weight and intensity question right there- to get big, you need to move heavy weight but also control the negative. It really is that simple.

[cephissus]

SMM has it dead on. Unless you are a strength and speed athlete, like an olympic lifter, the heavier the weight you lift the bigger you shall be.

The only real difference I see between a powerlifter vs a strong bodybuilder is that powerlifters do NOT accentuate the negative. They do this on purpose, BECAUSE IT SPURS MUSCLE GROWTH. They do not want this, they want the most neural adaptation possible with the least growth possible. The smallest (lightest) yet strongest powerlifters are the most successful. This should basically answer the volume vs weight and intensity question right there- to get big, you need to move heavy weight but also control the negative. It really is that simple.

Interesting post!

It seems like pro bodybuilders, on average, have much more control over the positive and negative portion of the rep compared to the average gym goer.  You rarely see them grind reps or even slow down toward the end of a set.  When I look around at the gym, most people's reps get slower and less explosive as the set goes on... even on their hardest sets, it looks (on the outside) like these bodybuilders are breezing through the workout, though you know they must have a pretty big pump and burn going on underneath.

Perhaps this is because the average gym member uses too much weight, as taught by the muscle-media?

[abijahmaniaco]

When you're on enough drugs to sterilize a large bear it doesn't really matter.

this
i lean more towards stimulate don't annihilate. think about all the guys who lift super heavy forced reps etc... ronnie, branch, and dorian
all had tons of injury!
ronnie's career ended prematurely bc of lat not being able to get enough nutrients bc of lower back injury from way back when - who knows! probably could have had nine or ten titles if he had trained like jay
dorian's career ended prematurely bc of tricep injury. also tore biceps
and now branch is out of the o bc he says slip and fall but i call bs. he was training to heavy too dry.
no look at jay's not showey style of lifting that you hate so much
he's already had a long career with no major injury!
you tell me which is better!

[dyslexic]

Juice does not strengthen tendons and ligaments in contrast to rapid muscle growth. This is why so many of the Pro's keep tearing up their shit.


There is no direct scientific answer to "what works best" except for what works best for you ~ right now.


Try everything. How else will you know?


It's just like the daily protein question: High or low? It depends. How do YOU respond? How would you know unless you tried both high and low for a time?


So much of bodybuilding is ambiguous and, of course, genetic.


There is no objective answer, especially when you are boat-loading and mega-dosing random types of gas.


Everyone say's something different. The only objectivity is going to be within yourself. Screw everyone else.

[Nails]

I use both principles .,, I only workout one bodypart a day, an my first excersie I go heavy trying for 12 reps first 3 sets then going to 5-8 on the next 3 sets.... Then the following 4 excersises i go back to 10-12 all the way thru.... Usually I'm 80% to failer at the 12 th rep

[chess315]

the problem with not doing a few heavy movements is testing your strength is some what important at least for non advanced lifters. I do belive if you want to be really massive you better plan on having to be able to bench 400 or more and squat, dead lift 500+ not saying you actually do it but you in theory would have to be strong enough to imo. ANd powerlfiters arent as much stronger then bodybulder as people think they . they are stronger in the movements which in powerlifting squat and bodybuilding squat are to toally differnt things. But you put jay cutler out there or who ever there going to be abel to keep up with powerlifters in lots of movement in there rep ranges mabey even best them

[chess315]

there are quite a few bodybuilder if they decided to do so could prolly total 2400 or 2500 hundered in a yrs time if they gorded there selves to 400lbs mabey more powerlifters have a weight advatage at talking in the higher weight classes. hell the strongest guy in the world right now is stan efferding a bodybuilder. Powerlifters use a lot of trickery with there gear i feel it is in some ways to give them an advatage over naturally athletic minoritys because there is really no way one could train for it with a out a well eqquiped gym and money and a team. I love date tate but with out his suits wrapps and shit hes not even as strong as many bodybuilder around his weight.

