Nick Walker Interview on Training and Future

[aHarness]

I’m just one of those guys who internalizes during a session. Everything happening around me fades out. I don’t even want a spotter near me.

What does that have to do with anything though?

 

[BLKGUY2006]

Yeah I noticed this a few years ago he went from decent content to just being a chuckle fuck. Can barley stand him. Not a fan of his training I think he makes it was more complicated than it needs to be. Obsessed with frequency, rir, I've never heard him acknowledge the most recent "data" that shows training a muscle 1x a week is equally as good as 2x. "Junk volume " lol

The problem with data is that it’s not representative of bodybuilders (nor could it be) who obsess over an infinite number of variables that would influence the outcomes.

Low volume works. High volume works. RIR works. Failure works.

People act like Mike is a skinny dude. No matter how much people disagree with him, where’s the proof? 9/10 people on this board aren’t as big as he is. Most use the same amount of, if not MORE gear. He’s like 5’6, 235.

Thank you gentlemen for helping my response pertaining to this topic. You both have hit the nail on the head.

 

[BLKGUY2006]

I’m trying to remember who Ronnie’s “training coach” was those last 7 Olympia's. You know? That guy he paid to stand behind him at Metroflex and encourage him and tell him to get tough when he was soft on a set. Who was that guy..

I kid of course but as an old guy it’s strange to me that a high caliber pro would need detailed coaching beyond diet and drugs. Seems like hand holding. Or maybe it’s the level of dependence and importance given to who is coaching who. “Oh he has that guy now. That guy will get him the trophy!”

I understand it of course it’s just strange to me the way things have changed. I have nothing against any of it it’s just not of my time.

His name is Brian Dobson. He own the gym He’s an older guy now. Even if Nick offered him $1 million I doubt he would do it. He is a stick to the basics and lift heavy ass shit type of guy.

 

[Alan1]

 

[FK86]

I’m trying to remember who Ronnie’s “training coach” was those last 7 Olympia's. You know? That guy he paid to stand behind him at Metroflex and encourage him and tell him to get tough when he was soft on a set. Who was that guy..

Cory Mathews

 

[FasciaSt]

Regarding his next coach, he did say currently Jared Feather is coaching his training but only training, and in a new video he put out to his channel within the last 24hrs he said something that implies that he didn't plan to go with a bigger more well known top level coach, and recently on Instagram had a short video where you can see Kyle Wilkes beside him while he was doing his sets, though not sure if that means anything or not.

Its looking like I might have been right when I guessed Kyle Wilkes last week.

 

[iron lifter]

Is there any reason Walker has not reached out to Aceto , chad, or hany/farah like the big name coaches with proven track record?

 

[3BILLS]

Is there any reason Walker has not reached out to Aceto , chad, or hany/farah like the big name coaches with proven track record?

You forgot about matt

 

[bbxtreme]

Is there any reason Walker has not reached out to Aceto , chad, or hany/farah like the big name coaches with proven track record?

He likely has. Those coaches have to “want” to take you on.

 

[danieltx]

He likely has. Those coaches have to “want” to take you on.

Particularly a guy like Aceto. His coaching is so cheap because his main income is real estate, he only keeps coaching because he loves bodybuilding so much.

 

[FasciaSt]

Is there any reason Walker has not reached out to Aceto , chad, or hany/farah like the big name coaches with proven track record?

He has said several times recently in interviews and his own YouTube videos that he doesn't want to go with a big well known coach, and I've also heard him say he wants to be the main focus of a coach.

Also, he has chosen Kyle Wilkes as his coach it seems, while Jared Feather is going to structure his training.

 

[iron lifter]

He has said several times recently in interviews and his own YouTube videos that he doesn't want to go with a big well known coach, and I've also heard him say he wants to be the main focus of a coach.

Also, he has chosen Kyle Wilkes as his coach it seems, while Jared Feather is going to structure his training.

wonder if that's holding him back, guys like Derek Cbum and Hadi have the same coach lol.

