BodyRecomposition Support Forums  

Go Back   BodyRecomposition Support Forums > General information > General training questions
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #71  
Unread 10-03-2010, 03:57 PM
mrlakramondas's Avatar
mrlakramondas mrlakramondas is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 3,815
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vic Mackey View Post
In Lyle's generic bulk (which you've referred a lot of people to in your posts), for bis and tris, he recommends 1-2 sets a piece. So you can do as little as 1 set a piece for tris and bis (ex. 1 set of pushdowns and 1 set of curls). Would you say thats one part of the generic bulk template you don't agree with? Taking it to the extreme, let's say someone was doing the generic bulk the low end of volume recommendations 3 days a week on an ABA BAB rotation, would 1 set for tris and 1 set for bis be enough?

A side note regarding volume, I had an intense lower day (generic bulk) yesterday doing the low end of volume recommendations and let me tell you, there's NO WAY I could even fathom doing any more volume than that (and I wasn't even going to failure).
no. you took my comment out of context.
Reply With Quote
  #72  
Unread 10-03-2010, 04:26 PM
mrlakramondas's Avatar
mrlakramondas mrlakramondas is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 3,815
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Uchi-mata View Post
OK, and if "everybody" uses drugs on this level of sport what do that tell us?

It's like the bodybuilders in the age of Arnold, someone got bigger and better even if "everybody" used drugs. And then you may pull the card of "great genetics", but perhaps great genetics also implicates the capasity of training hard, tolerate pain and get used to a high volume?
what arnold and a few top pros back then did is pretty irrelevant in many ways. arnold was one guy who got big. plenty of guys have gotten as big as him or bigger with much less volume.

so your argument that you need high volume (let's say 20-30 sets) as an advanced lifter is incorrect.
Reply With Quote
  #73  
Unread 10-03-2010, 06:13 PM
Uchi-mata's Avatar
Uchi-mata Uchi-mata is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Guayaquil, Ecuador
Posts: 81
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by lylemcd View Post
What people think speed skaters do and what they actually do tend to be fairly divergent. for example, back in Heiden's day, studies found that 2.5Xbodyweight for 5 reps parallel squat was a standard strength level for elite skaters. Heiden was like 180 lbs or so if I recall, do the math on that.

This was also a time when all skating was outdoors and being big with a big absolute strength levels was key. Between headwinds and poor ice, you had to be able to push hard in absolute terms. Little guys got pushed around by the wind.

And it is true that Heiden did something insane like 200lbsX300 reps of squats. My coach knew a guy who saw it. the workout was actually 2 sets of 150 reps but Heiden had a date so he did one long set and got out of there. Note: Heiden also competed before steroids were illegal, his dad was a doctor and uncle a pharmacist. Was he juiced? I can't say for sure.

Skating has changed in recent years since moving indoors. NO headwinds, perfect ice, you see much more variable bodysizes and far less emphasis on maximum strength. I watched members of the Canadian national team lift weights. Nothing impressive technically or poundage wise. doesn't matter, they skate like maniacs. Same for some of the top US guys. Maybe bodyweight poundage squats. The Dutch (who still train outdoors and probably continue to use traditional methods which means heavy strength training) still field big guys. Japanese sprinters tend to have pretty big legs. I can bet good money they do heavy strength training.

But the whole idea that speed skaters get massive legs through nothing but high rep work is one of those Internet ideas perpetrated by folks who know not of which they speak. It sounds great and makes for good articles but it's not entirely correct.

There is also the oddity of sakting, the bent over posture that occludes blood to the quads. Which probably, as mrlak brought up, has a kaatsu like effect. But applying that to other activities is a mistake.
First you are wrong about saying Heiden competed before steroids where illegal. How do I know? Living and training together with some of the very top speed skaters from 1979 - 82, in a norwegian sports college I have some experience outside the internet articles. My professor and "headmaster", was a guy later in charge of the US olympic team and the canadian team in speed-skating(before the canadians kicked his a**!). I can tell you for sure we where regulary tested for steroids and other drugs in this period. I have done my fair share of skating, without saying this should count as an argument for anything. Around this time we used an isocinetic squatmaschine, with only resistence in the consentric movment and no resistence in the eccentric. Why? because the coaches felt the skaters got enough of eccentric and isometric work from the ice. Weighted squat? Yes some of the athletes, but they did a helload of reps to "imitate" the work on the ice. We also had some skaters that never had done weights in their life, but they all had the same big "skaters-butt" as we called it...
Reply With Quote
  #74  
Unread 10-03-2010, 07:10 PM
frank yangs left quad's Avatar
frank yangs left quad frank yangs left quad is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 1,360
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Uchi-mata View Post
When I train press behind neck I somtimes do 5 X 12 repetitions, I rest the bar on my shoulders tree to ten seconds between the reps. Is this one set of 12 or 12 set of one? Was it 5 set or 60 ???
i dont know, why
Reply With Quote
  #75  
Unread 10-03-2010, 07:21 PM
Uchi-mata's Avatar
Uchi-mata Uchi-mata is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Guayaquil, Ecuador
Posts: 81
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mrlakramondas View Post

and what you say can be reversed. you can find many bodybuilders who are much bigger than male gymnasts and they aren't close to training 6-8 hours per day. ( if we use your line of reasoning that just looks at hours trained and ignores drug use).

in bodybuilding, massive amounts of volume is not needed to reach advanced level. certainly not 20-30 working sets for a muscle group per session. and very few pro bodybuilders train with that kind of volume these days (it depends abit on how you define a working set too).
Of course top bodybuilders should be bigger than top gymnasts, but thats not the point. In bodybuilding they train and diet to get big muscles, definition and symmetri. They use the all neccesary tools to achieve what they want, training, diet, drugs or whatever... (I have never said volume is the only factor that counts). They dont have to perform anything except posing. In the seventies some of the top bodybuilders trained 4 - 5 hours 6 days a week(or even more) like Serge Nubret, Frank Zane and Arnold himself. My point is: this is whats "normal" for a top athlete in almost every sport on earth. Drugs? Yes the top bodybuilders in the seventies used drugs, most of them I guess. You say that very few pro bodybuilders train 20 - 30 working sets for a muscle group today. Maybe so, but then I say they probably are using a lot more of drugs than Arnold & co did...

