Strength Training Doesn't Build Muscle

[jslep]

for me personally i like a combination of both. just depends on the lift. compound lifts for me i always add weight and lower reps as i progress..........for ex.

yesterday after warm-up of course

bb bench i progressed 185x6,225x6,275x6,305x3,315x1

but i always like to end with cable flys which i hit

60x15,70x15,80x15 tight squeeze on all for a good finishing burn.

[glwanabe]

Originally Posted by BendtheBar

I will add that I don't really think a lot of science means jack squat in the weight room. Sure, we know that the Carpinelli meta analysis of training reveals that it's the last rep(s) are most important to a set. And we know that 3 sets per exercise is ideal. And we know for naturals, one hour max is best. And we know that full body routines have an advantage over splits.

But big whoop. It still all comes down to moving more weight then before.

I'm not discounting quality science. Don't get me wrong. Science can help point us in the right direction. But at the end of the day, you still have to move more weight in a manner that suits your body and mind.

Take every successful advanced powerlifter and bodybuilder. I would wager that a solid majority of them aren't doing a routine they found on bodybuddies.com.

I think we diminish personal instinct and body feedback in training. Science can't trump that. I have to train in a way that stimulates me physically and mentally, that excites me, and that produces gains. But too many times young lifters read and read and read and read and read and read and read and read and read and read and read and read and read and read and read and read and read and read and read and read and read and read and read and read and read and read and read and read and read and read and read and read and read and read and read and read and read and read and read and read and read and read and read and read and read and read and read and read and read and read and read and read and read and read and read and read and read and read and read and read and read and read and read and read and read and read and read and read and read and read and read and read and read and read and read and read and read and read and read and read and read and read and read and read and read...

And they try to piece together all the science. All the while Joe Schmuck is in the corner smashing fucking weights, crazed on natty testosterone, ignorant of systems and schemes...but fucking pounding reps, hungry for one more.

I am convinced that all the studies in the world are meaningless to the Joe Schmucks of the world. He's in the gym. He never makes excuses. (My ass hurts, my nads hurt, my mom's ass and nads hurts...). And he's relentless about moving more weight.

Science can't measure determination, will and drive. Let us not forget that issue. Joe Schmuck can use science to refine his training, for sure. But the training science and knowledge without Schmuck's drive is useless.

I spend most of my day on other forums trying to help beginners. But it doesn't take me long to know who will succeed and who will fail. I give all of them the right science, and a scientifically sound approach. But that approach only works for 10% because they go and crush weights. The other 90% are busy making excuses. I can smell failure.

Success is guys like NT and Ripped and GL and BWYS and Jwood and Rick and BBG all the other guys on this forum who workout every fucking week, rain or shine, ass hurting or not. I know these guys will succeed. (Sorry if I didn't mention your name)

The determined eventually go after the science. The undetermined spend 20 years mucking it out in the gym, knowing the science.

The end.

I love this post, and not because of anybody you mentioned.

[BendtheBar]

Originally Posted by glwanabe

I love this post, and not because of anybody you mentioned.

I rep everyone who flatters me.

[Grim83]

Originally Posted by BendtheBar

I spend most of my day on other forums trying to help beginners. But it doesn't take me long to know who will succeed and who will fail. I give all of them the right science, and a scientifically sound approach. But that approach only works for 10% because they go and crush weights. The other 90% are busy making excuses. I can smell failure.

thats commendable, i did that for a while, but i just got tired of it, and realized i reach more people with my writing, plus i got tired of helping some dude for a week or two and then some 6'2 150 pounder comes in and says "insert lame shit" worked for me, and now everything i've done is for nothing

[glwanabe]

I frequent several different forums on various topics that I have an interest in.
It does not matter what the subject is, all of them are the same in regards to the types of personalitys that use them.

1. Some talk the talk, but don't walk the walk.
2. Some talk, and walk, and inspire those.
3. some just add a little help here and there while doing there thing.
4. Some are just self appointed know it all's who talk to feel good about themselves, but really don't know jack.


What number are you? Hopefully it's a 2 or 3.

[BendtheBar]

Originally Posted by glwanabe

What number are you? Hopefully it's a 2 or 3.

I hope so.

I don't want to be a know-it-all. I think each of us have those moments. There are some hot button issues for me...primarily old myths. And when someone places a 5'10" underweight hardgainer on a strict PCF diet I feel rage. (Not really rage, but you get the point - "Another obsessive-compulsive flying off the assembly line...")

[jhuse2]

On this subject I am a little 2. and alot 3. Now on knifemaking I am alot of 2 and 3.

"People who can. Do...People who can't. Teach..." quote from the movie School for scoundrels.

[jdmalm123]

Many would call 3x10 "high rep" and would call 10x3 "low rep" but they are both 30 rep programs.

I think the low rep/high rep confusion comes from a misunderstanding of the "total work done" concept. Keep progressing on a "total work done" scale and you'll make gains, no matter how many reps per set you use.

The reason why some "high reppers" see gains is they do more total work than the "low reppers" who have an almost too minimal program and progress too slowly.

Likewise ,the reason why some "low reppers" see gains is they do more total work than the "high reppers" who may do high rep sets, but quit before they really push themselves. In the end, some "low reppers" are doing more reps than the "high reppers" because they do more sets, and/or more workouts, per week!

[kman025]

Originally Posted by jdmalm123

Many would call 3x10 "high rep" and would call 10x3 "low rep" but they are both 30 rep programs.

I think the low rep/high rep confusion comes from a misunderstanding of the "total work done" concept. Keep progressing on a "total work done" scale and you'll make gains, no matter how many reps per set you use.

The reason why some "high reppers" see gains is they do more total work than the "low reppers" who have an almost too minimal program and progress too slowly.

Likewise ,the reason why some "low reppers" see gains is they do more total work than the "high reppers" who may do high rep sets, but quit before they really push themselves. In the end, some "low reppers" are doing more reps than the "high reppers" because they do more sets, and/or more workouts, per week!

great post man

[BendtheBar]

Originally Posted by jdmalm123

Many would call 3x10 "high rep" and would call 10x3 "low rep" but they are both 30 rep programs.

I think the low rep/high rep confusion comes from a misunderstanding of the "total work done" concept. Keep progressing on a "total work done" scale and you'll make gains, no matter how many reps per set you use.

The reason why some "high reppers" see gains is they do more total work than the "low reppers" who have an almost too minimal program and progress too slowly.

Likewise ,the reason why some "low reppers" see gains is they do more total work than the "high reppers" who may do high rep sets, but quit before they really push themselves. In the end, some "low reppers" are doing more reps than the "high reppers" because they do more sets, and/or more workouts, per week!

Thumbs up. The older I get, the more I like low rep training with short breaks. The muscle never fully recovers, and must "endure" a beating over 10 sets x 3 reps. I think with this approach, each rep tends to count more then the average rep on a 3 set x 10 rep scheme because the muscle is pushing while not fully recovered.