http://www.elitefts.com/documents/size-strength2.htm
My take home lesson from this article.
(1) Eat a Ton while Powerlifting so you can preserve muscle mass,
and get adequate recovery.
(2) Eat a Ton while Bodybuilding because this is where you’re going to make your greatest gains in size.
(3) Stop Eating a Ton when getting lean is a greater priority than getting huge for whatever reason (cutting weight, getting in contest shape, etc).
[quote]FightingScott wrote:
http://www.elitefts.com/documents/size-strength2.htm
My take home lesson from this article.
(1) Eat a Ton while Powerlifting so you can preserve muscle mass,
and get adequate recovery.
(2) Eat a Ton while Bodybuilding because this is where you’re going to make your greatest gains in size.
(3) Stop Eating a Ton when getting lean is a greater priority than getting huge for whatever reason (cutting weight, getting in contest shape, etc).[/quote]
you seriously didnt have eat more = get bigger and eat less = get leaner in the common sense folder?
[quote]LiveFromThe781 wrote:
FightingScott wrote:
http://www.elitefts.com/documents/size-strength2.htm
My take home lesson from this article.
(1) Eat a Ton while Powerlifting so you can preserve muscle mass,
and get adequate recovery.
(2) Eat a Ton while Bodybuilding because this is where you’re going to make your greatest gains in size.
(3) Stop Eating a Ton when getting lean is a greater priority than getting huge for whatever reason (cutting weight, getting in contest shape, etc).
you seriously didnt have eat more = get bigger and eat less = get leaner in the common sense folder?[/quote]
I do, but a lot of people don’t.
i couldn’t agree more w/ people not having the same mentality they do in the kitchen as they do in the gym. i confess i was there b4 but the kitchen is a whole different battle in this war 
[quote]LiveFromThe781 wrote:
you seriously didnt have eat more = get bigger and eat less = get leaner in the common sense folder?[/quote]
The problem could be related to not knowing how much you’re actually eating or burning.
Someone might do a BMR calculation and then estimate the amount of calories they need but be way off.
[quote]LiftSmart wrote:
LiveFromThe781 wrote:
you seriously didnt have eat more = get bigger and eat less = get leaner in the common sense folder?
The problem could be related to not knowing how much you’re actually eating or burning.
Someone might do a BMR calculation and then estimate the amount of calories they need but be way off.[/quote]
dieting sucks. =(
Those calculations honestly don’t mean much.
One thing Ive seen is that you can train your body to lose weight at 4000 calories as well as train it to gain weight at 1200 calories. Of course, what you lose at 4000 will be predominantly fat just as what you gain at 1200 will be more likely fat.
Your energy output chases activity levels AND just as importantly, your energy input. Eat more and lift/run more and your metabolism will rocket even with weight or composition held constant.
Its ok to use the equation as a starting point but make sure to adjust upwards/downwards depending on your goals. Ive known people who were maintaining weight for months at TWICE the calculated TDEE.
GIST: If you’re a 200 pound dude slowly gaining weight on 1800-2000 calories a day, chances are you’re just getting fatter.
[quote]LiftSmart wrote:
LiveFromThe781 wrote:
you seriously didnt have eat more = get bigger and eat less = get leaner in the common sense folder?
The problem could be related to not knowing how much you’re actually eating or burning.
Someone might do a BMR calculation and then estimate the amount of calories they need but be way off.[/quote]
I think the real problem when most people try to bulk is twofold…
1- eating the right foods
2- getting used to eating enough of the right foods (how many times have you not wanted to eat after a big feeding, even though it was time to?)
Just my own observations.
S
[quote]tribunaldude wrote:
GIST: If you’re a 200 pound dude slowly gaining weight on 1800-2000 calories a day, chances are you’re just getting fatter.
[/quote]
If you’re a 200 pound dude slowly gaining weight on 1800-2000 calories a day, you are either almost completely inactive, bed ridden or may have hypothyroidism.
From the article:
I love to come across articles in which authorities on strength training and powerlifting endorse bodybuilding methods. This is occuring on an increasingly frequent basis. It’s nice to see that everything you’ve been saying for years has been validated.
Get that, T-Nation?
Low reps, heavy weight is NOT best suited for mass.
What I’ve said all along.
BB > PL for hypertrophy
[quote]Nominal Prospect wrote:
From the article:
Why do some people fail to gain mass on a powerlifting routine? The classic answer is that the reps are too low. Higher reps are needed to gain muscle mass.
I love to come across articles in which authorities on strength training and powerlifting endorse bodybuilding methods. This is occuring on an increasingly frequent basis. It’s nice to see that everything you’ve been saying for years has been validated.
Get that, T-Nation?
Low reps, heavy weight is NOT best suited for mass.
What I’ve said all along.
BB > PL for hypertrophy[/quote]
Pretty sure some people are about to rip into you about that comment.
Many top BBers have achieved huge amounts of LBM with low reps and heavy weight. Ronnie Coleman was a PLer and built a shit ton of mass with that training. Sergio Oliva also used low reps with heavy weight, he was an Oly lifter. PLers on average have more LBM than bodybuilders, there was a study done on this. There are too many examples to discredit the mass building power of low rep heavy weight training.
