Training for decades,are you still re-inventing the wheel in the gym?

[pellius]

Vince, Dr. Walczak told me himself that if you are training and eating properly and natural you will max out in about three years with about 80% of those gains coming within the first year. You can play with body composition and gain a bit or lose it bit just by eating by overall real qualitative and quantitative gains comes to a halt.

Your body does not want large muscles and for good reason. Muscles, even at rest, require constant metabolic support. Unlike fat, which is just stored energy and something your body always wants and has a seemingly limitless capacity to store, supporting muscle is a cost to the body and given the slightest reason it will get rid of it straight away. Put your arm in a cast and your muscles shrivel away. The fat will stay or even increase depending on caloric expenditure but muscle is gone. And you start to lose it as you get older no matter what you do. You talk such nonsense when you say age doesn't matter. Every human being that has ever existed that continues lifetime serious bbing has proven that. Robby Robinson and Tony Pearson are gifted bberings that have never lost the desire to train and have incredible, mindblowing, physiques FOR THEIR AGE. They are nothing like how they were when they were in their twenties and thirties.

You knew Dr. Walczak. This was his world. He worked with all the top bbers including supplying anabolic hormones right out of his office. I saw his cabinet with rows of ciba dbols tabs and vials of Organon Deca.

Again, he was a real, legit medical doctor and knew the human body very well and how it responds to  training, nutrition, and anabolic hormones. And he knew bodybuilding and real bodybuilders and what it took to get on stage and win. Arnold and Franco went to him for a reason.

He even said he could make you a champ. Who knows what would have happened if you took him up on his offer.

[Vince B]

The good doctor to the stars knew about anabolic steroids but was not an expert in hypertrophy.

Explain this: why does a muscle get sore in a bodybuilder already training very hard.....he does something different and experiences DOMS the next few days. How come that happens? 

[Surfboard 1717]

 

The good doctor to the stars knew about anabolic steroids but was not an expert in hypertrophy.

Explain this: why does a muscle get sore in a bodybuilder already training very hard.....he does something different and experiences DOMS the next few days. How come that happens?  

I'm in the Queensland area looking to hook up.

This was posted by 1 of admins who loves Basil , OBW I am in Sydney 

[heenok]

There's next to no additional growth after your 1st few years if you are training hard, only growth from there is drug gains which will run out and have be took to death stack levels to carry on growing

There's no disputing this, everything else is delusion and fairy tales ...

There is. Its just incredibly slow. You can make gains after 10 years of hard training if you use progressive overload. Obviously those gains wont be really noticeable.

[falco]

Regarding arms, i recently came to the conclusion that using shitty partial range of motion and big weights gives you real size. Full range of motion and minor poundages will only get you so far.

[a_pupil]

it's awesome to once again read big man imbasille's delusional ravings again 

once you've been training a decade+, it's better just to train three times a week with just enough volume/intensity to maintain without messing up your joints.


injury prevention is better than going ott with excessive volume and intensity. the loss of consistency of training from injury will be worse in the long run than training at a comfortable level. I realised this when one of my elbows got effed. The cure was cutting down from 5 days a week to 3, keeping reps in the 8-12 range by lowering the weight, and replacing rest pause/low rest sets with 2-3 minute rest periods between sets. Also sticking to the exercises that are better for my body and not trying to do every exercise in existence to "hit the muscle from all angles".

plus one should do his best to stay lean and focus more on health.

[local hero]

There is. Its just incredibly slow. You can make gains after 10 years of hard training if you use progressive overload. Obviously those gains wont be really noticeable.

Well obviously...


That's the point im making, grind your joints into dust or release that's the size that your going  to be, maintain what you've got for as long as possible is the best goal...

[Al Doggity]

If one has been training for decades properly and drug free there are no more significant muscular gains to be made. So after that, it's a matter of maintaining or desperately trying to gain grams of muscle.

Strength is a different story.

