Train for size and not strength ?

[KTT]

"I seen an article were the late Dan Duchaine said the best way for a natural bodybuilder to gain size would be to use one set of several movements. If you do 6 sets for biceps you would do 6 movements of one set each instead. He said bodybuilders have to train for size instead of strength. He said since 4 sets of curls on the same plane lets you adapt were doing one set of different movements does not let the muscle adapt.
Any Thoughts?"

"Just wondering what you thought about Dan's ideas on how a natural should train. Instead of doing 4 sets of curls he said it would be better to do 4 different movements for one set. This would go for all bodyparts doing single sets of several movements. He said bodybuilders must learn to train for size and not strength."

What do you think about this quotations ?

 

[gtj220]

It seems that the main thing for a natural to watch more closely is recovery time.

 

[Research Em]

try to learn something about GTP, this system based one good science and statistical analysis. it was developed by TheGame46 on FlawlessTraining

 

[Moen]

Link bro !

We are too lazy to search for it ourselves

 

[Nat]

Dan was brilliant. I had a chance to talk with several times before
he passed.

I am not sure were your reading that from, but I would be interested in reading what Dan said.

But size without strength is an oxymoron. The stronger you get the bigger you get. So for a natural I would definitely have him monitor his strength gains week to week and with the strength will definitely come the size.

As far as the training I believe that is Mike Mentzger approach of hardcore training. I do believe that less, but hard and intense is the best for naturals. I think the most important thing for a natural is making sure the muscles are fully recovered. I think this is the biggest difference between a natural and a chemically enhanced athlete. Being a natural takes alot more science and study were being in chemical gives you a little room for error.

 

[Ashop]

SIZE comes from strength IMO.

 

[JohnnyPro]

I've seen a lot of really strong guys that weren't big at all. Look at some of the Olympic lifters and even some powerlifters. I've also seen huge bodybuilders doing curls with 20 pound dumbells and struggling to get 10 reps in the bench press with 225.

 

[dirkmoneyshot]

Size and strength are not correlated.

 

[Tom]

concur

Size and strength are not correlated.

agree 100%....i've been training over 35 years and seen it over and over. huge lean muscular guys unable to bench 350 or squat 400. on the other hand guys that hardly even look athletic let alone muscular rep out with 315 on the bench.

 

[mature muscle]

can you get big useing lighter weights and more reps i just changed my routine from heavy less reps to lighter high reps i'm going to try it for a couple of months see what it does.and how long should you stick with one thing.

 

[KTT]

Dan was brilliant. I had a chance to talk with several times before
he passed.

I am not sure were your reading that from, but I would be interested in reading what Dan said.

But size without strength is an oxymoron. The stronger you get the bigger you get. So for a natural I would definitely have him monitor his strength gains week to week and with the strength will definitely come the size.

As far as the training I believe that is Mike Mentzger approach of hardcore training. I do believe that less, but hard and intense is the best for naturals. I think the most important thing for a natural is making sure the muscles are fully recovered. I think this is the biggest difference between a natural and a chemically enhanced athlete. Being a natural takes alot more science and study were being in chemical gives you a little room for error.

I do not have the original from Dan, only that quotation from another forum.
Yes, i think to make gains you have to train in a progressive manner, for exampel more sets ( volume ), shorter rest periods or more weight.
If you gradually increasing the amount of weight you lift, you will becom stronger.

But is there a difference in training for strenght and training for size ?

Are different movements with one set ( 1 x benchpress, 1 x incline, 1 x dips, 1x dumbbell press ) better than 4 sets benchpress for chest ?

 

[nasser3]

Size and strength are not correlated.

I agree 100%.
See Gunter Schliekamp workout with master trainer Charles Glass!
http://it.youtube.com/watch?v=sF9hrx5KoPA&feature=related
http://it.youtube.com/watch?v=dhsbKvSgbcc&feature=related
http://it.youtube.com/watch?v=rmV5ASvd2aY&feature=related

Gunter in his workout use light weight , but with perfect execution.

 

[oldfella]

I do not have the original from Dan, only that quotation from another forum.
Yes, i think to make gains you have to train in a progressive manner, for exampel more sets ( volume ), shorter rest periods or more weight.
If you gradually increasing the amount of weight you lift, you will becom stronger.

