is getting a pump really related to stimulating hypertrophy?

[anabolichalo]

i didnt touch a steroid till i had 4 or 5 years of natural training under my belt, i think thats the best way. i see guys these days that never lifted n want to go on the juice as soon as they start training i think thats a big mistake though

i trained since i was like 12-24 and didnt start juicin untill recently at 25 lol


at 22 i was still full blown delusional, had some lying juicers tell me if i kept it up i'd be huge by 30

i was like "oh sweeeeet"


then no still no progress the next three years

and i was like

"the fuck"

[oldtimer1]

In it's most simple terms a bodybuilder's muscle is a strength endurance one. If getting stronger was the only magic bullet we would all be training for sets of one rep after warm up so we could get stronger. To make a muscle bigger you have to train it to keep up with muscular endurance.

Doing say 4 sets of 10 failing at 8 reps on the last set will get every fiber. A muscle fiber is completely on or off. Doing one set to failure doesn't mean you hit every fiber. It just means you couldn't complete another rep with the fibers available. Two sets is better than one set. Three sets is better than two but it's a diminishing return.

The argument that all bodybuilders trained for strength in their early years is very true. That would mean that their current training with volume was a waste of time which is far from the truth.  The over whelming amount of bodybuilding champs used volume. There are very few true intensity champs like Yates. The out right lies about champs that used HIT is just criminal.

[anabolichalo]

In it's most simple terms a bodybuilder's muscle is a strength endurance one. If getting stronger was the only magic bullet we would all be training for sets of one rep after warm up so we could get stronger. To make a muscle bigger you have to train it to keep up with muscular endurance.

Doing say 4 sets of 10 failing at 8 reps on the last set will get every fiber. A muscle fiber is completely on or off. Doing one set to failure doesn't mean you hit every fiber. It just means you couldn't complete another rep with the fibers available. Two sets is better than one set. Three sets is better than two but it's a diminishing return.

The argument that all bodybuilders trained for strength in their early years is very true. That would mean that their current training with volume was a waste of time which is far from the truth.  The over whelming amount of bodybuilding champs used volume. There are very few true intensity champs like Yates. The out right lies about champs that used HIT is just criminal.

you mean very false, right?

[gracie bjj]

i trained since i was like 12-24 and didnt start juicin untill recently at 25 lol


at 22 i was still full blown delusional, had some lying juicers tell me if i kept it up i'd be huge by 30

i was like "oh sweeeeet"


then no still no progress the next three years

and i was like

"the fuck"

u did the right thing, u trained natural for alot of years which is cool. id like to see more guys stay natural as long as possible than if they decide to juice thats their choice n thats okay.

[anabolichalo]

u did the right thing, u trained natural for alot of years which is cool. id like to see more guys stay natural as long as possible than if they decide to juice thats their choice n thats okay.

no i really regret it lol

those days i trained so fucking hard

i should have had roids back then

and big muscles are more fun to have as an adolescent who isnt just a drone in the daily routine of working


same old story....


but i'm glad i got the finasteride shit figured out before jumping on dbol and winstrol and nuking my hair

[cephissus]

In it's most simple terms a bodybuilder's muscle is a strength endurance one. If getting stronger was the only magic bullet we would all be training for sets of one rep after warm up so we could get stronger. To make a muscle bigger you have to train it to keep up with muscular endurance.

Doing say 4 sets of 10 failing at 8 reps on the last set will get every fiber. A muscle fiber is completely on or off. Doing one set to failure doesn't mean you hit every fiber. It just means you couldn't complete another rep with the fibers available. Two sets is better than one set. Three sets is better than two but it's a diminishing return.

The argument that all bodybuilders trained for strength in their early years is very true. That would mean that their current training with volume was a waste of time which is far from the truth.  The over whelming amount of bodybuilding champs used volume. There are very few true intensity champs like Yates. The out right lies about champs that used HIT is just criminal.

the training doesn't matter at all, unless you either hurt yourself or don't tax yourself whatsoever.

see pyrros dimas... bber legs, but probably did mostly sets of 1

[anabolichalo]

the training doesn't matter at all, unless you either hurt yourself or don't tax yourself whatsoever.

see pyrros dimas... bber legs, but probably did mostly sets of 1

ridiculous exageration

he has well developed legs but not close to a pro bber

[cephissus]

ridiculous exageration

he has well developed legs but not close to a pro bber

you compare him to jay cutler, who outweighs him by like 100 lbs?  compare him to a bber who weighs 180

[anabolichalo]

you compare him to jay cutler, who outweighs him by like 100 lbs?  compare him to a bber who weighs 180

that would be pointless because weightlifters weight distribution is totall bottom heavy etc etc etc funcitonailty blabla

comparing by height would make more sense


in that case

[cephissus]

has never done a bench press in his life, probably

[cephissus]

that would be pointless because weightlifters weight distribution is totall bottom heavy etc etc etc funcitonailty blabla

comparing by height would make more sense


in that case

lol, branch's dose is probably like 3x pyrros', or more.  compare him to a fake natural like layne, or ogus, this is what i had in mind.

[dj181]

dude, with all due respect, when are you going to see the fucking light, man?

you've been harping on "progressive overload" for years now.  what has this gotten you?  have you posted recent pictures?  i don't mean to be rude, but it's just mind-boggling how stubbornly you insist on the importance hard training when it seems like you've been spinning your wheels from the beginning... and now you're using steroids, too?  any results?

that's true i do harp on about progressive overload but the funny thing is even though i went on and on about it i WAS NOT able to add weight to the bar even on roids at the beginning (hence the reason why my muscles didn't get bigger) lol

so i didn't gain anything coz my fucking training loads stayed the same

not so long ago i took my dumbbell row from 90 pounds for 15 reps to 125 pounds for 10 reps and my lats and delts did indeed get bigger (i sent pics of this gain to mr. nobody, boraccho, and njflex, so they can testify to this)

just recently my weighted push-up training loads have went up and my pecs are thicker and fuller, and again mr. n, boraccho, and njflex will see this on weds and they can verify what i say is true

the funny thing is, i'm bigger now on less roids

but i attribute this to the fact that i overcame the fear of re-injuring a bad shoulder injury that i had a few years ago, which allowed me to push harder to increase my training loads and also to an improvement in "diet"

yeah, ok... i was a complete d!ckhead bout "diet" and i paid the price for it with my goddamn stubborness, but now i'm finally starting to see the light

[anabolichalo]

has never done a bench press in his life, probably

where do people get this idea? it is totally wrong


professional olympic lifters do bench presses, rows, curls....


how do i know? from watching their training videos and talking to a former national weightlifting coach of ukraine



this bullshit must end once and for all

[anabolichalo]

lol, branch's dose is probably like 3x pyrros', or more.  compare him to a fake natural like layne, or ogus, this is what i had in mind.

where do you get this idea?

the greek weightlifters are notorious for grotesque PED abuse

they use tons of AAS, HGH and insulin

i dont want to sound like an asshole

but this and your former wrong idea on their training is typical falsehoods people believe without good reason


VERY VERY WRONG


hope this helps

peace

[TigerStripes]

I think muscle growth when lifting is mostly about how you contract the muscles during lifts. How you squeeze the reps. All about mind/muscle connection.

My homeboy kai greene said the same thing, and he knows his stuff.

[cephissus]

where do people get this idea? it is totally wrong


professional olympic lifters do bench presses, rows, curls....


how do i know? from watching their training videos and talking to a former national weightlifting coach of ukraine



this bullshit must end once and for all

i know it's an exaggeration, but the point is, give him a better set of arms and what you have is basically a fake-natural bodybuilder.  yet his training is vastly different.

