Maximal Strength Training for Bodybuilders

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Maximal Strength Training for Bodybuilders

    Maximal Strength Training for Bodybuilders – Q&A

    Question: It’s hard for one to get bigger when their strength is the limiting factor. Eric Cressey once used an analogy of a cup with water in it. The water inside is your size, speed, endurance etc. but eventually the cup gets full and the only thing you can do to really progress is to increase the size of the glass – maximal strength.

    However, I don’t think it would be a good idea (would it?) for a bodybuilder to start doing a powerlifter’s routine which focuses on just moving a weight from point A to point B.


    So, my question is, how do you recommend a bodybuilder get stronger?



    Answer: Yes and no. How’s that for a useless answer? Ok, let me make it less useless.

    First off, I want to make the point that the primary stimulus for muscle growth is progressive tension overload; that is, you must subject a muscle to progressive overload (primarily in the form) of lifting more weight over time. This is discussed in more detail in Reps Per Set for Optimal Growth.

    Other factors such as volume/fatigue/work (and frequency) are clearly important but, simply, if you’re not getting stronger (and here I’m assuming that you’re not changing your form to handle more weight) over time, along with providing sufficient calories and building blocks, you’re not growing.

    Quick note: this doesn’t mean you have to add weight at every workout which is the HIT fallacy. Depending on your level of development, you might add weight every workout, you might stay at a given weight for 2-3 workouts or it might be 2-3 weeks before you can add weight in good form. But, if over some reasonable time frame, your training weights aren’t increasing, you won’t be growing. We’ve all seen guys handling the same weight for 6-12 months in the gym; that doesn’t get it done.

    In this vein, it’s sort of interesting that you mention powerlifters. I have often found it somewhat ironic (and amusing to boot) that the bodybuilders are the ones who are focusing all of their efforts on muscle growth; yet it’s the powerlifters who are the ones who are getting muscularly bigger (and yes, a little fatter).

    A lot of this has to do with where a lot of bodybuilders put their focus which is too frequently on the wrong stuff. Bodybuilders often get fixated on irrelevant stuff, the pump, how exhausted they are after their 20 sets for biceps, feel, etc. They focus on everything but what matters: getting stronger and subjecting a muscle to progressive tension overload.

    In contrast, the basis of powerlifting is adding more weight to the bar over time, it’s built in to the sport and is the explicit goal of the training. So whereas you might see a bodybuilder handling the same weights (but focusing on that feel, getting that pump and walking out of the gym destroyed) for a year, any powerlifter doing that will change his training program so that he’s getting stronger and adding weight to the bar.

    Quick tangential note:
    a lot of the reason that natural bodybuilders are so misled is that massive drug use among pro bodybuilders makes the training less important. All of the feel, pump, squeeze bs came out of drug fueled bodybuilding. I’ve seen enormous male bodybuilders handling weights that were lower than my female trainees were using, the drugs make up for it. A specific case that jumps to mind was a 150 lb. female trainee of mine who was handling 120X8-10 for strict reps on the rear lateral machine. The 280 lb. behemoth bodybuilder in the gym only used 70 lbs on it. As you might imagine, his shoulders were a bit bigger.

    Now, another aspect of the bodybuilding vs. powerlifting issue is food intake; bodybuilders are often so obsessed with staying super lean year round that they simply won’t eat enough. And they don’t grow. As I described in General Philosophies of Muscle Gain, I think natural bodybuilders will generally grow best by allowing a slight fat gain and interspersing that with short dieting cycles to strip the fat off while keeping the muscle.

    So that’s the basis for my comments: to grow, bodybuilders have to get stronger (and 99% of big natural bodybuilders will be damn strong). Does that mean that they should train like a power lifter? Not necessarily although there are some stories of powerlifters who dieted down to contest levels of leanness and could have blown bodybuilders out of the water.

    Of course, some of this depends on how you define ‘training like a powerlifter’. There are a couple of concerns here that I want to examine which are rep range and style of lifting.

    Depending on philosophy, powerlifters often work in pretty low rep ranges and I’m not saying bodybuilders should shift their training to nothing but singles, doubles and triples. But there is enormous variety here.

