[quote]dt79 wrote:
[quote]eatliftsleep wrote:
[quote]dt79 wrote:
Are any of the guys lifting or have lifted heavy weights relative to their bodyweights IN THIS THREAD grainy?[/quote]
Cant tell yet but will update in 6 weeks lol
[/quote]
Haha. Just saying there’s no need to bring up pro bodybuilders from the past and present to prove this point when all we have to do is look in the mirror.[/quote]
good point. Is there anyone on this site grainy? I’m sure as hell not.
Have any of the lighter weight class powerlifters on here dieted down to contest condition or close?
Matt Kroc got somewhat grainy in his
[quote]Yogi wrote:
[quote]dt79 wrote:
[quote]eatliftsleep wrote:
[quote]dt79 wrote:
Are any of the guys lifting or have lifted heavy weights relative to their bodyweights IN THIS THREAD grainy?[/quote]
Cant tell yet but will update in 6 weeks lol
[/quote]
Haha. Just saying there’s no need to bring up pro bodybuilders from the past and present to prove this point when all we have to do is look in the mirror.[/quote]
good point. Is there anyone on this site grainy? I’m sure as hell not.
[/quote]
[quote]Spidey22 wrote:
[quote]Depression Boy wrote:
He reached those strength levels (close enough) in his first couple years training at a bodyweight of around 176 pounds - AND he was very dense looking even at this point.
From his third or 4th post in the thread above
"And stat-wise:
Bench- 315x4
Deadlift- 405x6
Squat- 425x5
I don’t know what my one rep max is."
So he was repping with almost 2.5 times bodyweight on Squat and DL and he could have probably squeezed out a rep or two with twice bodyweight on the bench.
It doesn’t make sense for someone who’s got to that level of strength to focus on directly pushing his maxes farther so yeah he used more of BB-type training with the same weights (now moderately heavy for him?)
[quote]audiogarden1 wrote:
[quote]Spidey22 wrote:
yeah and i don’t think Aaron trained ‘heavy’ or whatever, pretty much BB’ing style 90% of his life. So I think the look is really mostly genetic, or maybe those with that ‘density’ are pre-disposed to being brutally strong, not the other way around. [/quote]
Yeah if you follow Aaron on instagram he does not lift crazy weights. He’s strong by my standards but at his level repping 315 8 times on bench or squatting 4 plates is nothing outstanding. The guy’s just a genetic freak. [/quote]
[/quote]
yeah I wasn’t saying he’s NOT strong. I’m just saying I don’t think he ever did the, idk, style of power training that most associate with the graininess look, a la Branch Warren, Dorian Blood and Guts style, Ronnie with his PL background.
All pro BB’ers are strong AF. Maybe I’m missing what ya’ll mean (not necessarily you DepBoy, idr if you said it) when someone gets the grainy look from brutally heavy lifting? Just lots of low reps? or years of training focusing on ‘strength’ over pump stuff?[/quote]
Inclining 405 for 4 is pretty damn strong.
Nah its an illusion…he’s in reality really focusing on “quality muscle stimulation” instead of that stupid power training that out of shape permabulkers and “gym rats” keep advocating. Clearly training for strength is pointless for BB purposes. Even when he got to reaping twice bodyweight and squatting and deading 2.5 times bodyweight he was using quality muscle stimulation instead of focusing on numbers.
[quote]WhiteFlash wrote:
[quote]Spidey22 wrote:
[quote]Depression Boy wrote:
He reached those strength levels (close enough) in his first couple years training at a bodyweight of around 176 pounds - AND he was very dense looking even at this point.
From his third or 4th post in the thread above
"And stat-wise:
Bench- 315x4
Deadlift- 405x6
Squat- 425x5
I don’t know what my one rep max is."
So he was repping with almost 2.5 times bodyweight on Squat and DL and he could have probably squeezed out a rep or two with twice bodyweight on the bench.
It doesn’t make sense for someone who’s got to that level of strength to focus on directly pushing his maxes farther so yeah he used more of BB-type training with the same weights (now moderately heavy for him?)
[quote]audiogarden1 wrote:
[quote]Spidey22 wrote:
yeah and i don’t think Aaron trained ‘heavy’ or whatever, pretty much BB’ing style 90% of his life. So I think the look is really mostly genetic, or maybe those with that ‘density’ are pre-disposed to being brutally strong, not the other way around. [/quote]
Yeah if you follow Aaron on instagram he does not lift crazy weights. He’s strong by my standards but at his level repping 315 8 times on bench or squatting 4 plates is nothing outstanding. The guy’s just a genetic freak. [/quote]
[/quote]
yeah I wasn’t saying he’s NOT strong. I’m just saying I don’t think he ever did the, idk, style of power training that most associate with the graininess look, a la Branch Warren, Dorian Blood and Guts style, Ronnie with his PL background.