Heavy low rep training works for hypertrophy because of the massive tension that is generated in the muscle fiber.
Right, I meant he would most likely have a damaged metabolism.
Believe me, Ive seen quite a few skinny fat dudes who train without eating enough and actually gain weight SLOWLY without getting any stronger.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
tribunaldude wrote:
GIST: If you’re a 200 pound dude slowly gaining weight on 1800-2000 calories a day, chances are you’re just getting fatter.
If you’re a 200 pound dude slowly gaining weight on 1800-2000 calories a day, you are either almost completely inactive, bed ridden or may have hypothyroidism.[/quote]
[quote]Professor X wrote:
tribunaldude wrote:
GIST: If you’re a 200 pound dude slowly gaining weight on 1800-2000 calories a day, chances are you’re just getting fatter.
If you’re a 200 pound dude slowly gaining weight on 1800-2000 calories a day, you are either almost completely inactive, bed ridden or may have hypothyroidism.[/quote]
Seriously, where did the original logic come from?
Did you even see the word ‘SOME’? Ive highlighted it for you.
A low volume high intensity approach is not idea for consistently gaining size and strength, but anyone with half a brain will do one of the following:
GIST (for the under-educated with poor reading comprehension and/or reasoning):
The article states that for someone who is neurologically efficient i.e. is able to recruit enough motor units in various movements, higher reps will be better for hypertrophy. NOT the same as whatever youre puking.
[quote]Nominal Prospect wrote:
From the article:
Why do some people fail to gain mass on a powerlifting routine? The classic answer is that the reps are too low. Higher reps are needed to gain muscle mass.
I love to come across articles in which authorities on strength training and powerlifting endorse bodybuilding methods. This is occuring on an increasingly frequent basis. It’s nice to see that everything you’ve been saying for years has been validated.
Get that, T-Nation?
Low reps, heavy weight is NOT best suited for mass.
What I’ve said all along.
BB > PL for hypertrophy[/quote]
The article states the following:
The point I’m trying to make is that support that for bodybuilding routines is growing constantly, and even coming from the unlikely places.
From 2000-2006, you couldn’t find a training article on the net that had anything good to say about bodybuilding which wasn’t written by a bodybuilder.
Now, everybody is putting in a good word…people like Dave Tate, Mike Boyle, Alwyn Cosgrove, CT, Poliquin, and countless other non-bodybuilders have all come out to defend bodybuilding principles on one occasion or another.
It is very vindicating for those of who knew the truth from the start. We had to put up with years of Chad Waterbury fanboyism on this very site.
I am keeping a running tally of instances where non-bodybuilder coaches and athletes have endorsed BB’ing principles in one form or another. You will see me point this out each time it happens. I fought hard for this when there was no support and now I’m reaping my gains.
Bodybuilding techniques are rapidly becoming “accepted” among the self-styled “training elite”.
[quote]tremad12 wrote:
Nominal Prospect wrote:
From the article:
Why do some people fail to gain mass on a powerlifting routine? The classic answer is that the reps are too low. Higher reps are needed to gain muscle mass.
I love to come across articles in which authorities on strength training and powerlifting endorse bodybuilding methods. This is occuring on an increasingly frequent basis. It’s nice to see that everything you’ve been saying for years has been validated.
Get that, T-Nation?
Low reps, heavy weight is NOT best suited for mass.
What I’ve said all along.
BB > PL for hypertrophy
Pretty sure some people are about to rip into you about that comment.
Many top BBers have achieved huge amounts of LBM with low reps and heavy weight. Ronnie Coleman was a PLer and built a shit ton of mass with that training. Sergio Oliva also used low reps with heavy weight, he was an Oly lifter. PLers on average have more LBM than bodybuilders, there was a study done on this. There are too many examples to discredit the mass building power of low rep heavy weight training.
Heavy low rep training works for hypertrophy because of the massive tension that is generated in the muscle fiber.[/quote]
And why do so many think it has to be all one way?
Higher reps, mid reps, low reps, they all have their place in a BB program.
What on earth are you talking about?
I haven;t seen any fanboys on this forum.
A search reveals that Waterbury himself has a program with 100 reps for hypertrophy so I’m not sure what youre even referring to.
What endorsement of ‘bodybuilding methods’ are we looking for? If anyone has been training exclusively high reps (> 10) or exclusively low reps low volume (reps<3) all his life I’ll bet bongs to barrels he’s not carrying all that much muscle on his body,which I assume goes against the principles of bbing in the first place (unless you’re a dude with short limbs and round muscle bellies - in which case ANY DAMN training should make you bigger)
[quote]Nominal Prospect wrote:
[/quote]
Your join date is May 08. You missed the battles.
[quote]Nominal Prospect wrote:
Your join date is May 08. You missed the battles.[/quote]
But his screenname is tribunaldude - in reference to the Alpha Cell. And he acts like his shit don’t stink and he’s just as colossal, jacked, and all knowing as his cartoon avatar.