    I’d probably argue that many (if not most) powerlifters don’t just use lots of low reps; the competition lifts (squats, bench, deadlift) may be worked in this fashion but usually higher rep (8-15 reps per set) supplemental work (for lagging muscle groups) is done afterwards. While we might quibble over whether a bunch of singles and doubles in the bench builds much pec mass (they can if you do a ton of them), the supplemental work done afterwards certainly does.

    Bodybuilders, in general will be better suited by working a more medium rep range. 5-12 reps is a common repetition range and there can be reasons to go even higher from time to time. I discuss this in more detail in Periodization for Bodybuilders Part 1, Periodization for Bodybuilders Part 2 and Periodization for Bodybuilders Part 3.

    I’d note in this context that there is an old school idea of ‘Power Bodybuilding’ that combines some of the best of both worlds. Typically the primary lift (squat, bench deadlift, etc.) is worked for heavy sets of 5 and that is followed by pump work for sets of 10-15 reps or what have you. I think this is an excellent way to train.

    Even there, I firmly believe that the average intermediate or advanced bodybuilder could benefit from the occasional foray into more power style training. Again, this doesn’t have to be singles and doubles (although I have done that with people) but even working heavy triples nearer the 85-90% of max range can help to improve some of the oft-ignored neural aspects of strength.

    By bumping up maximal strength through neural means, the bodybuilder will generally be able to handle heavier weights when they return to a more medium repetition range. More weight equals more tension on the muscle. Add that to a higher repetition range and a little more volume, add food and you get growth.

    How often? That’s always the debate. A bodybuilder might do a short (3 weeks) maximal strength phase to round out a longer hypertrophy cycle. So every 3-4 full hypertrophy cycles (which might be 6-8 weeks apiece), hit a 3 week strength phase. Then take an easy week and start over. I can’t see making it much longer than that or doing it more often.

    I’d also have the bodybuilder follow the heavy work with at least some higher rep work. Some early research on this suggested some muscle loss if volume dropped too much. So after you hit your 3X3 back squat go get some high rep leg (1-2 X6-10 reps) press or leg extension/leg curl to make sure you maintain your size.

    But used every once in a while, I think it’s a great way to enhance bodybuilding results.

    As far as exercise performance,one of your concerns above seems to be related to the idea that powerlifters simply focus on ‘moving the weight’ whereas bodybuilders are often obsessed with squeezing, feeling and working the muscle. And, as long as they do that within the context of getting stronger, that’s fine.

    Powerlifters often use techniques in the competition lifts that are focused at taking the stress off of the muscles so that more weight can be moved which is I think where part of your question is going. For bodybuilders, I wouldn’t generally recommend this, if you’re a high bar squatter, stick with that instead of a powerlifting style. Keep your deadlifts clean style, and your benches more towards the generic power style described in Bench Pressing Variations.

    Basically, bodybuilders still need to ensure that the target muscles (e.g. pecs in bench) are being hit when they lift. That doesn’t prevent them from doing short maximal strength cycles or using some powerlifting type ideas to improve their training.

    And I hope that answers the question.

    bron: Maximal Strength Training for Bodybuilders – Q&A | BodyRecomposition - The Home of Lyle McDonald
    I know from teaching hundreds of seminars that the guys who say they have “awesome technique” are usually the biggest disasters—their ego just doesn’t let them see it.
    - Dave Tate

  • #2
    Ik moest aan deze post denken toen ik het rood gemarkeerde gedeelte las:

    Originally posted by Iguana View Post
    Beginners die naturel trainen gainen een stuk sneller op powerliftingprogramma's dan op de zogenaamde bodybuildschema's.

    bron: http://forum.bodynet.nl/984065-post15.html
    Maar goed, ik ben het er wel mee eens. Veel jongens in de sportschool trainen worden misleid door artikels over de manier van trainen van top profs.
    I know from teaching hundreds of seminars that the guys who say they have “awesome technique” are usually the biggest disasters—their ego just doesn’t let them see it.
    - Dave Tate

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by inferno_0666 View Post

      Maar goed, ik ben het er wel mee eens. Veel jongens in de sportschool trainen worden misleid door artikels over de manier van trainen van top profs.
      ik vind dat veel beginners die willen bodybuilden teveel worden misleid door powerlifters.
      1e Masters Superbody YBF 2011!
      Go M.U.D. Mart's Ultimate Diet ©

