Branch Warren Interview | Overcome Podcast

[buck]

Good points. I know I've never had trouble with chest and bis...its my tris and caps that suck lol. Quads grow easy but no glutes. I do feel like chest compounds are the easiest to progress..seems like you can add weight for a long ass time to any chest compounds and injury happens before a stall lol

No glutes here either. After my first BB show the judges told me everything was put together well except i had no ass. After 2 decades of glutes and hams having their own day still nada. Butt my glutes attache very high on the leg so there is not much to build on.
I trained around powerlifters for years and benched like them so that may have been some of my issues with the straight bar.

 

[traininsane11]

Makes about as much sense as “fish thins the skin”

Being a high level athlete and having high level knowledge are often not linked

 

[qbkilla]

No glutes here either. After my first BB show the judges told me everything was put together well except i had no ass. After 2 decades of glutes and hams having their own day still nada. Butt my glutes attache very high on the leg so there is not much to build on.
I trained around powerlifters for years and benched like them so that may have been some of my issues with the straight bar.

Man, I never had lagging glutes or legs and I wa someone that admititngly didn't train legs as hard as I should. One summer i decided to do bodyweight + hard cutting, just see how lean i could get. My upper body kept its size but obviously legs took a hit without heavy loading. No problem right, hit legs hard thry come right back. .quads did but glutes...nope. now doing 2 leg days with rdl, hip thrusts, low bar squats, split squats...quads keep growing but no glutes. Its like once they are gone...they are gone.

 

[buck]

Man, I never had lagging glutes or legs and I wa someone that admititngly didn't train legs as hard as I should. One summer i decided to do bodyweight + hard cutting, just see how lean i could get. My upper body kept its size but obviously legs took a hit without heavy loading. No problem right, hit legs hard thry come right back. .quads did but glutes...nope. now doing 2 leg days with rdl, hip thrusts, low bar squats, split squats...quads keep growing but no glutes. Its like once they are gone...they are gone.

Legs were my fav part to train. I could use the most bone breaking weights. And people yelling out at me about my legs walking down the street always helped the ego. I spent a couple years were i only trained them about 6 weeks out of the year seriously as my upper body needed to catch up. By my early 50's the legs were going away. Started to be able to buy pants off the rack, which hadn't happened since my 20's. My gluteus medius could get bigger then my little bubble butt. Train legs 2x week for awhile now. With quads the focus one time and glutes/hams the other.

 

[hawkmoon]

I migrated to almost all machines in my later 40s.

Muscle doesn't know what's in your hand, just the load.
I don't use any free weights now - even my RDLs are in the Smith.

You can argue there is better accessory recruitment with free weights - but is that really wanted in bodybuilding?

If anything these days I am more "grainy". I think the look comes from muscle quality + thin skin, both of which have a significant genetic component.

 

[Golden]

Johnie Jackson said exactly the same last week in the same podcast. And he actually said what is undeniable: when you use free weights it requires stabilizers to work and the need to have a much better control of the load and the movement. It also allows you to find the right "setup" for your own body and target the desired muscle. When you use machines there is no need for stabilization and you are stuck to the load profile of the machine. Stabilization itself is working all muscles, requires a full body control during the movement.
I am a fan of machines and usually have few free weight movements in my workouts. But after listening to Johnie Jackson started to consider to use more free weight.

I’ve always had an issue with the term ‘stabilisers’ and how free weights encourage their use. What muscles are these stabilises exactly? And when doing an exercise, surely you want maximum focus on the muscle that exercise is aimed at hitting?of course every exercise will have some carry over to other muscles

I do agree with the allowance of free weights to change the groove to suit your body regarding nuances, where needed but on the whole today’s machines are in a different league to any machines a lot of us had access to a few decades back

 

[MajinBoo]

I’ve always had an issue with the term ‘stabilisers’ and how free weights encourage their use. What muscles are these stabilises exactly? And when doing an exercise, surely you want maximum focus on the muscle that exercise is aimed at hitting?of course every exercise will have some carry over to other muscles

I do agree with the allowance of free weights to change the groove to suit your body regarding nuances, where needed but on the whole today’s machines are in a different league to any machines a lot of us had access to a few decades back

Core, tendons, acessory muscles etc
Just compare a dumbell press vs machine press, a barbell row vs chest supported row, a squat vs hack... The first version always require "more" from your body than the second. That's their opinion. I agree it is not straightforward and there are pros vs cons for either free weight or machines. But I do believe everybody can benefit from some free weights training. Key is finding exercises that work for you.

 

[TheOtherOne55]

I’ve always had an issue with the term ‘stabilisers’ and how free weights encourage their use. What muscles are these stabilises exactly? And when doing an exercise, surely you want maximum focus on the muscle that exercise is aimed at hitting?of course every exercise will have some carry over to other muscles

I do agree with the allowance of free weights to change the groove to suit your body regarding nuances, where needed but on the whole today’s machines are in a different league to any machines a lot of us had access to a few decades back

I mean, i understand your thought. But it's pretttty simple. Go spend 2 months on a Hammer Strength press...then go load up a barbell bench and tell me how working up in weight is. You'll kill yourself.

 

[massephase]

Maybe just my opinion, but chest is the easiest muscle to grow and maintain. I feel like unless someone has horrible genetics, chest will always look fine no matter what snd is incredibly easy to get a mm connection.its usually the limbs that are lagging. I will say, it seems like guys who can do chinups, do deads, and barbell rows have a better back than guys who use machines, lat pull down etc. Have you noticed this as well?

I don't agree with any of what you said
Chest is not easy to grow at all and chinups, barbell rows and deads are not the best way to grow backs for many people.

One arm machine pulldowns are easily the better exercise compared to chinups for multiple reasons.

