The Role of Strength

Bigger Stronger Leaner
21

[quote]Mtag666 wrote:
As a natural getting stronger is the best way to gain muscle. If you’re not at least progressing in some major lift (whatever you chose them to be, the big 3 or incline and frontsquat and rack pull w/e) what’s the point? You can do all the pump stuff you want as assistance but getting stronger is still the biggest driver in gaining muscle. The guys at 3dmj (arguably the best natty bb coaches) preach this all the time[/quote]

You can progress at any rep range, even high reps for “pump work”.

22

I guess I will actually chime in on my own topic here with my annecdotal account.

I really dont know anymore. I had a bad injury riddled year about 2 years ago. 2 torn pecs, sports hernia, seperated shoulder and i fucked up my back. Took almost a year off. Came back into the game without any regard to strength. In terms of relative strength this is the weakest I have been in maybe 4-5 years.

The weights I use for my main lifts are no where near they were in the past, for example I used to do around 275 for 6 on flat barbell bench, rep 400+ for 3-5 for Deads and Oly squat in the low 300s for 3-5 reps. Recently I use 185-205 tops on bench, squat around the mid 200s and dead in the low 300s if i use those lower rep schemes which I am just now using, prior 8-10 reps was low rep for me since I got back into things.

I feel weak comparative to my former self at this weight(180 ish) but I have never been this developed or aesthetic. I mean I came across some pics of me from before, and from the injury year and compared to know I am shocked at how differnt I look at the same weight. The past 2-3 weeks I started getting back into the strenght phase so to speak, and my numbers are jumping up very quick, but I am worry about the injury bug coming back or wondering if it is even needed.

23

This is why I like doing the same workouts and trying to progress on everything. My back got wide from progressing on three exercises - keeping form the same is key obviously. My plan to grow my biceps is just to increase the weight, reps, and volume I can do on pinwheel cand preacher curls

24

[quote]BrickHead wrote:

[quote]ryan.b_96 wrote:

[quote]BrickHead wrote:
I think everyone, especially naturals, should focus on relative strength in the beginning until they put up some respectable poundages in exercises like squats, pullups, chinups, overhead presses, dips, bent over or dumbbell rows, and deadlifts.

However, after some time, if they want to have the most aesthetically pleasing physique, they have to make adjustments to their training and have a pure bodybuilding program. But if they want to just be a recreational lifter that’s big and strong, having “capped delts”, “teardrops”, “outer thigh sweep”, and a “v-taper” might be of little importance.

And again, this comes down to just how serious one wants to get also. Yes, there have been powerlifter-bodybuilder hybrids who did GOOD in both endeavors, but they were not at the very top of either. But then again, if one is not destined to be the best in either and he does those two thins for his personal reward and a lifestyle, either competitively or non-competitively, then not being the best isn’t in the card anyway, and he can do what he pleases. When Kirk Karwoski was asked about why he didn’t do a bodybuilding show during a time when he was very lean at 240-something, he said he wanted to accomplish specific things in powerlifting by a certain age and time frame and a physique show would disrupt that plan. [/quote]

what do mean by pure bodybuilder training?

cause there are alot of natural bodybuilders who use strength prioritization, and actual power lifting programs in the off-season. layne norton, jeff alberts, alberto nunez, matt ogus just to name a few. [/quote]

What I mean by pure bodybuilding training is the training nearly all bodybuilders do all of the time, a typical setup like:

  • 3 to 4 sets of 8 to 12 reps or 6 to 8 reps for all exercises
  • “training bodyparts”, not “training lifts”, not “training assistance movements”
  • 2 to 4 sets per muscle group
  • following a bodypart split, not days dedicated to improving lifts

Yes, I know there are guys who dabble in both, and if dabbling in both doesn’t hurt their accomplishments in either, then that’s good! However, the best in either never tampered with the other, and I think this says something, as I’ve gone over before.

