Author Topic: Matt C. Cycle Update.  (Read 149409 times)

wes

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 66344
  • What Dire Mishap Has Befallen Thee
Re: Matt C. Cycle Update.
« Reply #2050 on: September 16, 2022, 05:14:13 PM »
Two of the worst responders (Matt and bhanks) to PEDS to ever Grace this forum, yet given bodybuilding advice to each other.

Only on getbig :D :D :D :D
;D

ThisisOverload

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 7505
Re: Matt C. Cycle Update.
« Reply #2051 on: September 16, 2022, 05:25:18 PM »
Two of the worst responders (Matt and bhanks) to PEDS to ever Grace this forum, yet given bodybuilding advice to each other.

Only on getbig :D :D :D :D

The two most narcissistic know-it-alls we have.

It's funny to watch.

chaos

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 57904
  • Ron "There is no freedom of speech here" Avidan
Re: Matt C. Cycle Update.
« Reply #2052 on: September 16, 2022, 05:47:41 PM »

This gimpy ass fool is doing lifting videos now? This is going to be classic! ;D
Liar!!!!Filt!!!!

MCWAY

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 19263
  • Getbig!
Re: Matt C. Cycle Update.
« Reply #2053 on: September 16, 2022, 05:57:56 PM »
That's cool that it worked.  BTN presses are awful IMO, but I remember doing them all the same.

Probably why I've had two clavicle excision surgeries, lol.

Another way I made sure the barbell press hit mainly my side delts is to make sure the seat is STRAIGHT UP, not at a 10o angle. That (and initially doing laterals) was why I stopped doing BTNs. I never really had any shoulder issues from them. Then again, when I mainly did them was in my beginner stage, when all I had was cement weights.

wes

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 66344
  • What Dire Mishap Has Befallen Thee
Re: Matt C. Cycle Update.
« Reply #2054 on: September 16, 2022, 06:38:09 PM »
Another way I made sure the barbell press hit mainly my side delts is to make sure the seat is STRAIGHT UP, not at a 10o angle. That (and initially doing laterals) was why I stopped doing BTNs. I never really had any shoulder issues from them. Then again, when I mainly did them was in my beginner stage, when all I had was cement weights.
McWay,if you haven`t already give Bradford Presses a try.......I swear by them.

MCWAY

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 19263
  • Getbig!
Re: Matt C. Cycle Update.
« Reply #2055 on: September 16, 2022, 06:47:26 PM »
McWay,if you haven`t already give Bradford Presses a try.......I swear by them.

Is that where you do a regular barbell press, followed by a BTN press, which counts as one rep?

IroNat

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 34430
  • "Woke is a cult." - Joe Rogan
Re: Matt C. Cycle Update.
« Reply #2056 on: September 16, 2022, 06:57:52 PM »
Two of the worst responders (Matt and bhanks) to PEDS to ever Grace this forum, yet given bodybuilding advice to each other.

Only on getbig :D :D :D :D

Ha-ha!

Matt

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 16693
  • YouTube FitnessByMatt
Re: Matt C. Cycle Update.
« Reply #2057 on: September 16, 2022, 06:59:45 PM »
No, I said it's perfect form if you are going for constant tension.

None of which should count for full reps.

The amount of energy Eddie Hall is saving  by not locking out EVERY SINGLE REP is energy that I could easily put in to lowering my weight to get it as low as he does - which is not much lower than how low I lower it.

Anyway, I agree that for constant tension, Eddie's form is perfect. I do somewhat take issue with Eddie claiming a record for pressing a particular weight for reps, where he literally doesn't lock out one single rep. However, I can give Eddie the pass because even GIVEN his insufficient form, he is lifting a weight that no one else can likely lift [a few exceptions apply].

ThisisOverload

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 7505
Re: Matt C. Cycle Update.
« Reply #2058 on: September 16, 2022, 07:03:43 PM »
None of which should count for full reps.

The amount of energy Eddie Hall is saving  by not locking out EVERY SINGLE REP is energy that I could easily put in to lowering my weight to get it as low as he does - which is not much lower than how low I lower it.

