MB Madaera
Lost 31.7 lbs fat
Built 11.7 lbs muscle


Chris Madaera
Built 9 lbs muscle


Keelan Parham
Lost 30 lbs fat
Built 4 lbs muscle


Bob Marchesello
Lost 23.55 lbs fat
Built 8.55 lbs muscle


Jeff Turner
Lost 25.5 lbs fat


Jeanenne Darden
Lost 26 lbs fat
Built 3 lbs muscle


Ted Tucker
Lost 41 lbs fat
Built 4 lbs muscle

 
 

Determine the Length of Your Workouts

Evaluate Your Progress

Keep Warm-Up in Perspective


ARCHIVES >>

"Doing more exercise with less intensity,"
Arthur Jones believes, "has all but
destroyed the actual great value
of weight training. Something
must be done . . . and quickly."
The New Bodybuilding for
Old-School Results supplies
MUCH of that "something."

 

This is one of 93 photos of Andy McCutcheon that are used in The New High-Intensity Training to illustrate the recommended exercises.

To find out more about McCutcheon and his training, click here.

 

Mission Statement

H.I.T. Acceptable Use Policy

Privacy Policy

Credits

LOG IN FORUM MAIN REGISTER SEARCH
Talk the Talk & Walk the Walk
First | Prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | Next | Last
Author
Rating
Options

Tomislav

New York, USA

Brian Johnston wrote:
Tomislav wrote:
Brian Johnston wrote:
It's pretty bold to claim you have a six pack with defined serratus when your photos show you with a gut.

That's silly; because I like to bulk up I never have abs? I got leaner playing football and took a pic, already agreed to post it on the other thread but then you added new conditions that the pic had to be high resolution.

If you stop being so demanding maybe I will post it ;)

Demanding? Hmmm... look for my quote... I asked for something shot full frontal and not blurry. I never asked for hi def... then again, you like to interpret things the way you like to interpret things... like not understanding what Andrew stated when every other person on here did.


Brian,
not blurry means high resolution in this instance since the blurriness was due to resolution.

I think we all understood what Andrew stated:

I've added huge weight to certain lifts over the years but seen no real increase in lean body mass.

I think it's a pretty wild claim since the athletes I see lifting the huge weights are huge; there's a correlation between lifting huge weights and muscular size that cannot be denied and Jones observed it well after the 50's:

They should have arms big enough for any sport short of wrestling bears

Kind of reminds me of the athletes that claim to get stronger while getting smaller on consolidation training; same group isn't it?


Open User Options Menu

Brian Johnston

Ontario, CAN

Blurry means use a tripod and get the entire front with your six-pack showing, as opposed to holding the camera and it shaking, etc. Whatever. And I suggest you check out some of the lightweight powerlifters out there who can out-lift you (full reps in the squat) without having large thighs... or guys out there with half my back development who can chin 100 pounds or more around their waists.

Huge pounds do not always mean huge muscles, or even large muscles. Basic moronic knowledge if you've been lifting long enough. You're not that big, and look at the weights you lift... and if you shed your fat down to 10% you would be about 175 pounds I bet.
Open User Options Menu

HeavyHitter32

Tomislav wrote:
HeavyHitter32 wrote:
Tomislav wrote:
Pulling over 500 is pretty impressive if you mean the standard freeweight version; perhaps it built more muscle than you thought.


Tomi, I sure he would have known given it's his own body.

I too have made very large strength increases over full range and partial range movements (Power Factor Training) and gained zero muscle and actually got flatter and less vascular looking more untrained.

Instead of focusing on strength gains, focus on the *muscle* itself while training to achieve the desired effect - of course, assuming your goal is more hypertrophy.

HeavyHitter,
I agree with you form is important, but I find it hard to believe large strength increases in basic compound lifts I gave as examples could be achieved without gaining muscle; can you give an example of what they were (lift/strength gain) like Andrew did?


I had gained over 200 pounds on some key compound movements over a period of time. Nothing. Zilch in terms of muscular gains and I actually looked worse due to the low volume and frequency - and rigid standardization. At that point it seriously dawned on. If I could not gain muscle with strength gains like that, than how much more strength do I need to gain? This was at the advanced level and a surplus of calories as I was actually not even as lean as I should have been.