 

[Flex500]

It’s not surprising to me honestly after now being so deep into things at this level and knowing so many national level and pro guys.

At a certain level of pushing and doing it so many years you know you need to get it done, and should when your coach ask for it. But in my experience they just don’t want to know. Because if they do a CT angiogram for Cleerly or Heart Flow for example and it comes back with blockages then that means they have to accept what they aren’t ready for- to their coach and themselves which is that they are done at that level.

We all know that doing this sport at that level even at the generic elite level requires boatloads of supplements, peptides, and medications to offset where they are pushing at. For many it’s whatever it takes. So if they aren’t ready to be done, they don’t want to even risk opening that door. And many think “if there is something there and it gets bad I’ll know and feel it first because I’m so in tune with my body.” LOL no.

I’m not saying I agree with the above as we all have to pick our values and boundaries. Just offering some insight as I have had these convos with many guys at that level on this subject as I genuinely wanted to understand.

This is good insight...AND at to it that for males this is also normal behavior. My dad (not deceased) did 40 years of smoking, high blood pressure, etc. and never went to a doctor. Cardiac arrest at 58 he survived....cancer at 62 he did not. When he "felt something was off" was when he had a giant mass in his lungs...died 24 hours after finding out he had cancer. It wasn't "stage 4" it was "stage your dead now". Probably could have been alive today, but he lived terribly and just figured he'd know if something was off and address it then.

It's a huge issue with the male population and then add into it the mentality of bbers and you get exactly what you explained.

 

[bbxtreme]

This is good insight...AND at to it that for males this is also normal behavior. My dad (not deceased) did 40 years of smoking, high blood pressure, etc. and never went to a doctor. Cardiac arrest at 58 he survived....cancer at 62 he did not. When he "felt something was off" was when he had a giant mass in his lungs...died 24 hours after finding out he had cancer. It wasn't "stage 4" it was "stage your dead now". Probably could have been alive today, but he lived terribly and just figured he'd know if something was off and address it then.

It's a huge issue with the male population and then add into it the mentality of bbers and you get exactly what you explained.

My father had a cath done in his 30’s and the cardiologist told him if he didn’t make major life changes that he would be dead in his 50-60’s.

Did he listen? Nope. He was a workaholic executive and is now 65 and has had more heart procedures than I can count and can’t do anything but sit around all day.

The irony- he still hits up Culver’s and eats like shit. So you are absolutely right, many men simply just don’t care.

 

[Flex500]

This is good insight...AND at to it that for males this is also normal behavior. My dad (not deceased) did 40 years of smoking, high blood pressure, etc. and never went to a doctor. Cardiac arrest at 58 he survived....cancer at 62 he did not. When he "felt something was off" was when he had a giant mass in his lungs...died 24 hours after finding out he had cancer. It wasn't "stage 4" it was "stage your dead now". Probably could have been alive today, but he lived terribly and just figured he'd know if something was off and address it then.

It's a huge issue with the male population and then add into it the mentality of bbers and you get exactly what you explained.

I meant to put "now deceased". Lot of typos in the above. I'm not retarded, sorry guys. Working and typing

 

[traininsane11]

I thought this may be of some interest as it’s kinda relevant to this thread a conversation I’m having with Justin Harris shall post below interested to get your guys thoughts



Me:
Hey, hope you’re good! Just wanted to get your opinion on a training question

Branch warren style of training IE move the weight and get strong AF but not much thought to contraction

VS

Nick walkers current style (minus the stupid RIR nonsense) but really focussing on contracting the target muscle and taking it to failure for example I’ve seen him press the 220lb dumbells years ago but recently he’s been using like maybe 120lbs but much more locked in on taking the pecs to failure instead of just moving the weight from A to B