Anyway, I agree that for constant tension, Eddie's form is perfect. I do somewhat take issue with Eddie claiming a record for pressing a particular weight for reps, where he literally doesn't lock out one single rep. However, I can give Eddie the pass because even GIVEN his insufficient form, he is lifting a weight that no one else can likely lift [a few exceptions apply].

No need to lock out every rep. Unless you are focusing on lockout strength.

For strength athletes, it's considered a non-lift if you don't lock it out, typically. But when going for high reps they don't always hold it against you.

For stimulating muscle growth, it's best to not lock out fully.

Matt

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 16693
  • YouTube FitnessByMatt
Re: Matt C. Cycle Update.
« Reply #2059 on: September 16, 2022, 07:04:20 PM »
I like your posts but disagree that a barbell is "much safer".

Locking into a linear plane might not be the best option for everyone.

But Matt's reps suck.  It's quintessential using weights that are too heavy.

If he did a program like Wendler 5-3-1 he'd figure it out that the reps never have to get to that.

But Eddie Hall going 60% of the way up is "perfect form" to you? Lmao.

With the energy I would save skipping on the top or the rep range doing it Eddie's style, I'd likely get the same or close to the same number of reps as I did my way. And I'd have "perfect form" to you. Yes, perfect form is approaching nowhere near lockout on each rep:


Matt

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 16693
  • YouTube FitnessByMatt
Re: Matt C. Cycle Update.
« Reply #2060 on: September 16, 2022, 07:14:05 PM »
No need to lock out every rep. Unless you are focusing on lockout strength.

For strength athletes, it's considered a non-lift if you don't lock it out, typically. But when going for high reps they don't always hold it against you.

For stimulating muscle growth, it's best to not lock out fully.

With the amount of energy Eddie is saving by not bringing the numbers up 4-6", I could put that energy into lowering my reps by that same amount. That would add reps, and then I'd get Getbig's pass for "perfect form" apparently [only on Getbig do half reps count as perfect form and bad form on the same page of the same thread].

Of course in reality, there are flaws in both my form [on the lower end] and on Eddie's form [who doesn't come CLOSE to locking out any single rep].

My expectation was by posting that video of Eddie, that the people trashing my lift would point to that OBVIOUS flaw in Eddie's form.

Why would I take someone as credible who does that? It's now obvious to me that no matter how I improve my form, B. Hank will still trash it.

Hey B. Hank - at least I'm not bald and ugly, you stupid shit.

IroNat

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 34430
  • "Woke is a cult." - Joe Rogan
Re: Matt C. Cycle Update.
« Reply #2061 on: September 16, 2022, 07:25:02 PM »
.
Hey B. Hank - at least I'm not bald and ugly, you stupid shit.


That's rather personal don't you think, Matt?

Matt

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 16693
  • YouTube FitnessByMatt
Re: Matt C. Cycle Update.
« Reply #2062 on: September 16, 2022, 07:26:13 PM »
His elbows are below his shoulders yours are not even close

So you just completely ignored the fact that HE IS ONLY GOING 60% OF THE WAY UP,. you stupid sack of shit??

So you're saying I wouldn't be able to do more reps since I'm saving energy by not going a full range of motion, and then you see a video of Eddie OBVIOUSLY DOING THE SAME THING, and then you ignore it??

Dumb fuck.

The correct response is that Eddie is not doing full reps. OBVIOUSLY.

While you could argue that I save more energy by not going full depth than Eddie saves by not locking out, either way, significant energy is saved.

Furthermore - YOU DUMB PIECE OF SHIT - you could argue I couldn't handle that much weight if I did the full range of motion IF IT WASN'T A FUCKING WEIGHT I COULD HANDLE FOR TEN FUCKING REPS.

If a person does a one rep max bench press but doesn't go all the way down, you could argue - he can't do that weight. But if he does that for TEN REPS, then he very clearly CAN DO THAT WEIGHT, and the only argument is for how many reps he can do it.

Whether I could only do 8, 6, or even only 4, I CAN PRESS 100-LB DUMBBELLS FOR REPS.

As a matter of fact, you dumb mother fucker, I can literally hold 100-lb dumbbells on my shoulders, wait two seconds, and press it up, completely at rest.

So YES, I can do that weight. Even if I only get five reps with the 100-lb dumbbells, I can still get it.