The issue is just not form, per se, Tomi. It's greater neuromuscular efficiency with a given movement and lack of stimulation that occurs from a very standardized protocol of doing the same movement and adding a rep or a couple of pounds each workout. I can get extremely strong (for me) training a muscle every two weeks on extremely low volume (consolidation training), but that doesn't optimally support hypertrophy and muscularity compared to training a muscle at least once per week with multiple exercises, sets and reps. I also believe getting a pump is important with the context of where it's achieved in a good workout where the muscles are challenged. Pump is virtually no-existent on a minimalist routine (for me).
Open User Options Menu

jitterbug

Turpin wrote:
jitterbug wrote:
Turpin wrote:
cmg wrote:
Good luck gentlemen!!

Ron

X 2

Despite our previous jibes / disagreements I wish Andrew all the best with his endeavour & looking forward to seeing any changes.

Altho this kind of `walk` ( bodybuilding /exhibition thing ) is not for me I can / do appreciate the effort that goes into the prep for such.

T.




Gentlemen,

Good luck to both of you!

Mr.Turpin,

Are you only wishing Andrew the best?

Ed

Jittery Ed , Does Trentine need my blessing / best wishes ?
I have seen / read nothing from Trentine that would change my formed opinion of him.

T.



Mr.Turpin,

I don't believe he needs your blessings. Your comment was unclear, I thought that maybe you were finally burying the hatchet.

I guess you are not. It seems like you hate Mr.Trentine. How can you dislike someone because they exercise different than you? I am surprised that you are cordial with Mr.Shortt, why the difference he also disagrees with you?

Ed
Open User Options Menu

Turpin

jitterbug wrote:
Turpin wrote:
jitterbug wrote:
Turpin wrote:
cmg wrote:
Good luck gentlemen!!

Ron

X 2

Despite our previous jibes / disagreements I wish Andrew all the best with his endeavour & looking forward to seeing any changes.

Altho this kind of `walk` ( bodybuilding /exhibition thing ) is not for me I can / do appreciate the effort that goes into the prep for such.

T.




Gentlemen,

Good luck to both of you!

Mr.Turpin,

Are you only wishing Andrew the best?

Ed

Jittery Ed , Does Trentine need my blessing / best wishes ?
I have seen / read nothing from Trentine that would change my formed opinion of him.

T.



Mr.Turpin,

I don't believe he needs your blessings. Your comment was unclear, I thought that maybe you were finally burying the hatchet.

I guess you are not. It seems like you hate Mr.Trentine. How can you dislike someone because they exercise different than you? I am surprised that you are cordial with Mr.Shortt, why the difference he also disagrees with you?

Ed


I don't dislike Trentine because he exercises differently , I dislike him because he behaves a in a manner that I dislike.

T.

Open User Options Menu

jitterbug

Turpin wrote:
jitterbug wrote:
Turpin wrote:
jitterbug wrote:
Turpin wrote:
cmg wrote:
Good luck gentlemen!!

Ron

X 2

Despite our previous jibes / disagreements I wish Andrew all the best with his endeavour & looking forward to seeing any changes.

Altho this kind of `walk` ( bodybuilding /exhibition thing ) is not for me I can / do appreciate the effort that goes into the prep for such.

T.




Gentlemen,

Good luck to both of you!

Mr.Turpin,

Are you only wishing Andrew the best?

Ed

Jittery Ed , Does Trentine need my blessing / best wishes ?
I have seen / read nothing from Trentine that would change my formed opinion of him.

T.



Mr.Turpin,

I don't believe he needs your blessings. Your comment was unclear, I thought that maybe you were finally burying the hatchet.

I guess you are not. It seems like you hate Mr.Trentine. How can you dislike someone because they exercise different than you? I am surprised that you are cordial with Mr.Shortt, why the difference he also disagrees with you?

Ed

I don't dislike Trentine because he exercises differently , I dislike him because he behaves a in a manner that I dislike.

T.




Mr.Turpin,

He sure did get your goat.

Mr.Johnston,

What you say above is obviously incorrect. I thought you were an expert?

Ed
Open User Options Menu

DukeMatisse

Josh's coversations on this site were extremely canned and a horrible turn off to most people.

Believing in a training method is one thing, but turning every possible subject into an infomercial is as tolerable as most late night informercials.

Open User Options Menu

dipsrule

Pennsylvania, USA

HeavyHitter32 wrote:
Tomislav wrote:
Pulling over 500 is pretty impressive if you mean the standard freeweight version; perhaps it built more muscle than you thought.


Tomi, I sure he would have known given it's his own body.

I too have made very large strength increases over full range and partial range movements (Power Factor Training) and gained zero muscle and actually got flatter and less vascular looking more untrained.

