Very interesting
..........
..........
Bodybuilding has lied to you, and that’s why you’re still skinny
- Thread starter erstblackbeard
- Start date
Basic summary: Eat big + lift big = get big.
I'm not sure the major sites and magazines lie to us about this fact, per se, but they certainly aren't typically the cornerstone of what the mags preach. I've seen plenty of mags/articles that say that you need to keep lifting heavier to get bigger, which of course is true, but they give terrible advice on how to increase the weight you can lift. They all tell you to consume lots of protein ....in the form of 80 different shakes a day. The truth is in there, you just have to sort through 99% bro-science to get to the 1% good information.
One of the big faults of magazines is the belief that a more complicated exercise is always better. Complexity has its place, but it doesn't necessarily mean better exercise in the context of body composition. For example, I'm keen on Olympic weightlifting. Will training the Olympic lifts with progressive increase in weight lifted plus a caloric surplus and plenty of protein yield size gains? Probably. But that certainly doesn't make Olympic lifting superior to the basic exercises (squats, deadlifts, bench press, overhead press, chins and rows) with regards to bodybuilding. On BB.com, in the programming section there's a LOT of discussion on Rippetoe's Starting Strength, a book which I've read and think has a great program in it. People often debate the issue of using power cleans vs rows, and on BB.com it's almost unanimous that "cleans are better than rows." In the context of building muscle, I personally wouldn't put my money on that claim.
And of course, that's just the tip of the iceburg. Then you get one-arm kettlebell clean+presses, one-legged squats on a fitball, and so forth. There's nothing wrong with learning complex movements, and there's nothing wrong with training for balance, but if you turn around and say it's going to make you bigger than a simple, progressive strength exercise, you'd be making a weak claim.
My favourite items of dumb advice from mags are matrix sets (eg 21's) and mixing exercises so that you do one exercise on the concentric and another on the eccentric (eg you do a DB bench press concentric then a DB fly eccentric). For the former, what advantage could 7 full reps and 14 partial reps possibly have over 14 full reps? For the latter, it certainly doesn't make the best of both worlds, it just means one part of the movement is probably too light to be efficient and the other part is either at an appropriate weight to just do that exercise, or it's too heavy and a potential hazard.
I'm not sure the major sites and magazines lie to us about this fact, per se, but they certainly aren't typically the cornerstone of what the mags preach. I've seen plenty of mags/articles that say that you need to keep lifting heavier to get bigger, which of course is true, but they give terrible advice on how to increase the weight you can lift. They all tell you to consume lots of protein ....in the form of 80 different shakes a day. The truth is in there, you just have to sort through 99% bro-science to get to the 1% good information.
One of the big faults of magazines is the belief that a more complicated exercise is always better. Complexity has its place, but it doesn't necessarily mean better exercise in the context of body composition. For example, I'm keen on Olympic weightlifting. Will training the Olympic lifts with progressive increase in weight lifted plus a caloric surplus and plenty of protein yield size gains? Probably. But that certainly doesn't make Olympic lifting superior to the basic exercises (squats, deadlifts, bench press, overhead press, chins and rows) with regards to bodybuilding. On BB.com, in the programming section there's a LOT of discussion on Rippetoe's Starting Strength, a book which I've read and think has a great program in it. People often debate the issue of using power cleans vs rows, and on BB.com it's almost unanimous that "cleans are better than rows." In the context of building muscle, I personally wouldn't put my money on that claim.
And of course, that's just the tip of the iceburg. Then you get one-arm kettlebell clean+presses, one-legged squats on a fitball, and so forth. There's nothing wrong with learning complex movements, and there's nothing wrong with training for balance, but if you turn around and say it's going to make you bigger than a simple, progressive strength exercise, you'd be making a weak claim.
My favourite items of dumb advice from mags are matrix sets (eg 21's) and mixing exercises so that you do one exercise on the concentric and another on the eccentric (eg you do a DB bench press concentric then a DB fly eccentric). For the former, what advantage could 7 full reps and 14 partial reps possibly have over 14 full reps? For the latter, it certainly doesn't make the best of both worlds, it just means one part of the movement is probably too light to be efficient and the other part is either at an appropriate weight to just do that exercise, or it's too heavy and a potential hazard.
honeslty the skinny kids in the gym do change cause i was one of them. it is only if you stick with gym properly you will grow. the thing is people don't have the mentality to do it. they think that 6 months should do the trick but it takes years to get a good body naturally. that's why people turn to steroids because its more effective. i mean steroids is used to increase testosterone. testosterone is the key to build muscle and bone. an the people who have low testosterone are the ones going to struggle. but yea working out naturally takes years to get a good body and isolating muscle groups is a good way to go about it if you train hard. because your muscles need rest to grow. thats why they say to isolate the muscles. Tony D
You think isolating muscles is the best way to grow? If person A and person B are both 6 ft tall and weigh 130 lbs :-
- A does Starting Strength/5x5 and drinks a gallon of milk a day.
