• All new members please introduce your self here and welcome to the board:
    http://www.professionalmuscle.com/forums/showthread.php?t=259
Buy Needles And Syringes With No Prescription
M4B Store Banner
intex
Riptropin Store banner
Generation X Bodybuilding Forum
Buy Needles And Syringes With No Prescription
Buy Needles And Syringes With No Prescription
Mysupps Store Banner
IP Gear Store Banner
PM-Ace-Labs
Ganabol Store Banner
Spend $100 and get bonus needles free at sterile syringes
Professional Muscle Store open now
sunrise2
PHARMAHGH1
kinglab
ganabol2
Professional Muscle Store open now
over 5000 supplements on sale at professional muscle store
azteca
granabolic1
napsgear-210x65
advertise1
over 5000 supplements on sale at professional muscle store
over 5000 supplements on sale at professional muscle store
ashp210
UGFREAK-banner-PM
esquel
YMSGIF210x65-Banner
over 5000 supplements on sale at professional muscle store
over 5000 supplements on sale at professional muscle store
over 5000 supplements on sale at professional muscle store
over 5000 supplements on sale at professional muscle store
over 5000 supplements on sale at professional muscle store
over 5000 supplements on sale at professional muscle store
over 5000 supplements on sale at professional muscle store

Question For Dante / DC Training

IM going to put asterisks in front of my answers ok

Good stuff Dante, I appreciate the in depth replies.

I know some guys actually curl intentionally bringing their arms forward throughout the rep, citing the fact that the biceps are involved in shoulder flexion and that this results in their full ROM. What is your reasoning for suggesting the opposite and leaving them in a shoulder-extended position?

Is the reason you don't like to rest pause forearms due to injury risk?


I like advanced guys to do that because i feel everyone in the beginning needs size and the best way to do that is do the way heavy hitter and others have described but when someone gets more advanced there comes a time you can train your strong bodyparts once a week and still gain and your weak bodyparts 2x (one full and one not) a week and gain.

I could come into your gym and in one week i would show you about 10-15 variations of exercises that you have not thought of before....because i just have a mind like that...i see an exercise or a machine and i take it apart and think how i can get everything out of how it pulls down or presses...where i should be set up, and just the mechanics of it. I know this because i do this at every gym i go to and training partners and friends always say "how the hell did you come up with this"...and its just simply I take note of every single apparatus in the gym and what i can do with it....I do this almost every night when im falling asleep. Sometimes i go in and try it out and its a 100% certifiable disaster and wont work....sometimes i go in and "Boom" it is awesome and works exactly like i thought it would. Do you know you can do about the greatest fixed lateral raise there is on one of the hammer strength chest press machines? Its a fact. Thats how you got to get your mind working

One nice thing about what you're talking about is that it keeps the training fun. We all know we can progress whenever a new exercise is introduced, in large part due to neurological adaptations, and even though we may know that's the reason for a lot of the progress (rather than true muscle growth) it is still more fun than going in and say doing bench press 12x315...then next week doing 12x315....then next week 12x315....then next week 12x315 lol. I think once you're at an advanced stage you can mix thing up and not really compromise much as long as you're still pushing hard.

It sounds though like you're feeling these new exercises are providing new muscle growth. I suppose with slight differences in angle, mechanics, etc muscles may be worked in a way they haven't been before and this could lead to a different emphasis. Why do you think it's the case then that the vast majority of bodybuilders stick with their tried and true exercises year after year after year?

My hesitation with dropping the main lifts is you lose your gauge for true progress. If I was doing 10xBW+90 pull ups and now a year later I'm doing 10xBW+100 pull ups that tells me I've at least made some true progress (after 15 years I'd be ecstatic with a true 10lb gain on an exercise I've been doing for 15 years). Alternatively, if I was doing 10xBW+90lb pull ups two years ago and then 10x280lb cable pulldowns last year and then 10x360 HS Pulldowns this year (even if it was progressed over the last few months), how do I know I'm making real progress and didn't just get better at the exercise?

This is coming from someone who does not blast gear, who sits around 190-200lb most of the year, but personally I can gain a lot of "strength" on random exercises and get no bigger at all because I just improve my efficiency at the exercise over weeks/months. It's when I've actually gotten stronger at the exercises I've done for many years that I see myself actually get bigger and can confirm that with the tape measure. That's always been my concern with too much variation while taking away the main movements you've done for years.
 
