Is It important to get a pump?

[Alex23]

Why would you need a pump to confirm that a muscle is being hit? If I'm training say calves I don't need no pump to tell me I'm training calves, I kinda figured that out 

You are a brilliant young woman but missing the point;

the pump is the indicator the enough volume and intensity has been reached. Plain and simple.

"It's like cuming."
~King Schwarzenegger.

[Bluto]

You are a brilliant young woman but missing the point;

the pump is the indicator the enough volume and intensity has been reached. Plain and simple.

"It's like cuming."
~King Schwarzenegger.

That's interesting, would you say using a product that gives you more pump would make you quit too early and call it the day and cheating you off gains? How do you measure the maximum of the pump to know when it's enough?

I guess you dont count reps, sets or even poundages then, you just go by feel of the pump. Maybe you even stop in a middle of a set when the "feel" of a "pump" tells you - no more, "enough volume and intensity has been reached!"

Fascinating.

[Alex23]

That's interesting, would you say using a product that gives you more pump would make you quit too early and call it the day and cheating you off gains? How do you measure the maximum of the pump to know when it's enough?
I guess you dont count reps, sets or even poundages then, you just go by feel of the pump. Maybe you even stop in a middle of a set when the "feel" of a "pump" tells you - no more, "enough volume and intensity has been reached!"
Fascinating.

You sir are a pragmatic moron who obviously does not lift weights. I'm now convinced that your are a kid.

How to grow muscle (A23 101):
1- All sets, no matter what the rep range, ought to be to failure.
2- Every Tool knows that a rep range of 8-12 is optimal for hypertrophy. slap the poundages accordingly.
3- As the result of all this, pump ought to be achieve. If not, intensity or failure ought to be revisited.
4- Diet will affect your pump to a certain degree but no pump = no growth.

[Bluto]

1- All sets, no matter what the rep range, ought to be to failure.

Going to failure on all sets is a good strategy to fry your CNS. Hardly anyone in the sport of bodybuilding take all sets to failure.

2- Every Tool knows that a rep range of 8-12 is optimal for hypertrophy. slap the poundages accordingly.

And yet there's numerous people that have great success with lower reps like 5x5 or people like Milos with higher reps. And let's not forget the importance of sets, not just reps when it comes to hypertrophy.

[Alex23]

When I mean failure, is you can't complete sucessfully another rep.. not kill yourself trying to..

if you don't go to my definition of failure, how do you know you're in the right rep range for the weight and not wasting your time?

.... THE PUMP BABY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Bluto]

When I mean failure, is you can't complete sucessfully another rep.. not kill yourself trying to..

if you don't go to my definition of failure, how do you know you're in the right rep range for the weight and not wasting your time?

.... THE PUMP BABY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

That definition will work, and my answer is still the same - its not productive to go to failure all the time in every set, hardly anyone i know of or heard of ever does, i'd say it makes a whole lot more sense to go to failure far less enabling you to be able to train more frequent.

There's a whole lot of big guys out there that put on a lot of muscle without chasing the pump or going to failure for that matter - powerlifters, strong men etc but according to your logic theyre doing it wrong and wont put on any muscle...

[Alex23]

That definition will work, and my answer is still the same - its not productive to go to failure all the time in every set, hardly anyone i know of or heard of ever does, i'd say it makes a whole lot more sense to go to failure far less enabling you to be able to train more frequent.
There's a whole lot of big guys out there that put on a lot of muscle without chasing the pump or going to failure for that matter - powerlifters, strong men etc but according to your logic theyre doing it wrong and wont put on any muscle...

I'm not advocating "chasing" the pump at all cost... unless you're about to step onstage which you can attain with a rubber band...

I'm saying that the rep range MUST provide some level of pump to be declared the ideal rep range for hypertrophy.

yes, some will grow on 4-6 rep ranges, but not as much and not consistently.

[Soundness]

you just gave a rebutall to your own argument.don't know if your smart enough to figure it out though..

No, I didn't. Both genetics and growth stimulation (point of intensity) have a bearing on muscle growth. 

Is it that complicated, that two things influence one other thing at the same time?

It's like the nature vs. nurture debate. Anyone who takes a side is an idiot, because both are obviously at play at the same time. In other words, you're born with certain qualities and traits that will make you TEND to be certain ways and do certain things. BUT, you'll also be influenced by what you experience in life itself.

See, each separate individual is born with a unique tendency to gain size, relative to strength gains. Some will get a lot of size even when they gain just a little strength yet some will gain practically no size despite great strength gains. This is GENETICS (nurture) because each individual is unique by nature, with a unique strength-to-size ratio. BUT, in order for an individual to gain at all, delving into new points of INTENSITY, introducing the muscles to intensity they have never experienced, is necessary. This will hit that growth "switch," stimulating them to adapt into a form that will make them capable of exerting even more intensity than their previous form allowed.
The result is growth.

Is it really too complicated to understand 1) genetics and 2) intensity as separate yet interacting things? 

[Bluto]

Soundness: what if the intensity is pretty much the same week after week?

