HAVE WE LOST THE SCIENCE OF TRAINING??

[JonnyO]

he relied on the science of hypertrophy. every movement had a purpose. if he did benches , it was for low reps and explosive to hit the type 2b fiber. i saw him do bench press and he would do a desending rep scheme from 7 to 2. or maybe just 5 sets of 5. then the next movement would be more of a hypertrophy scheme. this would consists of sets of 8 to 12 reps done in a very controlled fashion. lastly he would pick a movement that stimulated the capillaries and help with glycogen storage. sets of 15 to 20 or more.
.

This is very close to how John designs his Mountaindog workouts, we do tons of explosive work, hypertrophy work and some high rep sets to failure lots of times bodyweight exercises to failure. They are tough but very well manufactured workouts with purpose. I couldnt train any other way and I been in the gym for close to 24 years now, I love the challenge and the layout of them.

 

[AshopRep]

Some of us are still scientific about our workouts.

 

[triathloncoach]

A reasonable person could argue that any PED use diminishes the science of training.

Where does one draw the line?

 

[norm1220]

A reasonable person could argue that any PED use diminishes the science of training.

Where does one draw the line?

A reasonable person could also say that PED's actually INCREASE the science of training, adding chemistry and pharmacology in with exercise physiology and thereby adding layers an layers of scientific complexity to the whole training equation.

As far as the line goes, we all know that in the real world, laws and rules aside, it's decided on an individual basis.

 

[Simpllyhuge]

So lets talk routines then.

 

[Bigd50]

There's a reason why Ronnie Coleman and Dorian Yates won so many Mr. Olympia's. They trained hard and heavy! How many Mr. O's did Flex Wheeler win?? He had some of the best genetics ever.

Most gyms are filled with 180 pound guys who do volume training and all these magazine routines and they never get any bigger and we wonder why guys now days are doing such huge cycles.

 

[TheOtherOne55]

There's a reason why Ronnie Coleman and Dorian Yates won so many Mr. Olympia's. They trained hard and heavy! How many Mr. O's did Flex Wheeler win?? He had some of the best genetics ever.

Jesus, nice argument.

The product of an era of INSANELY talented competition...literally nothing to do with "oh, he didn't train heavy enough."

 

[Pathfinding77]

Bump

Solely for the beauty and art of Lats eloquent post. W/O training all would be lost...

 

[greenwinger]

I love training and I would love it if there were more training threads on here because there are the smartest guys on this site. It gets a little frustrating that all the threads are about cycles and side effects. More Training!!

 

[mountaindog1]

This is very close to how John designs his Mountaindog workouts, we do tons of explosive work, hypertrophy work and some high rep sets to failure lots of times bodyweight exercises to failure. They are tough but very well manufactured workouts with purpose. I couldnt train any other way and I been in the gym for close to 24 years now, I love the challenge and the layout of them.

Ha! I was thinking...wait a minute - this sounds familiar!!

Lats - I feel your discouragement.

Here is the best way I can sum it up.

Chemicals camoflouge poor nutritional and training habits.

You get a guy who grows because drugs do work, so he says well shit, all this science stuff doesn't mean anything. All I have to do is go to the gym and strain.

Just because you are making good progress, doesn't mean you are making THE BEST PROGRESS POSSIBLE. This is the whole point of my training programs, to extract the maximum amount of hypertrophy possible.

The other thing that is annoying as hell (I am not attacking ANYONE on this)...is when you hear someone say the only way to grow is too add weight. Ummm...heard of sarcoplasmic hypertrophy by chance..just an example of a complete lack of scientific understanding of hypertrophy.

 

[Lenny]

Ha! I was thinking...wait a minute - this sounds familiar!!

Lats - I feel your discouragement.

Here is the best way I can sum it up.

Chemicals camoflouge poor nutritional and training habits.

You get a guy who grows because drugs do work, so he says well shit, all this science stuff doesn't mean anything. All I have to do is go to the gym and strain.

Just because you are making good progress, doesn't mean you are making THE BEST PROGRESS POSSIBLE. This is the whole point of my training programs, to extract the maximum amount of hypertrophy possible.

The other thing that is annoying as hell (I am not attacking ANYONE on this)...is when you hear someone say the only way to grow is too add weight. Ummm...heard of sarcoplasmic hypertrophy by chance..just an example of a complete lack of scientific understanding of hypertrophy.