For reference my opinion is a mix of both and a bit in the middle overall for example with the critical mass programme I kind of lean to the “Branch” style for PR sets specifically like free weight rowing stuff for back and the “Nick style” for the hypertrophy but overall I tend to lean towards the Nick style of training and really focussing on muscle connection over weight 90% of the time

My thoughts also are if you can press the 220lbs dumbells then realistically you’re top end strong so it then makes sense for longevity to find a new way to train instead of tearing muscles off but for those of us who aren’t that strong should we just be trying to get that strong OR should we be focussing more on making the target muscles work as it is bodybuilding not powerlifting and the muscles don’t know how much you’re lifting etc etc

I’m sure you get the general jist of what I’m getting at

Very interested to get your opinion on it especially in relation to someone of my level who’s perhaps somewhat slightly advanced in regards to muscle and strength but also not a Nick Walker


JH:
All that matters is the muscle gets worked.
Branch's style works because data shows that what stimulates MPS is generally fast positive protion of the rep, focusing on the bottom 2/3 of the movement (not locking out) and generally lifting pretty explosively.
I think he may have taken it a bit too far by the end, but the data suggests that is what works.
Nick's works for basically teh same reason. He just reduces momentum from other muscles.
He still lifts pretty explosively as far ass the primary muslcle is concerned.

On a bent row, branch will get momentum started by kidn of exploding with his whole body until his back can take over the movement of the bar, while Nick avoids that and just contracts with his back--but if you track bar path speed for the portion where branch's momentum from legs and hips have slowed down and it's really just his back...the bar moves relatively similar in speed to Nick.

So really....as far as recent testing shows...the best way to train is to lift explosively, focusing on the bottom 2/3 of the movement (not locking out), and the negative really only matters in that you control it enough to not get hurt.

If you prefer to be very explosive, go with the branch route.
If you prefer to be a more controlled explosive--go with Nick.

THey really cross each other for proably 60-70% of how they do things. It just looks like they're totally different because branch explodes with his whole body and nick really only does with the primary muscle being worked.

*Nick does a controlled negative, which is probably why it looks so much different...but if you focus on the positive portion of the rep after branch has passed that initial whole body explosion, the rep path/speed is sort of similar


Me:
That’s really insightful thank you! So I’m guessing it’s partly that extra momentum being removed that’s changed how Nick trains now for example like he stated on a podcast I watched recently he went from squatting 405/495 down to 185 but added a pause at the bottom and the reps were very much focussed on placing as much tension on the quads as possible

I’m thinking from what you said whether he continued with his original form and progressed those squats to say 600lbs for example

Or

Continued with his new form and progressed those squats to 315 even though the weight is much heavier in the first option but between the lessened focus on the quads, speed of reps and the additional recruitment of other muscles that the end result may be the same amount of growth

So in a nutshell as long as you’re progressing the weight on the bar (either the 495 OR the 185 style of reps being the difference) you’re going to grow the same or thereabouts?

 

[bbxtreme]

I thought this may be of some interest as it’s kinda relevant to this thread a conversation I’m having with Justin Harris shall post below interested to get your guys thoughts



Me:
Hey, hope you’re good! Just wanted to get your opinion on a training question

Branch warren style of training IE move the weight and get strong AF but not much thought to contraction

VS

Nick walkers current style (minus the stupid RIR nonsense) but really focussing on contracting the target muscle and taking it to failure for example I’ve seen him press the 220lb dumbells years ago but recently he’s been using like maybe 120lbs but much more locked in on taking the pecs to failure instead of just moving the weight from A to B

For reference my opinion is a mix of both and a bit in the middle overall for example with the critical mass programme I kind of lean to the “Branch” style for PR sets specifically like free weight rowing stuff for back and the “Nick style” for the hypertrophy but overall I tend to lean towards the Nick style of training and really focussing on muscle connection over weight 90% of the time

My thoughts also are if you can press the 220lbs dumbells then realistically you’re top end strong so it then makes sense for longevity to find a new way to train instead of tearing muscles off but for those of us who aren’t that strong should we just be trying to get that strong OR should we be focussing more on making the target muscles work as it is bodybuilding not powerlifting and the muscles don’t know how much you’re lifting etc etc

