logout
help
framed forum
go pro
subscriptions
account
create thread
Strength & Conditioning >> Building muscle over building strength
| 5/18/12 6:44 AM | |
Leigh
329 
Member Since: 1/1/01 Posts: 27326 |
What are peoples opinions on the difference in training methodologies? Same exercises? Different rep schemes? Tempo? Range of motion? I have built a reasonable level of strength by going against the classic bodybuilding rules - my reps are almost always under 5 and often less than 3, especially on full body lifts like dreads. I don't feel the muscle or use strict movement, I get the bar up as fast as I can. I've put on a decent amount of muscle by doing this and increasing calories but after Doug's posts I'm interested in learning more about gaining muscle as a priority Cheers for any feedback 
|
| 5/18/12 7:01 AM | |
|
HERTSWENIP
Edited: 05/18/12 7:14 AM Member Since: 1/1/01 Posts: 6072 |
IMO there isn't much difference in myofibrillar hypertrophy vs sarcoplasmic except in steroid users (because AAS dramaticaly augment intramuscular storage of energy substrates) and novice trainees within a given muscle group. (ie- course your soleus will experience more of the latter and your triceps more of the former, due to their inherent fibertype makeup in most of the population (ST and FT dominant, respectively) The lines are much more blurry when it comes to natural lifters and advanced athletes. Once you've developed muscle mass, it isn't difficult to transform that into specific strength through neurological adaptations. My best hypertrophic cycles have occured utilizing high set high intensity low volume protocols. IE 8-10 sets of 3 with the same weight (85%+ 1rm), resting ~3-5 mins between sets. Try it. This type of protocol wouldn't work well for those with poor neurological efficiency (novice-intermediate lifters), and those will a higher slow twitch phenotype. You'd achieve best results if you abstained from your MMA training while doing this protocol, and had a little "off season" I think. All the physically demanding stuff you do outside the weightroom will tap into your recovery capacity (gains). As an extreme example, Charles Poliquin says elite olympic lifters avoid walking anywhere for this reason nearing competition. |
| 5/18/12 7:15 AM | |
|
Leigh
329
Member Since: 1/1/01 Posts: 27329 |
Ok thanks, that's great info :) |
| 5/18/12 7:24 AM | |
|
HERTSWENIP
Edited: 05/18/12 7:37 AM Member Since: 1/1/01 Posts: 6073 |
I'd also add that since you've grown accustomed to ulta low volume training as of late, i'd segue into it with say 5 sets of3 the first week, 6 sets the following week, then 8, then 10 while maintaining the same weight. If you're responding well, then bump up the weight and drop back down to 6 sets and repeat from there. For me, because I do this protocol every 8 weeks or so, I tend to stop responding after 1-2 weeks. But I've been lifting for nearly 20 years (since I was a child) and have tried virtually everything- for me personally, this is where my "golden gains" reside. I and others are able to visibly notice the rapid difference it makes to my body after 1-2 sessions, along with the strength gains |
| 5/18/12 7:52 AM | |
|
HERTSWENIP
Edited: 05/18/12 7:56 AM Member Since: 1/1/01 Posts: 6074 |
| 5/18/12 7:54 AM | |
|
HERTSWENIP
Member Since: 1/1/01 Posts: 6075 |
I just noticed this part "I don't feel the muscle or use strict movement, I get the bar up as fast as I can." -I'd definately say try to feel the muscle working, it's been shown to facilitate MU recruitment. I'd also say be sure to tightly control the both the eccentric and concentric parts of non-dynamic movements. (ie- of course you should always explode on a clean, but say with benching or chins, use a strict controlled tempo- ie its ok to spend a full second in the concentric, and 2-3 or even 4 seconds on the eccentric. It's ok to explode out of the hole on your chins or bench, so long as your body doesnt sway or your bench form is off. Think of how a gymnast moves... explosive yet tight and controlled) |
| 5/18/12 8:02 AM | |
|
Leigh
329
Member Since: 1/1/01 Posts: 27332 |
Ah ok. ta, I will try to add some of this stuff into my routine |
| 5/18/12 9:44 AM | |
|
LiftStrong
7
Member Since: 10/15/08 Posts: 3230 |
Definitely some good info there HERTSWENIP. Pretty much agree with everything you said. It seems to me that the higher rep bodybuilding schemes are only effective if you are saucing. What are everyones thoughts on splits? For muscle gain I have always liked using an upper/lower split. My thought is that the BB split (legs, back, chest, shoulders/arms)is ineffective for most individuals. I dont like micromanaging movements. |
| 5/18/12 9:49 AM | |
|
vermonter
28
Member Since: 1/1/01 Posts: 9941 |