[BB]

Periodization.

For every Haney, Taylor, Nimrod King, etc.... that falls on the lightish "feel the muscle" side of the fence, they'll be a Columbu, Mentzer(s), Sipes, Elder, Seno, Coleman, etc..... that trained heavy and hard, but smartly. Even most of the best Powerlifters have light times of the year, especially when they are looking to add a bit of size(by light work I mean periods in the 70-80% of max range).

Thee smartest thing to do is block it off, periods where you'll push hard, other where you'll hang back.

[Dr Dutch]

 They say that more sets and reps with lower weights are better for size than super-heavy weights for few sets, but all the drug-free powerlifters I've ever met were a hell bigger than all natural bodybuilders I've known. In fact, powerlifters are the only drug-free weigh trainers I've ever seen who had real size. They did nothing but bench presses, dedlifts, military presse and squats, and the few exercises they did besides this were triceps and shoulders exercises to support strength gains on those big exercises. And guess what? It works. They are all much, much bigger than guys who train in a traditional bodybuilding way doing 4 sets of 10 reps for 3-5 exercises for each bodypart.

SUCKMYMUSCLE

Because they are fat.

[cephissus]

Thanks for the replies everybody.  It seems to me the "intensity" that bodybuilders train with is grossly exaggerated.  I see this group of poor highschool kids at my gym who go yap it up with all the "natural wonders," gallon jug of water and gym bag in hand, wrist wraps and belt firmly fastened.  They go hard every set, tons of sets, grinding out big weights and still, of course, have stick limbs and 16% bodyfat (naturally they're bulking ).  Seems like they never notice the whole time they're dripping sweat and destroying their joints, the big guys are calmly breezing through a set or two of nearly the same weights.

The more bodybuilding videos I see, the more it seems like most pros don't push themselves as hard as the 16 year olds who just gained their first 15 lbs and are hungry for more.  Sure they sweat and grunt a lot more and heave heavier weights around, but they're putting their bodies through less punishment, I think, than the delusional kid who's pushing 3 plates on squat for a handful of bone-crushing reps.

[Papper]

both schools of thought are correct you have to find the right balance between them.

stay away from failure, lift as heavy as you can while keeping good form, do a mixture of sets in the lower rep range and in the higher rep range.

some key points=
-a bigger muscle is always a stronger muscle, but you dont necessarily have to lift heavier to get bigger.
-low reps provide what high reps dont, and vice versa
-staying away from failure ensures you consistant progress as you wont be overtraining
-good form, controlling the weight ensures proper muscle development and prevents injury
-lifting as heavy as you can is good but only so long as its done with proper form

Agreed but why stay away from failure?

How will you know what you can put up with if you dont push the boundaries? How to you know when to up the weights? If you never try for more youll be at the same weights and the growth stagnates right?

From a natural point of view this is..

[suckmymuscle]

Because they are fat.

  Fat can't move hundreds of pounds, dummy. Fat tissue doesen't generate force...

SUCKMYMUSCLE

[Meso_z]

Agreed but why stay away from failure?

How will you know what you can put up with if you dont push the boundaries? How to you know when to up the weights? If you never try for more youll be at the same weights and the growth stagnates right?

From a natural point of view this is..

He means 1-2 reps away from failure.

Thats what im trying to do lately, after reading tbombz posts..

although i sometimes still go to failure I significantly reduced the "failed reps" in my workouts.

[JasonH]

It's pretty simple really - just experiment over a significant period of time and find out which works best for you. Me personally it's a bit of both but leaning towards the "stimulate, don't annihilate" route.

[Dr Dutch]

  Fat can't move hundreds of pounds, dummy. Fat tissue doesen't generate force...

SUCKMYMUSCLE

Of course they got lots of muscle. Sumo wrestlers got the biggest muscles around. But leaning out (what natural bodybuilders do) burns the muscle away like shit..