When/Why did training change?

[MANWHORE]

I know this is an old post and i already put more than my 2 cents into it but i was just thinking again. O no .... I wonder how much Ronnie would have over Arnold if he was to shed all that viceral fat and was using the same amount of gear as Arnold...I don't believe all types of hypertrophy take the same amount of time,so ED training is possible.

 

[Freddy]

Ahh. Finally Madcow mentioned what I was waiting to see throughout post after post of redundant babble. It depends! That's all that needs to be said. Going back to the original question-why did training style change? If you watch "Pumping Iron", you only see the Big Guys, the Genetic Freaks, the Guys who take.....oh, I think you know what they take! They can work out as much as they god-damn well please, because recover periods sure are a lot faster! But for the general population, it depends on your genetics. Some people can work their balls off in the gym and never worry about overtraining. Other people-yes, it's very much absolutely possible to overtrain. It's called Exercise Science. Buy a book. It's not b/c they're pussies (very observant ). Everyone is different and everyone has different training capacities. For me, if I do more than 3-4 sets of biceps once a week, I'll be overtraining Bi's. Period. Want to refute that? Here, I'll let you borrow them for a while. The pro's today can lift bodyparts more than once a week (even though most I know admit they don't-probably lying). But for Jonny poo-bear who doesn't juice like it's an oxygen tank, it's definitely POSSIBLE to overtrain. Plus Jonny poo-bear may have job, and can't spend all his waking hours in the gym. Pretty rational scenario I'd say.

Oh, and there was GH back in the day just on a side note. Know that gap in Aronld's teeth? Yeeeahh (disclaimer: not all people with teeth gaps take GH)
Peace.

Not sure if the pussy statement was directed at my explanation of the Bulgarian system or not.

If it was, it should be clear from my post that I wasn't judging those who train with the Bulgarian system or not (since I don't), I was merely describing their approach. There is no need to be insecure about it and take it personally.

And Arnold had those buck teeth when he was 11, was he taking GH then too?

EDIT: Oh, I see what that was in reference to. Yes, I stick by that sentance, its about pussies specifically.

Exercise science? Funny, I've read Zatsiorski, Siff, Medvedyev, and talked to the best coaches in the country (perhaps the world) about strength training. I routinely talk to the best powerlifters as well. I'm actually chatting with Tim Harold Jr at the moment.

And the fact that you mentioned biceps furthor illustrates the pussy comment. Jesus...who gives a shit how often you train that, honestly? Bicep training is incidental in a good program.

Yes, most recreational "bodybuilders" are pussies. P-U-S-S-I-E-S. They're afraid to squat, much less squat 2-3 times a week.

They feel a little lactic acid buildup or fall short of breath (because their GPP sucks dick) and assume its overtraining because they've never trained hard in their life.

It is "very observant", don't be offended because it hits too close to home! Haha!

 

[Grizzly]

Yes, most recreational "bodybuilders" are pussies. P-U-S-S-I-E-S. They're afraid to squat, much less squat 2-3 times a week.

They feel a little lactic acid buildup or fall short of breath (because their GPP sucks dick) and assume its overtraining because they've never trained hard in their life.

It is "very observant", don't be offended because it hits too close to home! Haha!

LMMFAO!

 

[Who's Victor Martinez?]

Who are you?



I didn't take anything personally. I'm not even sure who you are or that you read my post. But that aside, I'm proud for you sir, that you have read the best and mingled with the best. Still doesn't change the fact that science is science. You can overtrain. Period. Double period. If you squat too much weight too many times a week, it's not doing your quads any good. In fact, it may be doing the opposite. Your body needs time to rest (a.k.a. grow). Now, like I said, it depends on who you are. That's the key word here Freddy. You perhaps may be able to train balls-to-the-wall several times per week, and that's great! It doesn't make other's pussies or give you the right to think you're hot shit and put others down. That sir, shows insecurity.
Personally I could jump right in there with you and hang baby. I haven't seen anybody train harder me (note: not nessecarily heavier with respective strengths). But see, for me I would overtrain if I worked out too much. Not that I don't want to, or am scared to....or whatever you think it is. Another factor is I personally don't have time to be in there two times a day. I work every muscle by themself and pair arms up (doing traps with shoulders) and the two days I don't work out I'm in there doing abs and cardio (I also do cardio two other days of the week early in the morning). So it's not a dedication issue or a pussification issue. Also, I train bi's b/c.....oh yeah I'm a bodybuilder, not a corebuilder. Core is essential and foremost in a bulking regimen (maybe then I would concentrate less on arms) but I'm leaning right now anyway, so no muscle is really being created since I'm not eating enough I'm just trying to maintain right now.