Now, once muscle is built in some areas, it’s highly unlikely that muscle will be lost during a 3 to 6 month powerlifting stint, but max strength can suffer during a bodybuilding phase and we should take notice that some bodybuilders do not feel the flat bench, back squats, and/or deadlifts are not the best exercises for their personal physique makeup and that by excluding these exercises during a bodybuilding phase, they are not making headway in them. They’ll also lose ground if they don’t include 1 to 5 rep max lifts because straining with a 1 to 5 rep max is very different than lifting for reps.

Anyway, losing some ground here and there shouldn’t be of consequence to some guy that doesn’t even compete in either. [/quote]

While I generally agree with your message brick, don’t forget Big Nasty…he started out powerlifting, and was good at it, then went on to win a fistful of Mr Olympia’s…

To be fair, I think the point that makes is that if you’re got the genetic makeup to be the best at anything athletic related, chances are you’ll be at least above average at most athletic endeavors. Hope that makes sense.

25

I don’t really understand why this is an issue.
Anyone who does BBing training with enough intensity & volume to elicit hypertrophy will eventually use bigger weights in almost all exercises.
Imo, for BBing training an increase in strength is a nice side effect but should not be the goal by itself.
There are many ways to program progressive overload.
People who believe that programs that focus primarily on increasing the big 3 or 4 are better for aesthetics than good BBing splits are idiots or have an agenda.

26

YOU KNOW NOTHING OF STRENGTH

27

For hypertrophy the best way is the DC line of thought of getting stronger for reps. There has to be both enough tension AND time under tension for the muscle to grow.

28

[quote]myself1992 wrote:
For hypertrophy the best way is the DC line of thought of getting stronger for reps. There has to be both enough tension AND time under tension for the muscle to grow.[/quote]

I agree. I train in a similar fashion and have made the best gains to date.

29

Strength should not be the main focus if physique is the main goal. Now I do think base strength should be attained first. But isolation work should not be thrown under the bus even for a beginner.

For me. As soon as I stopped focusing in weight and only focused on the muscle working my progress skyrocketed. I think rest periods should be short and reps medium to high. But also experiment to find what works best and don’t be afraid to try what others say doesn’t work.

30

[quote]MattyXL wrote:

[quote]BrickHead wrote:
I think everyone, especially naturals, should focus on relative strength in the beginning until they put up some respectable poundages in exercises like squats, pullups, chinups, overhead presses, dips, bent over or dumbbell rows, and deadlifts. However, after some time, if they want to have the most aesthetically pleasing physique, they have to make adjustments to their training and have a pure bodybuilding program. But if they want to just be a recreational lifter that’s big and strong, having “capped delts”, “teardrops”, “outer thigh sweep”, and a “v-taper” might be of little importance.

And again, this comes down to just how serious one wants to get also. Yes, there have been powerlifter-bodybuilder hybrids who did GOOD in both endeavors, but they were not at the very top of either. But then again, if one is not destined to be the best in either and he does those two thins for his personal reward and a lifestyle, either competitively or non-competitively, then not being the best isn’t in the card anyway, and he can do what he pleases. When Kirk Karwoski was asked about why he didn’t do a bodybuilding show during a time when he was very lean at 240-something, he said he wanted to accomplish specific things in powerlifting by a certain age and time frame and a physique show would disrupt that plan. [/quote]

x2

I compete as PLer, but I totally understand and realize that I am certainly not gonna be upper crust material, I do it for myself, and my own pursuits, with that being said, when training I also like to do both styles of training.

Dan Green is a guy that comes to mind of a guy who is a absolute beast in the PL world and could probably do a BB show as well.[/quote]

Good post. I agree: Dan Green could do well in bodybuilding. Did you see his article critical of Westside?

31

[quote]hungry4more wrote:

[quote]BrickHead wrote:

[quote]ryan.b_96 wrote:

[quote]BrickHead wrote:
I think everyone, especially naturals, should focus on relative strength in the beginning until they put up some respectable poundages in exercises like squats, pullups, chinups, overhead presses, dips, bent over or dumbbell rows, and deadlifts.

However, after some time, if they want to have the most aesthetically pleasing physique, they have to make adjustments to their training and have a pure bodybuilding program. But if they want to just be a recreational lifter that’s big and strong, having “capped delts”, “teardrops”, “outer thigh sweep”, and a “v-taper” might be of little importance.

