is getting a pump really related to stimulating hypertrophy?

[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

[jr]

Robert Foerstemann does a combination of heavy weights low reps, and lighter loads with lots of reps. They key is to get stronger with low reps and than translate that strength to be able to perform higher reps with a reletively heavy loads. Elite leg genetics also helps.

i.e someone who can squat 150kg for 20 reps will have bigger legs that the same person who can only do 120kg for 20. The easiest way to increase your 20 rep max is to increase your strength in the low rep ranges 1 - 5 reps. If the 120kg for 20 reps guy increases his 1RM from 150kg to 180kg, then 120kg will feel lighter and then the 20RM can be increase which will lead to hypertrophy etc.

This probably matters less and less the more PEDs you take.

A good training routine for naturals or low PED usage is full body workouts with compound movements, on one workout day try to work on increasing the 5 rep max range, take a few rest days and in the next workout work on increasing the 10 -20 rep max. So heavy (strength) days, rest a few days, light (hypertrophy) day, rest a few days, back to heavy etc. A synergistic effect will be occuring between the two workouts.

Blasting each body part once a week bodybuilding high volume splits doesn't do shit for me except make me sore all week. You need lots of PEDS for this to work.

[anabolichalo]

i googled "starting strength" again for pics


lol

[anabolichalo]

[anabolichalo]

[jr]

has nothing to do with steroids etc.nothing.


theres similiar "phenomenon", some serbian canoo athlete, his arms are quite something.must be from canoo rowing

Pro cyclists can't go crazy on the PEDs like pro bodybuilders due to random drug testing. He'd be on low dosages of fast acting compounds plus gh peps.

[cephissus]

gal, are you saying this guy was born with crazy arms?

i've always wondered why i always seem to see guys, even naturals, with crazy legs, but never chest, arms, back etc.  i don't think i've ever seen even close to the seemingly natural variation in legs (thighs and calves) in any other muscle group.

[anabolichalo]

not impressed

[jr]

They cyclist legs are more impressive considering 10 times less anabolics were used to build them. Also Ronnie Coleman trained heavy as fuck in his videos.

[anabolichalo]

They cyclist legs are more impressive considering 10 times less anabolics were used to build them. Also Ronnie Coleman trained heavy as fuck in his videos.

do you actually believe this bullshit?

that would mean he is 10 times more responsive to anabolic than ronnie coleman, the freakiest bb of all time 

[oldtimer1]

you mean very false, right?

No, true. Most bodybuilders in their early years trained for strength. Arnold and Franco power lifted. Sergio Oliva was an Olympic weight lifter. Mentzer was squatting 500 pounds at 16 years old. Zane power lifted in his youth. Chris Dickerson competed in the AAU Mr. America contest in his early years where you had to Olympic lift to get your athletic points. Samir the lion of Lebanon was an Olympic lifter. I could go on.

[oldtimer1]

Those bike sprint racers have incredible legs. I wonder how many reps of spinning the pedals they put in during a training session?

[jr]

do you actually believe this bullshit?

that would mean he is 10 times more responsive to anabolic than ronnie coleman, the freakiest bb of all time 

Do you really think that a pro cyclist who is randomly drug tested year round would be taking bodybuilder drug stacks and dosages. That would be career suicide. They are a bit smarter than that.

[anabolichalo]

Do you really think that a pro cyclist who is randomly drug tested year round would be taking bodybuilder drug stacks and dosages. That would be career suicide. They are a bit smarter than that.

pro cycling is the cleanest sport of sports

[cephissus]

here's a theory i've wondered about:

suppose if you lift weights "hard enough" an "all or nothing" hypertrophy-inducing signal gets sent to your muscles.  how effective this signal is depends on genetics and hormone levels, but not how hard you lifted (hence, "all or nothing") beyond the "hard enough" threshold, of course.

whether high reps/low weight or low reps/high weight both could get the signal going.  bodybuilders ended up adopting high reps/low weight because they could trigger the signal this way without hurting their joints as much.  smart bodybuilders (lee haney, vince taylor) realized they could trigger the signal even without lifting that much weight at all, and ignored all the theories of "no pain, no gain" etc.  they discovered certain muscle sensations that indicated the signal was sent, and sought those ("listening to the body") instead of "going to failure" or "shredding the fibers" -- alternate theories which led to injury anyway, and were simply excessive.