I didn't really say anything about training "gains" being limited to weight gain, though. Strength is important, but I don't agree that you're only in maintenance mode after year 3 or 5 or whatever.  I'm  at about year 20 in my weightlifting habit, and even without a  dramatic change in weight, my arms are much larger and more defined than they were 5 years ago. Last year I started working out legs twice a week- obsessively and consistently, whereas it used to be the workout I would skip if I just didn't have the the time or inclination- and they look much better than they ever have. My wife has a pic of us on vacation 6 years ago on her facebook page and so many people have commented on how different I look, even though I think I weighed more in that pic and was pretty muscular. My upper body taper is noticeably more dramatic and my shoulders have changed a lot. I'm not exactly Phil Heath, but they have that rounder, cannon ball look now as well as an improved upper chest and that didn't start to happen until recently. They used to look more like this:





Even without dramatic changes in weight, your body still changes.

[a_pupil]

I didn't really say anything about training "gains" being limited to weight gain, though. Strength is important, but I don't agree that you're only in maintenance mode after year 3 or 5 or whatever.  I'm  at about year 20 in my weightlifting habit, and even without a  dramatic change in weight, my arms are much larger and more defined than they were 5 years ago. Last year I started working out legs twice a week- obsessively and consistently, whereas it used to be the workout I would skip if I just didn't have the the time or inclination- and they look much better than they ever have. My wife has a pic of us on vacation 6 years ago on her facebook page and so many people have commented on how different I look, even though I think I weighed more in that pic and was pretty muscular. My upper body taper is noticeably more dramatic and my shoulders have changed a lot. I'm not exactly Phil Heath, but they have that rounder, cannon ball look now as well as an improved upper chest and that didn't start to happen until recently. They used to look more like this:





Even without dramatic changes in weight, your body still changes.

what you're saying is true. but I think the point is that past a certain stage it's needless to go all out like in the beginning stage. the look will change and improve but very slowly. being able to maintain a consistent training routine over the years will reap more reward than going extra hard and risking joint damage.

edit: maybe when you're hit with joint problems/niggles like i've been, it changes your outlook on things 

[Al Doggity]

what you're saying is true. but I think the point is that past a certain stage it's needless to go all out like in the beginning stage. the look will change and improve but very slowly. being able to maintain a consistent training routine over the years will reap more reward than going extra hard and risking joint damage.

edit: maybe when you're hit with joint problems/niggles like i've been, it changes your outlook on things 

In my first post I said this:

Part of me feels like just consistently working out is all anybody needs, no matter their goals.

   Threads evolve on their own, but my initial point wasn't that you should be killing yourself with each workout. It was more or less about constantly trying new stuff even after years in the gym. Crazy stuff like buying a nautilus machine and converting it to do triceps exercises.

[Vince B]

In my first post I said this:

   Threads evolve on their own, but my initial point wasn't that you should be killing yourself with each workout. It was more or less about constantly trying new stuff even after years in the gym. Crazy stuff like buying a nautilus machine and converting it to do triceps exercises.

Logic insists that muscles must have a reason to grow larger. Providing the reason is what bodybuilding is all about. Things get difficult when the intermediate stage is reached: 16 to 17 1/2 inch arms. After a certain amount of hypertrophy is obtained how does one generate more? Therein lies the question. Most trainees don't go beyond plateaus to any impressive degree. So gains will slow to a stop. What then? What triggers more hypertrophy? Well, broscience suggests to train harder. What exactly is that? We end up with platitudes instead of good information. That is why the pros are always in demand for seminars. The same questions get asked over and over. What is so difficult about maximum hypertrophy? Clearly we have to keep doing something extraordinary to progress in the size game. Eventually this pursuit becomes too difficult or time consuming so is abandoned. Cries of no drugs or no genetics are heard all around the world by hapless trainees on plateaus. Even if good information is given it can't be accepted because of pre-existing beliefs and practices. Therefore these discussions are literally a waste of time. No one will change anything they are doing. Obviously, repeating the same thing over and over and expecting a different result is the stuff of lunacy.

[oldtimer1]

All I know is that I take training advice from champs with  the advisement that most look like crap without drugs. Where is their training knowledge without the drugs? Apparently their guru training knowledge and work ethic is of no use without the syringe. 