Example on high volume bodybuilding in the good old days:

http://ironage.us/yabbse/index.php/topic,20606.0.html
Reply With Quote
  #76  
Unread 10-04-2010, 05:48 AM
mrlakramondas's Avatar
mrlakramondas mrlakramondas is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 3,815
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Uchi-mata View Post
Of course top bodybuilders should be bigger than top gymnasts, but thats not the point. In bodybuilding they train and diet to get big muscles, definition and symmetri. They use the all neccesary tools to achieve what they want, training, diet, drugs or whatever... (I have never said volume is the only factor that counts). They dont have to perform anything except posing. In the seventies some of the top bodybuilders trained 4 - 5 hours 6 days a week(or even more) like Serge Nubret, Frank Zane and Arnold himself. My point is: this is whats "normal" for a top athlete in almost every sport on earth. Drugs? Yes the top bodybuilders in the seventies used drugs, most of them I guess. You say that very few pro bodybuilders train 20 - 30 working sets for a muscle group today. Maybe so, but then I say they probably are using a lot more of drugs than Arnold & co did...
Example on high volume bodybuilding in the good old days:

http://ironage.us/yabbse/index.php/topic,20606.0.html
so you can play the drug card when it suits you but others can't?

of course the drug use has changed and it's a big part of why many of today's pros are bigger than arnold and the boys (and the fact that that more people lift weights > >the genetic pool is bigger). but that's not the point, we were discussing the necessity for 20-30 sets per bodypart and you have plenty of guys who have gotten as big or bigger than arnold without using those volume levels. (even if we equate the drug use).
Reply With Quote
  #77  
Unread 10-04-2010, 06:38 AM
mrlakramondas's Avatar
mrlakramondas mrlakramondas is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 3,815
Default

if we look at for example the training of serge nubret (who was an amazing bodybuilder), it was mostly ineffective OCD driven madness. not a good way to train if you use drugs and a disaster for natural lifters.

drugs let you get away with all kinds of stupid ****. that goes both ways; both the very low volume extreme high intensity (HIT) stuff and the very high volume pump training routines that nubret and company used.

neither of those training styles are appropriate for naturals. but short periods of very high intensity and sane levels of pump training can be a part of a training program for a natural.
Reply With Quote
  #78  
Unread 10-04-2010, 07:12 AM
mrlakramondas's Avatar
mrlakramondas mrlakramondas is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 3,815
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Uchi-mata View Post
First you are wrong about saying Heiden competed before steroids where illegal. How do I know? Living and training together with some of the very top speed skaters from 1979 - 82, in a norwegian sports college I have some experience outside the internet articles. My professor and "headmaster", was a guy later in charge of the US olympic team and the canadian team in speed-skating(before the canadians kicked his a**!). I can tell you for sure we where regulary tested for steroids and other drugs in this period.
in usa steroids became a schedule III controlled substance in 1991.
Reply With Quote
  #79  
Unread 10-04-2010, 07:49 AM
Uchi-mata's Avatar
Uchi-mata Uchi-mata is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Guayaquil, Ecuador
Posts: 81
Unhappy

Quote:
Originally Posted by mrlakramondas View Post
so you can play the drug card when it suits you but others can't?

.
Have I denyed you or other this? I said in a earlier post: "In my view its much to simplistic to pull the cards of drugs and genetic to explain why high volume works." In my view its a bit irrelevant because we know high volume works, even without the use of drugs. But it's not irrelevant when you use a pro bodybuilder of today as an example of a bodybuilder that got bigger on a more modest routine than the high volume bodybuilders of the past !

Quote:
Originally Posted by mrlakramondas View Post
if we look at for example the training of serge nubret (who was an amazing bodybuilder), it was mostly ineffective OCD driven madness. not a good way to train if you use drugs and a disaster for natural lifters.

drugs let you get away with all kinds of stupid ****. that goes both ways; both the very low volume extreme high intensity (HIT) stuff and the very high volume pump training routines that nubret and company used.
I respectfully disagree. As a lifelong natural I have tried a lot of different trainingprotocols and high volume works very well for me, even in my age.

Quote:
Originally Posted by mrlakramondas View Post
in usa steroids became a schedule III controlled substance in 1991.
OK, but it was ILLEGAL to use in olympic sports long before this, and Heiden competed in europe so I can tell for sure he was tested.
Reply With Quote
  #80  
Unread 10-04-2010, 07:54 AM
mrlakramondas's Avatar
mrlakramondas mrlakramondas is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 3,815
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Uchi-mata View Post



OK, but it was ILLEGAL to use in olympic sports long before this, and Heiden competed in europe so I can tell for sure he was tested.
yes it was and i bet lyle knows this. there is a difference between a substance being illegal and being banned in a sport.

as for the doping tests back then? they were a joke in many ways. but that is a whole another discussion.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 04:16 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.