Remember the article about the arnold classic in issue 199. heres the link:
www.t-mag.com/articles/199crazy.html
That one guy squatted 760 at a weight of 165. A female competitor squatted 446 at a body weight of 131. I am not a genetic freak, far from it. I just work hard.
You are attributing volume of work [standing for long hours, pulling heavy palettes all day] as the causing factor to your superior leg strength. Yet I remember reading on many of your posts that brief, infrequent and intense training are the secrets to success. Your stand now looks to be in direct conflict of the Volume vs Intensity debate.
Let me make it clear that I’m not trying to make you look silly by pointing this out. Just like everyone here I’m trying to gain a greater understanding of resistance training and its effects on our bodies. I know I’ve flip-flopped back and forth on this topic many times. Your point of view will be appreciated.
Just thought I’d re-post this response as it was mistakenly posted to another thread:
Standing around on my feet all day leads to increased stamina, as does my daily walk to work (about 3 miles total). Dragging pallets was for a short burst maybe 100 feet at the most, somtimes pulling them up a slope to get them off the truck, not pulling it around for 8 hrs. Totally different "exercises". Now that I do not pull pallets around any more (its been about a year), I have seen a tremendous increase in leg strength, as before I was probably over training (because of the inclusion of weight training). Does that clarify things? Let me know if it does not. By the way, if you don't feel comfortable using your real name, you could at least use your forum name. These annonymous posts are getting annoying.
Thanks dude, time for another cup of coffee.
But the caffeine ko, the caffeine…
Just so you know, that anonymous post was not me. I don’t play that game. The guy who squats 760 and is 165 or whatever is a) using steroids, b) genetically strong, and c) works very, very hard. Probably 90% of the people that lack b) and weigh 165 will never squat over 500. To attain that strength would take years of hard work and practice. I would think you could easily squat 450 (especially with a suit, wraps, and belt) if you tried. Your 315 for 12 reps is 70% of the 450 hypothetical max. You can do 4 sets of that so actually you could probably do 335-350 for 12 reps to failure. Now either you have a very dominant slow-twitch make-up (like da women) and can do nearly 80% of your 1RM for 12 reps or you just don’t ever max. I’m very perplexed right now. Just admit it, you modest guy you. You’re strong and you know it. Heh.
Just wanted to add something. My max squat (without suit or wraps) is 425. The most I’ve done with 315 is 7 reps. There is no way in hell I could squat 80% of my max for 4 sets of 12 reps. Unbelievable. One of these days I’m going to get me some wraps and a suit and see how much I can do. By the way, I’m 6’1 and 222 lbs. so you can imagine why I’m impressed with your squat ko.
I’ve already given up beer for 12 weeks, there is no way in hell i am giving up coffee.
Yes I do have strong legs, but there are guys who are stronger ( some use roids some don't). The reason my max is not there, is more than likely because I have not been training with maximal loads. If I were to start, I could get there pretty quickily. However I am in a bulking stage, so it will have to wait.
I found no real connection between squat weight, bench press weight, and body mass. Of course, I claim no “scientific observation” in this. I’ve seen skinny legged squatters, good leg mass on those who don’t squat, and other variations to this.