My hesitation with dropping the main lifts is you lose your gauge for true progress. If I was doing 10xBW+90 pull ups and now a year later I'm doing 10xBW+100 pull ups that tells me I've at least made some true progress (after 15 years I'd be ecstatic with a true 10lb gain on an exercise I've been doing for 15 years). Alternatively, if I was doing 10xBW+90lb pull ups two years ago and then 10x280lb cable pulldowns last year and then 10x360 HS Pulldowns this year (even if it was progressed over the last few months), how do I know I'm making real progress and didn't just get better at the exercise?

This is coming from someone who does not blast gear, who sits around 190-200lb most of the year, but personally I can gain a lot of "strength" on random exercises and get no bigger at all because I just improve my efficiency at the exercise over weeks/months. It's when I've actually gotten stronger at the exercises I've done for many years that I see myself actually get bigger and can confirm that with the tape measure. That's always been my concern with too much variation while taking away the main movements you've done for years.
I think you're complicating things a bit. It doesn't really matter which exercises you're getting stronger on...as long as you're consistently gettign stronger. And if you're consistently getting stronger...you should consistently become larger as well. And going by youre exampl of chins, pulldowns, and HS....that's where the logbook comes in. You keep track of your progress on these exercises and when they rotated back into the mix eventually youll fins that even though you haven't done a chin in several months....within a couple weeks of blasting on them again you will far surpass your previous numbers as long as you've been doing the program correctly and nutrition is in check.
Since your focus seems to be on strength on basic exercises how about this example. Powerlifters who are trying to get strong at the deadlift don't actually train the deadlift much leading until the last few weeks before a meet. They train things like good mornings, rack deads, banded deads, deficit deads, sldl, and other accesories and yet their strength on the core exercise of deadlifts still goes up
And Dante doesnt recommend dropping the main lifts, just training the most efficient and safest way possible. For example...he doesnt recommend falt bench press. You can build a lot of strength and size with this....but the potential for injury leading to lost training time with this exercise is soooo much greater than say a smith machine low incline press. Whats better....hitting those main lifts and risking injury which will require time away from the gym....or modifying that exercise slightly so you can pound on it month after month and make some srious gains until you stall on it and then swap it out?
And if you really love those core movements and they work for your physique...keep them in there. Dante just wants people to tailor their training to their own individual structure....but has found some tweaks that work for a majority of people such as the DC calf training method and the quad widomakers
 
I think you're complicating things a bit. It doesn't really matter which exercises you're getting stronger on...as long as you're consistently gettign stronger. And if you're consistently getting stronger...you should consistently become larger as well. And going by youre exampl of chins, pulldowns, and HS....that's where the logbook comes in. You keep track of your progress on these exercises and when they rotated back into the mix eventually youll fins that even though you haven't done a chin in several months....within a couple weeks of blasting on them again you will far surpass your previous numbers as long as you've been doing the program correctly and nutrition is in check.
Since your focus seems to be on strength on basic exercises how about this example. Powerlifters who are trying to get strong at the deadlift don't actually train the deadlift much leading until the last few weeks before a meet. They train things like good mornings, rack deads, banded deads, deficit deads, sldl, and other accesories and yet their strength on the core exercise of deadlifts still goes up
And Dante doesnt recommend dropping the main lifts, just training the most efficient and safest way possible. For example...he doesnt recommend falt bench press. You can build a lot of strength and size with this....but the potential for injury leading to lost training time with this exercise is soooo much greater than say a smith machine low incline press. Whats better....hitting those main lifts and risking injury which will require time away from the gym....or modifying that exercise slightly so you can pound on it month after month and make some srious gains until you stall on it and then swap it out?
And if you really love those core movements and they work for your physique...keep them in there. Dante just wants people to tailor their training to their own individual structure....but has found some tweaks that work for a majority of people such as the DC calf training method and the quad widomakers

Spot on!

I would also add: If you can find the range of volume you can recover from, and progress within that range, it's a game changer long term.

For example: Let's say my max on DB incline is 120s for 8, and my max recoverable volume for that exercise is 2 working sets in a given session (1 to absolute failure). I can progress that movement from 8 reps to 12, and then add one more set where I do one set to not absolute failure, and then one to absolute failure doing the same weight.

You've effectively exhausted the muscle fiber way beyond previous points doing this. Added an element of progressive overload in the form of volume, and used the same weight before moving up too quickly (thinking long term injury wise).

In 1 year, let's say you're doing 120s for 10 reps on your first set, and 135s for 10 reps on your second set (to absolute failure). You'll have a much bigger chest.