Oh, and I've never seen a picture of Arnold before, so nevermind about that. GH could definetely do that though, lol.

Sorry if I offended you or whatever, before. I didn't remember who said the "pussy" thing. It was an idirect statement. Later.

peace.

 

[Grizzly]

Well, there's your problem. YOu don't squat "balls to the wall" 3 times a week. The intensity is varied to produce your so much sought after "rest" without sacrificing neural efficiency and simultaneously providing more frequent stimulus(which is scientifically shown to produce more results).

 

[Dschingis]

Reading the stickies is just for the gifted. Martinez, tell us something about your training history, your successes and the number of read stickies in this forum.

 

[Who's Victor Martinez?]

Well, there's your problem. YOu don't squat "balls to the wall" 3 times a week. The intensity is varied to produce your so much sought after "rest" without sacrificing neural efficiency and simultaneously providing more frequent stimulus(which is scientifically shown to produce more results).

But I have though. It didn't work for me. More frequent stimulus....not too much stimulus. And I say again...it depends. A lot of people can, and a lot of people can't. Not that hard. And yeah, I'm giving my nervous system a rest! If that's not recovered, your muscles ain't gonna work.

It's just a different issue for me. Dude, I've tried variation after variation and found what works best. I just don't think people should be called childish names for something that works best for them. Granted, some guys are pussies and don't give it their all. But let's not generalize. It's like the guy after you said....you don't know my training history. I've done everything I can to stimulate any kind of hypertrophy, lol. It's a bitch. This method works better for me.

 

[Madcow2]

Okay - I am the "other guy" but what I said does not apply to you in the way you are thinking at all.

First of all - everyone can squat 3x per week. Frequency alone is not the killer. Shit, do you think your CNS is going to burn out squatting the bar for 5x5 3x per week - No. Will it burn out in a few weeks squatting your best 5x5 3x per week, Yes. What's the difference? Intensity and it's relation to total volume. The 3 squat sessions are all different and this serves to make this a bit easier.

If you tried this program and followed it but "burned out" you set the weights too high too early in the program to scale upward. If you were too sore to keep going, you likely aren't acclimated to training well enough so you needed a few really light weeks to get going first. For a beginner to this training the first few weeks should not be very hard. Starting too high breaks this program and being conservative allows you to complete it and reap the lion's share of gains albeit not 100% unless you just luck into absolutely perfect wieght settings and progression.

So basically, anyone can make this program work (start your weights somewhere between an empty bar and 100%). It's a matter of locating your tolerances and setting the weights accordingly. To claim that you cannot perform this program is rediculous and shows a complete misunderstanding of the concepts. It is simply a matter of setting it up correctly which means following directions and paying attention to your body. Start conservatively and get through it. Once you've run it you will have a better idea of your tolerances for setting up programs in the future.

So once again - it is absolutely invalid to claim that the frequency alone is too high and your CNS is burning out. There is certainly a lot of varriance between individuals but this is a matter of not setting up the program correctly and not understanding what it is you are doing. This is an indefensible point. Empty bar vs. 100% - frequency is not the issue. Setting the weights for your conditioning level and tolerances is.

This is the variability I am talking about and it is an observation and not an excuse. If you know your body best and don't like the program, that's fine. However, you cannot claim you can't handle it without saying that you are unable to set the weights correctly and find your tolerances. So, I venture that if you knew your body really well, you should be able to set your tolerances and know how to run this program. Here we hit a quandry - you know your body and your training history yet you cannot set up this program properly for your body based on said training history. The answer lies in one of the following: 1) lack of understanding of the program 2) lack of knowledge regarding your own tolerances 3) inability to follow directions. I'll leave that choice to you.

 

[MANWHORE]

Squating is for pussys. Do LUNGES like a real man

 

[kenneth]

Okay - I am the "other guy" but what I said does not apply to you in the way you are thinking at all.

First of all - everyone can squat 3x per week. Frequency alone is not the killer. Shit, do you think your CNS is going to burn out squatting the bar for 5x5 3x per week - No. Will it burn out in a few weeks squatting your best 5x5 3x per week, Yes. What's the difference? Intensity and it's relation to total volume. The 3 squat sessions are all different and this serves to make this a bit easier.

If you tried this program and followed it but "burned out" you set the weights too high too early in the program to scale upward. If you were too sore to keep going, you likely aren't acclimated to training well enough so you needed a few really light weeks to get going first. For a beginner to this training the first few weeks should not be very hard. Starting too high breaks this program and being conservative allows you to complete it and reap the lion's share of gains albeit not 100% unless you just luck into absolutely perfect wieght settings and progression.

So basically, anyone can make this program work (start your weights somewhere between an empty bar and 100%). It's a matter of locating your tolerances and setting the weights accordingly. To claim that you cannot perform this program is rediculous and shows a complete misunderstanding of the concepts. It is simply a matter of setting it up correctly which means following directions and paying attention to your body. Start conservatively and get through it. Once you've run it you will have a better idea of your tolerances for setting up programs in the future.

So once again - it is absolutely invalid to claim that the frequency alone is too high and your CNS is burning out. There is certainly a lot of varriance between individuals but this is a matter of not setting up the program correctly and not understanding what it is you are doing. This is an indefensible point. Empty bar vs. 100% - frequency is not the issue. Setting the weights for your conditioning level and tolerances is.

This is the variability I am talking about and it is an observation and not an excuse. If you know your body best and don't like the program, that's fine. However, you cannot claim you can't handle it without saying that you are unable to set the weights correctly and find your tolerances. So, I venture that if you knew your body really well, you should be able to set your tolerances and know how to run this program. Here we hit a quandry - you know your body and your training history yet you cannot set up this program properly for your body based on said training history. The answer lies in one of the following: 1) lack of understanding of the program 2) lack of knowledge regarding your own tolerances 3) inability to follow directions. I'll leave that choice to you.

amen madcow. if he can read what you just posted and still come back with some type of exception, then it's not about not GETTING IT anymore it's about refusing to get it. I'm not too sure if he's heard of DELOADING, obviously one of the most important aspects of the program.

 

[Ronin_]

Freddy

OK Freddy so what do you make of Dorian Yates and Mike Mentzer's self professed training "sciences" (ones which i never believed in beyond a couple of months when i was 16)? Did they train like that or was it Weider propaganda etc to sell magazines when how they trained was along true established athletic lines?

In 99.9% of the cases a steroid using bodybuilder knows less than a natural trainer of 2 years in my experience

 

[Who's Victor Martinez?]

amen madcow. if he can read what you just posted and still come back with some type of exception, then it's not about not GETTING IT anymore it's about refusing to get it. I'm not too sure if he's heard of DELOADING, obviously one of the most important aspects of the program.

Fuck you, Kenneth. I can read doochebag.

 

[kenneth]

Fuck you, Kenneth. I can read doochebag.

first of all you fucking NON-EDUCATED on training son of a bitch, i wasn't implying that you couldn't read, so therefore i learned something, YOU CAN'T READ. because you read the sentence wrong. so nice way to smack yourself in the face real good. Anyway, I was trying to be nice, but you're a total fucking moron, your posts are pathetic, and full of sh*t thinking you know something about training because you've used alot of different programs. idiot.

 

[Grizzly]

OK Freddy so what do you make of Dorian Yates and Mike Mentzer's self professed training "sciences" (ones which i never believed in beyond a couple of months when i was 16)? Did they train like that or was it Weider propaganda etc to sell magazines when how they trained was along true established athletic lines?

In 99.9% of the cases a steroid using bodybuilder knows less than a natural trainer of 2 years in my experience

I would bet they used those methods. However, especially in BB, those at the top of the sport succeed inspite of themselves. It's nearly all about genetics.

 

[Who's Victor Martinez?]

first of all you fucking NON-EDUCATED on training son of a bitch, i wasn't implying that you couldn't read, so therefore i learned something, YOU CAN'T READ. because you read the sentence wrong. so nice way to smack yourself in the face real good. Anyway, I was trying to be nice, but you're a total fucking moron, your posts are pathetic, and full of sh*t thinking you know something about training because you've used alot of different programs. idiot.