I’m sure you get the general jist of what I’m getting at

Very interested to get your opinion on it especially in relation to someone of my level who’s perhaps somewhat slightly advanced in regards to muscle and strength but also not a Nick Walker


JH:
All that matters is the muscle gets worked.
Branch's style works because data shows that what stimulates MPS is generally fast positive protion of the rep, focusing on the bottom 2/3 of the movement (not locking out) and generally lifting pretty explosively.
I think he may have taken it a bit too far by the end, but the data suggests that is what works.
Nick's works for basically teh same reason. He just reduces momentum from other muscles.
He still lifts pretty explosively as far ass the primary muslcle is concerned.

On a bent row, branch will get momentum started by kidn of exploding with his whole body until his back can take over the movement of the bar, while Nick avoids that and just contracts with his back--but if you track bar path speed for the portion where branch's momentum from legs and hips have slowed down and it's really just his back...the bar moves relatively similar in speed to Nick.

So really....as far as recent testing shows...the best way to train is to lift explosively, focusing on the bottom 2/3 of the movement (not locking out), and the negative really only matters in that you control it enough to not get hurt.

If you prefer to be very explosive, go with the branch route.
If you prefer to be a more controlled explosive--go with Nick.

THey really cross each other for proably 60-70% of how they do things. It just looks like they're totally different because branch explodes with his whole body and nick really only does with the primary muscle being worked.

*Nick does a controlled negative, which is probably why it looks so much different...but if you focus on the positive portion of the rep after branch has passed that initial whole body explosion, the rep path/speed is sort of similar


Me:
That’s really insightful thank you! So I’m guessing it’s partly that extra momentum being removed that’s changed how Nick trains now for example like he stated on a podcast I watched recently he went from squatting 405/495 down to 185 but added a pause at the bottom and the reps were very much focussed on placing as much tension on the quads as possible

I’m thinking from what you said whether he continued with his original form and progressed those squats to say 600lbs for example

Or

Continued with his new form and progressed those squats to 315 even though the weight is much heavier in the first option but between the lessened focus on the quads, speed of reps and the additional recruitment of other muscles that the end result may be the same amount of growth

So in a nutshell as long as you’re progressing the weight on the bar (either the 495 OR the 185 style of reps being the difference) you’re going to grow the same or thereabouts?

There’s been studies on this, but it’s the eccentric that matters most as Justin touched on.

Lengthened Partial Repetitions Elicit Similar Muscular Adaptations as a Full Range of Motion During Resistance Training in Trained Individuals | SportRxiv

sportrxiv.org

 

[traininsane11]

There’s been studies on this, but it’s the eccentric that matters most as Justin touched on.

Lengthened Partial Repetitions Elicit Similar Muscular Adaptations as a Full Range of Motion During Resistance Training in Trained Individuals | SportRxiv

sportrxiv.org

Makes sense when you watch a lot of the top pros train or at least in years gone by before it got overly science based

I always thought Jay Cutler had it about right with his training his reps very similar to this in fact can’t recall ever seeing him really lock out any reps and they were always relatively fast paced and that never seemed to change during any of his videos over the many years

Whereas with Nick for example he used to train super heavy in a similar form to Jay or any of the other guys but then in later years went to this science based stuff

I’ve tried both extremes just moving weight and super controlled and I think somewhere in the middle is probably where I find I get the most out of it. Just moving maximal weight I get done with the set and it’s hit or miss on whether whatever muscle I was trying to hit really got hit properly but then overly controlled stuff the weight is just that light relatively speaking I’m not sure if that much overload is occurring other than doing an exercise for like 30 seconds straight

 

[Brock456]

I thought this may be of some interest as it’s kinda relevant to this thread a conversation I’m having with Justin Harris shall post below interested to get your guys thoughts