I am working atm, but i thought i'd throw my hat in to join in and then contribute more later. I think at a given level of hypertrophy, lower rep ranges will be superior for developing strength in a given exercise. That part is fairly uncontroversial. However, as Jeremy and i have been talking about lately, I think hypertrophy itself can be well developed, and in the average population of non-steroid users probably developed BETTER, with lower rep ranges as well. Let me rephrase for simplicity: For the average person, i think low rep ranges are best for strength AND size. |
| 5/18/12 11:58 AM | |
|
Leigh
329
Member Since: 1/1/01 Posts: 27336 |
OK thanks guys. Seems we agree cos my experience is that higher reps do nothing for me
|
| 5/18/12 12:24 PM | |
|
SidRon
11
Member Since: 2/5/06 Posts: 1121 |
vermonter - I am working atm, but i thought i'd throw my hat in to join in and then contribute more later. What is your definition of low reps? |
| 5/18/12 1:43 PM | |
|
vermonter
28
Member Since: 1/1/01 Posts: 9942 |
SidRon - 5 or less. I still made progress as I got into higher reps with the pullups but my progress slowed. It may be a good idea when doing a program like the one herts mentions to gradually increase the reps even as high as 10 before increasing the weight and dropping the reps down again to prevent the staleness issue he mentions. |
| 5/18/12 1:48 PM | |
|
vermonter
28
Member Since: 1/1/01 Posts: 9943 |
Leigh - OK thanks guys. Seems we agree cos my experience is that higher reps do nothing for me Bear in mind that this could be the result of your skill work counting towards important endurance training that you might not get otherwise... Although I think lower rep ranges are best for strength and size, I also think that muscular endurance is important for high frequency (critical in strength work) and recovery (critical for all exercise). This makes higher rep ranges important, but to what extent (and more importantly, to what intensity) I'm still working on. I think the best possible protocol to follow for the greatest strength gains is a conjugate program, including both low reps and high. |
| 5/18/12 3:16 PM | |
|
bigbabyjesus
Member Since: 6/27/07 Posts: 60 |
What are your guys' opinion on ramping for building muscle? You still get a reasonable number of reps while also getting work near your max. |
| 5/19/12 1:15 AM | |
|
12ealdeal
Member Since: 1/1/12 Posts: 849 |
vermonter -Fewer reps....but much more weight lifted?SidRon - How much weight? To the point b the fifth rep it's tough to get out? Slow controlled motions? Or fast paced reps? 
|
| 5/19/12 10:31 AM | |
|
vermonter
28
Member Since: 1/1/01 Posts: 9944 |
bigbabyjesus - What are your guys' opinion on ramping for building muscle? You still get a reasonable number of reps while also getting work near your max.  This kid's pretty yoked, so sure... why not? |
| 5/19/12 10:35 AM | |
|
vermonter
28
Member Since: 1/1/01 Posts: 9945 |
12ealdeal -vermonter -Fewer reps....but much more weight lifted?SidRon - I generally aim for fatigue avoidance. If i'm doing 5 reps, it's with a weight I could do 6 or 7. I don't generally lift slow, nor do I pay much attention to tempo. I think it's largely a waste of time. I go as fast as i feel like going, and generally de-emphasize the eccentric, mainly because i dislike eccentrics. That said, I'm always in control. |
| 5/19/12 10:37 AM | |
|
vermonter
28
Member Since: 1/1/01 Posts: 9946 |
This screen name belongs to an - I sincerely hope this is a poor attempt at humor. |
| 5/19/12 11:18 AM | |
|
ArtWanderlei
Member Since: 1/1/01 Posts: 102945 |
that dude is annoying as hell. I put him on the greasemonkey filter a week ago. |
| 5/19/12 11:53 AM | |
|
vermonter
28
Edited: 05/19/12 11:53 AM Member Since: 1/1/01 Posts: 9952 |
This screen name belongs to an - Ah English at work again. My bad Fixed. Also here's a little linguistics lesson for you. The dialects of modern english that are the most similar to middle english are in parts of the appalachian mountains. Just so you don't have to Google it, that's in the U.S. So who has the "real" english again, by your reckoning? Additionally, your women would melt at the sound of my american english. Be thankful I haven't been there. Yet. |
| 5/19/12 12:26 PM | |
|
vermonter
28
Member Since: 1/1/01 Posts: 9954 |
I recall a study being done a few years back in which sentences of various dialects of english were played to speakers of different languages from all over the world and american english was deemed overwhelmingly the most beautiful of all. Sorry homie. We got this locked. |
| 5/20/12 1:05 AM | |
|
ArtWanderlei
Member Since: 1/1/01 Posts: 102979 |
could someone ban the above idiot? Annoying as hell. |
| 5/20/12 5:24 AM | |
|
Leigh
329
Member Since: 1/1/01 Posts: 27381 |
So no need to go to failure? Cos I always do that
|
| 5/20/12 2:04 PM | |
|
vermonter
28
Member Since: 1/1/01 Posts: 9962 |
I think avoiding failure for the most part is a good idea. |
| 5/20/12 3:06 PM | |
|
Leigh
329
Member Since: 1/1/01 Posts: 27403 |
Really? Ok cheers |
Reply Post
You must log in to post a reply. Click here to login.
