posted Wed, 01/24/2018 - 04:58
2982
+ 1 research link
ad
hey guys thought this might make your day. cool stuff in there. Personally ill cycle heavy and go high rep lifting every 6-12 weeks or so. http://sci-fit.net/2017/scientific-recommendations-1/ So what ill do now with this is go through each study in the over 150+ studies referenced. which will keep me busy for a few days.:-)
- Bookmark
- 1
- 0
basskiller89From a bodybuilding standpoint, and by this I mean size alone. I have been able to grow pretty big for my frame without lifting heavy. I lift around 40-50% of my maxes and just make it feel heavier. I'm not a competitor so I may be giving up some density by excluding heavy heavy lifts, I'm aware. I'm just not looking to grind on my joints for the next 20 years when my focus is more personal aesthetics. Plus, I'm scared I'm going to tear something. Power lifting is cool stuff though, props to those guys. I guess for me knowing I can bench 405 is more than enough. I don't feel the need to show off in the gym and damage my joints and tendons just to impress others. I'm saving my 600+lb deadlift for when some dude wants to slap my future girlfriends ass lol
I lift about the same. If I can’t do 10 it’s too heavy. It’s probly the over 40 mind set. I have realized we are not invincible. Plus most research for hypertrophy training points to low/mod weight over high reps.
To be clear, the link posted is not a meta-analysis, merely loose interpretations of data set up into an article format. That’s an important distinction.
I’m not saying you claimed this was a meta-analysis, bones, but just so no one’s confused here.
thumbs up buddy
That kind of sums everything up there.
If you are a newb in the gym, just showing up at the gym will make you grow no matter what you do. As you get more advanced, you have to be more detail oriented and structured if you want to continue to make gains. There are hypertrophy protocols and there are strength protocols so you need to know what your goals are and structure the workout accordingly. The whole process basically boils down to:
1. Designing a proper training program
2. Designing your training around your body type and goal
3. Take proper measures to make sure you recover on a daily basis.
Sounds simple and for most just looking to "stay in shape" it probably should be, but for those taking it to the next level it becomes very complex and the generalities you can throw out the window.
Id like to see a study done with 30 or 40 well trained(5+years exp) lifters and see how that effects results....because you are right. A new lifter can do anything and will grow...high reps low reps what ever.....it all changes after you have been hittin iron for years and have already gained 2o to 40lbs past where you started...
A interesting fact is when studying the cross sectional anatomy of untrained individuals is that most if not all strength gains are not anatomical but are neurological. :-) Chris Bearsley has a loaded book called muscle hypertrophy.
This is true to a very, very limited threshold, which is why the untrained distinction is important. Once neuromuscular adaptations cease, and this happens very quickly once a movement pattern is learned, the only way to get significantly stronger over the long term is by packing on honest to god muscle.
Bingo! You obviously are well versed.
This has plenty of truth to it, and I’m gonna piggyback off this post a bit because it’s very good. Biologically speaking, strength and size are necessarily interdependent. That’s obvious to anyone with even high school level knowledge of mammalian physiology. But the extremist’s line of thinking is that the pendulum cannot be tipped one way or another, and this is simply false. There are plenty of great programs that bring the best of both worlds to the fitness enthusiast, but there are also ones that are extremely specialized in either direction.
In other words, while strength protocols will clearly result in hypertrophy and hypertrophy protocols will clearly result in strength, the scale can absolutely be tipped to favor one or the other. For the competitive athlete, specificity of training becomes more crucial than ever.
Seems pretty standard.
I’m a reference kinda guy. I can’t stand when people write article with no references. This has citations of over 150+ Referenced studies on B.B. have a great day bro.
The majority of those studies I think you don't need to waste your time on. From what I could peruse through most are on untrained athletes and have very limited participants. Spend your time reading up on Charles Poliquin and Kassem Hanson. You'll get much more out of your time doing that.
I'm always up for good reading recommendations. thanks!