All pro BB’ers are strong AF. Maybe I’m missing what ya’ll mean (not necessarily you DepBoy, idr if you said it) when someone gets the grainy look from brutally heavy lifting? Just lots of low reps? or years of training focusing on ‘strength’ over pump stuff?[/quote]
Inclining 405 for 4 is pretty damn strong. [/quote]
[quote]Depression Boy wrote:
Even when he got to reaping twice bodyweight and squatting and deading 2.5 times bodyweight he was using quality muscle stimulation instead of focusing on numbers.
[/quote]
They’re not always mutually exclusive approaches.
S
No doubt. However, a LOT of BBers (including yourself Stu IIRC a close to 4 plate bench Stu in your first couple years training) spent their early years and paid their dues getting strong. While you dont chase weight on the bar now (for good reason) you’re still using 100 pound DBs for reps on the seated shoulder press, or you were using before your injury. Heck even EyeDentist who trains light now has pressed 385 for a single when he was younger (from his thread) and he’s bird boned! Even Tim McBride who’s faaaar from a big guy posted a video pushing a double with three plates on the bar before he began dieting for his last contest.
That itself added a lot of size for many (albeit not a proportionate physique by any stretch) and for some others while it didn’t give them as much size gain per se… gave them the strength to make the most of their BB focused training later on.
The BB forum has gotten to the point where the forum experts are now scrawny kids with less than 3-4 years of training grinding 2 plates for a max (on a good day) while pushing the whole “stimulation not annihilation” argument and IIFYM/carb backloading/intermittent fasting whatever have you! A couple of the same kids from here (with TWO whole years of cycling under their belt) and are trying to gain “bodybuilding and PED guru” status on PM much to the chagrin of Phil lol.
[quote]The Mighty Stu wrote:
[quote]Depression Boy wrote:
Even when he got to reaping twice bodyweight and squatting and deading 2.5 times bodyweight he was using quality muscle stimulation instead of focusing on numbers.
[/quote]
They’re not always mutually exclusive approaches.
S[/quote]
[quote]The Mighty Stu wrote:
[quote]Depression Boy wrote:
Even when he got to reaping twice bodyweight and squatting and deading 2.5 times bodyweight he was using quality muscle stimulation instead of focusing on numbers.
[/quote]
They’re not always mutually exclusive approaches.
S[/quote]
why does nobody get that?
In the “I’ll never be a weightlifter” video Kai talks all about the importance of muscle stimulation, but the dude’s still strong as an ox.
Quality muscle stimulation with heavy weights. DUN DUN DUNNNNNNN
You are right. In theory.
People who actually DO move massive weights with bodybuilding emphasis spent years getting strong - Im not referring to powerlifting - Im referring to the so called ’
powerbuilding" mentality of getting brutally strong in a moderate rep range, with maxing every now and then on some key compounds!
[quote]Yogi wrote:
[quote]The Mighty Stu wrote:
[quote]Depression Boy wrote:
Even when he got to reaping twice bodyweight and squatting and deading 2.5 times bodyweight he was using quality muscle stimulation instead of focusing on numbers.
[/quote]
They’re not always mutually exclusive approaches.
S[/quote]
why does nobody get that?
In the “I’ll never be a weightlifter” video Kai talks all about the importance of muscle stimulation, but the dude’s still strong as an ox.
Quality muscle stimulation with heavy weights. DUN DUN DUNNNNNNN[/quote]
I completely agree with Depression Boy here, I think a lot of people get really strong, kind of reap the size gains from that, THEN go to ‘pump’ training and end up getting some growth there too, but don’t realize that ‘base’ of strength is what allows them to benefit from the pump training. I had that idea early on, fell away from it, and am now not as far along as I would have been had I chased numbers a bit more
And I know Aaron is brutally strong, I guess that’s my point in all this lol. I’m saying I don’t think training has to do with the training style. All elite BB’ers are strong, everyone on the Olympia stage or with a shot at being there can rep 405 of Incline and has squatted 500 for a ton of reps. I’m saying that, too me, means it’s doubtful that any kind of training style dictates the ‘look’ of someone in terms of graininess.
[quote]Spidey22 wrote:
All elite BB’ers are strong, everyone on the Olympia stage or with a shot at being there can rep 405 of Incline and has squatted 500 for a ton of reps. I’m saying that, too me, means it’s doubtful that any kind of training style dictates the ‘look’ of someone in terms of graininess. [/quote]
that’s my thinking too. Every big dude has tested his maxes and pushed the envelope in terms of strength at some point in his life. A lot of them move away from it as they get older, but everyone’s done it, so they should all be grainy if that were the case.