Credit goes to both Dante, and @homonunculus on this practice
 
I think you're complicating things a bit. It doesn't really matter which exercises you're getting stronger on...as long as you're consistently gettign stronger. And if you're consistently getting stronger...you should consistently become larger as well. And going by youre exampl of chins, pulldowns, and HS....that's where the logbook comes in. You keep track of your progress on these exercises and when they rotated back into the mix eventually youll fins that even though you haven't done a chin in several months....within a couple weeks of blasting on them again you will far surpass your previous numbers as long as you've been doing the program correctly and nutrition is in check.
Since your focus seems to be on strength on basic exercises how about this example. Powerlifters who are trying to get strong at the deadlift don't actually train the deadlift much leading until the last few weeks before a meet. They train things like good mornings, rack deads, banded deads, deficit deads, sldl, and other accesories and yet their strength on the core exercise of deadlifts still goes up
And Dante doesnt recommend dropping the main lifts, just training the most efficient and safest way possible. For example...he doesnt recommend falt bench press. You can build a lot of strength and size with this....but the potential for injury leading to lost training time with this exercise is soooo much greater than say a smith machine low incline press. Whats better....hitting those main lifts and risking injury which will require time away from the gym....or modifying that exercise slightly so you can pound on it month after month and make some srious gains until you stall on it and then swap it out?
And if you really love those core movements and they work for your physique...keep them in there. Dante just wants people to tailor their training to their own individual structure....but has found some tweaks that work for a majority of people such as the DC calf training method and the quad widomakers

Tone through text sometimes comes across the wrong way, so keep in mind what I'm saying is purely meant for good discussion and isn't meant to be argumentative :)

Regarding the deadlifts, that's certainly true for some powerlifters who use the conjugate method. Many many powerlifters though do deadlifts year round, and most of the top powerlifters of today favor specificity by training the deadlift and close variations most of the time. What you describe is still out there of course, but was big with Westside and a lot of geared (i.e. not raw) powerlifters, as they had to focus on specific points where the gear was weak.

I agree with you that "as long as you're consistently getting stronger" is the important point but it has to be that you're getting stronger due to the muscles growing. You're obviously an experienced lifter so I'm sure you know this, but much of the strength one gains when performing a new exercise comes from neurological adaptations. Your body becomes better at the movement and so you can lift more, even if you have no more muscle. This year I hit a personal best on overhead press....I hit a 1RM with 15lb more weight than I've ever hit before, and a 10RM with 10lb more weight than I've ever hit before. Did I actually gain muscle? Unlikely. I've been lifting for 15 years and don't use anabolics, so there's no way I'm putting on significant muscle at this point. Measurements, weight, pics, etc were the same. I got stronger because I did the movement (OHP) a lot (specialization phase) and became better at it. "Neurological gains".

Someone may very well find that they progress on pull ups through 10xBW+50, then 10xBW+60, then 10xBW+70, etc....then switch exercises and get pulldowns 10x280, then 10x290, then 10x300, etc....then switch again and get HS pulldowns 10x360, then 10x370, then 10x380, etc....then rotate pull ups back in only to find they are back at 10xBW+60 and then get back to 10xBW+70 and then stall again.

Of course some people will find they go back to that old exercise and are even stronger and can keep gaining. Ultimately a lot of it comes down to how advanced you are and how much muscle you have left to pack on your frame. If you still have muscle left to gain (i.e. you're not genetically maxed out) I think that method works well and is more fun, breaks up the monotony. But if you're maxed, you're maxed (by definition).

Oh and I fully agree with you about getting the right, low risk, exercises for oneself. I was more referring to keeping whatever that is in there long term as a gauge. So if you like smith machine low incline press that's great. But make sure you're stronger on it this year than last year, and make sure you're stronger on it again 2 years from now....because if you're not, I can almost guarantee if all other factors are equal you won't have a bigger chest. So for example if you could do 10x315 smith machine low incline press and then the next 3 years you come back to it and you're still only doing 10x315 then I would bet money your chest is the same size...that's what I mean by using core lifts as a gauge, whichever core lifts you choose for that purpose. Hope that makes sense.


Spot on!

I would also add: If you can find the range of volume you can recover from, and progress within that range, it's a game changer long term.

For example: Let's say my max on DB incline is 120s for 8, and my max recoverable volume for that exercise is 2 working sets in a given session (1 to absolute failure). I can progress that movement from 8 reps to 12, and then add one more set where I do one set to not absolute failure, and then one to absolute failure doing the same weight.

You've effectively exhausted the muscle fiber way beyond previous points doing this. Added an element of progressive overload in the form of volume, and used the same weight before moving up too quickly (thinking long term injury wise).

In 1 year, let's say you're doing 120s for 10 reps on your first set, and 135s for 10 reps on your second set (to absolute failure). You'll have a much bigger chest.