But is there a difference in training for strenght and training for size ?Are different movements with one set ( 1 x benchpress, 1 x incline, 1 x dips, 1x dumbbell press ) better than 4 sets benchpress for chest ?

The short answer to your question (in bold) is yes!! Strength and size training are different. it is usually the volume of training and some of the methodology that dictates size over strength. I have trained individuals for strength and also for size. yes the bigger some of them got came strength increases also. But the pure strength trainers did not necessarily get a whole lot bigger. Different protocols in nutrition and training produce the desired results. it is much like training a a competitive lifter in a weight division. he can't afford to get bigger (heavier) or he will be bumped out of his weight class and be forced up a rung on the ladder, he would then be at the bottom end of his class in terms of strength (usually).

 

[Nat]

Just to clarify what I said.

There is a definite difference between powerlifting and bodybuilding. I was assuming we are talking bodybuilding here.

Bodybuilders usally are very instinctive and change things up (depending on what stimulates the muscle and pumps the muscle best). You can get big lifting with higher reps and high volume. But from what I have seen this high volume and high rep approach is down by bodybuilders who have already developed enough size and mass. From there the gains will continue to come as these bodybuilders with great size and mass have a mind/muscle connection and know how to stimulate there muscles.

But for pure mass, basic heavy movements, with great form is what produces mass. And I cant imagine anyone who lifts weights say, " I am alot weaker this weak but alot bigger", that is crazy!! The more muscle you have the stronger you are whether it is high volume or low volume.

I am not sure how some of you guys are not correlating muscle and strength together. I would like to hear your thoughts on exactly what you mean by lifitng light and still producing quality mass gains (it just doesnt make sense to me). Help me out here guys!!

 

[LATS]

size and strength are linked.. but, let me clearify.. if a person is considered "weak" (we all know strength is relative to the person in question) and is yet still big.. you can rest assured that if he adds weight to the bar and keeps his form cadence ect the same he will "eventually" get bigger.. as tom said, we have all seen guys who were large and muscular that were not pillars of strength.. but, the weight is relative.. if it is heavy for him it is heavy period.. leverage , bone length ect all contribute to this thing we call strength.. it does not mean that the muscle of the guy in question are not taking a beating.. but, if a guy is only capable to benching 225 for ten and aftyer a couple of months is capable of doing 250 for ten.. he will be on his way to getting thicker by upping the muscle tension and keeping the time under tension the same.. what i am trying to say is, when you think getting stronger (upping tension on the muscle by increasing weight) is not important anymore, i will say you will be disappointed with future gains.. now that being said, there are numerous ways to hypertrophy.. upping volume , adding weight ect ect.. but, getting stronger is diffinitely one of the most used and proven..

 

[noname103]

Dan Duchaine was a junky I would not consider him the best source for natural training advice. The whole size vs strength thing gets everyone all upset. No one mentioned the difference between strrong ligaments and tendons vs. muscle. Once you get a certain amount of size your muscles can be stronger than your tendons, ligaments, joints, and even bone. But it should be clear to everyone that if I add tissue to a muscle it gets stronger.

 

[LATS]

true.. but, duchaines theory was based on cns adapting to the movement.. he believed that when doing one set the movement is a little uncoordinated which in turn, caused the cns to be heightened and activate more fibers.. he thought a second set would cause a adaptation and , therefore, more coordination and the muscle would be less activated.. he believed in numerous exercises for only one set based on this theory of getting more out of the movement in just one set.. that is what he preached..

 

[bigheinz]

HIT is perfec for natural bodybuilders, perfect estructured estimulation and recovery times. Less workouts but effective intensity and recovery, thats is how i got my pro card when i was under dopping control.

 

[Research Em]

Link bro !

We are too lazy to search for it ourselves

here is the links to GTP tester logs

**broken link removed**

 

[Sesshomaru]

I've seen a lot of really strong guys that weren't big at all. Look at some of the Olympic lifters and even some powerlifters. I've also seen huge bodybuilders doing curls with 20 pound dumbells and struggling to get 10 reps in the bench press with 225.

Yeah but many OLers and PLers compete in weight classes so no matter how strong they are, they wont grow unless they eat for it.

Ive also seen the 'weak' BBer, but there are many reasons for weakness such as injury, depletion, volume, etc. That same guy who struggles with high reps may be able to put up some nice numbers when the reps go down.