DP: What do you think is a good strength benchmark to reach before one focuses on “stimulation” (you know what I mean)? I think 1.5 x BW bench, 2 x bodyweight squat, and 2.5 x BW (maybe a little less) deadlift. There are noobs coming out who want to do five to six way splits with god knows how many exercises.
[quote]BrickHead wrote:
DP: What do you think is a good strength benchmark to reach before one focuses on “stimulation” (you know what I mean)? I think 1.5 x BW bench, 2 x bodyweight squat, and 2.5 x BW (maybe a little less) deadlift. There are noobs coming out who want to do five to six way splits with god knows how many exercises. [/quote]
I think those are good targets in the 4-8 rep. range. Toss in a 1 x BW O.H. press and a 1.5 x BW bent row and a lifter is going to get some where.
[quote]BlueCollarTr8n wrote:
[quote]BrickHead wrote:
DP: What do you think is a good strength benchmark to reach before one focuses on “stimulation” (you know what I mean)? I think 1.5 x BW bench, 2 x bodyweight squat, and 2.5 x BW (maybe a little less) deadlift. There are noobs coming out who want to do five to six way splits with god knows how many exercises. [/quote]
I think those are good targets in the 4-8 rep. range. Toss in a 1 x BW O.H. press and a 1.5 x BW bent row and a lifter is going to get some where. [/quote]
I was thinking singles for those targets, to be conservative because I think drug-free average people will have to work quite a bit to get there and might come up a bit short actually. Again, I am being very conservative here and taking into account an average, which would include genetically hapless people in there.
I was thinking 1 x BW overhead press too. I think 1.5 BB row is amazing actually but it could be I just suck at them. I’ve tried all variations: Dorian Yates upright style with minimal hitch, Pendlay, bent over strict, bent over on a step or plyo box with a big ROM and some body English, and so on. So far the only one I’ve actually felt in the lats is the last one, on a step with BE. What style do you use?
[quote]BrickHead wrote:
[quote]BlueCollarTr8n wrote:
[quote]BrickHead wrote:
DP: What do you think is a good strength benchmark to reach before one focuses on “stimulation” (you know what I mean)? I think 1.5 x BW bench, 2 x bodyweight squat, and 2.5 x BW (maybe a little less) deadlift. There are noobs coming out who want to do five to six way splits with god knows how many exercises. [/quote]
I think those are good targets in the 4-8 rep. range. Toss in a 1 x BW O.H. press and a 1.5 x BW bent row and a lifter is going to get some where. [/quote]
I was thinking singles for those targets, to be conservative because I think drug-free average people will have to work quite a bit to get there and might come up a bit short actually. Again, I am being very conservative here and taking into account an average, which would include genetically hapless people in there.
I was thinking 1 x BW overhead press too. I think 1.5 BB row is amazing actually but it could be I just suck at them. I’ve tried all variations: Dorian Yates upright style with minimal hitch, Pendlay, bent over strict, bent over on a step or plyo box with a big ROM and some body English, and so on. So far the only one I’ve actually felt in the lats is the last one, on a step with BE. What style do you use? [/quote]
Those targets will require hard work over time…no doubt; and perhaps my 4-6 rep. range is a bit optimistic. Of course some lifters will be much better at some movements than others and may reach certain points long before others. I wouldn’t expect many to reach those targets in a single run either. More likely requiring 12-18 months on a particular protocol followed by a change for 6 months or so and then a return to the original protocol, and repeat.
I’m very fortunate and have never met a bent row I didn’t like. I prefer the elevated, long ROM, w/a bit of BE. When I’m in a good groove I can tap every rep. on my toes. In my prime @ 210-220lbs. I could work up to 365 for 6 proper reps. I also like the Yates style with a reverse grip when using about BW for resistance.
Correct. I dont think that has anything to do with graininess either. I was just saying the key to maxing out your muscular potential is, as you said, pushing the strength envelope early on and then focusing on quality of muscular contractions later on.