[TRIX]

Yes I have wasted all this time being a natural twink, tho I look very young for age

[Al Doggity]

Logic insists that muscles must have a reason to grow larger. Providing the reason is what bodybuilding is all about. Things get difficult when the intermediate stage is reached: 16 to 17 1/2 inch arms. After a certain amount of hypertrophy is obtained how does one generate more? Therein lies the question. Most trainees don't go beyond plateaus to any impressive degree. So gains will slow to a stop. What then? What triggers more hypertrophy? Well, broscience suggests to train harder. What exactly is that? We end up with platitudes instead of good information. That is why the pros are always in demand for seminars. The same questions get asked over and over. What is so difficult about maximum hypertrophy? Clearly we have to keep doing something extraordinary to progress in the size game. Eventually this pursuit becomes too difficult or time consuming so is abandoned. Cries of no drugs or no genetics are heard all around the world by hapless trainees on plateaus. Even if good information is given it can't be accepted because of pre-existing beliefs and practices. Therefore these discussions are literally a waste of time. No one will change anything they are doing. Obviously, repeating the same thing over and over and expecting a different result is the stuff of lunacy.

As a superior alternative to reverse grip pushdowns, you suggested buying a used nautilus machine and converting it. Ignore the surface lunacy of this for a moment and look at the meat of the matter: what is the fundamental difference between the two that's supposed to trigger maximum hypertrophy? The movements aren't drastically different and there are any number of exercises you can do with prefab gym equipment that mimics your "superior" version even more closely. So what is supposed to be the groundbreaking principal here that is supposed to trigger maximum hypertrophy?

[Vince B]

As a superior alternative to reverse grip pushdowns, you suggested buying a used nautilus machine and converting it. Ignore the surface lunacy of this for a moment and look at the meat of the matter: what is the fundamental difference between the two that's supposed to trigger maximum hypertrophy? The movements aren't drastically different and there are any number of exercises you can do with prefab gym equipment that mimics your "superior" version even more closely. So what is supposed to be the groundbreaking principal here that is supposed to trigger maximum hypertrophy?

I have found that pressdowns are not effective after a certain arm size is reached. Can't say this is true for everyone else.

The original Nautilus Triceps machine has the user in a weak seated position. By modifying the machine it becomes more effective.

First the elbows are adjacent to the head and cause pre-stretching in the triceps which is a benefit.

Second, a straight body position is used which allows much more force to be used.

Third, the karate chop hand position isn't as hard on the forearm connective tissue.

Fourth, the upper arms cannot move outward or downward so provide more tension to the triceps than other movements.

There are not many excellent triceps machines out there. Perhaps Medx made the best one. It provided increased resistance near the end of the movement.

[pellius]

The good doctor to the stars knew about anabolic steroids but was not an expert in hypertrophy.

Explain this: why does a muscle get sore in a bodybuilder already training very hard.....he does something different and experiences DOMS the next few days. How come that happens? 

That's the answer. Doing something different that your body is not accustom to.

Re., Dr. Walckzak: that's why people don't accept you as an expert. Whenever someone disagrees with you, you just dismiss the source. No evidence or proof needed. The study which shows you can't grow in DOMS and presents evidence and empirical proof of this claim is just dismissed with you offering nothing, no rebuttal in return. You have never conducted a scientific study on anything.

Dr. Walczak made his living working with bodybuilders and has countless examples of success with some of the best bodybuilders in the era -- including Arnold. But you just blithely dismiss him as not being an expert om hypertrophy. How do you know this? And what success do you have compared to Walczak? In fact, what success do you have in grooming a champion compared to bigmc do you have?

I know first hand a person who was trying to make his way in the bbing world and training at our gym and was already on hormones before he saw Walczak. Dr. Walczak prescribed less hormones to this person than he was taking on his own and tweaked both his diet and training and the gains started coming. This person, J.J. Marsh, never made it to the top of the top but he did improve into a very advance bber. I think he even made it to the Olympia stage.