 

[KyleSmith1985]

Maybe just my opinion, but chest is the easiest muscle to grow and maintain. I feel like unless someone has horrible genetics, chest will always look fine no matter what snd is incredibly easy to get a mm connection.its usually the limbs that are lagging. I will say, it seems like guys who can do chinups, do deads, and barbell rows have a better back than guys who use machines, lat pull down etc. Have you noticed this as well?

Both of these are the opposite for me. I have a small chest. Even benching 315x12 still small. Very had muscle for me to grow.

My back got much better when I switched to mostly machines. Especially chest supported. Pulling strength, especially with straps has become so strong for me the limiting factor is my core when using free weights. The only non machine back work I do is pullups.

 

[d4ve]

Yea, glutes is another rare one, especially if you are a man, although outside of bodybuilders, no men really want glutes

Yea, no. If you want to have a complete physique and healthy hips and knees, you want glutes.

 

[Siggy]

Yea, no. If you want to have a complete physique and healthy hips and knees, you want glutes.

I agree. But the view of normie men on glutes seems to be on the level of " Only women should have glutes, I man. I no need glute. Glute is for woman. Unga bunga"

 

[TheOtherOne55]

I agree. But the view of normie men on glutes seems to be on the level of " Only women should have glutes, I man. I no need glute. Glute is for woman. Unga bunga"

I know we are in that weird zone of "are we talking about normal gym goers or BBers or just normies?" but the guys you are referencing also dont even want legs and/or a balanced physique...so we shouldnt even take their thought process into account.

 

[PissedPajamas]

Maybe just my opinion, but chest is the easiest muscle to grow and maintain. I feel like unless someone has horrible genetics, chest will always look fine no matter what snd is incredibly easy to get a mm connection.its usually the limbs that are lagging. I will say, it seems like guys who can do chinups, do deads, and barbell rows have a better back than guys who use machines, lat pull down etc. Have you noticed this as well?

Sounds like you were blessed with the right genetics for building chest. I can build better legs than most by just hitting the stairmaster, doesn’t mean it’s the easiest muscle to build across the board for everyone.

and no, my biggest back gains came from feeling my back during rows and pull downs. Some grip and rip stuff here and there, but 70% of the work was targeted and intentional

 

[Communion]

Maybe just my opinion, but chest is the easiest muscle to grow and maintain…

Man, I wish this were true!

 

[qbkilla]

Sounds like these old timers use alot of bro science lol..but imo you can't argue with the results..they look better in my opinion than today's guys with half the drugs and half the knowledge...at a smaller size. Some other thoughts why perhaps...

1. Better quality food? Eggs, steak vs shakes, pre workout powders...etc
2. Like they said, more basic movements, less isolation
3. Less stress. No doubt people back than didn't have as much stress...they could live their lives without being on call to the world via a cell.where anyone can i

Sounds like you were blessed with the right genetics for building chest. I can build better legs than most by just hitting the stairmaster, doesn’t mean it’s the easiest muscle to build across the board for everyone.

and no, my biggest back gains came from feeling my back during rows and pull downs. Some grip and rip stuff here and there, but 70% of the work was targeted and intentional

I've never had problems with chest, or adding weight easily on any compound chest exercises. I feel like in my years browsing forums guys are looking for specific routines to bring up shoulders, arms, legs. Ive never really seen anyone say they need a special exercise or routine to help their chest grow? I dunno could be wrong, maybe its my perception because to me big legs , delts, arms stand out. I've never seen anyone in the gym and said "damn bro, what's your chest routine?" Lol. Maybe the fact that its always covered...I just don't pay attention. I can say I've seen some very chest dominant physiques where it looks like dudes do nothing to bench with small limbs...I think its sometimes called the spider physique..all torso.

 

[nothuman]

He said the reason the top guys today are not as hard is because they use too many machines and not enough free weights. ( I dont know if it was this interview though)

What do you guys think about this?

That’s not what the studies say at all

Effect of free-weight vs. machine-based strength training on maximal strength, hypertrophy and jump performance – a systematic review and meta-analysis - PMC

The effectiveness of strength training with free-weight vs. machine equipment is heavily debated. Thus, the purpose of this meta-analysis was to summarize the data on the effect of free-weight versus machine-based strength training on maximal ...

pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Checking your browser - reCAPTCHA

Checking your browser - reCAPTCHA

 

[kadafi2]

Young Branch. This guy was born to be a top 2 Mr. O and an AC winner. Another thing is that I don't believe he trained his whole life like he does in the training videos. I don't know what kind of endurance you'd need to not crush your joints and tear most of your muscles after so many years of throwing weights around like some savage. While I believe Dorian trained like he did in Blood & Guts, I'm skeptical about Branch.

Overall, the intense training helped them achieve the granite look, but genetics played a bigger role. Oh, and John Jackson had legs like an amateur, not "a little weaker," lol. It's also purely genetics, since he tortured them for so many years, and they were just average compared to his upper body, which looked fantastic.

And just a casual observation: white competitors are more likely to have a granite, hard look, while black competitors have rounder muscle bellies. I'm generalizing heavily, but you get the idea. Genetics.

 

[LATS]

He said the reason the top guys today are not as hard is because they use too many machines and not enough free weights. ( I dont know if it was this interview though)

What do you guys think about this?

Tension is tension.. load is load.. sorry but its completely broken science that hypertrophy from a machine is any different than hypertrophy from free weights.. the " grainey" look is from dieting and genetics.. not free weights

 

[Shelby]

Kind of cool / interesting that Branch and Johnnie both earned their pro cards at the same show (2001 Nationals)
Johnnie won the light heavyweight and overall, Branch won the heavyweights

2001 Nationals - NPC