[jr]

pro cycling is the cleanest sport of sports

They take LOW DOSAGES to evade getting caught, eg Lance Armstrong and teammates took oral andriol which has a short half life and also transdermal patches, very low dosages.

Floyd Landis was unlucky being tested right after the race, test to epi test ratio out of whack due to transdermal patch. If he was tested a few hours later he would be in the clear.

[jr]

here's a theory i've wondered about:

suppose if you lift weights "hard enough" an "all or nothing" hypertrophy-inducing signal gets sent to your muscles.  how effective this signal is depends on genetics and hormone levels, but not how hard you lifted (hence, "all or nothing") beyond the "hard enough" threshold, of course.

whether high reps/low weight or low reps/high weight both could get the signal going.  bodybuilders ended up adopting high reps/low weight because they could trigger the signal this way without hurting their joints as much.  smart bodybuilders (lee haney, vince taylor) realized they could trigger the signal even without lifting that much weight at all, and ignored all the theories of "no pain, no gain" etc.  they discovered certain muscle sensations that indicated the signal was sent, and sought those ("listening to the body") instead of "going to failure" or "shredding the fibers" -- alternate theories which led to injury anyway, and were simply excessive.

From wikipedia

"Myofibrillar vs. Sarcoplasmic hypertrophy

In the bodybuilding and fitness community and even in some academic books skeletal muscle hypertrophy is described as being in one of two types: Sarcoplasmic or myofibrillar. According to this theory, during sarcoplasmic hypertrophy, the volume of sarcoplasmic fluid in the muscle cell increases with no accompanying increase in muscular strength, whereas during myofibrillar hypertrophy, actin and myosin contractile proteins increase in number and add to muscular strength as well as a small increase in the size of the muscle. Sarcoplasmic hypertrophy is characteristic of the muscles of certain bodybuilders while myofibrillar hypertrophy is characteristic of Olympic weightlifters.[15] These two forms of adaptations rarely occur completely independently of one another; one can experience a large increase in fluid with a slight increase in proteins, a large increase in proteins with a small increase in fluid, or a relatively balanced combination of the two."


This is impying that for optimal hypertrophy one should use a combination of low reps higher weight and high reps lower weight.

[cephissus]

From wikipedia

"Myofibrillar vs. Sarcoplasmic hypertrophy

In the bodybuilding and fitness community and even in some academic books skeletal muscle hypertrophy is described as being in one of two types: Sarcoplasmic or myofibrillar. According to this theory, during sarcoplasmic hypertrophy, the volume of sarcoplasmic fluid in the muscle cell increases with no accompanying increase in muscular strength, whereas during myofibrillar hypertrophy, actin and myosin contractile proteins increase in number and add to muscular strength as well as a small increase in the size of the muscle. Sarcoplasmic hypertrophy is characteristic of the muscles of certain bodybuilders while myofibrillar hypertrophy is characteristic of Olympic weightlifters.[15] These two forms of adaptations rarely occur completely independently of one another; one can experience a large increase in fluid with a slight increase in proteins, a large increase in proteins with a small increase in fluid, or a relatively balanced combination of the two."


This is impying that for optimal hypertrophy one should use a combination of low reps higher weight and high reps lower weight.

people conclude that "sarcoplasmic hypertrophy" = high reps, low weight while "myofibrillar hypertrophy" = low reps, high weight, while i somehow doubt that's the case.  i looked up the source for citation 15, "science and practice of strength training" which seems to imply this, and funny enough it's a book i always wanted to read, and had on my amazon wish list.  i really wonder how they came to this conclusion... maybe they sliced open munzer and noticed a lot of liquid pouring out?

[anabolichalo]

i think training as hard as possible is more beneficial for powerlifting than bb

[dj181]

i think training as hard as possible is more beneficial for powerlifting than bb

you've definitely put on size recently, so... have your training loads increased?

[anabolichalo]

you've definitely put on size recently, so... have your training loads increased?

i dont really know

decline bench press definitely went up

military press as well

squats is still not close to my natural best

but i didnt squat for months and months

and when natural i lived and breathed "the magical exercise"

also quit deadlifting


all in all i'm doing a lot more volume

not really concerned with the weight too much, just take a weight i strugle with for good volume sets with proper form


definitely not adding microweights etc like i used to in the past


 

[dj181]

so have you put most of your new size on your upper body then?

[anabolichalo]

so have you put most of your new size on your upper body then?

i guess but i did gain 1cm on my calves