Graininess has more to do with genetics and “thin skin” than people realize. Pwrbarboy’s muscle density at that tender age is unreal. IMO its that predisposition for muscle maturity at a younger age which is responsile for his relative strength and not vice-versa
[quote]Yogi wrote:
[quote]Spidey22 wrote:
All elite BB’ers are strong, everyone on the Olympia stage or with a shot at being there can rep 405 of Incline and has squatted 500 for a ton of reps. I’m saying that, too me, means it’s doubtful that any kind of training style dictates the ‘look’ of someone in terms of graininess. [/quote]
that’s my thinking too. Every big dude has tested his maxes and pushed the envelope in terms of strength at some point in his life. A lot of them move away from it as they get older, but everyone’s done it, so they should all be grainy if that were the case.[/quote]
[quote]jeremielemauvais wrote:
Graininess has more to do with genetics and “thin skin” than people realize. Pwrbarboy’s muscle density at that tender age is unreal. IMO its that predisposition for muscle maturity at a younger age which is responsile for his relative strength and not vice-versa
[/quote]
This was exactly what I was trying to say, but you put it much more eloquently than I could. lol
[quote]BrickHead wrote:
[quote]BlueCollarTr8n wrote:
[quote]BrickHead wrote:
DP: What do you think is a good strength benchmark to reach before one focuses on “stimulation” (you know what I mean)? I think 1.5 x BW bench, 2 x bodyweight squat, and 2.5 x BW (maybe a little less) deadlift. There are noobs coming out who want to do five to six way splits with god knows how many exercises. [/quote]
I think those are good targets in the 4-8 rep. range. Toss in a 1 x BW O.H. press and a 1.5 x BW bent row and a lifter is going to get some where. [/quote]
I was thinking singles for those targets, to be conservative because I think drug-free average people will have to work quite a bit to get there and might come up a bit short actually. Again, I am being very conservative here and taking into account an average, which would include genetically hapless people in there.
I was thinking 1 x BW overhead press too. I think 1.5 BB row is amazing actually but it could be I just suck at them. I’ve tried all variations: Dorian Yates upright style with minimal hitch, Pendlay, bent over strict, bent over on a step or plyo box with a big ROM and some body English, and so on. So far the only one I’ve actually felt in the lats is the last one, on a step with BE. What style do you use? [/quote]
I dont really have much issue feeling rows but a great one imo is just a simple smith machine row and just really getting that mmc with a good squeeze.
[quote]BrickHead wrote:
[quote]BlueCollarTr8n wrote:
[quote]BrickHead wrote:
DP: What do you think is a good strength benchmark to reach before one focuses on “stimulation” (you know what I mean)? I think 1.5 x BW bench, 2 x bodyweight squat, and 2.5 x BW (maybe a little less) deadlift. There are noobs coming out who want to do five to six way splits with god knows how many exercises. [/quote]
I think those are good targets in the 4-8 rep. range. Toss in a 1 x BW O.H. press and a 1.5 x BW bent row and a lifter is going to get some where. [/quote]
I was thinking singles for those targets, to be conservative because I think drug-free average people will have to work quite a bit to get there and might come up a bit short actually. Again, I am being very conservative here and taking into account an average, which would include genetically hapless people in there.
I was thinking 1 x BW overhead press too. I think 1.5 BB row is amazing actually but it could be I just suck at them. I’ve tried all variations: Dorian Yates upright style with minimal hitch, Pendlay, bent over strict, bent over on a step or plyo box with a big ROM and some body English, and so on. So far the only one I’ve actually felt in the lats is the last one, on a step with BE. What style do you use? [/quote]
I to had problems really feeling my back work on rows so, CT suggested I try Chinese rows, they are awesome.
[quote]BlueCollarTr8n wrote:
I’m very fortunate and have never met a bent row I didn’t like. I prefer the elevated, long ROM, w/a bit of BE. When I’m in a good groove I can tap every rep. on my toes. In my prime @ 210-220lbs. I could work up to 365 for 6 proper reps. I also like the Yates style with a reverse grip when using about BW for resistance.
[/quote]
That’s some scary strength.
[quote]xXSeraphimXx wrote:
[quote]BrickHead wrote:
[quote]BlueCollarTr8n wrote:
[quote]BrickHead wrote:
DP: What do you think is a good strength benchmark to reach before one focuses on “stimulation” (you know what I mean)? I think 1.5 x BW bench, 2 x bodyweight squat, and 2.5 x BW (maybe a little less) deadlift. There are noobs coming out who want to do five to six way splits with god knows how many exercises. [/quote]
I think those are good targets in the 4-8 rep. range. Toss in a 1 x BW O.H. press and a 1.5 x BW bent row and a lifter is going to get some where. [/quote]
I was thinking singles for those targets, to be conservative because I think drug-free average people will have to work quite a bit to get there and might come up a bit short actually. Again, I am being very conservative here and taking into account an average, which would include genetically hapless people in there.
I was thinking 1 x BW overhead press too. I think 1.5 BB row is amazing actually but it could be I just suck at them. I’ve tried all variations: Dorian Yates upright style with minimal hitch, Pendlay, bent over strict, bent over on a step or plyo box with a big ROM and some body English, and so on. So far the only one I’ve actually felt in the lats is the last one, on a step with BE. What style do you use? [/quote]
I to had problems really feeling my back work on rows so, CT suggested I try Chinese rows, they are awesome.[/quote]
I’m going to look them up.