Just some observations

[Big A]

I've been around this sport for 35 years. I have been involved at all levels and met countless pros.

All these are just observations:

- those that train with a full range of motion, don't look that impressive in real life but on stage, when they flex, they just POP
- those that train with a short range of motion, and generally just throwing the weights around, look crazy big and thick next to you but on stage there is no difference between relaxed and flexed. They walk on stage looking crazy and then you expect something insane to happen when they flex and nothing does.

- those that train heavy with low reps have big torso muscles (delts, pecs, back) plus calves, but smaller (proportion wise) limb muscles (legs, arms) (ie Dorian)
- those that train lighter with higher reps have large limb muscles (arms, legs) but smaller torso muscles and calves (ie. Flex Wheeler)

Obviously that is a generalisation because there are plenty of exceptions.

 

[romo]

Interesting. Never really thought of it that way. Of course when you said short range of motion i thought of Branch Warren. When he flexed it was just like that, no real popping just a block of mass.

 

[luki7788]

I've been around this sport for 35 years. I have been involved at all levels and met countless pros.

All these are just observations:

- those that train with a full range of motion, don't look that impressive in real life but on stage, when they flex, they just POP
- those that train with a short range of motion, and generally just throwing the weights around, look crazy big and thick next to you but on stage there is no difference between relaxed and flexed. They walk on stage looking crazy and then you expect something insane to happen when they flex and nothing does.

- those that train heavy with low reps have big torso muscles (delts, pecs, back) plus calves, but smaller (proportion wise) limb muscles (legs, arms) (ie Dorian)
- those that trainer lighter with higher reps have large limb muscles (arms, legs) but smaller torso muscles and calves (ie. Flex Wheeler)

Obviously that is a generalisation because there are plenty of exceptions.

I definitely have to say that there is a lot of truth in this

 

[qbkilla]

I've been around this sport for 35 years. I have been involved at all levels and met countless pros.

All these are just observations:

- those that train with a full range of motion, don't look that impressive in real life but on stage, when they flex, they just POP
- those that train with a short range of motion, and generally just throwing the weights around, look crazy big and thick next to you but on stage there is no difference between relaxed and flexed. They walk on stage looking crazy and then you expect something insane to happen when they flex and nothing does.

- those that train heavy with low reps have big torso muscles (delts, pecs, back) plus calves, but smaller (proportion wise) limb muscles (legs, arms) (ie Dorian)
- those that train lighter with higher reps have large limb muscles (arms, legs) but smaller torso muscles and calves (ie. Flex Wheeler)

Obviously that is a generalisation because there are plenty of exceptions.

I find this interesting and should spark some good discussion. Do you have a theory why this is the case?

 

[alfresco]

I've been around this sport for 35 years. I have been involved at all levels and met countless pros.

All these are just observations:

- those that train with a full range of motion, don't look that impressive in real life but on stage, when they flex, they just POP
- those that train with a short range of motion, and generally just throwing the weights around, look crazy big and thick next to you but on stage there is no difference between relaxed and flexed. They walk on stage looking crazy and then you expect something insane to happen when they flex and nothing does.

- those that train heavy with low reps have big torso muscles (delts, pecs, back) plus calves, but smaller (proportion wise) limb muscles (legs, arms) (ie Dorian)
- those that train lighter with higher reps have large limb muscles (arms, legs) but smaller torso muscles and calves (ie. Flex Wheeler)

Obviously that is a generalisation because there are plenty of exceptions.

Great post Big A (not sucking up). Know you are busy but would love for to post more. Such a wealth of info you bring to the table.

 

[Fleezy]

I feel like I remember Justin Harris saying something similar

 

[3BILLS]

So what's the answer?

Doing abit of every style?

Full rom on squats and lunges
Shorten range on leg press, hacks , ext ect

Heavier on compounds with tight form and then
More ballistic and higher reps on some compounds and isolations

This is how I train, not that it works magic

Chest. Bench full rom lower to mid range. Machines, Flys higher reps. Pistol style , non lockout

 

[TomJ]

All the more reason not to get overly emotionally attached to certain movements or certain training methodologies.

variety is the spice of life

 

[kadafi2]

Maybe it's just that arms and legs prefer higher reps for hypertrophy, and chest/back lower and heavier? Has anyone found doing 6 reps for biceps beneficial? Probably not many. But bench presses and rows for 6 reps are something else. And of course genetics play a huge role in all this. I know that it's worth doing 6 heavy reps for shoulders, there used to be a myth that you have to do a lot of reps for shoulders to grow.

 

[steve0691]

Pavol jablonicky comes to mind regarding walking around relaxed looking crazy. His training footage ive seen he did use alot of body motion in his lifting. With how he looked just standing relaxed youd think he was gonna be mr olympia when he flexed. Just fyi im not saying pavol isnt good, im a fan of his physique and actually feel hes a bit under rated, just pointing out an example of what comes to mind with what Big A is saying.

 

[d4ve]

I've been around this sport for 35 years. I have been involved at all levels and met countless pros.