Instead of focusing on strength gains, focus on the *muscle* itself while training to achieve the desired effect - of course, assuming your goal is more hypertrophy.


I had basically the same results as yours.

I followed Mentzers advice to the letter. I talked to him several times over a 4 month period.

While I did gain some muscle I gained alot of body weight.

I did better on the ideal routine. But for 4 months I did the consolidation routine.

When I told him enough is enough already. Eating more adding rest days.

His exact words to me were "would you cry in your milk if some of that weight turned out to be muscle."

That was the last time I talked to him and pissed away my money.

I took some time off and then did Dr.Dardens Upsidedown bodybuilding routine.

I lost 25 pounds. I looked better. People ask me are you training with weights? I was stronger than I was on the consolidation routine.

I called Mentzer to tell him what I did. It was like me saying screw you.

He was not there. He was having health problems.

The funny thing is Ray answered the phone.

I told him what happened. He agreed with my problem with the consolidation routine. He told me I would be better off using the ideal routine with more rest days added. He told my to read HD II. LOL I did read it.

He was really nice and talked to me for a while. We even talked about things not involved with training.

We agreed there is more in life than things more important weight training.

Before I became disabled I got better results with compound moves twice a week using 4-5 exercises.

I had a very demanding job mentally and physically. Often working 12 hours a day. Sometimes more. So the compound movements fit it well.Not always optimal buts thats what I did.

In the past ive had good results training 3 x a week. Some time 2x a week,and once a week. Any more the 7-10 days I would start loosing strength.

Open User Options Menu

Brian Johnston

Ontario, CAN

No idea what you're talking about Ed, but then again... I likely don't care.
Open User Options Menu

Tomislav

New York, USA

Brian Johnston wrote:
Blurry means use a tripod and get the entire front with your six-pack showing, as opposed to holding the camera and it shaking, etc. Whatever. And I suggest you check out some of the lightweight powerlifters out there who can out-lift you (full reps in the squat) without having large thighs... or guys out there with half my back development who can chin 100 pounds or more around their waists.

Huge pounds do not always mean huge muscles, or even large muscles. Basic moronic knowledge if you've been lifting long enough. You're not that big, and look at the weights you lift... and if you shed your fat down to 10% you would be about 175 pounds I bet.


Arguing that huge weights and huge muscles are not related is silly; you're examples don't prove anything because they are contrived:

Let's see your lightweight PL who can match my squat form with comparable weight and reps (done raw) yet doesn't have large thighs - not going to happen because the form I use empahsises the thigh; a heavyweight PL on steroids issued a squat challenge to me on the forum a few years ago but couldn't match my squats.

The form of an exercise is a component that can't be ignored; sure you could find an athlete who can pile more weight on the French Press by doing a pullover movement and flaring their elbows but the form I use is very strict and puts the emphasis squarely on the tris.

Once you account for form the relationship between huge weights and huge muscles becomes stronger; athletes sometimes confuse the issue by using specialised machines like the pullover to build massive lats without commensurate development of the rest of the kinetic chain and thus cannot chin with a 100 lb plate.
Open User Options Menu

Brian Johnston

Ontario, CAN

Tomislav wrote:
Arguing that huge weights and huge muscles are not related is silly.


Who said that? It was stated clearly that up to a point focusing on loads and adding reps will do only so much for bodybuilding purposes, and that the effect (ability to demonstrate the lifting of heavier loads) is related to adaptive coordination/neuromuscular efficiency. And it was stated clearly that there are those who can get a lot stronger on lifts without showing any added muscle, with powerlifters being a prime example. Again, you like to interpret what people are saying when we're stating something different. So friggin' narrow minded and ignorant.
Open User Options Menu

Brian Johnston

Ontario, CAN

By the way, I worked with a powerlifter in North Bay, ON who weighed 140 pounds (very lean) and he could squat three times his weight... competition squat. He competed at the Canadian level. That's 420 pounds to parallel. I never saw you squat to parallel in your video... not for even one rep.

You are doing top partials. I can do 4 plates a side doing that, but it does nothing for my thighs in terms of maintaining fullness or development. But to each his or her own.
Open User Options Menu

HeavyHitter32

dipsrule wrote:
HeavyHitter32 wrote:
Tomislav wrote:
Pulling over 500 is pretty impressive if you mean the standard freeweight version; perhaps it built more muscle than you thought.


Tomi, I sure he would have known given it's his own body.

I too have made very large strength increases over full range and partial range movements (Power Factor Training) and gained zero muscle and actually got flatter and less vascular looking more untrained.

Instead of focusing on strength gains, focus on the *muscle* itself while training to achieve the desired effect - of course, assuming your goal is more hypertrophy.

I had basically the same results as yours.

I followed Mentzers advice to the letter. I talked to him several times over a 4 month period.

While I did gain some muscle I gained alot of body weight.

I did better on the ideal routine. But for 4 months I did the consolidation routine.

When I told him enough is enough already. Eating more adding rest days.

His exact words to me were "would you cry in your milk if some of that weight turned out to be muscle."

That was the last time I talked to him and pissed away my money.

I took some time off and then did Dr.Dardens Upsidedown bodybuilding routine.

I lost 25 pounds. I looked better. People ask me are you training with weights? I was stronger than I was on the consolidation routine.

I called Mentzer to tell him what I did. It was like me saying screw you.

He was not there. He was having health problems.

The funny thing is Ray answered the phone.

I told him what happened. He agreed with my problem with the consolidation routine. He told me I would be better off using the ideal routine with more rest days added. He told my to read HD II. LOL I did read it.

He was really nice and talked to me for a while. We even talked about things not involved with training.

We agreed there is more in life than things more important weight training.

Before I became disabled I got better results with compound moves twice a week using 4-5 exercises.

I had a very demanding job mentally and physically. Often working 12 hours a day. Sometimes more. So the compound movements fit it well.Not always optimal buts thats what I did.

In the past ive had good results training 3 x a week. Some time 2x a week,and once a week. Any more the 7-10 days I would start loosing strength.



Dipsrule,

Very interesting to hear of your experience.

I too was a Mentzer client for quite some time during the 90s.

I basically quit talking to him in the late 90s as he kept having me reduce my training to such minimal levels which I knew wouldn't/didn't give me the result I was looking for. The initial consolidation routine he gave me in 1993 had a little more volume and was done twice per week - I found that more effective than the every 7-14 day approach with even fewer exercises.

I also never did well on the HDII Ideal Routine as it was just too infrequent for some muscles (directly hitting the chest only every 16-20 days was a disaster). I did much better on the HDI routine by comparison.
Open User Options Menu

indexit

Hi,

I have on occasion made fun of Joshua on Facebook for not showing pictures of his legs. Recently all he has shown is his biceps and upper body. I am kind of a legs guy, and most of the shots of people are always about the upper body. I also send Joshua a few kind of mean emails about him and doing intense training and how he must have a bad case of chicken leg disease.

Joshua emailed me this picture of himself on leg extension. He has been telling me that he has been using 2-3 minute plus TULs on the RenEx leg press, and 400 pounds on his long stack travel leg extension for 5 plus reps 8/8 or longer reps. I think he is just doing an A and B routine right now, and never mixing it up.

I am posting this because any thread involving Trentine provides a good bit of free entertainment. Joshua sent me this picture to show his progress for the competition. He complained/whined a bit that he doesn't have real cuts yet, but still has eleven weeks to get it done with the diet angle. Joshua seems a bit more irritable then usual to me on the strict diet he is following.

I am not sure if I will take some shit for posting this picture he sent me. Maybe he sent it to me thinking I would post it - I don't know -- I haven't posted on here in a while. Either way it is all in good sport Joshua.

IMO Joshua has some dieting to do here before the show 11 weeks may be cutting it close.

thanks,

jeff
Open User Options Menu

Turpin

Genetically Trentine will never have impressive legs ( especially calves & soleus ) , similarly he does not have the pelvic/hip structure to impress even if he improved his upper body width.

Great tattoo`s though , those ARE impressive & detract from his shortcomings.

T.
Open User Options Menu

Tomislav

New York, USA

Brian Johnston wrote:
By the way, I worked with a powerlifter in North Bay, ON who weighed 140 pounds (very lean) and he could squat three times his weight... competition squat. He competed at the Canadian level. That's 420 pounds to parallel. I never saw you squat to parallel in your video... not for even one rep.

You are doing top partials. I can do 4 plates a side doing that, but it does nothing for my thighs in terms of maintaining fullness or development. But to each his or her own.


No take a closer look at the form - I'm not locking out just focusing on the ROM I can maintain form with (keep a straight line) using a close parallel stance.

If you try the strict stance and don't lock out you should (in addition to getting a tremendous leg pump) see the mechanics don't allow you to go much lower than I go in the video, which puts the knee close to 90% - a wide stance like many prefer would have less of an angle for so shallow a depth which is why it's misleading.