And again, this comes down to just how serious one wants to get also. Yes, there have been powerlifter-bodybuilder hybrids who did GOOD in both endeavors, but they were not at the very top of either. But then again, if one is not destined to be the best in either and he does those two thins for his personal reward and a lifestyle, either competitively or non-competitively, then not being the best isn’t in the card anyway, and he can do what he pleases. When Kirk Karwoski was asked about why he didn’t do a bodybuilding show during a time when he was very lean at 240-something, he said he wanted to accomplish specific things in powerlifting by a certain age and time frame and a physique show would disrupt that plan. [/quote]

what do mean by pure bodybuilder training?

cause there are alot of natural bodybuilders who use strength prioritization, and actual power lifting programs in the off-season. layne norton, jeff alberts, alberto nunez, matt ogus just to name a few. [/quote]

What I mean by pure bodybuilding training is the training nearly all bodybuilders do all of the time, a typical setup like:

  • 3 to 4 sets of 8 to 12 reps or 6 to 8 reps for all exercises
  • “training bodyparts”, not “training lifts”, not “training assistance movements”
  • 2 to 4 sets per muscle group
  • following a bodypart split, not days dedicated to improving lifts

Yes, I know there are guys who dabble in both, and if dabbling in both doesn’t hurt their accomplishments in either, then that’s good! However, the best in either never tampered with the other, and I think this says something, as I’ve gone over before.

Now, once muscle is built in some areas, it’s highly unlikely that muscle will be lost during a 3 to 6 month powerlifting stint, but max strength can suffer during a bodybuilding phase and we should take notice that some bodybuilders do not feel the flat bench, back squats, and/or deadlifts are not the best exercises for their personal physique makeup and that by excluding these exercises during a bodybuilding phase, they are not making headway in them. They’ll also lose ground if they don’t include 1 to 5 rep max lifts because straining with a 1 to 5 rep max is very different than lifting for reps.

Anyway, losing some ground here and there shouldn’t be of consequence to some guy that doesn’t even compete in either. [/quote]

While I generally agree with your message brick, don’t forget Big Nasty…he started out powerlifting, and was good at it, then went on to win a fistful of Mr Olympia’s…

To be fair, I think the point that makes is that if you’re got the genetic makeup to be the best at anything athletic related, chances are you’ll be at least above average at most athletic endeavors. Hope that makes sense. [/quote]

Good post. Points taken.

32

[quote]Steel Nation wrote:
I don’t think chasing 1RMs is helpful at all unless you want to get into powerlifting. Building up rep maxes will suit you better. As in, no lower than a 5RM.

Of course, then you get into the argument of “will building your 1RM build your 5RM?” I don’t know…maybe, probably? I’m far from being an expert at this, and I’ve chased the 1RMs like everyone else so I guess I’m a hypocrite, LOL.[/quote]

I quit chasing 1RM years ago and my strength has done nothing but get better. I train high volume, but still can put up some heavy numbers for me. Sure, probably not as heavy as if I were to train for solely 1RM, but my goal is purely aesthetic. So in short I agree 1RM isn’t all that useful for bodybuilding or looking good nekkid purposes. For me it is too much of a risk for injury and not much reward in the looking better department.

33

[quote]myself1992 wrote:
For hypertrophy the best way is the DC line of thought of getting stronger for reps. There has to be both enough tension AND time under tension for the muscle to grow.[/quote]

^ Yes, this.

34

[quote]Bauber wrote:

[quote]Steel Nation wrote:
I don’t think chasing 1RMs is helpful at all unless you want to get into powerlifting. Building up rep maxes will suit you better. As in, no lower than a 5RM.