All these are just observations:

- those that train with a full range of motion, don't look that impressive in real life but on stage, when they flex, they just POP
- those that train with a short range of motion, and generally just throwing the weights around, look crazy big and thick next to you but on stage there is no difference between relaxed and flexed. They walk on stage looking crazy and then you expect something insane to happen when they flex and nothing does.

- those that train heavy with low reps have big torso muscles (delts, pecs, back) plus calves, but smaller (proportion wise) limb muscles (legs, arms) (ie Dorian)
- those that train lighter with higher reps have large limb muscles (arms, legs) but smaller torso muscles and calves (ie. Flex Wheeler)

Obviously that is a generalisation because there are plenty of exceptions.

Justin (Harris) always says the torso muscles are the “heavy muscles,” snd the limbs are the “volume muscles.” I’m more or less found this to be the case, and my look has dramatically improved since I dropped the obsessive progressive overload approach for arms and legs.

 

[alfresco]

- those that train with a full range of motion, don't look that impressive in real life but on stage, when they flex, they just POP
- those that train with a short range of motion, and generally just throwing the weights around, look crazy big and thick next to you but on stage there is no difference between relaxed and flexed. They walk on stage looking crazy and then you expect something insane to happen when they flex and nothing does.

I agree.

Don’t have the research material with me now but there are 2 types (that are known now) of responders to weight training: Type G and Type S.

If memory serves (I have a great memory, it just isn’t very long) . . .

Type G means general.
Type S means specific.

Type G’s strength training “curve” is unrelated / affected by the range of motion. In short, a general response, an overall strength improvement.

Type S’s strength curve is effected only within that specific range of motion. In short, you only get stronger within that specific ranger of motion whereas Type G can exercise like Type S but gets an overall strength improvement.

Or something like that, my recollection.

Flexing and effect.

I remember talking to Dr. Please (sp) who was in charge of the controversial Colorado Experiment at Fort Collins, CO. He said that when he saw Casey Viator, he was not impressed. But when Casey flexed “things happened”. He just blew up, would not have believed it had he not seen it.

 

[dimethyl11]

Justin (Harris) always says the torso muscles are the “heavy muscles,” snd the limbs are the “volume muscles.” I’m more or less found this to be the case, and my look has dramatically improved since I dropped the obsessive progressive overload approach for arms and legs.

big JH fan - so your training is like 6-8 reps for say back and chest and 12-15 reps for legs/arms?

 

[d4ve]

big JH fan - so your training is like 6-8 reps for say back and chest and 12-15 reps for legs/arms?

Tbh I don’t go as low as 6-8 on much anymore- basically just one pressing movement for chest and shoulders workout.


Theres more to it than rep range. More a matter of focusing on a small number of failure sets that I try to progress very frequently vs a larger number of sets, the use of clusters and other long set intensifiers, chasing a pump and stretch and squeeze, etc

 

[dimethyl11]

Tbh I don’t go as low as 6-8 on much anymore- basically just one pressing movement for chest and shoulders workout.


Theres more to it than rep range. More a matter of focusing on a small number of failure sets that I try to progress very frequently vs a larger number of sets, the use of clusters and other long set intensifiers, chasing a pump and stretch and squeeze, etc

cool that makes more sense - thanks dude

 

[Alzadosghost]

I know for myself personally, when I made the switch from low reps and heavy weight w lots of partials, to a lot lighter weight training in the 15-30 rep range shortly thereafter my body started undergoing some serious changes in the form of harder more striated grainy looking 3D muscles as opposed to the more full undefined bloated look I was carrying around. I get asked alot how I got the look to my muscle's I have and I just tell people lighten it up a lot and slow down and control the weight and focus on feeling the muscle work and the squeeze as oppposed to just throwing the weight around uncontrolled and haphazardly. I think your definitely onto something here

 

[LK3]

from 13-20ish i trained more simple for football, lower reps multiple sets pushing max effort.
from 22 to 30 ish trained hit dc style
early 30s did a volume experiment more sets higher reps lower weights i feel like it changed my shape
33 and after it was a mix. working around injuries and other issues.
if i want to add size now i generally do less volume and push for weight. rp
that said high rep more volume seems to work best for arms, shoulder, calves. stay with higher reps for legs due to injuries. tore my chest a year ago and have worked it back to same strength as before using a mix. high rep flys to pre exhaust the rp bench. bench due to the injury has a bit more limited rom. mid 40s now.

 

[madg]

I always do full RoM in everything , slow and controlled

24 years till now not even one injury

Interesting what you say about the look i havent thought of that

 

[AllOkJumpmaster]

everything discussed here is determined by genetics. Always has been, always will be. It is the same reason Phil was a better bodybuilder as a basketball player that didn't even lift than 99% of bodybuilders.

 

[alfresco]

everything discussed here is determined by genetics. Always has been, always will be. It is the same reason Phil was a better bodybuilder as a basketball player that didn't even lift than 99% of bodybuilders.

Dammit. We need identical twins.