View Single Post
Old 07-06-2009, 10:40 AM   #3
BendtheBar
Bearded Beast of Duloc
Max Brawn
 
BendtheBar's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Louisiana
Posts: 80,571
Training Exp: 20+ years
Training Type: Powerbuilding
Fav Exercise: Deadlift
Fav Supp: Butter
Reputation: 2686219
BendtheBar is one with Crom!BendtheBar is one with Crom!BendtheBar is one with Crom!BendtheBar is one with Crom!BendtheBar is one with Crom!BendtheBar is one with Crom!BendtheBar is one with Crom!BendtheBar is one with Crom!BendtheBar is one with Crom!BendtheBar is one with Crom!BendtheBar is one with Crom!
Default

Rick, great post. I think you nailed it head on. Many training threads back a system because of the science, but as we all know - there is a study to back up just about everything. In essence, they are simply backing the science that either makes the most sense to them, or that backs up their philosophy.

None of my training approaches were formed with any science in mind. I didn't not train to failure for any other reason then I found it annoying. And I don't perform higher rep sets of 8-12 because I find that annoying too.

Joe Weider had it right when he talked about instinctive training. I don't believe training complexity nor training science is the golden key to strength and size gains.

Obviously, science can get us thinking about training techniques such as slow negatives, or periodization, but it can't create an uber system like Mentzer attempted to do.

A lifter needs to stick with a system for a while to get the feel of it, and adapt it to his/her body and needs.

Many paths lead up the mountain. it is up to you to clear your own path.
__________________
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Destroy That Which Destroys You

"Let bravery be thy choice, but not bravado."


BendtheBar is offline   Reply With Quote