I know, so many people think there is only way or form of progression...a stronger muscle can be a bigger muscle, but a better muscle can be a bigger muscle pending nutrition, individual response, recovery, blah blah blah... I like plans, progression platforms, intensity progressions, etc.

I did 12 week program with John, freaking loved it! But, also love Yates style of training to a certain extent...the idea is progress the muscle, follow a plan, then assess, then move onto the next phase....gotta love to train because that is what makes this fun! Hell I have trained hammys and chest most days of the week...obviously, touch up stuff on top of all the major stuff...sound crazy, only crazy if you do not try it

 

[LATS]

Ahh.. I remember writing this now lol. John contacted me and said he responded and I was wondering how old this was.. My feelings still stand.. And yes I do think since anabolic use / abuse came along much of the science of hypertrophy has been greatly lacking.. Up the dosage and still grow..

But John is 100 percent correct.. Take a guy who understand hyper trophy.. Design a program that encompasses all aspects.. One that is disciplined.. Well thought out.. Along with a killer diet and proper use of supplements and that guy will be ahead of the crowd.. Yes training of any sort and high dose gear will get a lazy man gains.. But training based on knowledge of hyper trophy and diet and proper use of supplements will win .. So why not be ahead of the crowd since we know many will just rely on throwing weights and upping the dose..?..Eventually both have their limits.. Then what ya gonna do? Time to train smart...then maybe.. Just maybe we can reduce our gear intake and actually rely on the training and diet to elicit the gains more than the gear...

 

[homonunculus]

Ahh.. I remember writing this now lol. John contacted me and said he responded and I was wondering how old this was.. My feelings still stand.. And yes I do think since anabolic use / abuse came along much of the science of hypertrophy has been greatly lacking.. Up the dosage and still grow..

But John is 100 percent correct.. Take a guy who understand hyper trophy.. Design a program that encompasses all aspects.. One that is disciplined.. Well thought out.. Along with a killer diet and proper use of supplements and that guy will be ahead of the crowd.. Yes training of any sort and high dose gear will get a lazy man gains.. But training based on knowledge of hyper trophy and diet and proper use of supplements will win .. So why not be ahead of the crowd since we know many will just rely on throwing weights and upping the dose..?..Eventually both have their limits.. Then what ya gonna do? Time to train smart...then maybe.. Just maybe we can reduce our gear intake and actually rely on the training and diet to elicit the gains more than the gear...

There is one general answer to your (albeit rhetorical) questions, LATS: Human nature. From the mouth of a researcher who was once the foremost exercise adherence expert in the world (he abandoned that line of research for this reason), "We are creatures of immediate gratification."

If training itself is immediately rewarding - the battle with the iron, the pump, the visual changes, endorphins, the anxiolytic effect or, the tinkering that goes with training science - then a focus on training is a given for that person because he / she finds it cool. Same with diet - if someone for some reason enjoys seeing how dietary changes affect one's physique, or if "suffering" through a contest diet or pushing the limits of off-season food consumption is fun for someone, then diet will be a focus. For one person, auto maintenance is a pain in the ass. Other guys could spend all night tinkering in their garages...

All in all, of diet, training and supplementation, supplementation is the easiest part of the equation, and in the case of super-supplements, the most powerful in the context of the the greatest reward / effort ratio.

Hell, even with creating a well thought out training regime, there is still an underlying effort level that's required, and the smartest trainers know that for the most part (given appropriate periodization and deloading), greater training efforts translate into greater gains, but with diminishing returns.

Super supplements have diminishing returns as well, but the effort of using them pales in comparison. Someone on to someone on an outrageous amount of AAS compared to someone on HRT levels of testosterone is putting forth more effort, but comparing filling syringes (and even in some cases getting the money to pay for what fills them) pales in comparison to pushing oneself to the brink of nausea several times a week in the gym vs. easier styles of training.

Also, it takes TIME to see (and thus trust) that a given training regime will be advantageous. Take DC training for example - despite the hundreds of success stories, it's still questioned repeatedly, which I suspect is because the notion of doing widowmakers and bleed-from-your-head deadlifts, etc. is only worth swallowing as being "worth it" vs. a more gratuitous pump-style workout if you're DAMN sure it's gonna work, at least for some who haven't got the screws loose to really want to train like a crazy man anyway.