Credit goes to both Dante, and @homonunculus on this practice

For sure, many ways to progress, and ultimately the goal is to get stronger for reps, as you mentioned. Big fan of Scott, I'll be talking to him again tomorrow for my podcast :)
 
Tone through text sometimes comes across the wrong way, so keep in mind what I'm saying is purely meant for good discussion and isn't meant to be argumentative :)

Regarding the deadlifts, that's certainly true for some powerlifters who use the conjugate method. Many many powerlifters though do deadlifts year round, and most of the top powerlifters of today favor specificity by training the deadlift and close variations most of the time. What you describe is still out there of course, but was big with Westside and a lot of geared (i.e. not raw) powerlifters, as they had to focus on specific points where the gear was weak.

I agree with you that "as long as you're consistently getting stronger" is the important point but it has to be that you're getting stronger due to the muscles growing. You're obviously an experienced lifter so I'm sure you know this, but much of the strength one gains when performing a new exercise comes from neurological adaptations. Your body becomes better at the movement and so you can lift more, even if you have no more muscle. This year I hit a personal best on overhead press....I hit a 1RM with 15lb more weight than I've ever hit before, and a 10RM with 10lb more weight than I've ever hit before. Did I actually gain muscle? Unlikely. I've been lifting for 15 years and don't use anabolics, so there's no way I'm putting on significant muscle at this point. Measurements, weight, pics, etc were the same. I got stronger because I did the movement (OHP) a lot (specialization phase) and became better at it. "Neurological gains".

Someone may very well find that they progress on pull ups through 10xBW+50, then 10xBW+60, then 10xBW+70, etc....then switch exercises and get pulldowns 10x280, then 10x290, then 10x300, etc....then switch again and get HS pulldowns 10x360, then 10x370, then 10x380, etc....then rotate pull ups back in only to find they are back at 10xBW+60 and then get back to 10xBW+70 and then stall again.

Of course some people will find they go back to that old exercise and are even stronger and can keep gaining. Ultimately a lot of it comes down to how advanced you are and how much muscle you have left to pack on your frame. If you still have muscle left to gain (i.e. you're not genetically maxed out) I think that method works well and is more fun, breaks up the monotony. But if you're maxed, you're maxed (by definition).

Oh and I fully agree with you about getting the right, low risk, exercises for oneself. I was more referring to keeping whatever that is in there long term as a gauge. So if you like smith machine low incline press that's great. But make sure you're stronger on it this year than last year, and make sure you're stronger on it again 2 years from now....because if you're not, I can almost guarantee if all other factors are equal you won't have a bigger chest. So for example if you could do 10x315 smith machine low incline press and then the next 3 years you come back to it and you're still only doing 10x315 then I would bet money your chest is the same size...that's what I mean by using core lifts as a gauge, whichever core lifts you choose for that purpose. Hope that makes sense.




For sure, many ways to progress, and ultimately the goal is to get stronger for reps, as you mentioned. Big fan of Scott, I'll be talking to him again tomorrow for my podcast :)
I definitely didnt take your tone as argumentative. And i enjoy a good debate myself. DC training is something i have a lot of experience with and gained a tremendous amount of muscle doing so. I enjoy discussing it. And i dont completely agree with your final statement. In part due to what you mentioned earlier in your post. Neuromuscular adaptation to a specific exercise. Lets say i didnt train the flat bench in several months, but i got stronger on the dumbell bench and the pec deck push press. It stands to reason that i could have added some muscle doing so, but wouldnt neccesarilly be any stronger on the flat bench press because it's been out of rotation. But.....if i were to start training that movement again with the extra muscle i added from the other exercises, i would probably set a personal best in no time. And again, the log book is important so i can look back on exercises from a year ago to make sure i am actually improving them
 
You also have to keep in mind that for things like the bench press, many other muscle are involved in becoming "stronger" on it. For instance, i could train the bench press with the exact same weight and rep scheme every week for 12 weeks without ever varying it, but hammer my upper back and triceps with progressive overload and get much stronger on both of them....and then come back and set a personal best at the bench press. So the movement itself is sometimes not quite as important to strength as getting the individual muscles stronger and bigger. A bigger lat or tricep gives a mechanical advantage when bench pressing
 
Which takes us back to getting interesting with it for exercise selection. Lets say i have a hard time activating my triceps long head with "traditional" triceps exercises. Well if i got really strong at reverse grip smith presses with my ass hanging off the end of the bench like dante describes, theres no way i wont have added some serious development to my triceps long head. This area gets hammered for me with this movement. And having a big bulky long head mashing into you lat while doing pressing movements will certainly enhance your ability to perform said movement
 