      Comment


      • #4
        Ik heb nooit pomp...
        focus on progression at all times, so when you are able to, load the bar.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Teddek View Post
          Ik heb nooit pomp...
          pomp zit vaak ook alleen maar in de weg.
          1e Masters Superbody YBF 2011!
          Go M.U.D. Mart's Ultimate Diet ©

          Comment


          • #6
            interessant artikel ... ik vind de keuze tussen kracht en massa ook niet evident. Ik hoor meer te tillen om aan massa te winnen, maar ik weeg 67kg voor 1m82 en kracht is dus niet mijn grootste troef.
            was ik maar een vrouw, dan was ik tevreden geweest met mijn huidig gewicht

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Teddek View Post
              Ik heb nooit pomp...
              vandaag voor het eerst op gelet en naar gestreefd maar zonder succes
              was ik maar een vrouw, dan was ik tevreden geweest met mijn huidig gewicht

              Comment


              • #8
                die schema's uit de flex etc lijken me nochtans goeie cardio
                Raw 235-180-275 totaal 690kg 413.7 wilks @ IPF -105

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Dimix View Post
                  interessant artikel ... ik vind de keuze tussen kracht en massa ook niet evident. Ik hoor meer te tillen om aan massa te winnen, maar ik weeg 67kg voor 1m82 en kracht is dus niet mijn grootste troef.
                  Om meer te groeien moet je idd meer gewicht gaan tillen.... m.a.w. progressief laden. Veel mensen blijven hangen in 1 reprange en op 1 gewicht, resultaat blijft dan lang uit..... je zal moeten verzwaren, altijd zo zwaar mogelijk in je werkset of sets.



                  Originally posted by Dimix View Post
                  vandaag voor het eerst op gelet en naar gestreefd maar zonder succes
                  Komt vanzelf een keer. Lekker zwaar blijven gaan en lekker volume draaien dan krijg je vanzelf een keer flinke pomp.
                  1e Masters Superbody YBF 2011!
                  Go M.U.D. Mart's Ultimate Diet ©

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Triple Aces View Post
                    die schema's uit de flex etc lijken me nochtans goeie cardio
                    Misschien moet je dan een keer zo'n schema doen voor je conditie. Wellicht heeft Mvos er nog 1 voor je of GIP.
                    1e Masters Superbody YBF 2011!
                    Go M.U.D. Mart's Ultimate Diet ©

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by marnop View Post
                      Misschien moet je dan een keer zo'n schema doen voor je conditie. Wellicht heeft Mvos er nog 1 voor je of GIP.
                      Misschien is mijn conditie wel beter dan jouwe?
                      Raw 235-180-275 totaal 690kg 413.7 wilks @ IPF -105

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        How big should you go? High intensity or high volume: which one for maximum muscle?

                        There is an age-old debate about which is more important intensity or volume. Before we get into that, the term intensity needs a little bit of clarification. I prefer not to use the word intensity at all, primarily because it confuses people who associate it with fatigue (one-set-to-absolute-failure mentality) and not weight loads. Rather than intensity, I like the term load or load-stress. Load-stress more accurately describes the importance of using enough weight. The question of whether or not to take each set to failure is a different issue.

                        HOW HEAVY IS "HEAVY ENOUGH"?
                        Now, about that research; when looking at a broad sample of studies examining the impact of load (i.e., intensity) versus volume, we do see some basic principles emerge. Data from more than 70 different muscle hypertrophy studies was collected by Wernbom and colleagues and published in the journal Sports Medicine in 2007. (1) In general, the rate of hypertrophy in these studies was greatest when the toads were 65%-85% of an athlete's one-repetition maximum (1RM). It is of interest that you don't see a linear dose-response by increasing the weight from 65%-85%. The seemingly equivalent results from widely varying weight loads demonstrate a "threshold" effect. As with other threshold-type models, once the threshold is crossed, you see diminishing returns as you push things higher. The same is true for weight; heavier doesn't necessarily mean more effective. The only time heavier equals better is when you haven't reached the effective load-stress threshold for your level of conditioning.