You critiquing my form is one thing - you claiming I need to go down another foot on what is an obviously lift [and stronger than ANYTHING you have ever done], and saying I couldn't get any reps is another matter entirely.

As I said, a few more inches down would be sufficient by MY standards. Shoulder press is not a lift where most people have a uniform view of what is sufficient depth - and the instructional videos online show that.

Flexacon

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 8115
Re: Matt C. Cycle Update.
« Reply #2063 on: September 16, 2022, 07:32:29 PM »
Two of the worst responders (Matt and bhanks) to PEDS to ever Grace this forum, yet given bodybuilding advice to each other.

Only on getbig :D :D :D :D

Too Bhankys credit at least with some of his training/form comments he seems to know what he's talking about.

Matt

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 16693
  • YouTube FitnessByMatt
Re: Matt C. Cycle Update.
« Reply #2064 on: September 16, 2022, 07:36:12 PM »
That's rather personal don't you think, Matt?

Yes it is. What about it?

The ugly fuck lost credibility with me when he shit on my form, and then ignored Eddie Hall not locking out any of his reps when he did it. B. Hank's claim is that I'm saving energy, and lifting more weight than I could otherwise lift by skimping on the bottom range of motion. Well, WHAT IN THE FUCK do you think happens when you fail to lock out every single fucking rep?

YOU SAVE ENERGY, FUCKING OBVIOUSLY.

So if I used Eddie Hall's supposedly perfect form, I'D GET THE SAME NUMBER OF FUCKING REPS ANYWAY, AND GET B. HANK'S PASS FOR PERFECT FORM.

Scratch that - I'd maybe get two reps less.

But either way - the audacity of this guy saying my form helps me save energy and lift more, while he then gives the pass to another style that saves energy and helps a person lift more...unbelievable.

Do you think skipping out on THIS MUCH of the press wouldn't allow a person to do more reps?!




Matt

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 16693
  • YouTube FitnessByMatt
Re: Matt C. Cycle Update.
« Reply #2065 on: September 16, 2022, 07:45:19 PM »
Two of the worst responders (Matt and bhanks) to PEDS to ever Grace this forum, yet given bodybuilding advice to each other.

Only on getbig :D :D :D :D

Gaining 27-lb on 16mg Anadrol daily for two months is a bad response?

How is that a bad response? It's about the best response a person can possibly ever hope for, and is probably in thx top 1%.

As for B. Hank's response - it really depends on how much gear he uses. If he's using IFBB pro level doses, then his response is pretty bad. If he's using the amount I am, then I'd say his response is excellent.

Grape Ape

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 22523
  • SC è un asino
Re: Matt C. Cycle Update.
« Reply #2066 on: September 16, 2022, 07:49:06 PM »
But Eddie Hall going 60% of the way up is "perfect form" to you? Lmao.

With the energy I would save skipping on the top or the rep range doing it Eddie's style, I'd likely get the same or close to the same number of reps as I did my way. And I'd have "perfect form" to you. Yes, perfect form is approaching nowhere near lockout on each rep:



Stop worrying about Eddie Hall, someone who is elite in his field, and at the top tier of what he does.  It has nothing to do with you.  There is literally no comparison.

But once again, his "perfect form" is perfect WITHIN THE CONTEXT OF WHAT HE WAS DOING.

He could have done full lockout as well, albeit not as many reps, yet still full ROM and no shaky shakes.

You're using weights near your 1RM, with broken form.  If you read Wendler 5-3-1, a well renowned STRENGTH program, you'd know you'd never be in a situation doing the epilepsy reps you seem to be bragging about.
Y

SGT BARNES

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 1412
  • crush your enemies, see them driven before you
Re: Matt C. Cycle Update.
« Reply #2067 on: September 16, 2022, 07:51:22 PM »
This is the guy who says he is a monster that people stare at !  Hahahahahahahaa

dude is fucking swimming in a medium shirt looking like hes never been near a gym...hahahaha

19 inch arms! hahahahahah 19 inch neck! more hahahahahahahahahaa

broski even making videos with his fly open! hahahahahahahaha CLOOOOWWWWWN




MCWAY

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 19263
  • Getbig!
Re: Matt C. Cycle Update.
« Reply #2068 on: September 16, 2022, 08:10:37 PM »
Palumboism - do you know if I have Palumboism?