I definitely didnt take your tone as argumentative. And i enjoy a good debate myself. DC training is something i have a lot of experience with and gained a tremendous amount of muscle doing so. I enjoy discussing it. And i dont completely agree with your final statement. In part due to what you mentioned earlier in your post. Neuromuscular adaptation to a specific exercise. Lets say i didnt train the flat bench in several months, but i got stronger on the dumbell bench and the pec deck push press. It stands to reason that i could have added some muscle doing so, but wouldnt neccesarilly be any stronger on the flat bench press because it's been out of rotation. But.....if i were to start training that movement again with the extra muscle i added from the other exercises, i would probably set a personal best in no time. And again, the log book is important so i can look back on exercises from a year ago to make sure i am actually improving them

Totally agree. I was thinking when I posted that about the 10x315 smith machine low incline press that I should have clarified. When I said you won't have anymore muscle if you aren't any stronger, I meant if the exercise was back into rotation for a sufficient period of time.

So example 1:
Smith Machine Low Incline Press: Do it for a few months, work up to 10x315
Low incline DB Bench: switch to this for a few months from 10x100s --> 10x105s --> 10x110s --> 10x110s --> 10x110s (stalled, so switch)
Hammer strength press: switch to this for a few months from 10x270 --> 10x290 --> 10x310 --> 10x310 --> 10x310 (stalled, so switch)
Back to Smith Machine Low Incline Press: Do it for a few months, work up from 10x295 --> 10x305 --> 10x315 --> 10x315 --> 10x315
^^I don't think this person will have gained any significant chest size, because even though they were training progressively they did not get truly stronger

example 2:
Smith Machine Low Incline Press: Do it for a few months, work up to 10x315
Low incline DB Bench: switch to this for a few months from 10x100s --> 10x105s --> 10x110s --> 10x110s --> 10x110s (stalled, so switch)
Hammer strength press: switch to this for a few months from 10x270 --> 10x290 --> 10x310 --> 10x310 --> 10x310 (stalled, so switch)
Back to Smith Machine Low Incline Press: Do it for a few months, work up from 10x295 --> 10x305 --> 10x315 --> 10x325 --> 10x330
^^I think this person WILL have gained significant chest size, because they netted true strength gains on a core lift they previously stalled on

So my point was to say, you can flip flop exercises every month and "gain strength" but it's not necessarily strength due to hypertrophy, it may largely be due to neurological efficiency. I think we're both on the same page here.

and in the above example #2, if that guy is then, after reincorporating Smith Machine Low Incline Press for a few months, now up to 10x350 he will again have made real progress. But if he rotates exercise after exercise and then comes back to Smith Machine Low Incline Press for a few months and is still doing 10x330 he will not have put on additional size in my opinion. I think you and Dante would agree with this for the most part.

This drove me nuts when I hired a coach (who I won't name as he has since committed suicide) when I was in high school. I kept telling him I wasn't progressing and he said "look at all those increased reps across your workouts!" and I said "yea obviously, they're new exercises. My core lifts are the same as when we started working together 3 months ago".

You also have to keep in mind that for things like the bench press, many other muscle are involved in becoming "stronger" on it. For instance, i could train the bench press with the exact same weight and rep scheme every week for 12 weeks without ever varying it, but hammer my upper back and triceps with progressive overload and get much stronger on both of them....and then come back and set a personal best at the bench press. So the movement itself is sometimes not quite as important to strength as getting the individual muscles stronger and bigger. A bigger lat or tricep gives a mechanical advantage when bench pressing

Yes agreed, in the case of such compound movements I would say hypertrophy in any of the working muscles could contribute to increased strength.

Which takes us back to getting interesting with it for exercise selection. Lets say i have a hard time activating my triceps long head with "traditional" triceps exercises. Well if i got really strong at reverse grip smith presses with my ass hanging off the end of the bench like dante describes, theres no way i wont have added some serious development to my triceps long head. This area gets hammered for me with this movement. And having a big bulky long head mashing into you lat while doing pressing movements will certainly enhance your ability to perform said movement

For sure. I think it comes down to making sure you've done an exercise long enough to get past that neurological adaptation stage and really max out your gains there.
 
Totally agree. I was thinking when I posted that about the 10x315 smith machine low incline press that I should have clarified. When I said you won't have anymore muscle if you aren't any stronger, I meant if the exercise was back into rotation for a sufficient period of time.

