Here’s my body, I got a long torso,relatively narrow shoulders, but it annoys me the most that I got squared shoulders. The back isn’t as wide as Id like it to be, it seems to me that I should train more lower lats and lower back.
It looks to me that I lack lateral head and traps… Im training 3 times per week, superhero training from kinobody, strenght is there, volume about 30-40 reps per exercise, with 3 different body parts volume work.
Im more concerned about fixing the squared shoulders and traps, but roast me, but also give advice.
On the right track mate. Traps are lagging, do you deadlifts or rack pull?
Lats and upper traps and you will be a ready for anything. I think you are doing great.
I do 3 sets of deadlifts on leg day. 6x120 kg being the most weight pulled, 8, 10 reps. I did rack pulls for some time, but not at the moment
So you’re fasting then? Do you want to add muscle mass?
Try and do more overhead Press for Shoulders and probably shrugs aswell. if you want to add muscle mass I wouldn’t really diet because whatever you want to do it’s very hard to add muscle and no fat.
I’m not fasting, I just find that his programs work best for my schedule and body. Have had good results with Greek God and superhero so far.
I think you actually appear to have wide shoulders, they obviously have little muscle but they are wide compared to your waist in terms of bone structure. This is great, add some muscle width to that mix keeping your waist small and your gonna look amazing. Although you need mass everywhere your gonna get the biggest visual effects by getting them shoulders up to speed.
I will also add that I don’t really agree that overhead press is the best for shoulders, I followed the rule of “hit a bodyweight overhead press for reps and you will have big shoulders” I did that and I didn’t have good shoulders, I now don’t make overhead pressing a priority and have seen great improvement. I have found variety, high volume and mmc are key.
2 Likes
Your main issue is the training. 3x a week will not do much for anybody that has worked out for more than a few months. I would suggest looking at hypertrophy guides on renaissance periodization.
That’s very very wrong.
4 Likes
Apparently science is “wrong.”
That is a really odd thing to comment. There are plenty of excellent strength and mass programs out there that only have you train 3x a week. A lot of these programs are written by very successful and experienced coaches.
I understand that, and appreciate that you replied kindly. The issue with it though is that when you take hypertrophy as the goal, the minimum effective frequency for any muscle that has potential to be ficused on (eg. Biceps, triceps, chest, back, etc., but not something like the seratus.) is twice a week. This is true until one cannot recover quick enough. He definitly doesn’t fall into that category, unless he has illnesses that we do not know about. He very likely could train everyting that often, but to do that with an effective volume for everything that is being trained would make for very long workouts. So long, in fact, that I am next to completely certain that he does not stay there for that long.
Depends on the quality of said “science” and the people interpreting it.
In my industry, I can bill you $50,000 to 1 million for the same type of project involving scientific research which will all be handled by phds. The quality will depend on the price you pay, how concise the research will be and the experience levels and amount of professionals handling the project. You pay peanuts, you get monkeys.
In an industry like this where:
-
There is little money for the pursuit of a higher education, hence the quality of well educated “talent” may not be very high.
-
The type of studies cited are of low quality due to multiple constraints which includes the lack of talent and budget, with many resembling high school projects.
-
A simple thing like lifting weights and getting big, which has been done by thousands of people with little education on the subject and even boderline retards, can be purposefully over-complicated just to sell programs.
Then I wouldn’t put too much faith in what is passing off as “science”.
I realise this is not PC but this is a fact of life.
1 Like
Oh sorry forgot about science.
The several studies done have all shown that a frequency of at least twice a week for all muscles worth focusing on is always better than once, unless you are absolutely huge or have medical issues that restrict recovery tremendously. This is in the case of hypertrophy of course, since strength training is and should be notably different. The reason why this frequency is better than once a week is because volume (with a decent load) drives hypertrophy. If you have a lack luster amount of volume, it shows in your gains. If you do have a great amount of volume but you only train the area once a week, chances are that you are recovering fully within 3 days or less. You are then able to do more, and make what you are doing more effective. Another point that I have to offer was already mentioned, but every study that has ever been done on the subject has shown my case to be true. The final point is that there is a difference between research and programs. Most of the research can be found for free. Almost all research in this field can be found for free. The hypertrophy guides that I recommended to him are 100% free and are not programs, but the results of these numerous studies.
I have read all the studies. That is why I wrote the post above. I also do not understand why you felt the need to parrot them to me.
I did not parrot anything towards you. I explained the sciences that I was referring to and the validity of them, since you said that things that belittled research that has been proven as fact. If you cannot believe in the facts, then why would you hop on a topic that is aimed to aid somebody with what is regarded to as fact by either a sigular person that is incorrect, or by another that has research and proof behind the made claims?
Your sciences doesn’t once talk about science. You just strung a bunch of conclusions together. 
2 Likes
I will second this notion that 3x is lacking; from experience and most articles I’ve read including many here on T-nation. I like Thibaudeau’s contributions most, read up on his regimens.
2 Likes