"If he can read what you just posted...". Idiot. Yes, I can read, and therefore didn't respond, did I? Slap...face...who? Aparently I skipped this "program" that you guys have been discussing, while reading (as in didn't read it at all, not misunderstood). Hence the reason for my remarks. When Madcow delved into the different set/rep schemes etc it made perfect sense. So in other words it made perfect sense the first time I actually read it (even though I didn't appreciate his "snippyness" either). But pretending, I didn't know about this case-by-case basis program (which I didn't), then my comments were completely relevant and made sense. That's why I was wondering why everybody was arguing with me (because now knowing, they wouldn't have). But I didn't read the specific program (which madcow explained with the personal strength differences etc), which is my fault. So that's my bad. But it doesn't give you or anybody else the right to be so goddamn curt! I know if I was in your situation, I would have asked "me" if I "may have misread something or looked over something". Something to that extent. But most everybody is quick to be a rude ass in their way of explaining or assuming. I can see where some people would turn into a bunch of hothead know-it-alls on a chat board, but god, I hope you're not like that in real life. That person would have ZERO friends.

Now that I've explained myself (which I wasn't going to do. I wasn't going to post, but just leave his statement be..), you can cut out those kind of comments, and I can cut out on rude returns. Sound good?

 

[kenneth]

"If he can read what you just posted..."...dude, you failed to read the rest of the sentence or left it out to make it look that way. there was more to that sentence, the next word was AND..in other words if you read it, AND still don't get it, then it seems to me like you're refusing to get it.

 

[kenneth]

anyway, yes, truce. good deal

 

[CyniQ]

In 99.9% of the cases a steroid using bodybuilder knows less than a natural trainer of 2 years in my experience

Hasty generalization my brother.

But I'll agree on this level. Lee Priest has worked out in my gym a couple of times (that I've seen). He's a pussy. He threw a few weights around, bullshitted, threw a few weights around. It wasn't training IMO.

That is one BIG little muther though. Lead me to believe, (contrary I'll admit to what alot of more experienced bros on this board say) that good drugs can do alot to make up for bad training. BTW, I wasn't the only one who noticed LP's lack of conviction. A number of guys said it looked like he had no plan. I think at least once he was in and out in 1/2 an hour.

 

[Madcow2]

"If he can read what you just posted...". Idiot. Yes, I can read, and therefore didn't respond, did I? Slap...face...who? Aparently I skipped this "program" that you guys have been discussing, while reading (as in didn't read it at all, not misunderstood). Hence the reason for my remarks. When Madcow delved into the different set/rep schemes etc it made perfect sense. So in other words it made perfect sense the first time I actually read it (even though I didn't appreciate his "snippyness" either). But pretending, I didn't know about this case-by-case basis program (which I didn't), then my comments were completely relevant and made sense. That's why I was wondering why everybody was arguing with me (because now knowing, they wouldn't have). But I didn't read the specific program (which madcow explained with the personal strength differences etc), which is my fault. So that's my bad. But it doesn't give you or anybody else the right to be so goddamn curt! I know if I was in your situation, I would have asked "me" if I "may have misread something or looked over something". Something to that extent. But most everybody is quick to be a rude ass in their way of explaining or assuming. I can see where some people would turn into a bunch of hothead know-it-alls on a chat board, but god, I hope you're not like that in real life. That person would have ZERO friends.

Now that I've explained myself (which I wasn't going to do. I wasn't going to post, but just leave his statement be..), you can cut out those kind of comments, and I can cut out on rude returns. Sound good?

Victor, it's unfair to you but people's patience on this board has been totally worn out by the general BBing contingent. They are full of excuses and psuedo-science and seem more intent on talking themselves into believing in their own bullshit programs than learning, trying new things, and adapting. They talk and post but never put any effort into learning beyond the keyboard. I can't tell you how common this is. So, there is nothing wrong with misunderstanding or misapplying and everyone starts out at zero anyway but a huge portion of patience has already been used up by the moron contingent who is either stuck at 6' 185lbs or a career drug user on the same shitty program now 6' and 250. So for what it's worth, that's how people here got to be so frustrated and snippy. Shit, how many archived posts are there with people suggesting changes to the 5x5 who have never run it? Tons and basically everyone wants to make it a 3 day split with each muscle group trained 1x per week - that way it's exactly like the same shitty programs they use right now.

 

[rook48]

now madcow has explained the 5X5 me pretty well, so this question isn't about that, and the 5X5 isn't hard to follow. but i guess i'm wondering how the BBs today are so damn big? is it because of the massive amounts of drugs they take and GH? from what it seems like ronnie and a lot of the other pros still work out a lot and intensely (though i'm basing a lot of this off of their vids so i could be comletely wrong) and are huge and strong considering ronnie can squat 8 plates or whatever it is, but it's a lot.