Me:
Hey, hope you’re good! Just wanted to get your opinion on a training question

Branch warren style of training IE move the weight and get strong AF but not much thought to contraction

VS

Nick walkers current style (minus the stupid RIR nonsense) but really focussing on contracting the target muscle and taking it to failure for example I’ve seen him press the 220lb dumbells years ago but recently he’s been using like maybe 120lbs but much more locked in on taking the pecs to failure instead of just moving the weight from A to B

For reference my opinion is a mix of both and a bit in the middle overall for example with the critical mass programme I kind of lean to the “Branch” style for PR sets specifically like free weight rowing stuff for back and the “Nick style” for the hypertrophy but overall I tend to lean towards the Nick style of training and really focussing on muscle connection over weight 90% of the time

My thoughts also are if you can press the 220lbs dumbells then realistically you’re top end strong so it then makes sense for longevity to find a new way to train instead of tearing muscles off but for those of us who aren’t that strong should we just be trying to get that strong OR should we be focussing more on making the target muscles work as it is bodybuilding not powerlifting and the muscles don’t know how much you’re lifting etc etc

I’m sure you get the general jist of what I’m getting at

Very interested to get your opinion on it especially in relation to someone of my level who’s perhaps somewhat slightly advanced in regards to muscle and strength but also not a Nick Walker


JH:
All that matters is the muscle gets worked.
Branch's style works because data shows that what stimulates MPS is generally fast positive protion of the rep, focusing on the bottom 2/3 of the movement (not locking out) and generally lifting pretty explosively.
I think he may have taken it a bit too far by the end, but the data suggests that is what works.
Nick's works for basically teh same reason. He just reduces momentum from other muscles.
He still lifts pretty explosively as far ass the primary muslcle is concerned.

On a bent row, branch will get momentum started by kidn of exploding with his whole body until his back can take over the movement of the bar, while Nick avoids that and just contracts with his back--but if you track bar path speed for the portion where branch's momentum from legs and hips have slowed down and it's really just his back...the bar moves relatively similar in speed to Nick.

So really....as far as recent testing shows...the best way to train is to lift explosively, focusing on the bottom 2/3 of the movement (not locking out), and the negative really only matters in that you control it enough to not get hurt.

If you prefer to be very explosive, go with the branch route.
If you prefer to be a more controlled explosive--go with Nick.

THey really cross each other for proably 60-70% of how they do things. It just looks like they're totally different because branch explodes with his whole body and nick really only does with the primary muscle being worked.

*Nick does a controlled negative, which is probably why it looks so much different...but if you focus on the positive portion of the rep after branch has passed that initial whole body explosion, the rep path/speed is sort of similar


Me:
That’s really insightful thank you! So I’m guessing it’s partly that extra momentum being removed that’s changed how Nick trains now for example like he stated on a podcast I watched recently he went from squatting 405/495 down to 185 but added a pause at the bottom and the reps were very much focussed on placing as much tension on the quads as possible

I’m thinking from what you said whether he continued with his original form and progressed those squats to say 600lbs for example

Or

Continued with his new form and progressed those squats to 315 even though the weight is much heavier in the first option but between the lessened focus on the quads, speed of reps and the additional recruitment of other muscles that the end result may be the same amount of growth

So in a nutshell as long as you’re progressing the weight on the bar (either the 495 OR the 185 style of reps being the difference) you’re going to grow the same or thereabouts?

When anyone mentions Branch Warren style training I always think of those videos of him doing DB front raises with like 80lb DBS performed like a kettle bell swing lol

I would never advise anyone to lift like that but who am I lol

 

[traininsane11]

When anyone mentions Branch Warren style training I always think of those videos of him doing DB front raises with like 80lb DBS performed like a kettle bell swing lol

I would never advise anyone to lift like that but who am I lol

Other than injury I’m pretty certain I wouldn’t gain much from training so extreme. He obviously made it work for himself though