So example 1:
Smith Machine Low Incline Press: Do it for a few months, work up to 10x315
Low incline DB Bench: switch to this for a few months from 10x100s --> 10x105s --> 10x110s --> 10x110s --> 10x110s (stalled, so switch)
Hammer strength press: switch to this for a few months from 10x270 --> 10x290 --> 10x310 --> 10x310 --> 10x310 (stalled, so switch)
Back to Smith Machine Low Incline Press: Do it for a few months, work up from 10x295 --> 10x305 --> 10x315 --> 10x315 --> 10x315
^^I don't think this person will have gained any significant chest size, because even though they were training progressively they did not get truly stronger

example 2:
Smith Machine Low Incline Press: Do it for a few months, work up to 10x315
Low incline DB Bench: switch to this for a few months from 10x100s --> 10x105s --> 10x110s --> 10x110s --> 10x110s (stalled, so switch)
Hammer strength press: switch to this for a few months from 10x270 --> 10x290 --> 10x310 --> 10x310 --> 10x310 (stalled, so switch)
Back to Smith Machine Low Incline Press: Do it for a few months, work up from 10x295 --> 10x305 --> 10x315 --> 10x325 --> 10x330
^^I think this person WILL have gained significant chest size, because they netted true strength gains on a core lift they previously stalled on

I agree with you that person number 2 would have gained size where person number 1 probably did not.

So my point was to say, you can flip flop exercises every month and "gain strength" but it's not necessarily strength due to hypertrophy, it may largely be due to neurological efficiency. I think we're both on the same page here.

and in the above example #2, if that guy is then, after reincorporating Smith Machine Low Incline Press for a few months, now up to 10x350 he will again have made real progress. But if he rotates exercise after exercise and then comes back to Smith Machine Low Incline Press for a few months and is still doing 10x330 he will not have put on additional size in my opinion. I think you and Dante would agree with this for the most part.

I do agree with you. but on the flip side, And given your example, if said person is able to gain strength on other exercises progressively, but every time they come back to incline smith press they just cant seem to get past 315, then maybe that exercise is not mechanically suited to said person and another exercise, such as hammer strength incline presses, might be an exercise that said person could consistently gain size and strength because this exercise suits their particular build better. This is where "getting weird with it" comes in i feel. For example....Dorian Yates said he never gained any appreciable size or strength from squatting, but when he consistently trained leg presses with heavy progressive weight he was better able to build his legs. And i dont think anyone could say Yates had underdevelpoed legs even though he never did "The king of leg exercises"

This drove me nuts when I hired a coach (who I won't name as he has since committed suicide) when I was in high school. I kept telling him I wasn't progressing and he said "look at all those increased reps across your workouts!" and I said "yea obviously, they're new exercises. My core lifts are the same as when we started working together 3 months ago".

But what makes these "core" exercises? Soembody just decided they were. That doesnt mean theyre neccesarilly the best for muscular development. For example...everyone thinks of the flat bench press as the king of chest exercises, however, electromyography shows that the decline bench press activates the pecs better.

Yes agreed, in the case of such compound movements I would say hypertrophy in any of the working muscles could contribute to increased strength.



For sure. I think it comes down to making sure you've done an exercise long enough to get past that neurological adaptation stage and really max out your gains there.
 
pec deck push press - kind of guessing at this exercise I have seen mentioned in this thread. anyone have details on performing it?
 
pec deck push press - kind of guessing at this exercise I have seen mentioned in this thread. anyone have details on performing it?
You're going to get in a pec deck machine. Not the one with the handles that you grip. The one with the pads for your forearms like this one
1593120053606.png 1593120053606.png
Instead of placing your forearms on the pads bend your elbows at a 90 degree angle and grip the pads in a nuetral grip like youre going to do a dumbell flye. Then forcefully press the pads together by contracting your pecs with an arched back. Hold and squeeze the contracted position for a 1 count, lower the weight slowly, and contract again explosively. This exercise is usually done as somewhat of a widowmaker after your main lkift for someone with a weak chest
 
I agree with you that person number 2 would have gained size where person number 1 probably did not.

(y)

I do agree with you. but on the flip side, And given your example, if said person is able to gain strength on other exercises progressively, but every time they come back to incline smith press they just cant seem to get past 315, then maybe that exercise is not mechanically suited to said person and another exercise, such as hammer strength incline presses, might be an exercise that said person could consistently gain size and strength because this exercise suits their particular build better. This is where "getting weird with it" comes in i feel. For example....Dorian Yates said he never gained any appreciable size or strength from squatting, but when he consistently trained leg presses with heavy progressive weight he was better able to build his legs. And i dont think anyone could say Yates had underdevelpoed legs even though he never did "The king of leg exercises"