Don't you see why people see you as arrogant and condescending. Compare you to Dr. Walczak. One a medical doctor who made his living developing successful bbers. Again, I want to emphasize "medical doctor" who specialize by his own interest and choosing the science, in so far as you can call it a science, of bbing. Then there's you who has never ever been successful in producing one advance bber using your theory of DOMS. You've even tried and fail on yourself. Yet you just dismiss the doctor with your bias opinion.

JJ Marsh:

[Vince B]

That's the answer. Doing something different that your body is not accustom to.

Re., Dr. Walckzak: that's why people don't accept you as an expert. Whenever someone disagrees with you, you just dismiss the source. No evidence or proof needed. The study which shows you can't grow in DOMS and presents evidence and empirical proof of this claim is just dismissed with you offering nothing, no rebuttal in return. You have never conducted a scientific study on anything.

Dr. Walczak made his living working with bodybuilders and has countless examples of success with some of the best bodybuilders in the era -- including Arnold. But you just blithely dismiss him as not being an expert om hypertrophy. How do you know this? And what success do you have compared to Walczak? In fact, what success do you have in grooming a champion compared to bigmc do you have?

I know first hand a person who was trying to make his way in the bbing world and training at our gym and was already on hormones before he saw Walczak. Dr. Walczak prescribed less hormones to this person than he was taking on his own and tweaked both his diet and training and the gains started coming. This person, J.J. Marsh, never made it to the top of the top but he did improve into a very advance bber. I think he even made it to the Olympia stage.

Don't you see why people see you as arrogant and condescending. Compare you to Dr. Walczak. One a medical doctor who made his living developing successful bbers. Again, I want to emphasize "medical doctor" who specialize by his own interest and choosing the science, in so far as you can call it a science, of bbing. Then there's you who has never ever been successful in producing one advance bber using your theory of DOMS. You've even tried and fail on yourself. Yet you just dismiss the doctor with your bias opinion.

JJ Marsh:

You've got nothing there, Pellius. Why not do an experiment with your body and test my theory? You might be surprised.

I can dismiss that study because it doesn't seem relevant to the population of serious bodybuilders.

Walczak was an expert in bodybuilding hormones but wasn't a bodybuilder himself that I recall. I doubt someone who isn't a BB

would know what to do re training. Of course, he could have hung around gyms and learned that way. So let us give him the benefit

of the doubt but I don't recall he had a new theory of hypertrophy.

[Simple Simon]

The muscle responds to intensity not weight and it doesn't matter what exercise you do just do things you like doing and feel good

[Vince B]

The muscle responds to intensity not weight and it doesn't matter what exercise you do just do things you like doing and feel good

Check Hypertrophy Specific Training. They claim the muscles respond to changes in resistance as well.

When I have had a hard workout I don't feel good at all! But it feels good to feel that bad.


http://hypertrophyspecific.com/hst_index.html

[Tennisballz]

I didn't really say anything about training "gains" being limited to weight gain, though. Strength is important, but I don't agree that you're only in maintenance mode after year 3 or 5 or whatever.  I'm  at about year 20 in my weightlifting habit, and even without a  dramatic change in weight, my arms are much larger and more defined than they were 5 years ago. Last year I started working out legs twice a week- obsessively and consistently, whereas it used to be the workout I would skip if I just didn't have the the time or inclination- and they look much better than they ever have. My wife has a pic of us on vacation 6 years ago on her facebook page and so many people have commented on how different I look, even though I think I weighed more in that pic and was pretty muscular. My upper body taper is noticeably more dramatic and my shoulders have changed a lot. I'm not exactly Phil Heath, but they have that rounder, cannon ball look now as well as an improved upper chest and that didn't start to happen until recently. They used to look more like this:



Even without dramatic changes in weight, your body still changes.

Most of the research I've seen says the natural can gain around 30 pounds of muscle over their lifetime, most of it coming in the first 3 years.  So if you gained 25 pounds in the first 3 years, you still have 5 in the tank that you have to grind out over the rest of your life.  Perhaps you have just slowly gained that 5. 

[Simple Simon]

Check Hypertrophy Specific Training. They claim the muscles respond to changes in resistance as well.