Of course, then you get into the argument of “will building your 1RM build your 5RM?” I don’t know…maybe, probably? I’m far from being an expert at this, and I’ve chased the 1RMs like everyone else so I guess I’m a hypocrite, LOL.[/quote]

I quit chasing 1RM years ago and my strength has done nothing but get better. I train high volume, but still can put up some heavy numbers for me. Sure, probably not as heavy as if I were to train for solely 1RM, but my goal is purely aesthetic. So in short I agree 1RM isn’t all that useful for bodybuilding or looking good nekkid purposes. For me it is too much of a risk for injury and not much reward in the looking better department.[/quote]
Besides going for heavy 1RM is how a lot of injuries occur. Sooo… don’t do that anymore

35

[quote]BrickHead wrote:

[quote]MattyXL wrote:

[quote]BrickHead wrote:
I think everyone, especially naturals, should focus on relative strength in the beginning until they put up some respectable poundages in exercises like squats, pullups, chinups, overhead presses, dips, bent over or dumbbell rows, and deadlifts. However, after some time, if they want to have the most aesthetically pleasing physique, they have to make adjustments to their training and have a pure bodybuilding program. But if they want to just be a recreational lifter that’s big and strong, having “capped delts”, “teardrops”, “outer thigh sweep”, and a “v-taper” might be of little importance.

And again, this comes down to just how serious one wants to get also. Yes, there have been powerlifter-bodybuilder hybrids who did GOOD in both endeavors, but they were not at the very top of either. But then again, if one is not destined to be the best in either and he does those two thins for his personal reward and a lifestyle, either competitively or non-competitively, then not being the best isn’t in the card anyway, and he can do what he pleases. When Kirk Karwoski was asked about why he didn’t do a bodybuilding show during a time when he was very lean at 240-something, he said he wanted to accomplish specific things in powerlifting by a certain age and time frame and a physique show would disrupt that plan. [/quote]

x2

I compete as PLer, but I totally understand and realize that I am certainly not gonna be upper crust material, I do it for myself, and my own pursuits, with that being said, when training I also like to do both styles of training.

Dan Green is a guy that comes to mind of a guy who is a absolute beast in the PL world and could probably do a BB show as well.[/quote]

Good post. I agree: Dan Green could do well in bodybuilding. Did you see his article critical of Westside?[/quote]

Yeah man, I have to admit I totally agree with him as well. It seems like there is this Juggernaut Training vs Westside thing going on.

36

I’m actually a bit confused here as it relates to my own training.

I’ve been working in a 3x8-12 format for overhead press, using a linear progression (hit 3x12, add weight, work to 3x12).

The basic assumption is the more weight I can press for 3x12, the more developed – size-wise – my traps, triceps and delts will be.

Let’s say a goal is 1.5xBW for 3x12. Would I be better served focusing on getting my 2-3RM up to a point that I can do 1.5xBW for 3x12… or would I be better served by progressing in the 8-12 range until I get there?

37

[quote]Waittz wrote:

[quote]BrickHead wrote:

[quote]ryan.b_96 wrote:

[quote]BrickHead wrote:
I think everyone, especially naturals, should focus on relative strength in the beginning until they put up some respectable poundages in exercises like squats, pullups, chinups, overhead presses, dips, bent over or dumbbell rows, and deadlifts.

However, after some time, if they want to have the most aesthetically pleasing physique, they have to make adjustments to their training and have a pure bodybuilding program. But if they want to just be a recreational lifter that’s big and strong, having “capped delts”, “teardrops”, “outer thigh sweep”, and a “v-taper” might be of little importance.

And again, this comes down to just how serious one wants to get also. Yes, there have been powerlifter-bodybuilder hybrids who did GOOD in both endeavors, but they were not at the very top of either. But then again, if one is not destined to be the best in either and he does those two thins for his personal reward and a lifestyle, either competitively or non-competitively, then not being the best isn’t in the card anyway, and he can do what he pleases. When Kirk Karwoski was asked about why he didn’t do a bodybuilding show during a time when he was very lean at 240-something, he said he wanted to accomplish specific things in powerlifting by a certain age and time frame and a physique show would disrupt that plan. [/quote]

what do mean by pure bodybuilder training?

cause there are alot of natural bodybuilders who use strength prioritization, and actual power lifting programs in the off-season. layne norton, jeff alberts, alberto nunez, matt ogus just to name a few. [/quote]

What I mean by pure bodybuilding training is the training nearly all bodybuilders do all of the time, a typical setup like:

  • 3 to 4 sets of 8 to 12 reps or 6 to 8 reps for all exercises
  • “training bodyparts”, not “training lifts”, not “training assistance movements”
  • 2 to 4 sets per muscle group
  • following a bodypart split, not days dedicated to improving lifts

Yes, I know there are guys who dabble in both, and if dabbling in both doesn’t hurt their accomplishments in either, then that’s good! However, the best in either never tampered with the other, and I think this says something, as I’ve gone over before.

Now, once muscle is built in some areas, it’s highly unlikely that muscle will be lost during a 3 to 6 month powerlifting stint, but max strength can suffer during a bodybuilding phase and we should take notice that some bodybuilders do not feel the flat bench, back squats, and/or deadlifts are not the best exercises for their personal physique makeup and that by excluding these exercises during a bodybuilding phase, they are not making headway in them. They’ll also lose ground if they don’t include 1 to 5 rep max lifts because straining with a 1 to 5 rep max is very different than lifting for reps.

Anyway, losing some ground here and there shouldn’t be of consequence to some guy that doesn’t even compete in either. [/quote]

Hey Brick, off topic, are you still doing the ‘2 steps forward, 1 step back’ approach from that timberwolf blurb you posted a while back? [/quote]

I am not doing a two-steps-forward-one-step-back" approach with anything. What I’m doing with the Timberwolf approach is just paying attention first and foremost to total protein and total caloric amount as I believe those are the two most important things for body composition purposes and macronutrient allotment with fats and carbs to make up the non-protein calories is of secondary importance so long as you make up some of them with at least 6 grams of fish oil or 15 grams of flax oil a day for EFA’s (obviously other foods have EFA’s in smaller amounts per measure of food).

I am just maintaining and keeping in shape and somewhat athletic now.

38

[quote]LoRez wrote:
I’m actually a bit confused here as it relates to my own training.

I’ve been working in a 3x8-12 format for overhead press, using a linear progression (hit 3x12, add weight, work to 3x12).

The basic assumption is the more weight I can press for 3x12, the more developed – size-wise – my traps, triceps and delts will be.

Let’s say a goal is 1.5xBW for 3x12. Would I be better served focusing on getting my 2-3RM up to a point that I can do 1.5xBW for 3x12… or would I be better served by progressing in the 8-12 range until I get there?[/quote]

1.5 BW x 3 x 12 with overhead pressing?! That’s a 300 pound overhead press for 12 reps for a 200 pound man!

Anyway, the there is a THEORY that working both rep ranges for blocks of time will have a good effect on both high and low rep ranges. However, I do think if you’re interested on higher rep maxes, the bulk of the training should be with higher reps.

39

[quote]myself1992 wrote:
For hypertrophy the best way is the DC line of thought of getting stronger for reps. There has to be both enough tension AND time under tension for the muscle to grow.[/quote]

I know this will come off as sarcastic, but it’s hard not to: it always amazed me that Dante had to tell grown men they need to use progressive resistance to get bigger.

40

[quote]BrickHead wrote:

[quote]LoRez wrote:
I’m actually a bit confused here as it relates to my own training.

I’ve been working in a 3x8-12 format for overhead press, using a linear progression (hit 3x12, add weight, work to 3x12).

The basic assumption is the more weight I can press for 3x12, the more developed – size-wise – my traps, triceps and delts will be.

Let’s say a goal is 1.5xBW for 3x12. Would I be better served focusing on getting my 2-3RM up to a point that I can do 1.5xBW for 3x12… or would I be better served by progressing in the 8-12 range until I get there?[/quote]

1.5 BW x 3 x 12 with overhead pressing?! That’s a 300 pound overhead press for 12 reps for a 200 pound man!

Anyway, the there is a THEORY that working both rep ranges for blocks of time will have a good effect on both high and low rep ranges. However, I do think if you’re interested on higher rep maxes, the bulk of the training should be with higher reps. [/quote]

Yeah, that was a bad choice of numbers there… that would have to be something in the ballpark of 400ish for a 1RM at 200lbs. 1xBW for 3x12 is plenty impressive.

Thanks for answering the question though.