                        REDEFINING VOLUME

                        But what about volume? The controversy about the optimal number of sets stems from a large number of studies that show little difference (and a significant number that do) between one set and multiple sets in producing hypertrophy. When we take a closer look at these studies, the reason for the conflicting data becomes clear. The overwhelming majority of studies showing no difference in growth between one set and multiple sets use untrained subjects. This means that their muscles' load-stress threshold was very low, allowing very little volume to induce measurable growth. In addition to using untrained subjects, nearly all studies showing no difference were short-term, lasting no longer than 14 weeks. What these researchers demonstrated was that in these untrained individuals, the threshold for triggering growth was adequately met using only one set. As expected, once the threshold was reached, any additional "work" failed to produce measurably greater anabolic effects. (2)
                        There were many who questioned the validity of such a one-size-fits-all, low-volume conclusion. What about well-trained populations? This skep-ticism rises from anecdotal evidence that once you have been training a few years, just dropping by the gym to do one set and then packing up and going home is not going to get you very far. Indeed, later ABLY research utilizing longer training periods and altering the loads to accommodate tissue conditioning have demonstrated superior gains from multiple-set training. (3), (4) We can think of volume in ways other than total sets, though. Counting the "total reps" per session is a way of quantifying volume as well. Counting total reps is probably a more accurate way of estimating time under load. Most of the training scenarios considered thus far used anywhere from 8 to 12 total reps for single-set training and 24-36 total reps for multiple-set training. Referring again to Wernbom's analysis of 70 different studies, it's clear that measurable hypertrophy can be achieved using a wide variety of set and rep combinations; nevertheless, the greatest anabolic response was obtained when using 30-60 total reps per muscle group per session.
                        BEST OF BOTH WORLDS
                        In the end it isn't either high intensity or high volume, it is the right combination of both for your particular situation. In a nutshell, you can be confident that if you use 75% to 85% of your 1RM and perform enough sets to equal 30 total reps per upper-body muscle group and 60 total reps for leg muscle groups, you will be pretty close to the ideal combination of intensity and volume for maximum gains.


                        REFERENCES: 1) M. Wernbom et al., Sports Med., 37(3);225-64, 2007.2) V. Kumar et al., J. Physiol., 587(Pt1):211-7, 2009. 3) S. Marzolini et al., Med. Sci. Sports Experc., 40:1557-64, 2008.4) B.R. Ronnestad et al., J. Strength Cond. Res., 21:157-63, 2007.
                        BY BRYAN HAYCOCK, M.S.
                        1e Masters Superbody YBF 2011!
                        Go M.U.D. Mart's Ultimate Diet ©

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Triple Aces View Post
                          Misschien is mijn conditie wel beter dan jouwe?
                          ik rook dus al ruim 30 jaar zware shag en redelijk veel....zal jouw conditie beter zijn.... goh... interessante vraag.
                          1e Masters Superbody YBF 2011!
                          Go M.U.D. Mart's Ultimate Diet ©

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by marnop View Post
                            ik rook dus al ruim 30 jaar zware shag en redelijk veel....zal jouw conditie beter zijn.... goh... interessante vraag.
                            zelfkennis is toch ook mooi hé
                            was ik maar een vrouw, dan was ik tevreden geweest met mijn huidig gewicht

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Dimix View Post
                              zelfkennis is toch ook mooi hé
                              superbe
                              1e Masters Superbody YBF 2011!
                              Go M.U.D. Mart's Ultimate Diet ©

                              Comment

                              Sidebar top desktop

                              Collapse

                              Actieve discussies

                              Collapse

                              porn porn porn porn porn porn porn porn porn porn porn porn porn porn porn porn porn
                              erotik film izle Rus escort gaziantep rus escort
                              Antalya Escort
                              sikis
                              gaziantep escort
                              gaziantep escort
                              İstanbul Escort
                              istanbul escort bayan
                              sisli escort beylikduzu escort bayan
                              antalya escort atakoy escort
                              umraniye escort bayan
                              Very sweethearts get banged by pretty pals Баба посидела анусом на крепком стояке fotos de vaginas sexis
                              Working...
                              X