I do wonder what would happen to the population of bodybuilders if there were an apocalypse that left no supplements (super or otherwise) on earth. Would there be some (how many) trainees who just gave it up because training and dieting unassisted would be just too damn hard or not worth it?... I'm not accusing anyone here (and wouldn't think ill of anyone who did decide that - those remaining would not be any "better," per se, albeit perhaps a bit crazier... LOL)

-S

 

[LATS]

Yep.. As I just told one of the members.. Many want the muscles.. But don't want the journey.. " just give em too me"... Trust me they mean much more when they are fought for tooth and nail..

 

[drazz238]

This is a great thread and would love to see more on training. I think I enjoy the mental aspect of pushing myself more than the physical. The post by homonunculus was right on the money. Best thread on this forum in a while.

 

[Simpllyhuge]

Old school body builders had the major lifts and 5x5 routines it seems, unless I am mistaken. they talk about building a strong base before getting into what we hypertrophy training today.
I think the old school method makes much more sense personally IMHO

 

[tokon]

So lets talk routines then.

good idea!

excellent opening post from Lats, i'd be interested in his suggestions as regards actual routines.

 

[skii96]

Thank you. Great thread here!!!

 

[Pathfinding77]

There is one general answer to your (albeit rhetorical) questions, LATS: Human nature. From the mouth of a researcher who was once the foremost exercise adherence expert in the world (he abandoned that line of research for this reason), "We are creatures of immediate gratification."

If training itself is immediately rewarding - the battle with the iron, the pump, the visual changes, endorphins, the anxiolytic effect or, the tinkering that goes with training science - then a focus on training is a given for that person because he / she finds it cool. Same with diet - if someone for some reason enjoys seeing how dietary changes affect one's physique, or if "suffering" through a contest diet or pushing the limits of off-season food consumption is fun for someone, then diet will be a focus. For one person, auto maintenance is a pain in the ass. Other guys could spend all night tinkering in their garages...

All in all, of diet, training and supplementation, supplementation is the easiest part of the equation, and in the case of super-supplements, the most powerful in the context of the the greatest reward / effort ratio.

Hell, even with creating a well thought out training regime, there is still an underlying effort level that's required, and the smartest trainers know that for the most part (given appropriate periodization and deloading), greater training efforts translate into greater gains, but with diminishing returns.

Super supplements have diminishing returns as well, but the effort of using them pales in comparison. Someone on to someone on an outrageous amount of AAS compared to someone on HRT levels of testosterone is putting forth more effort, but comparing filling syringes (and even in some cases getting the money to pay for what fills them) pales in comparison to pushing oneself to the brink of nausea several times a week in the gym vs. easier styles of training.

Also, it takes TIME to see (and thus trust) that a given training regime will be advantageous. Take DC training for example - despite the hundreds of success stories, it's still questioned repeatedly, which I suspect is because the notion of doing widowmakers and bleed-from-your-head deadlifts, etc. is only worth swallowing as being "worth it" vs. a more gratuitous pump-style workout if you're DAMN sure it's gonna work, at least for some who haven't got the screws loose to really want to train like a crazy man anyway.

I do wonder what would happen to the population of bodybuilders if there were an apocalypse that left no supplements (super or otherwise) on earth. Would there be some (how many) trainees who just gave it up because training and dieting unassisted would be just too damn hard or not worth it?... I'm not accsing anyone here (and wouldn't think ill of anyone who did decide that - those remaining would not be any "better," per se, albeit perhaps a bit crazier... LOL)

-S

Great point in the last paragraph...I ask myself this very question oftentimes...if there were nothing else, no powders, no gear, just weights, would I still lift? The answer is always unequivocally YES! If you truly love this basic, hard way of exercising, then you will love it for LIFE!

 

[drillbit369]

With most of my workouts it's basically the same. Heavy weight for 3-4 sets the drop set until I literally cannot do another. For my last contest prep I would train for an hour and a half 5-6 days a week not counting cardio. When I leave the gym I feel like I have ran a marathon.

There are so many guys that preach there is no need for more than 45min and 3 sets with each muscle group..... I'm sorry did you see a vein pop out in your workout and decide that was enough? :facepalm: