If you were Fat and Stiff . ..

[Mr Punch]

McGill










.

[GunnedDownAtrocity]

DO NOT READ THIS POST IF YOU HAVE NO INTEREST IN THE FINER POINTS OF STRENGTH TRAINING!!! SERIOUSLY ... IT WILL BORE YOU TO TEARS.

This is excellent and explains why what GDA just said makes sense.

while i agree with the general message of the article there are some key points i have issues with.

for overall strength and athletic performance, full body workouts are great, but i think the article oversimplifies this and ignores a lot of other factors. bodybuilders "isoloate" muscle groups and work on splits for a reason. full body routines are great up to a certain point, but even if you aren't a professional bodybuilder, there may come a time that your chest overshadows your back, or your calves are small compared to your quads and hammies. in such cases you may want to give these bodyparts a little extra love. also, splits offer a variety to training and can keep things from getting monotonous after doing full body workouts for a length of time. also, after one has gained a significant amount of strenght (with or without gaining a significant amount of size), i really wouldnt recommend deadlifting more than once a week. again ... i do agree full body routines are ideal for the general athlete; however, there are few sports that have relied on science as much as bodybuilding, so i wouldnt throw the baby out with the bathwater.

"Go heavy or go home" is a common saying among bodybuilders. But, while it's crucial that you use a weight that provides a challenging load, the mantra is flawed. That's because muscle fibers can grow in two ways. The first is when the myofibrils -- the parts of the fiber that contain the contracting proteins -- increase in number and density. This type of growth leads to strength gains and can be accomplished by using heavy weights that allow only one to seven repetitions. The second type of growth, however, occurs when your muscles are forced to contract for longer periods of time. Typically, this means using lighter loads that allow you to complete 12 to 15 repetitions. This increases the number of energy-producing structures within the fiber. So you don't get significantly stronger, but you do get bigger.

on one hand, i find it slightly irritating that this information is given as if its something new. its presented as if there's a single powerlifter or bodybuilder on earth who didn't already know this, and they werent simply rehashing the info for the sake of those who are new to training. on the other hand, presentation aside, im very happy to hear a mainstream magazine finally get it right, and not recommend doing endless repetitons to "tone up" and avoid heavy weights if you dont want to "get too bulky" as if getting big happens all by itself.

For example, let's say it takes 5 seconds to complete one repetition. This means one set of eight repetitions would place your muscles under tension for 40 seconds. So, using Cosgrove's theory, you'd need to do only three sets -- for a total of 120 seconds -- to perform enough exercise to stimulate muscle growth. Likewise with four sets of five repetitions or two sets of 12 repetitions.



However, even Cosgrove admits that this is more theory than fact, primarily for one reason: Human studies simply haven't compared a wide variety of set and repetition ranges or even controlled for the duration of muscle tension. So there's simply no data to draw from. At least not until you look elsewhere in the animal kingdom.

actually this has been studied extensively for many years. most of this stuff is over my head, but the ideal rep range is 25 - 30 reps ... how you get there depends on your goals. on opposite ends of the spectrum, powerlifters may do speed training with 10 sets of 3, while bodybuilders will perform the same exercise and do 3 sets of 10. 4 x 6, 5 x 5, 6 x 4, and 3 x 8 are also very common rep schemes. also the article mentions mixing togeather these rep schemes kind of all willy nilly through the week ....

For instance, he might prescribe five repetitions of each exercise on Monday, 15 on Wednesday, and 10 on Friday. "

..... while this might be ok sorta, its not the smartest or most "scientific" approach to strength training. again ... this stuff is a little over my head, but the science of periodization has been well established and researched from little hole in the wall powerlifting gyms to the top strength coaches responsible for placing weightlifters into the olympics. coaches have devised many ways of altering volume and intensity for proven optimal results. a program may have you keep volume the same while increasing intensity, start with high volume low intensity and move towards low volume high intensity, or (less commonly) keep intensity relativley consistant while increasing volume. theres linear periodization which is used the most in america, and conjugate periodiztion which was adopted and made popular by west side. this isn't something ive read into extensively, but it just hit a nerve to hear someone say that it was something that "is more theory than fact [because] studies simply haven't compared a wide variety of set and repetition ranges or even controlled for the duration of muscle tension.'

i apologize for the long winded response, especially considering the fact that i was picking at details, but these things bother me and i had to vent.

[GunnedDownAtrocity]

http://www.alwyncosgrove.com/SevenHabits.html
And I don't mean to "bag" on bodybuilding. One can't help but be impressed by top athletes in any sport. But the fact that it is a sport is also an important thing to remember. Bodybuilding is a unique sport unto itself. For the general fitness enthusiast (i.e. not a competitive bodybuilder) to develop and implement a fitness program using bodybuilding theory and bodybuilding type exercises makes as much sense as using soccer training or racquetball to design that same program. And while most people recognize that this is idiotic at best, we still continue to talk about splitting up "body parts" and following a bodybuilding-based program.

Now, that's not to say we don't use exercises or ideas from all sports and systems (remember, absorb what is useful…) To do so would be closed-minded. But to adopt any one single philosophy is just as closed-minded.

see ... now this guy is speaking my language.

[Mr Punch]

see ... now this guy is speaking my language.

It's the same guy. Actually he does say the same thing in the first article I linked to directly (and the same as you): bodybuilders split for a reason.

... but even if you aren't a professional bodybuilder, there may come a time that your chest overshadows your back, or your calves are small compared to your quads and hammies. in such cases you may want to give these bodyparts a little extra love...

He says that too, if not in that article then certainly in many others.

on one hand, i find it slightly irritating that this information is given as if its something new. its presented as if there's a single powerlifter or bodybuilder on earth who didn't already know this, and they werent simply rehashing the info for the sake of those who are new to training.

Yeah well, it IS Men's Health. I think you're overestimating average human intelligence.

[GunnedDownAtrocity]

It's the same guy. Actually he does say the same thing in the first article I linked to directly (and the same as you): bodybuilders split for a reason.

haha ... so much for details when i completely ignore who the author is.

Yeah well, it IS Men's Health. I think you're overestimating average human intelligence.

fair enough.

[David Jamieson]

so you don't agree with curls, dips, rows, french curls, hammer curls, lunges, squats etc. cohen curls, preacher curl, flys, back flys...and so on which all work specific muscle groups and ion effect isolate those groups and are isolation.

I think we need to look at what you see as isolation.
I don't advocate it as the totality of strength development and would also throw in a crap load of the body weight work such as chins and pullups, pushups, crunches, plyo et al.

so what are you guys defining as isolation and under which terms? I don't get how all that stuff i listed wouldn't develop strength. It's been shown to and I've done it myself. Maybe I'm just not getting your perspective on it?

[sanjuro_ronin]

so you don't agree with curls, dips, rows, french curls, hammer curls, lunges, squats etc. cohen curls, preacher curl, flys, back flys...and so on which all work specific muscle groups and ion effect isolate those groups and are isolation.

I think we need to look at what you see as isolation.
I don't advocate it as the totality of strength development and would also throw in a crap load of the body weight work such as chins and pullups, pushups, crunches, plyo et al.

so what are you guys defining as isolation and under which terms? I don't get how all that stuff i listed wouldn't develop strength. It's been shown to and I've done it myself. Maybe I'm just not getting your perspective on it?

Concentration curls, for example, that isolate the biceps is an isolation move.
A chin that hist the biceps, as well as the lats and rear delts and so on, is a compound move.

Dips are compound moves, rows are compound moves, anything that gets multiple muscle groups in action are compounds.

Now, that said, even isolation moves CAN build strength, try doing a one arm DB curl with 100 lbs and tel me you are not strong.

[David Jamieson]

there really aren't a lot of exercises you can do as isolations really.

cohen / preacher / concerntartion curls only work bicep
Lying down tricep lifts only work tri's

most other stuff is centric but still is compound as well.
so lats get a huge bit of work from say a row, but there are other muscle groups invoved in carrying out the movement.

anyway. lifting is only part oft he overall package.

fitness is what this guy needs first and that will come through activity that breaks a sweat and maintains a zone heart beat for 20-30 minute intervals.

In the end, the exact type of exercise isn't as relevant as the fact that you are indeed exercising!

[David Jamieson]

oh, and if you smoke, stop.

if you are eating a lot of crap, stop that too and get some dietary/nutritional advice from a nutritionist.

be very moderate in alcohol consumption.

keep negative thoughts and people out of your life when possible.

work with someone who is stronger than you.

[GunnedDownAtrocity]

so what are you guys defining as isolation and under which terms? I don't get how all that stuff i listed wouldn't develop strength. It's been shown to and I've done it myself. Maybe I'm just not getting your perspective on it?

almost everything in my entire workout last night was isolation movements. barbell curls with skull crushers, (chins and dips - not isolation), hammer curls with standing french presses, supersetted this weird seated bar curl with your elbows way back and only moving from stomach to chest with laying cable curls, then supersetted seated french curls with laying tri kickbacks, followed by rolling wrist curls and reverse curls.

but see ... that entire workout was based purely on asthetics. i want bigger arms. tonight ill follow squats with isolation movements for the legs like leg extentions and leg curls.

sanjuro is right ... isolation movements can build strength, but usually this type of strength is limited to that particular movement and has littel carry over to the real world. take curls for example ... being good at the curling movement might help you hold out in an arm bar to get better positioning or lift up small children who like to hang on your forearms, but the functional application is limmited. squats have improved my jumping ability - not so much as the oly lifts, but there was definitely marked improvement as my squat went up. i dont think leg curls or leg extentions will ever provide that benifit.

[GunnedDownAtrocity]

also sorry for sidetracking the thread ..... david is right and the most important thing is to just start doing something. even if its 10 mins a day instead of 6 hours a day its a good start ... once you get your foot in the door and consistantly dedicate a part of your day to fitness, no matter how small, it gets easier to build from there.

[David Jamieson]

gda-

just post a couple of your skinny ass pictures, your chemo pics and your pics now. Maybe that'll inspire him.

you were a skinny little bugger a few years ago and now you are in pretty good shape. Use that!

[GunnedDownAtrocity]

prechemolicious

chemofabulous

chemovictorious

[David Jamieson]

fuggin a.

testify!

[Seppukku]

So I want to get as much information as possible. If you were going to go into training a traditional martial art, more or less blind, and you were

-fat
-oldish
-had low physical endurance
-were basically inflexible

What would you do to remedy the problems as quickly as possible?

Can anyone suggest a basic training routine, without knowing to many details?

Thanks

I hear Lama Pai can help you with some of that. But if that doesn't work, you could always try some SanDa.