For sure, alternatively they may just be done growing. So step 1 would be determining the right exercise....so for Dorian, despite trying squats it didn't do much for him, so even if he continued to gain strength on them, maybe he would have had suboptimal development. Step 2 is taking the exercise you have found to be good for you, leg press in his case, and getting everything you can out of it over time. Assuming the leg press is a good exercise for him, once it's maxed out, and he's done everything in his power to max out the strength on that exercise for reps, the muscles being worked in that exercise are probably more or less done growing (assuming proper nutrition, recovery, etc has been in place). That may very well entail stepping away from it at times and coming back to it, I'm just saying eventually when he can no longer add anymore strength to it over an extended period of time, he's likely done growing those muscles and I don't think switching to another exercise that works the same muscles will now lead to significant additional growth. Say he never did a hack squat before, so he starts at 10x540 and gets up to 10x720 over the next year. If he had, over the last 10 years, already built up his leg press from 10x700 to 10x1400 and it's been at 10x1400 for the last year I really don't see that hack squat progress doing much. I think his hack squat will largely have gotten stronger due to just getting used to a brand new movement and 95+% of his size would have already been built from the leg press and whatever other leg exercises (not hack squats since he's never done those before in this example) he's been doing.


But what makes these "core" exercises? Soembody just decided they were. That doesnt mean theyre neccesarilly the best for muscular development. For example...everyone thinks of the flat bench press as the king of chest exercises, however, electromyography shows that the decline bench press activates the pecs better.

When I say core exercises I just mean whatever main movements you've decided to use as your core lifts for each muscle group to gauge progress over the years.
 
For sure, alternatively they may just be done growing. So step 1 would be determining the right exercise....so for Dorian, despite trying squats it didn't do much for him, so even if he continued to gain strength on them, maybe he would have had suboptimal development. Step 2 is taking the exercise you have found to be good for you, leg press in his case, and getting everything you can out of it over time. Assuming the leg press is a good exercise for him, once it's maxed out, and he's done everything in his power to max out the strength on that exercise for reps, the muscles being worked in that exercise are probably more or less done growing (assuming proper nutrition, recovery, etc has been in place). That may very well entail stepping away from it at times and coming back to it, I'm just saying eventually when he can no longer add anymore strength to it over an extended period of time, he's likely done growing those muscles and I don't think switching to another exercise that works the same muscles will now lead to significant additional growth. Say he never did a hack squat before, so he starts at 10x540 and gets up to 10x720 over the next year. If he had, over the last 10 years, already built up his leg press from 10x700 to 10x1400 and it's been at 10x1400 for the last year I really don't see that hack squat progress doing much. I think his hack squat will largely have gotten stronger due to just getting used to a brand new movement and 95+% of his size would have already been built from the leg press and whatever other leg exercises (not hack squats since he's never done those before in this example) he's been doing.
I agree with you that once hes at or near his genetic limit that rotating in a new exercise and progressing on that is probably not going to add significant muscle. But how many people are at their genetic limit? Not very many besides very elite bodybuilders. the 2 way DC split was created to help people reach that genetic limit as quickly as possible. After that Dante has people switch to the 3 way split to focus on weak body parts
 
@MaconiDDS

I am also natural and sit around the same bodyweight. I'd spent the last three years following Dante's principles and JP's style of workouts. An upper/lower split with body parts being trained twice a week. I absolutely crushed my logbook on exercises, but despite putting on weight, rarely gaining much muscle. I put on 40 lb in about ten months from May until February, but most of it went to my waistline. Two times prior I made 20 lb gains, but dieted back down when I ran into the same issue of gaining mostly adipose. My diet was clean foods and I did the green tea, cardio, olive oil tricks that have become staples.

I am NOT knocking Dante's methods I am simply pointing out that I believe in what Mike Israetel calls Minimum Effective Volume. I think this varies for each individual and you have to find what you need to efficiently engage the stimulate/response/recover/grow cycle. I know @TheOtherOne55 has done DC and said he got strong as hell, but also found muscular gains were better when he upped his volume slightly to PPL done JP style.

The argument for frequency, though this is an oversimplification, is that 10 sets twice a week is better than 20 sets once a week. It sounds good, but I do not agree with this at all based on experience. With the Coronavirus keeping me out of the gym I was able to reflect on when I was my biggest and strongest and it's when my training was set up the following way:

- 4 days a week

- 6 sets per body part

- Duration of less than 60 minutes (overlooked part of training in my opinion)

- Sticking with the same exercises

- Training each body part directly once a week

So I share the same view with you that getting better neurologically at an exercise isn't really gaining muscle. Christian Thibaudeau talks about that here: **broken link removed**

Paul Carter also recently made a comment on frequency:
My understanding of what Paul says here is that if you do 3 sets twice a week instead of 6 sets once a week you're *not* growing faster. Ultimately it would be what you prefer to do. Plus, with the concept of MEV, someone might need all 6 sets in one session in order to make progress and dividing it up does not result in the same return.