I bet your 140 lb powerlifter can't do 30 reps with 332 lbs raw using that form - that's what he'd need to match my performance with the 475 based on bodyweight. If he could, his legs would be as muscular as mine but even if 420 to parallel were enough to equal 332x30 partials (it's not) it's more likely the PL has a disproportionately massive posterior chain as per today's wide stance emphasis in powerlifting and would find himself at a disadvantage with my style.

This is an illustration of Wolff's law, but it confuses many athletes who expect heavy butt squatting to build big wheels. Wolff would say they've got the wrong form for that and you would seem to agree as per your salient observation about turnip thighs on the other thread.
Open User Options Menu

Brian Johnston

Ontario, CAN

Keep convincing yourself of your great squatting ability Tom (just don't go down to parallel as it will crush you). It matters not that you want to compare yourself to a guy half your size in terms of thigh development. That's not even the point, not that you ever will get the friggin' point that PEOPLE CAN GAIN SIGNFICANT AMOUNTS OF WEIGHT ON EXERCISES AND NOT EXPERIENCE ADDED MUSCEL MASS.

Duh! Heck, I DOUBLED the load on a squat machine over the course of about 4-6 months (I don't recall the time line, but something like that)... 350 pounds for 60-seconds TUT to 700 pounds for 60-seconds TUT. Thighs looked and measured the same, lol.
Open User Options Menu

dcshores

California, USA

Tomislav wrote:
Brian Johnston wrote:
By the way, I worked with a powerlifter in North Bay, ON who weighed 140 pounds (very lean) and he could squat three times his weight... competition squat. He competed at the Canadian level. That's 420 pounds to parallel. I never saw you squat to parallel in your video... not for even one rep.

You are doing top partials. I can do 4 plates a side doing that, but it does nothing for my thighs in terms of maintaining fullness or development. But to each his or her own.

No take a closer look at the form - I'm not locking out just focusing on the ROM I can maintain form with (keep a straight line) using a close parallel stance.

If you try the strict stance and don't lock out you should (in addition to getting a tremendous leg pump) see the mechanics don't allow you to go much lower than I go in the video, which puts the knee close to 90% - a wide stance like many prefer would have less of an angle for so shallow a depth which is why it's misleading.

I bet your 140 lb powerlifter can't do 30 reps with 332 lbs raw using that form - that's what he'd need to match my performance with the 475 based on bodyweight. If he could, his legs would be as muscular as mine but even if 420 to parallel were enough to equal 332x30 partials (it's not) it's more likely the PL has a disproportionately massive posterior chain as per today's wide stance emphasis in powerlifting and would find himself at a disadvantage with my style.

This is an illustration of Wolff's law, but it confuses many athletes who expect heavy butt squatting to build big wheels. Wolff would say they've got the wrong form for that and you would seem to agree as per your salient observation about turnip thighs on the other thread.


Wolf's law has to do with bone loading and remodeling. With that partial squat you are loading mostly the spine, hips and knees. The quads are off loaded the way you do them. Any one with a basic understanding of biomechanics would be able to comprehend that.

Open User Options Menu

Mr. Strong

Brian Johnston wrote:
Keep convincing yourself of your great squatting ability Tom (just don't go down to parallel as it will crush you). It matters not that you want to compare yourself to a guy half your size in terms of thigh development. That's not even the point, not that you ever will get the friggin' point that PEOPLE CAN GAIN SIGNFICANT AMOUNTS OF WEIGHT ON EXERCISES AND NOT EXPERIENCE ADDED MUSCEL MASS.

Duh! Heck, I DOUBLED the load on a squat machine over the course of about 4-6 months (I don't recall the time line, but something like that)... 350 pounds for 60-seconds TUT to 700 pounds for 60-seconds TUT. Thighs looked and measured the same, lol.



But you altered the performance on the squat machine to allow for more weight. And it was a single set.

Now if you went from multiple sets of 10 chins with bw, to multiple sets of 10 chins with 200kg in addition to bw with perfect form and control throughout, you would see an increase in size.

Keep your focus on the targeted musculature and as you increase reps/weight you will build muscle, but put your focus on hitting a certain number of reps with x weight regardless of how, then you may not build much muscle.