[jpm101]

If going by the pump as a gauge, there is no clear confirmation that a certain muscle is being hit hard. Can do sissy stuff like 20-25 reps with a pair of 20 pounder's for benches and have the chest blow up like a balloon. Does not mean that any lasting size will develop. You can also do lateral raises and get a pump in the traps and neck area. But they are not getting prime work at all. But are getting a pump from their supporting efforts. Or BB curls and have the pec's and lats get a slight pump.

I. All reps should avoid the point of failure with-in the 1 to 2 rep's, no matter what the rep range intended. There are two degrees of major muscle failure. Momentary and complete. Avoid each by all means. Most power and Olympic lifters do in regular training sessions. Only testing their lifting max every 3 to 4 week is when failure is approached or met. This also included BB'ing.

2. A rep range from 3 to 20 can build muscle mass and strength. 3 reps will do for you what 20 can not and vice versa. So many guy make little or no progress, with years of training, because they will stick  to the written in stone accepted 8 to 12 range for hypertrophy. If just switching to a lower 5 rep per set, or even 15-20 rep per set, may offer dramatic improvement in size and strength. And in a somewhat short period.

3. Tell the huge and thick PL'ers and Olympic lifters that they need to achieve a superior pump before any muscle mass can be gained. Or that their intensity may not be good enough for pure size without the pump. Tell that also to the power BB'ers ( me included) who rather enjoy lifting heavy with-in the lower rep range.

4. Diet will affect the pump. And how long that pump will remain after a training session. Complex carb-protein feeding throughout the day work very well in this regard. Good reason for shakes between regular meals. Good Luck.

[pumpster]

That definition will work, and my answer is still the same - its not productive to go to failure all the time in every set, hardly anyone i know of or heard of ever does,

That only covers part of it, one extreme. The truth is that one should go to failure at least some of the time each workout, otherwise it's essentially going through the motions of what can already be done. Nothing to do with CNS burnout in that case. The sets that aren't taken to failure, for example pyramiding sets up or down, are just part of warmups.

Also, different people can handle higher levels of training to failure without problem. Anyone can do it part of the time though, and should or they're kidding themselves, treading water.

[pumpster]

in order for an individual to gain at all, delving into new points of INTENSITY, introducing the muscles to intensity they have never experienced, is necessary. This will hit that growth "switch," stimulating them to adapt into a form that will make them capable of exerting even more intensity than their previous form allowed.
The result is growth.

Ya, it's actually simple. Going to failure is required, otherwise one essentially maintains status quo. It's no different from challenging oneself mentally, must reach for more than one's able to currently do.

Tell the huge and thick PL'ers and Olympic lifters that they need to achieve a superior pump before any muscle mass can be gained. Or that their intensity may not be good enough for pure size without the pump. Tell that also to the power BB'ers ( me included) who rather enjoy lifting heavy with-in the lower rep range.

Actually, some of them do get pumps during training, even though it's not a goal. Further, i can assure you that a strong guy like Mariusz with superior development to most of his peers not only gets pumps he also includes other elemets of BB non-compound/non-powerlifting training to induce growth-not an accident.

[Bluto]

Ya, it's actually simple. Going to failure is required, otherwise one stays more or less at status quo.

You sure?

How about someone adding more weight to the bar over time, maybe even down to fractional plates? Or someone changing reps? Changing sets? How about shortening the rest period between sets? Or performing a lift slower?

Looks to me there's quite a few things one can do, without failure being required and without staying at status quo.

Actually, some of them do get pumps during training, even though it's not a goal. Further, i can assure you that a strong guy like Mariusz with superior development to most of his peers not only gets pumps he also includes other elemets of BB training to induce growth.

Yes SOME do, but if it would be a REQUIREMENT they ALL would have to. Since this isnt the case, that SOME do is pointless.

[pumpster]

You sure?

How about someone adding more weight to the bar over time, maybe even down to fractional plates? Or someone changing reps? Changing sets? How about shortening the rest period between sets? Or performing a lift slower?

Looks to me there's quite a few things one can do, without failure being required and without staying at status quo.

All of those things-adding weight, changing reps, changing sets-eventually requires greater intensity in order to improve over today's performance. Even if the change is incremental, at some point the wall's hit, it requires extraordinary effort to rise above it, it ain't happenin by chance.

Could it be achieved without increasing intensity-some growth might still happen but that's not opitmal since the muscle's not been fully challenged.

[Alex23]

I don't care for all the typing tbh....

All I know is, I lift heavyweights, as many reps as I can until I can't push anymore, get a penis like veiny pump and grow like a mushroom. BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOMMMM!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!




On the other hand, no pump, I don't grow...

[tbombz]

I don't deny that. But if you don't get a pump doing it, you ain't growing.

i agree with you 100% on this issue       

[tbombz]

You sir are a pragmatic moron who obviously does not lift weights. I'm now convinced that your are a kid.

How to grow muscle (A23 101):
1- All sets, no matter what the rep range, ought to be to failure.
2- Every Tool knows that a rep range of 8-12 is optimal for hypertrophy. slap the poundages accordingly.
3- As the result of all this, pump ought to be achieve. If not, intensity or failure ought to be revisited.
4- Diet will affect your pump to a certain degree but no pump = no growth.

cool ! again, im agreeing with you ! ...damnit     

[Soundness]

You sir are a pragmatic moron who obviously does not lift weights. I'm now convinced that your are a kid.