- B follows a 7-day professional bodybuilder split with lots of isolation exercises.
Tell me why you think person B will get stronger or increase in size 6 months or a year down the line.
Last edited:
can't say who will because it depends on genetics and how they exercise etc. but what i meant about isolating muscles is to have a routine for example. back and biceps, shoulders legs and chest and triceps. this is because your muscles need rest like i said before and if you don't know this maybe that's why your muscles arn't growing. the reason why people who know what they are doing in the gym follow a routine is so they can come almost everyday without overtraining.
you don't really know what your talking about either because if someone drank a gallon of milk a day it would just lead to fat. even if they drank half a litre of milk it could still lead to fat.
Now, if a person A and B who both are 6 ft tall, 130 lbs (must be daym skinny)
- A does Starting Strength/5x5 and drinks a gallon of milk a day.
- B 6 days a week of strength training following a routine to isolate muscle groups with an adequate diet.
B will gain more muscle then A. Why? because muscles grow outside of the gym and person B will be letting his muscles have enough rest before he works the same muscle groups out.
A depending on his genetics, diet etc. he will problem end up in circles if he does have a routine and just does full body workouts all the time. Drinking all that milk will just make him fat aswell.
If you don't believe what i have explained here, you need to do some research. Tony D
Well, since the MPS response after a pretty high volume work out only lasts for like 36-48 hours, then shouldn't you train every muscle group about every other day? Too much rest isn't good either. You need to rest just enough for your muscles to restore themselves, then you need to go at it again.
anthony.m.d you are actually proving why skinny gym goers remain skinny after following flex magazine workouts. A skinny underweight guy doing a professional bodybuilder split is a no-no. The trainee has no muscle to isolate. The professional bodybuilder has 10-20 years of training under his belt and plenty of muscle. The professional bodybuilder is also chemically enhanced, so your skinny trainee will remain skinny proving the point in the first post.
Spend some time reading proper training material. This is why bodybuilding has lied to you.
Spend some time reading proper training material. This is why bodybuilding has lied to you.
Why does drinking milk lead to fat?
The original program is A: Squats/Bench/Deadlift and B: Squats/Press/P.Clean. Once upon a time, some guy suggested doing barbell rows instead of cleans if someone doesn't have a coach to teach them the movement. People on BB.com haven't shut up about it since. The only comparison between cleans and rows is that it's a light pull from the floor. But yeah, the two exercises have very different purposes (which, possibly, is cause for debate when dealing with beginners who want to be bodybuilders).
I also agree with your more recent point that 36-48 hours after training, the muscle is usually ready to train again, so if you're sensible you can make more progress training the same muscles every other day. So long as there's some form of progression, people can certainly make gains on a 5-day split, but I don't see how it's in any way optimal or ideal for most trainees. If the muscle's ready to train again, you'll probably make the most progress by training it again.
Final note: Milk doesn't make a person fat. Too many calories does. While I think GOMAD is generally going to be overkill for most beginners, milk itself won't make anyone fat. It's a good, nutritious substance that most trainees should take advantage of.
2 pints a day for me!the only reason why i said to much milk will make you fat is because it's fast absorbing carbs and to much of it in one hit can lead to fat. milk is essential for muscle contractions and bone growth and everyone needs milk. but someone said a gallon and i said that would lead to fat wich it will.
you need to read more about muscle building and maybe do gym yourself an you will understand
you need to read more about muscle building and maybe do gym yourself an you will understand
LOL! This is why I hate this forum sometimes because you get people who often cannot even squat 225 signing up and offering others "advice". Tell me from your knowledge of strength and conditioning :-
- how or why the squats and milk programme is effective.
- What does Rippetoe recommend in Starting Strength?
- which strength and conditioning coach can you cite you backs up your bro-science?
There is a fair amount of fat in milk and if you drink alot of milk it will go to fat. There are many other reasons and that's all i was trying to say. I didn mention anything about squats. I was replying to the guy that asked y does milk make u fat.
Nothing wrong with fat.
Body part splits are one of the worst things you can do if you are trying to get stronger/bigger and this is the same mentality of many guys in the gym I train at. I would bet that with that sort of split you don't have time to squat and deadlift properly.
If you want to get stronger, look at 5x5 and include compounds in your routine.
If you had a high fat diet u would have a high calorie intake since fat is worth the most energy. So having a high fat diet you will gain fat even if you stay at your maintenance level. As you get fat, you will also lose muscle in the gym because your body's diet doesn't supply the energy it needs to build muscle. Not only will you gain fat and lose muscle, you will clog up your arteries from all the cholesterol. you can't gain muscle without a good diet, it's not a one way road. so it's not just about "It's all about calories in vs calories out" it's about what's in those calories as well. Tony D
Nothing is wrong with fat, it's when you have to much of it.