When I have had a hard workout I don't feel good at all! But it feels good to feel that bad.


http://hypertrophyspecific.com/hst_index.html

stfu gimmick

[The True Adonis]

That's the answer. Doing something different that your body is not accustom to.

Re., Dr. Walckzak: that's why people don't accept you as an expert. Whenever someone disagrees with you, you just dismiss the source. No evidence or proof needed. The study which shows you can't grow in DOMS and presents evidence and empirical proof of this claim is just dismissed with you offering nothing, no rebuttal in return. You have never conducted a scientific study on anything.

Dr. Walczak made his living working with bodybuilders and has countless examples of success with some of the best bodybuilders in the era -- including Arnold. But you just blithely dismiss him as not being an expert om hypertrophy. How do you know this? And what success do you have compared to Walczak? In fact, what success do you have in grooming a champion compared to bigmc do you have?

I know first hand a person who was trying to make his way in the bbing world and training at our gym and was already on hormones before he saw Walczak. Dr. Walczak prescribed less hormones to this person than he was taking on his own and tweaked both his diet and training and the gains started coming. This person, J.J. Marsh, never made it to the top of the top but he did improve into a very advance bber. I think he even made it to the Olympia stage.

Don't you see why people see you as arrogant and condescending. Compare you to Dr. Walczak. One a medical doctor who made his living developing successful bbers. Again, I want to emphasize "medical doctor" who specialize by his own interest and choosing the science, in so far as you can call it a science, of bbing. Then there's you who has never ever been successful in producing one advance bber using your theory of DOMS. You've even tried and fail on yourself. Yet you just dismiss the doctor with your bias opinion.

JJ Marsh:

Hey Pellius,
Interesting about Dr. Walczak.  Do you have any idea of the training routines he advocated? 

[The True Adonis]

The muscle responds to intensity not weight and it doesn't matter what exercise you do just do things you like doing and feel good

Not for me and I have done some of the most intense workouts I have found, 20 sets of 20 on squats for many sets, German Volume Training, Smolov, Routines from books, Arnolds laborious routine, and on and on.


And I would find that I would actually regress in terms of strength, gain, etc.   I would get weaker and weaker.  For me, its all about LOW sets, HEAVY weight.  Its crazy when I start doing that, while eating the same calories as previous training, what happens.  Bodyweight goes up, bodyfat goes down, strength goes up.


Volume is pure shit for me.  Could be because I am lifetime natural, who knows, but your style of training does not work for me at all if you are advocating light weight, higher sets, multiple exercises.

[kepler2008]

JJ Marsh 1991, (16") :

[Vince B]

Pellius tries to be fair dinkum in this discussion. Unfortunately he misses the mark. Let me explain.

Bodybuilding seems to be a simple thing. You lift weights and over time your muscles get bigger.

This happens to almost everyone. Many train hard but few succeed in winning titles or getting big.

There seems to be many paths to size because even today there is no agreement. Not even in

basic principles.

Pellius is capable of reading studies done in exercise science. He embraces the results of one small

study and uses it to criticize my theory of hypertrophy. Another 'test' he uses is to demand who has

built more muscle using my method? He fails to consider the long experience I have had both in the gym

and reading about bodybuilding and exercise science. I just didn't stumble upon what I propose. No, I saw

the light by doing things in the gym. My own experiment. I was astonished by what I found. I wanted to

share my insight so wrote two articles for IronMan magazine that were published in 2000 and 2001.

I call my theory the DOMS method. Not a single person on Getbig has tried this method. That would be

an easy way to test the theory. Train one calf conventionally and the other using the DOMS method. After a few

weeks measure them and see if there is any difference.

The other thing that perplexes me in how come no one else can see what I see re training? Well, we all hang

onto our hallowed theories and will take them to our graves instead of changing or abandoning them.

I ask Pellius: Are your muscles huge and have you tried to get them huge? If not then you are not a real

bodybuilder. Cast off doing all manner of crazy things like martial arts. Let your bigger muscles ward off any

aggressive behaviour. Fear no man!



I took the photo of Kai in Melbourne in 2009.