In the 2005 versus present-day comparison below...is that Palumboism?

At least on this question, all my other mandatory poses would fit d roughly the same picture. What I am saying is: if I have Palumboism, it should be discernible from this comparison.

What do you think?

Regarding my legs, there is some potential for improvement despite my age [which I would think would make some improvements nearly impossible], but with my chest - I just don't see it happening.

Ever.

I mean, how can anyone get to a 345 bench press and not have a chest?

That's easy!

1. You hump the weight up, to the point where you nearly castrate yourself on the ceiling fan.

2. Your grip is too narrow

3. You bounce the bar off your chest or ribcage

4. You let the delts and triceps take too much of the load.

Quit worrying about 1-rep maxes. When you can hit decent poundages for 7-10 reps, business will pick up. Plus, there are other chest exercises that you simply REFUSE to utilize (i.e. dips and incline presses).



I attribute it to bad genetics.

As you said - I'm already good at dieting. The issue is not keeping my protein high enough.

Out of curiosity, do you have a cutting diet for me, or some guidelines I can follow as I transition off-cycle?

The only possibility for my chest - maybe - is that if I get leaner, perhaps my chest will show a bit better.

No, you're not good at dieting (as in keeping as much muscle as possible, while shedding bodyfat). You simply know how to drop weight, losing almost as much muscle as bodyfat.



I did get my calories way up for this cycle - but I would not commit to another cycle unless I had my diet fully on-point.

I find a respond pretty well to improvements to my diet + adding gear. My deficit was always calories, and not using gear [barely/rarely].

When anyone ever mentions training...well...we can all improve our training. But how will my training help me improve if I'm eating 90g protein daily, like I traditionally have?

Again, my deficit is diet.

Training refinements won't do much if I am deficient in protein or overall calories.


Are you really this daft? How much crack did you smoke to think you could get big on 90g of protein?

I (and others) have been telling you this for WEEKS, if not MONTHS, on thread after thread after thread. Steroids or no steroids, you NEED FOOD (quality and quality) to GROW. What you can't eat in solid food, you drink in liquid food.

You know what to do; you're simply too blasted LAZY to do it, period.

And spare us the excuses of your alleged concern for your health. No one is buying it.

Flexacon

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 8115
Re: Matt C. Cycle Update.
« Reply #2069 on: September 16, 2022, 08:13:55 PM »
Eddie Hall perfectly explains his perfect technique.

"Eddie hall 60kg shoulder press. (Constant pressure technique)
40 powerful reps with 60kg dumbells with constant weight kept on the shoulders.
No resting at the top... This method is used to build explosive power off the shoulders. And helps train lactic acid resistance."



Flexacon

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 8115
Re: Matt C. Cycle Update.
« Reply #2070 on: September 16, 2022, 08:15:16 PM »


You know what to do; you're simply too blasted LAZY to do it, period.



It's not laziness. It's a brain defect.

Matt

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 16693
  • YouTube FitnessByMatt
Re: Matt C. Cycle Update.
« Reply #2071 on: September 16, 2022, 08:32:40 PM »
Stop worrying about Eddie Hall, someone who is elite in his field, and at the top tier of what he does.  It has nothing to do with you.  There is literally no comparison.

But once again, his "perfect form" is perfect WITHIN THE CONTEXT OF WHAT HE WAS DOING.

He could have done full lockout as well, albeit not as many reps, yet still full ROM and no shaky shakes.

In one of Dave Palumbo Bros vs. Pros events, they bench pressed 225 for reps. Michael Liberatore didn't lock out something like 43 reps, and therefore zero reps were counted. He was wearing headphones at the time, and didn't hear the judge's command to stop. But I agree that we should be completing full reps, if the event in question is a max reps one.

Regarding Eddie:

I would generally take issue with Eddie's form for not locking out, but in his case it's probably a record REGARDLESS, so I'm ok with it.

In other words - handling that much weight for that many reps is pretty impressive, regardless of his form.

Now, on a much smaller scale, relating this to me:

It blows my mind that I post a video of me pressing 100-lb dumbbells for seven reps - which is a good lift by ANY standard - and to have that lift trashed on here.