[cephissus]

where do you get this idea?

the greek weightlifters are notorious for grotesque PED abuse

they use tons of AAS, HGH and insulin

i dont want to sound like an asshole

but this and your former wrong idea on their training is typical falsehoods people believe without good reason


VERY VERY WRONG


hope this helps

peace

you think a top 10 mr olympia competitor and a weightlifter are on similar doses of PED?

[anabolichalo]

i know it's an exaggeration, but the point is, give him a better set of arms and what you have is basically a fake-natural bodybuilder.  yet his training is vastly different.

yes but he is taking enormously more juice than a typical fake natural

so this proves weightlifting training is a very juice-inefficient way of building size


no wonder, as it is mostly neurological adaptation and they get most of their juice effects this way

[anabolichalo]

you think a top 10 mr olympia competitor and a weightlifter are on similar doses of PED?

it would probably be comparable

don't be fooled by the innocent appearance of a guy like pyrros dimas, what he does to the weights is inhuman performance

[cephissus]

yes but he is taking enormously more juice than a typical fake natural

what makes you think that?

here's "natural" kiyoshi moody:



legs not too much better than pyrros, i bet

[anabolichalo]

what makes you think that?

the same things that make getbig think they know what the ifbb pros are taking

rumors basically, insiders, whatever

[Option D]

what causes a muscle to grow from training

why are we here

you need both

[anabolichalo]

what makes you think that?

here's "natural" kiyoshi moody:



legs not too much better than pyrros, i bet

haha oh shit this passes for a fake natural?

i was thinking something much smaller

[cephissus]

i've watched a lot of training videos on weightlifters.  i rarely see them bench or anything like that, but they probably just don't record these exercises as much.

i know the chinese lifters incorporate a huge amount of retardedly worthless exercises, including all sorts of random abs stuff and funny gimmick shit nobody even would think to do over here.  on the other hand you have the bulgarian style which is to do like 5 exercises only, ever.

basically, over the years, i've come to the conclusion it's all a bunch of shit.  there is practically no factor that is consistent across all the various samples.  i've even heard of a guy who had 34 inch quads by doing 135 on squat for 8 minute sets, nothing else.  i tried a version of this for myself, using 115 and my legs got bigger, if anything (definitely didnt shrink).  far from "usual bodybuilding" fare and could be explained away 100 different ways by the dogmatists, but in the end these people usually haven't tried it for themselves.  how can one even really measure and test all the different theories?  you can't, in practice, so all the hardcore HITers or volumers or doggcrappers or Tnationers or whomever are basically mindless zealots.

[anabolichalo]

i've watched a lot of training videos on weightlifters.  i rarely see them bench or anything like that, but they probably just don't record these exercises as much.

i know the chinese lifters incorporate a huge amount of retardedly worthless exercises, including all sorts of random abs stuff and funny gimmick shit nobody even would think to do over here.  on the other hand you have the bulgarian style which is to do like 5 exercises only, ever.

basically, over the years, i've come to the conclusion it's all a bunch of shit.  there is practically no factor that is consistent across all the various samples.  i've even heard of a guy who had 34 inch quads by doing 135 on squat for 8 minute sets, nothing else.  i tried a version of this for myself, using 115 and my legs got bigger, if anything (definitely didnt shrink).  far from "usual bodybuilding" fare and could be explained away 100 different ways by the dogmatists, but in the end these people usually haven't tried it for themselves.  how can one even really measure and test all the different theories?  you can't, in practice, so all the hardcore HITers or volumers or doggcrappers or Tnationers or whomever are basically mindless zealots.

the chinese training thing you mention is a more realistic idea of a professional weightlifters training


weightlifters do much more than the lifts, they run, do calisthenics and a lot of assistance exercises


how do you think some of them are so muscular all over, not from just doing those few lifts that are all legs


but you are definitely right with the "there is no system" idea, in fact it's a very enlightened profound realization