Exercise rotation is useful, but isn't totally necessary. When I was rotating exercises, I was at gym where I could only do three exercises for calves, so I had to keep repeating them and could never change the three I was doing. My standing calf raise went nowhere for 8 months. Tried different rep ranges and cadences, but I was stuck. Then one day I broke through and for 8 months I was able to add 5 lb every ten days and get the same amount of reps. So I was at a plateau for a while, but I think that repeated consistency of just hammering it resulted in the breakthrough that took off and resulted in the great gains that followed.

We are definitely not all built the same.
 
@MaconiDDS

I am also natural and sit around the same bodyweight. I'd spent the last three years following Dante's principles and JP's style of workouts. An upper/lower split with body parts being trained twice a week. I absolutely crushed my logbook on exercises, but despite putting on weight, rarely gaining much muscle. I put on 40 lb in about ten months from May until February, but most of it went to my waistline. Two times prior I made 20 lb gains, but dieted back down when I ran into the same issue of gaining mostly adipose. My diet was clean foods and I did the green tea, cardio, olive oil tricks that have become staples.

I am NOT knocking Dante's methods I am simply pointing out that I believe in what Mike Israetel calls Minimum Effective Volume. I think this varies for each individual and you have to find what you need to efficiently engage the stimulate/response/recover/grow cycle. I know @TheOtherOne55 has done DC and said he got strong as hell, but also found muscular gains were better when he upped his volume slightly to PPL done JP style.

The argument for frequency, though this is an oversimplification, is that 10 sets twice a week is better than 20 sets once a week. It sounds good, but I do not agree with this at all based on experience. With the Coronavirus keeping me out of the gym I was able to reflect on when I was my biggest and strongest and it's when my training was set up the following way:

- 4 days a week

- 6 sets per body part

- Duration of less than 60 minutes (overlooked part of training in my opinion)

- Sticking with the same exercises

- Training each body part directly once a week

So I share the same view with you that getting better neurologically at an exercise isn't really gaining muscle. Christian Thibaudeau talks about that here: **broken link removed**

Paul Carter also recently made a comment on frequency:
My understanding of what Paul says here is that if you do 3 sets twice a week instead of 6 sets once a week you're *not* growing faster. Ultimately it would be what you prefer to do. Plus, with the concept of MEV, someone might need all 6 sets in one session in order to make progress and dividing it up does not result in the same return.

Exercise rotation is useful, but isn't totally necessary. When I was rotating exercises, I was at gym where I could only do three exercises for calves, so I had to keep repeating them and could never change the three I was doing. My standing calf raise went nowhere for 8 months. Tried different rep ranges and cadences, but I was stuck. Then one day I broke through and for 8 months I was able to add 5 lb every ten days and get the same amount of reps. So I was at a plateau for a while, but I think that repeated consistency of just hammering it resulted in the breakthrough that took off and resulted in the great gains that followed.

We are definitely not all built the same.

FK, I understand what you are saying, but wouldn't you say that the lack of muscle mass gained would have more to do with your diet (especially in this case because you said you gained some bodyfat)?
 
FK, I understand what you are saying, but wouldn't you say that the lack of muscle mass gained would have more to do with your diet (especially in this case because you said you gained some bodyfat)?

As stated above, I was eating clean foods and using all the tricks that were advised. I made calorie and macro adjustments accordingly. I also compare this to eating pretty much the same with a different style of training.
 
I am also natural and sit around the same bodyweight. I'd spent the last three years following Dante's principles and JP's style of workouts. An upper/lower split with body parts being trained twice a week. I absolutely crushed my logbook on exercises, but despite putting on weight, rarely gaining much muscle. I put on 40 lb in about ten months from May until February, but most of it went to my waistline. Two times prior I made 20 lb gains, but dieted back down when I ran into the same issue of gaining mostly adipose. My diet was clean foods and I did the green tea, cardio, olive oil tricks that have become staples.

The only way I can see this being possible is through poor exercise selection and execution - training movements vs. actually training muscles.
 

Forum statistics

Total page views
558,071,244
Threads
135,760
Messages
2,768,729
Members
160,343
Latest member
12cc
NapsGear
HGH Power Store email banner
your-raws
Prowrist straps store banner
infinity
FLASHING-BOTTOM-BANNER-210x131
raws
Savage Labs Store email
Syntherol Site Enhancing Oil Synthol
aqpharma
yourmuscleshop210x131
hulabs
ezgif-com-resize-2-1
MA Research Chem store banner
MA Supps Store Banner
volartek
Keytech banner
musclechem
Godbullraw-bottom-banner
Injection Instructions for beginners
Knight Labs store email banner
3
ashp131
YMS-210x131-V02
Back
Top