If the comments were "Strong lift, but you need to go down a few inches more on each rep, so you'd probably get a few less reps if you did that", I'd be like "Ok, cool."

But to shit on a press which is not doubt among the best pressing strength currently on Getbig - that I don't get.

And then to give Eddie a pass despite not locking out, and the subsequent savings of energy that correspond with that...it just makes me wonder if people here are just trashing my reps just to trash them.

Trashing my 120-lb dumbbells bench press is one thing - that was legitimately bad form [keeping in mind gyms JUST opened here again on March 24th, and I haven't been able to get in the groove of properly lifting heavy] - but trashing my dumbbell presses, which were considerably better form, in particular my previous video [below] which really wasn't THAT bad [especially for the weight] is another matter entirely.

My form was slightly off, to be sure, but that's a good weight with ok form.

Even my video bench pressing the 120-lb dumbbells was pretty good, in that it demonstrated good strength.

I mean, I've seen videos of people doing 200-lb dumbbells with bad form, and my response is still - that's strong as hell.

What's more insane about all this is that the Canadian 80kg Circus Dumbbell record is 156-lb, and I am on track to breaking the record.

So to have my presses trashed - my only response is "Seriously??"  ???

My pressing is at a very competitive level for my weight class. Not the best - but just...competitive. And yet I get shit on here. So my response to that is that it makes me question how credible ANY of the criticisms are here.

Walter Sobchak is just some nasty piece of shit, like SquadFatter before him. He criticizes just for the sake of criticizing. Sometimes I don't even want to hear CONSTRUCTIVE CRITICISM, but at the current time - I do.

But if people are going to make comments like that I need to go a full foot lower, or that I wouldn't be able to get any reps with the 100-lb dumbbells if I improved my form [bullshit], or that I'm saving energy by skimping out on range of motion while giving Eddie Hall the pass for skimping out on his range of motion as well, then I just have to wonder - is this constructive criticism, or people on here trashing me just for the sake of trashing me?

If it's the latter, I would just as well prefer not to take such comments seriously.


wes

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 66344
  • What Dire Mishap Has Befallen Thee
Re: Matt C. Cycle Update.
« Reply #2072 on: September 16, 2022, 08:35:08 PM »
Is that where you do a regular barbell press, followed by a BTN press, which counts as one rep?
Yes it is but at the top of the front press,you just clear the top of your head......no lockout,then behind the neck as comfortable as you can without undue pain,then back to the front just clearing the top of the head again.....in essence its front to back clearing the head with no lockout which creates constant tension on the deltoids.

I have no problem doing BTNP though I haven`t done them in eons and opted for Bradfords which I feel is far superior due to the constant tension and no strain on the joints due to locking out.

I hope that was clear.....if not I`m sure YouTube has a tutorial.....kind of hard to explain.

wes

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 66344
  • What Dire Mishap Has Befallen Thee
Re: Matt C. Cycle Update.
« Reply #2073 on: September 16, 2022, 08:39:01 PM »
1. You hump the weight up, to the point where you nearly castrate yourself on the ceiling fan.
LOL  ;D

Matt

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 16693
  • YouTube FitnessByMatt
Re: Matt C. Cycle Update.
« Reply #2074 on: September 16, 2022, 08:41:35 PM »
Eddie Hall perfectly explains his perfect technique.

"Eddie hall 60kg shoulder press. (Constant pressure technique)
40 powerful reps with 60kg dumbells with constant weight kept on the shoulders.
No resting at the top... This method is used to build explosive power off the shoulders. And helps train lactic acid resistance."



So it's ok to avoid 4-6" of pressing by not locking out, and subsequently use that energy for additional reps, with the same limited range of motion?

Then my response to that is:

I got seven reps using my form...and I could do it again next week using Eddie's form. I'd probably get six reps.

So, I mean - what's the difference? There would be a marginal difference, to be sure, but is it really THAT much different?

So it's bad for me to save energy by skimping on the bottom of the range of motion, but it's cool if I save energy by skimping on the lockout?

...

Ok, so how about next week, I use the same weight again and do it Eddie's style, and get six reps?

Would that be acceptable to you, Flexacon? By your got damn standards?