Open User Options Menu

Tomislav

New York, USA

Brian Johnston wrote:
Keep convincing yourself of your great squatting ability Tom (just don't go down to parallel as it will crush you). It matters not that you want to compare yourself to a guy half your size in terms of thigh development. That's not even the point, not that you ever will get the friggin' point that PEOPLE CAN GAIN SIGNFICANT AMOUNTS OF WEIGHT ON EXERCISES AND NOT EXPERIENCE ADDED MUSCEL MASS.

Duh! Heck, I DOUBLED the load on a squat machine over the course of about 4-6 months (I don't recall the time line, but something like that)... 350 pounds for 60-seconds TUT to 700 pounds for 60-seconds TUT. Thighs looked and measured the same, lol.


LOL Brian, you were the one that asked to compare the 140 lb powerlifter, my example was hypothetical.

And there's no way to know he's half my size without knowing his height too; What if he was a foot shorter?

Consider that perhaps the squat machine allowed you to change your technique to increasingly offload weight to the posterior chain where the gains would be less noticed, particularly when measuring the thighs.
Open User Options Menu

farhad

Massachusetts, USA

You're trying to debate with someone who really believes that fat can turn into muscle. Why even bother with anything else?
Open User Options Menu

Brian Johnston

Ontario, CAN

Sorry, Strong... next time I'll do 10 sets of squats to see if there is a change. But why stop at 10... why not 11... and maybe 9 sets would be enough. Blah, blah, blah. Still waiting for your photo to even prove you lift weights, since what you suggest makes me think otherwise.
Open User Options Menu

Tomislav

New York, USA

dcshores wrote:
Tomislav wrote:
Brian Johnston wrote:
By the way, I worked with a powerlifter in North Bay, ON who weighed 140 pounds (very lean) and he could squat three times his weight... competition squat. He competed at the Canadian level. That's 420 pounds to parallel. I never saw you squat to parallel in your video... not for even one rep.

You are doing top partials. I can do 4 plates a side doing that, but it does nothing for my thighs in terms of maintaining fullness or development. But to each his or her own.

No take a closer look at the form - I'm not locking out just focusing on the ROM I can maintain form with (keep a straight line) using a close parallel stance.

If you try the strict stance and don't lock out you should (in addition to getting a tremendous leg pump) see the mechanics don't allow you to go much lower than I go in the video, which puts the knee close to 90% - a wide stance like many prefer would have less of an angle for so shallow a depth which is why it's misleading.

I bet your 140 lb powerlifter can't do 30 reps with 332 lbs raw using that form - that's what he'd need to match my performance with the 475 based on bodyweight. If he could, his legs would be as muscular as mine but even if 420 to parallel were enough to equal 332x30 partials (it's not) it's more likely the PL has a disproportionately massive posterior chain as per today's wide stance emphasis in powerlifting and would find himself at a disadvantage with my style.

This is an illustration of Wolff's law, but it confuses many athletes who expect heavy butt squatting to build big wheels. Wolff would say they've got the wrong form for that and you would seem to agree as per your salient observation about turnip thighs on the other thread.


Wolf's law has to do with bone loading and remodeling. With that partial squat you are loading mostly the spine, hips and knees. The quads are off loaded the way you do them. Any one with a basic understanding of biomechanics would be able to comprehend that.


dcshores,
I disagree; Wolff's law also covers soft tissue:

Mineral is laid into bone axially along lines of force and muscle and sinew follow suit.

Do you imagine you're not building muscle along lines of force? That's what form is all about, directing the lines of force.

Why not share a pic of your results and describe/explain your squatting technique?
Open User Options Menu

Turpin

I believe there is indeed correlation between resistance used and muscle size , BUT upon reaching ones limitations in strength ( which doesn't take long ) there are far more variables that are necessary to realise ongoing hypertrophy and not necessarily involving adding pounds on the bar.

T.
Open User Options Menu

Brian Johnston

Ontario, CAN

Turpin wrote:
I believe there is indeed correlation between resistance used and muscle size , BUT upon reaching ones limitations in strength ( which doesn't take long ) there are far more variables that are necessary to realise ongoing hypertrophy and not necessarily involving adding pounds on the bar.

T.


Exactly, it does not take long. And there is a difference between muscle strength (actual force production) and adaptive coordination, etc. Hitting a peak in lifting ability comes quick, whereas the little increases in weight or reps over the course of months or years thereafter is a different animal.

That is why those who investigate and apply SMART variation are doing better than those who keep yapping about 'increase loads' and you will get huge (although they are not!).
Open User Options Menu
First | Previous | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | Next | Last
Administrators Online: Mod Phoenix
H.I.T. Acceptable Use Policy