How to grow muscle (A23 101):
1- All sets, no matter what the rep range, ought to be to failure.
2- Every Tool knows that a rep range of 8-12 is optimal for hypertrophy. slap the poundages accordingly.
3- As the result of all this, pump ought to be achieve. If not, intensity or failure ought to be revisited.
4- Diet will affect your pump to a certain degree but no pump = no growth.

Actually, I agree with you here Alex. I do think you should mention compound movements, however.

Are you saying that if you train intensely enough, it will cause a pump, that if you don't get a pump it means you're not training intensely enough to stimulate growth?

[MisterMagoo]

all sets to failure, unless you're on gear or working with super low volume, will lead to CNS burnout. plain and simple. that's a horrifically stupid way to train.

no pump = no growth: also stupid. the muscles that have grown the best on me have been the ones i get little to no pump in. my triceps blew up doing heavy board presses and close-grip benches, none of which resulted in a "pump". meanwhile i do all the 8-12 reps on curls and "squeeze" and shit like that until they feel all "swole" and so far they still suck.

[tbombz]

Actually, I agree with you here Alex. I do think you should mention compound movements, however.

Are you saying that if you train intensely enough, it will cause a pump, that if you don't get a pump it means you're not training intensely enough to stimulate growth?

even iof you train super low volume ala mike mentzer ie = one set to failure only... if you train correctly 9the mike metzre way).. land you really truly hit that mike mentzer type of failure 9 keep repping like there is a gun to your head and the trigger gets pulled if you stop).. youll get a massive pump even from one set.

more volume,. less intensity= pump.. less volume, more intansity = pump... you  get a pump regardless if your training right to p[rovide ampole growth stimulation..

[Soundness]

even iof you train super low volume ala mike mentzer ie = one set to failure only... if you train correctly 9the mike metzre way).. land you really truly hit that mike mentzer type of failure 9 keep repping like there is a gun to your head and the trigger gets pulled if you stop).. youll get a massive pump even from one set.

more volume,. less intensity= pump.. less volume, more intansity = pump... you  get a pump regardless if your training right to p[rovide ampole growth stimulation..

That's what I'm thinking Alex meant.
BTW, that part about "keep repping like there is a gun to your head and the trigger gets pulled if you stop," THAT is what will make you grow.

[MisterMagoo]

that's the kinda BS that FLEX magazine hocks to kids so they'll buy more magazines.

if i make you bench 135 50 times you'll get a crazy pump. if i make you hop on a stairmaster and do 5 minutes at a stupid high setting you'll get a crazy pump. just because there is or isn't blood in the muscle doesn't mean you're doing anything useful. that's not how growth happens. it's a pleasant side effect often times, make you feel like you did something and feels cool as hell, but it's by NO means a requirement.

[pumpster]

that's the kinda BS that FLEX magazine hocks to kids so they'll buy more magazines.

if i make you bench 135 50 times you'll get a crazy pump. if i make you hop on a stairmaster and do 5 minutes at a stupid high setting you'll get a crazy pump. just because there is or isn't blood in the muscle doesn't mean you're doing anything useful. that's not how growth happens. it's a pleasant side effect often times, make you feel like you did something and feels cool as hell, but it's by NO means a requirement.

For the last time, using a silly extreme example doesn't prove anything.

Pump's part of the recipe, several factors are intertwined like it or not. Wanna be smart, cover all the bases by satisfying all the important ingredients including pump, training to failure some of the time, etc.

[MisterMagoo]

For the last time, using a silly extreme example doesn't prove anything.

it's not an extreme example, per se. it's just showing that the mere fact of getting a pump isn't an indicator that you're inducing growth. if you get a pump from what you're doing and you happen to be growing from that training protocol, cool. keep it up and enjoy every pump you get.

my calves and biceps used to get pumps so big it hurt, but both muscles absolutely suck on me. meanwhile i've never had a trap pump or a very intense chest pump in my life and those muscles are better developed than the rest. my triceps used to get CRAZY pumps from my workouts and they stayed small. after heavy work in the 3-5 rep range they blew up.

that's ME, and it's not YOU, but as they say it's the exception that proves the rule, yah?

[pumpster]

my calves and biceps used to get pumps so big it hurt, but both muscles absolutely suck on me. meanwhile i've never had a trap pump or a very intense chest pump in my life and those muscles are better developed than the rest. my triceps used to get CRAZY pumps from my workouts and they stayed small. after heavy work in the 3-5 rep range they blew up.

that's ME, and it's not YOU, but as they say it's the exception that proves the rule, yah?

The fact you tried different training methods with different areas of the body means that you really can't draw conclusions, it's a strange way to train pumping only certain areas. To pump only certain areas and not others makes no sense and doesn't allow any basis to compare results.

Genetics was the biggest determinant of your size limits i'd say, not the pumping, You're confusing one with the other.