T Nation

Poliquin Recycling

IMO (but closer to a fact) I feel THAT almost all current POPULAR authors on here are a regurgitation of Poliquin. His presence has been less and less over the years on this website and recently (LIGHTLY renewed) in the last year. I have to say that none of the popular authors really are as creative as they portray. Some of the things they proclaim as there ow cutting edge progams, I have written in journals from Poliquin seminars in 1999.

I do appreciate authors filling a void but have to say much if not any of there programs are as good as the source. YES I KNOW That Poliquin has built off many before him, but ( in such away that his principles have become uniquely his, where i dont feel that way about current authors. IMO the only author that offered the yin to Poliquin’s yang was Ian King. Everyone else just regurgitates Poliquin’s principles.

The thing most dont realize on here is that he shares only about ten percent of what he is actually doing on these articles ( he with hold’s allot ) holds the rest for seminars, clients and the tip top for pro athlete clients. I really dont feel that the envelope has been pushed in recent years with regards to training, nutrition or supplementation design from the current crop of authors except from the minutia available to us from Poliquin.

As shocking as it may seem, bodybuilders have been building competition-level mass well before Poliquin and the rest of 'em. There are guys who compete in state level shows back in Asia and Africa who have never even heard of Gironda, Poliquin or whoever.

If anyone is really pushing any envelope around anywhere, we should be seeing at least a national-level competitor coming out of their stables,…which we are not AFAIK.

My point is…

DOES ANYONE REALLY CARE IF SOMEONE IS REGURGITATING POLIQUIN OR NOT?

I do see the T-Nation authors writing a lot of similar stuff, but they’re hardly regurgitating Poliquin. They do all tend to regurgitate the same junk science (Estrogen is in everything! Soy is evil! Ignore all of the scientific evidence that says otherwise, Tribulus increases testosterone levels!) that Poliquin is constantly regurgitating from the tinfoil-hat crowd, but aside from that they constantly disagree with each other, and, over time, with their own positions from years prior.

How much new stuff do you really expect there to be?
With an article 4 days/wk you can’t expect ground breaking new research every day.

There’s hasn’t been anything ‘‘NEW’’ in regard to strength training methods since the 80s or even 70s. The only thing that evolved and changed is the way these methods are used.

I was talking to Charles a while ago (yeah yeah… ) and he told me ‘‘Christian, if you want to learn something new about training, buy a training book from 70 years ago’’.

[quote]supabeast wrote:
They do all tend to regurgitate the same junk science (Estrogen is in everything! Soy is evil! Ignore all of the scientific evidence that says otherwise)

[/quote]

There’s scientific evidence that says soy doesn’t contain phytoestrogens? And that high levels of estrogen don’t negatively effect body composition?

[quote]supabeast wrote:
I do see the T-Nation authors writing a lot of similar stuff, but they’re hardly regurgitating Poliquin. They do all tend to regurgitate the same junk science (Estrogen is in everything! Soy is evil! Ignore all of the scientific evidence that says otherwise, Tribulus increases testosterone levels!) that Poliquin is constantly regurgitating from the tinfoil-hat crowd, but aside from that they constantly disagree with each other, and, over time, with their own positions from years prior.[/quote]

+1000

I never got a clear idea about Soy. Too many contradicting articles.

[quote]rakris wrote:
supabeast wrote:
I do see the T-Nation authors writing a lot of similar stuff, but they’re hardly regurgitating Poliquin. They do all tend to regurgitate the same junk science (Estrogen is in everything! Soy is evil! Ignore all of the scientific evidence that says otherwise, Tribulus increases testosterone levels!) that Poliquin is constantly regurgitating from the tinfoil-hat crowd, but aside from that they constantly disagree with each other, and, over time, with their own positions from years prior.

+1000

I never got a clear idea about Soy. Too many contradicting articles.[/quote]

then just use some common sense (not a knock). do you really think a little bit of soy in your diet will wreak havoc?

reminds me of people that will never eat tuna, or never eat PB. get real

that being said, I don’t like soy so I don’t eat it

I don’t believe this notion that CP is being regurtitated. There have been many other coaches who have been very successful getting their athletes better in their respective sport.

One of my biggest problems was explained to me by CP, so I cannot call bullshit by any means on it because it was finally explained to me. And with some advice from CP and CT, I have solved a problem that plagued me for years, despite training and dietary “insanity.” It was actually quite easy to resolve once it was explained.

[quote]Christian Thibaudeau wrote:
There’s hasn’t been anything ‘‘NEW’’ in regard to strength training methods since the 80s or even 70s. The only thing that evolved and changed is the way these methods are used.

I was talking to Charles a while ago (yeah yeah… ) and he told me ‘‘Christian, if you want to learn something new about training, buy a training book from 70 years ago’’.[/quote]

We’ve been writing that only to be told by newbies that we are the ones who are in the dark.

Most of the ideas I have seen are either bringing up old lost training techniques (THAT WERE ABANDONED FOR A REASON) or renaming something just to put a spin on it so that it sparkles to newbs.

That whole Kettlebell bullshit from years ago is a prime example. Every single newbie for about two years acted as if they just NEEDED to buy a fucking kettlebell to see progress.

[quote]Professor X wrote:

That whole Kettlebell bullshit from years ago is a prime example. Every single newbie for about two years acted as if they just NEEDED to buy a fucking kettlebell to see progress.

[/quote]

True.

Other examples:

  • The olympic lifts (hey I used to be an olympic lifter so I’m not bashing them)… they have been used since the early 1900s and constituted the bulk of the training of ‘‘iron men’’ from the 30s up to the 50s. It’s not like they are some revolutionary NEW lifts like some people tend the believe.

  • The Swiss ball… it has been used since the 60s for rehab purposes. It was actually invented by an Italian plastic manufacturer and first used for rehab by a British physical therapist.

Then it because widely used in Switzerland’s rehab clinics. Still… it is more than 40 years old and some people still think of it as a novel tool.

  • ‘‘Complexes’’ (e.g. combining several movements, most often variation or parts of the olympic lifts, into one exercise) have been around for over 40 years in the training of olympic lifters and throwers.

  • Floor press… a great powerlifting exercise often seen as novel; people think that the Westside cree invented it. Well I have a book from the 1930s and there is a picture of a floor press!

One of the main problems of the average trainee is that he tends to prefer to be seduced by a method/tool rather than be convinced of its efficacy.

[quote]Christian Thibaudeau wrote:

True.

Other examples:

  • The olympic lifts (hey I used to be an olympic lifter so I’m not bashing them)… they have been used since the early 1900s and constituted the bulk of the training of ‘‘iron men’’ from the 30s up to the 50s. It’s not like they are some revolutionary NEW lifts like some people tend the believe.

One of the main problems of the average trainee is that he tends to prefer to be seduced by a method/tool rather than be convinced of its efficacy.[/quote]

These things wouldn’t bother me so much if they were actually growing better as a result of following most of this crap…but they aren’t.

In general, you can tell who the weakest and smallest lifters on this site are by how much they put into defending certain authors (regardless of what has been stated) or programs despite great evidence showing their loyalty to be a bit misplaced.

I believe Charles Manson once said, “If I haven’t seen it, it’s new to me.”

[quote]super saiyan wrote:
I believe Charles Manson once said, “If I haven’t seen it, it’s new to me.” [/quote]

…and he was insane.

The Bible also reads, “there is nothing new under the sun”
-Ecclesiastes 1: 9

While it may be new to you…or even some new twist on old ideas, the fact still stands that it is not brand new.

Everything someone needs to stand out as one of the elite can probably be written in less than 5 lines of text. The reason for that is that genetic ability trumps all else and hard work and consistency trump what someone has read somewhere.

That is why so many keep repeating, “the best program done half ass has nothing on the worst program done all out”.

That means logic would dictate to watch what the best have done…not try to pretend as if they somehow ignored the best routine on the planet and it was somehow just dug up and branded some ancient lost training technique by “insert author”.

If you want to be like one of the best, follow what the best did.

[quote]Professor X wrote:
…If you want to be like one of the best, follow what the best did.[/quote]

Maybe. But what if you don’t want to be like the best, but better than the best? The best of the best. What then? Is it better to follow the best if better techniques than what the best are using can be used to my betterment to get the better of the best, who are better than the rest and considered the best, but not the potential best?

[quote]super saiyan wrote:
Professor X wrote:
…If you want to be like one of the best, follow what the best did.

Maybe. But what if you don’t want to be like the best, but better than the best? The best of the best. What then? Is it better to follow the best if better techniques than what the best are using can be used to my betterment to get the better of the best, who are better than the rest and considered the best, but not the potential best?
[/quote]

You won’t be better than the best unless you can at the very least get close to them first.

I’m sorry, but I must have missed the loads of really big bodybuilders on this forum who are all as strong as the average NPC heavy weight competitor. Therefore, what fucking better technique have you seen that is producing lifters who make the best seem like they need more work?

The biggest and strongest people on this site seem to be the ones who DON’T look for the shiniest and newest routine all of the time. They are the ones who MADE what they are doing work and figured out their own bodies quickly. They have also likely been training nearly the same for several years.

You are talking out of your ass. Where are these elite trainers on this forum who are now putting the best to shame?

Was this an attempt at more theory?

Guess what, we’ve had enough.

[quote]Professor X wrote:

You are talking out of your ass. Where are these elite trainers on this forum who are now putting the best to shame?

Was this an attempt at more theory?

Guess what, we’ve had enough. [/quote]

Well, here is one of my athletes who won his pro card this weekend (Isreal overall champ). He may not be putting the best to shame, but since I’ve been training him his competition weight has increased by 22lbs with better condition. Next year he will come in another 15lbs or so heavier.

[quote]Christian Thibaudeau wrote:
Professor X wrote:

You are talking out of your ass. Where are these elite trainers on this forum who are now putting the best to shame?

Was this an attempt at more theory?

Guess what, we’ve had enough.

Well, here is one of my athletes who won his pro card this weekend (Isreal overall champ). He may not be putting the best to shame, but since I’ve been training him his competition weight has increased by 22lbs with better condition. Next year he will come in another 15lbs or so heavier.[/quote]

Awesome.

Tell me…full body routine 3 times a week built all of that?

[quote]Professor X wrote:
Christian Thibaudeau wrote:
Professor X wrote:

You are talking out of your ass. Where are these elite trainers on this forum who are now putting the best to shame?

Was this an attempt at more theory?

Guess what, we’ve had enough.

Well, here is one of my athletes who won his pro card this weekend (Isreal overall champ). He may not be putting the best to shame, but since I’ve been training him his competition weight has increased by 22lbs with better condition. Next year he will come in another 15lbs or so heavier.

Awesome.

Tell me…full body routine 3 times a week built all of that?[/quote]

And tabatas for cardio :wink: