Stop telling people to engage in workout programs not conducive to their goals

[gaaaaabe]

It seems to be an unfortunate trend on this forum in general that, despite what one's personal goals are, they will be barraged by a group of parrots saying that they need to do Rippetoe's Starting Strength or something similar.

Lets take a closer look into the logic (or lack thereof) behind recommending a program like Starting Strength to the typical young adult male who personally doesnt care about his legs and just wants bigger arms and chest. Rippetoe's is devoid of isolation movements in favor of compound movements such as bench, deadlift and squat - the latter of which holds the highest frequency of any movement in said program. Parrots love to say that to get bigger arms, one should focus on getting their squat and deadlift up - yet there is no physiological mechanism backing said claim that isolating a muscle group in a direct contractile or isometric movement causes more muscle fiber trauma than performing a compound exercise whose primary movers have no relation to said body parts.

Then there is the nonsensical broscientist claim that all beginners need to develop a "strength base" despite the fact that they want to focus on size. From a physiological standpoint, what logic dictates that the process of muscular hypertrophy is induced to a greater extent on an individual who has a higher 1 rep max in their squat/deadlift/bench press? Furthermore, it is completely incorrect to push someone toward programs centered around repetition ranges that induce greater central nervous system adaptation than muscular hypertrophic adaptation. Unless you happen to know the muscle fiber composition of the poster in question, it makes zero sense to push him or her toward a strength based program that ignores extremity isolation if their goal is size.

Stop parroting Rippetoe's, its a bad program for people that want to bodybuild and furthermore, not everyone has the same goals that they should all be pushed into one size fits all programs to build up a "strength base."

[Farley1324]

It seems to be an unfortunate trend on this forum in general that, despite what one's personal goals are, they will be barraged by a group of parrots saying that they need to do Rippetoe's Starting Strength or something similar.

Lets take a closer look into the logic (or lack thereof) behind recommending a program like Starting Strength to the typical young adult male who personally doesnt care about his legs and just wants bigger arms and chest. Rippetoe's is devoid of isolation movements in favor of compound movements such as bench, deadlift and squat - the latter of which holds the highest frequency of any movement in said program. Parrots love to say that to get bigger arms, one should focus on getting their squat and deadlift up - yet there is no physiological mechanism backing said claim that isolating a muscle group in a direct contractile or isometric movement causes more muscle fiber trauma than performing a compound exercise whose primary movers have no relation to said body parts.

Then there is the nonsensical broscientist claim that all beginners need to develop a "strength base" despite the fact that they want to focus on size. From a physiological standpoint, what logic dictates that the process of muscular hypertrophy is induced to a greater extent on an individual who has a higher 1 rep max in their squat/deadlift/bench press? Furthermore, it is completely incorrect to push someone toward programs centered around repetition ranges that induce greater central nervous system adaptation than muscular hypertrophic adaptation. Unless you happen to know the muscle fiber composition of the poster in question, it makes zero sense to push him or her toward a strength based program that ignores extremity isolation if their goal is size.

Stop parroting Rippetoe's, its a bad program for people that want to bodybuild and furthermore, not everyone has the same goals that they should all be pushed into one size fits all programs to build up a "strength base."

No, people inform them that getting the squat and deadlift up should be considered more important than doing curls.

They are not told they need to squat to get bigger arms.

If that is your claim, some direct quotes and links are in order.


If you have a better beginner's program for noobs, then inform them of it and tell them exactly why you think they should do it. If you are right I'm sure they will listen and do it since, after all, you are telling them what they want to hear.

Then there is the nonsensical broscientist claim that all beginners need to develop a "strength base" despite the fact that they want to focus on size.

Good luck getting guys big when their bench is around 100 pounds

[Fury22]

No, people inform that getting the squat and deadlift off should be considered more important than doing curls.

They are not told they need to squat to get bigger arms.


If you have a better beginner's program for noobs, then inform them of it and tell them exactly why you think they should do it. If you are right I'm sure they will listen and do it since, after all, you are telling them what they want to hear.

If that is your claim, some direct quotes and links are in order.




Good luck getting guys big when their bench is around 100 pounds

^^This x2.

[Muckle_Ewe]

Here's a better way of looking at Rippetoes.

The program itself lasts what, 3? 6 months? That's a very short time compared the many years you could spend training. In this time you learn...

- The importance of diet

- The importance of workout/weekly progression

- Proper form in exercises which are the backbone in the vast majority of all weight training programs

- How to properly warm up


And to a lesser extent things like rest intervals and how to structure a program.

How long do you think it takes the average gym rat to learn these things? You think the people who come here going "HEEEELP MEEE MY BICEPS WONT GROW" know any of these things well?

To give everyone an individual routine would require knowledge about that person that they themselves probably don't know and given the sparse details given in posts how are WE supposed to know whether they would be better of doing one exercise/routine over another.

Rippetoes just provides a quick way of giving someone a 12-24 week program that will teach them a lot about lifting.


By the way. I do think isolations are important at all stages of training. It's just that SS will allow these people to hopefully answer their own questions in a couple of months rather than coming back here to post more about to isolate there inner bicep or whatever. Put them on a BB program and they will still come back in a month saying something is not working.

[delineator]

to the typical young adult male who personally doesnt care about his legs and just wants bigger arms and chest.

The typical young adult male left to his own devices will do tons of bench & curls at least every second day. There are millions of shoulder problems walking around today because of this. SS is a balanced program. Even if someone didnt care about legs, they should still do deads or Romanian deads for the benefit to upper body, ok they may leave out squats. The progression schedule of SS is smack bang in the middle of what most of the population will respond best to. After that they can chose to do higher reps, more isos or whatever.

[Tim035]

It is unlikely that even a hypertrophy specific program is going to be completely devoid of squats, bench press, dead lifts and shoulder press. So why not spend a couple of months learning them with quality form combined with proper dieting and sleep? Then in 3-6 months you can begin your higher rep range routine, but begin it with strength that is way beyond the guy who jumped straight on to that type of routine in the first place.

Personally I've found after doing strength training I just can't go back to higher reps and much slower progressive overload. The satisfaction from squatting for 5 a weight that would have caused your knees to buckle under you only months early ranks higher then seeing abs or having a higher bicep peak... But to each their own.

[kilua.]

I pretty much agree with what the above posters had to say about SS. It's not the only program that's recommended, but it HAS worked for a lot of beginners in gaining strength (and believe it or not some decent size). Plus it's a lot easier to recommend rather than pumping out 100s of customized routines a day to people who hardly even listen to the advice they're given.

The way I see it, hating on SS because it's popular is like hating on Walmart because it's a big corporation. Sure other stores carry the same shit but I don't give a fuck what other people think, sometimes going to Walmart is just the better option.

[Farley1324]

What bugs me the most, I think, is the anti SS crowd is absolutely nowhere to be found when the noobs are asking these questions. And if they do happen to show up they are unwilling or unable to provide an alternative routine. Put up or shut up, I say.

[JasonDB]

This site has the word bodybuilding in the url...the means training to develop a balances, muscular development. It doesn't say www.curljockies.com it says BODYbuilding.com If one is not interested in developing a well balanced, strong and attractive physique why would they come to a place called bodybuilding.com? Better yet, why should they be allowed to stay and waste the time of experienced bodybuilders if they have no desire to bodybuild?

[kilua.]

What bugs me the most, I think, is the anti SS crowd is absolutely nowhere to be found when the noobs are asking these questions. And if they do happen to show up they are unwilling or unable to provide an alternative routine. Put up or shut up, I say.

Too true, it's usually "inb4ss", "lol starting strength", or "rIppPplE tOadZZ parrots at it again". How about posting something helpful instead of useless bullsh!t just to up your post count. A fully customized routine with a detailed daily exercise regimen, planned progression, and general diet would be a good start. And you better be willing to help them out if they have a ton of questions and/or eventually stall.

[SumDumGoi]

What bugs me the most, I think, is the anti SS crowd is absolutely nowhere to be found when the noobs are asking these questions. And if they do happen to show up they are unwilling or unable to provide an alternative routine. Put up or shut up, I say.

Perhaps this is because whenever someone dares to mention doing something slightly different you and the other parrots start simultaneously screaming at the top of your lungs that they are not doing the program as written and that they shouldn't deviate away from the program because then it won't be starting strength anymore and the program will lose all of its effects.

[03Venomous]

What's all the fuss about? Just take a multi and keep lifting heavy.

/thread

[braden101]

Preaching thats sh*t is exactly why these kids are to scared to go near a squat rack. Exactly why they cant grasp the concept of a FULL BODY lift. Exactly why they kill themselves in the gym and dont get reults.

Learning the basic barbell moves is a nessecity, no matter what your goal. Anyone can do a curl or a lateral raise, it takes technique and concentration to perform a perfect squat, power clean, deadlift, bench row.

And for most of these kids there main goal is size, fat loss, strength. Rippetoes is the most logical, simple and PROVEN routine to reccomend to a clueless newb. When you find a better one you let them know.

It is not just a strength base for future routines, it is a knowledge base, a familiarty with the gym, the iron and how your body works and should be worked. It is a simple program aimed at progression, and that is what a newb needs, no matter his goals.

[strong_strength]

this is a new and intriguing thread idea

excellent work op, 5 star

[KyleAaron]

Lets take a closer look into the logic (or lack thereof) behind recommending a program like Starting Strength to the typical young adult male who personally doesnt care about his legs and just wants bigger arms and chest.

Chest growth will be limited by back strength, since latissimus dorsi have a stabilising effect on the lift. You'll be lucky to press more than about 1.25x bodyweight by benching alone. You need back strength to match it.

Back strength will similarly be limited by leg strength. So it turns out that while the typical scrawny teenaged male can get a bigger chest from just bench, for a really really big chest, he'll need to do back and leg work as well.

Likewise, if he only curls, he'll reach a limit in his bicep development, limited by his back strength. That's why he has to swing his body when curling, he's lifting a weight his biceps can manage but his back and shoulders can't. So it turns out that if he wants big arms, he needs to work on his back, too.

There's also posture. If you do presses and no pulls, your pecs and front shoulder become tight, your back relatively weak. So your shoulders round forwards. You've spent all this time building up an impressive chest, and now you're hunching your shoulders and hiding it. Likewise, if you don't work legs, you'll bend forwards and your hips tilt back. To avoid this, ensure your back and legs are at least as strong as your chest, this makes you stand tall and show what you've got.

Then there is the nonsensical broscientist claim that all beginners need to develop a "strength base" despite the fact that they want to focus on size. From a physiological standpoint,

From a physiological standpoint, while the biggest guys are not the strongest, nor the strongest the biggest, a weak scrawny runt cannot get bigger without also getting stronger, nor a weak scrawny runt get stronger without also getting bigger. The road to Buffville passes through Strongville. Bench Gulch and Curl Valley are dead ends.

You need only look at the evidence. Gyms are full of brahs doing bench press and curls, and after years of training not only have they still chicken legs, but their chest and arms are unimpressive, their posture slumped. If asked, they would say, "I'm a hardgainer." Is this what every young bloke dreams of? Probably not.

Nice attempt at a troll, though. I give you lame/10.

[CookAndrewB]

I think the OP is simply a troll, but let me quickly weigh in on this stupid thread.

1) Starting Strength has a bit of a hint in it... STARTING! Nobody called it Forever Strength, or The Only Strength You Will Ever Need. Jesus, people. This is really the worst thing we can do for a beginner looking to gain size or strength? Introduce them to a simple program that has a chance to develop a strong foundation?

2) SS is not the only thing that gets suggested around here. Somewhere along the line, some guys decided it was cool to hate on SS, and thus the real parroting seems to be this anti-SS trend. As someone previously pointed out, it is staggering how few alternatives are ever offered, just some ambiguous shot that "SS isn't the only way, and it doesn't focus on teh bicepts!"

3) Where the OP hit the nail on the head is that anybody who only wants to bench and curl is already a lost cause, so why is anyone bothering to suggest something productive?

[guest89]

OP Starting Strength is a base to get STARTING STRENGTH and to teach a person how to lift weights and be successful at it. (All aspects of it) On top of that Starting Strength provides perhaps the absolute fastest method to put on mass/strength. Its basically foolproof because if someone does it they WILL PROGRESS.

If they have issues with the diet it provides they can still follow their bodybuilding diet and eat 100% clean. If they still aren't satisfied, after a few months they can change up to something different.


The thing is isolation/hypertrophy training isn't very effective if you have no muscle base. How are you going to build muscle lifting light weight with poor form? I'd be willing to lay money on the line the guy who does Rippetoes for 3-6 months then does a more bodybuilding specific program for 6 months will look better/be bigger, be A LOT stronger, and have a better grasp on lifting then someone who just does isolation work/hypertrophy training right of the bat for a years time.


Also another thing. I'd be willing to bet most normal healthy individuals that do SS can expect to be squatting at least 250x5, benching 170-200x5, and deadlifting 285-300x5 (all with perfect form) in about 6 months. Some people may have better progress on certain lifts, some may have slightly worse, but still numbers should at least be around there. Plenty of people train for YEARS and don't reach those (weak) lifts because they have a crappy program.

What bugs me the most, I think, is the anti SS crowd is absolutely nowhere to be found when the noobs are asking these questions. And if they do happen to show up they are unwilling or unable to provide an alternative routine. Put up or shut up, I say.

Exactly. Its easy to hate on SS. But unless someone writes a book/guide explaining a decent program and the technique/form for lifts, diet/nutrition, and all of the basic training fundamentals they really shouldn't be bashing.

SS definitely works, and if someone uses a proper diet perhaps they'll even look pretty damn good by the end of it, at least better then before they started it.

[james0566]

Lets take a closer look into the logic (or lack thereof) behind recommending a program like Starting Strength to the typical young adult male who personally doesnt care about his legs and just wants bigger arms and chest.

i wouldn't recommend Starting Strength to this type person either, nor would i any program because this person doesn't care about a bodybuilding routine, nor strength training nor any decent solid program

[delineator]

Perhaps this is because whenever someone dares to mention doing something slightly different you and the other parrots start simultaneously screaming at the top of your lungs that they are not doing the program as written and that they shouldn't deviate away from the program because then it won't be starting strength anymore and the program will lose all of its effects.

Judging by the way most noobs think (as evidenced by the majority of questions asked on boards) being overly restrictive on them is clearly a very good idea. Give them just 'concepts' & allow them the freedom to fill in their own details & almost always they will fukk it up. As usual you are focused more on some trivial irrelevant argument for its academic value while ignoring the bigger picture which will make the most difference out in the field.

I can understand why people who like to make things overcomplicated would get mad & hate on something that is so simple yet so very effective. Feels like youre spinnin your wheels dont it?

[ZionNYC]

Beginners Routine:

Monday:
Bench Press: 3x5
Incline Dumbell Bench Press: 4x8
Dips: 4x8
Close Grip Bench Press: 4x8

Wednesday:
Squats: 3x5
Leg Press: 4x8
Dumbell Curls: 5x10
Seated Calf Raises: 5x12

Friday:
Dumbell Shoulders Press: 4x8
Lateral Raises: 4x8
Dumbell Shrugs: 3x10
Weighted Decline Crunches: 3x10

Saturday:
Deadlifts: 3x5
Leg Curls: 4x8
Barbell Rows: 4x8
Pullups: 4x8

[grumble1]

SS isn't magic, or the only way to do things. It is one very effective way for novices to pack on muscle all over, it's simple, and it's got a ton of info (books, guides, etc) that do most of the explaining for you. It's a total no-brainer recommendation for novices.

When a guy comes in who's 6'0" 140 lbs soaking wet and he says he wants a workout to focus on his upper chest, of course people are going to tell him he's retarded, because he is retarded. He needs to pack on muscle all over.

As for people recommending SS being annoyed by changes, this is because first off the one doing the changes has no idea what they are doing and are likely to cause more harm than good, and secondly because one change tends to lead into five other changes until the program actually is unrecognizable and has lost what makes it work.

As for the OP (who I think is trolling), saying that training for size and strength are different is stupid. That simply is not true in the prescence of a caloric surplus for either a novice or an early intermediate. Advanced lifters can choose to tweak their routines to somewhat alter their size, but strength and size (when food is there) are more or less the same thing:



Here is Dave Tate, powerlifter extraordinaire. He trained for strength, then when his injuries piled up and his poor eating habits were looking lethal, he lost some weight. You know, training for strength really doesn't make you look strong at all. He's shrunken like a grandmother.

[SumDumGoi]

Judging by the way most noobs think (as evidenced by the majority of questions asked on boards) being overly restrictive on them is clearly a very good idea. Give them just 'concepts' & allow them the freedom to fill in their own details & almost always they will fukk it up. As usual you are focused more on some trivial irrelevant argument for its academic value while ignoring the bigger picture which will make the most difference out in the field.

I can understand why people who like to make things overcomplicated would get mad & hate on something that is so simple yet so very effective. Feels like youre spinnin your wheels dont it?

I was responding to a specific assertion made in his statement. Let me add in something else though. But before I do let me say that I don't necessarily agree with the OP's sentiment as strength is the basis for everything that people do in the gym and beginners do not need to follow anything more than a basic program. However, what you are left with on this board are a lot of people who have followed SS for 3-6 months and now think they are an authority when it comes to exercise. They aren't! The reasons why they themselves can't make changes to an exercise program is quite simply they do not know enough themselves and all they are effective at doing is spewing back the same program that they themselves have used. Just because someone has used an exercise program does not make that person an expert.

Either that or the other common response you hear is about them complaining about always having to answer the same questions over and over again if they were to recommend something else. Then they often just say that it is "easier" to just recommend SS because the program is already laid out. In either case the individuals responding either don't know enough about exercise in order to make an informed decision regarding a program or they are too lazy to answer someone's question or both.

And yes, I am spinning my wheels because the retardedness on these boards has reached mind-boggling levels of circle-jerking logic.

[Farley1324]

Either that or the other common response you hear is about them complaining about always having to answer the same questions over and over again if they were to recommend something else. Then they often just say that it is "easier" to just recommend SS because the program is already laid out. In either case the individuals responding either don't know enough about exercise in order to make an informed decision regarding a program or they are too lazy to answer someone's question or both.

And yes, I am spinning my wheels because the retardedness on these boards has reached mind-boggling levels of circle-jerking logic.

Feel free to step up to the plate, then.

[SumDumGoi]

SS isn't magic, or the only way to do things. It is one very effective way for novices to pack on muscle all over, it's simple, and it's got a ton of info (books, guides, etc) that do most of the explaining for you. It's a total no-brainer recommendation for novices.

When a guy comes in who's 6'0" 140 lbs soaking wet and he says he wants a workout to focus on his upper chest, of course people are going to tell him he's retarded, because he is retarded. He needs to pack on muscle all over.

As for people recommending SS being annoyed by changes, this is because first off the one doing the changes has no idea what they are doing and are likely to cause more harm than good, and secondly because one change tends to lead into five other changes until the program actually is unrecognizable and has lost what makes it work.

As for the OP (who I think is trolling), saying that training for size and strength are different is stupid. That simply is not true in the prescence of a caloric surplus for either a novice or an early intermediate. Advanced lifters can choose to tweak their routines to somewhat alter their size, but strength and size (when food is there) are more or less the same thing:



Here is Dave Tate, powerlifter extraordinaire. He trained for strength, then when his injuries piled up and his poor eating habits were looking lethal, he lost some weight. You know, training for strength really doesn't make you look strong at all. He's shrunken like a grandmother.

Why is his head always down or face obscured in every picture where he is ripped up? I went through 5-6 pages of google images and couldn't find a single image of this man with his face nonobscured in some way.

[Farley1324]

You can start with these threads, all currently on the top page

http://forum.bodybuilding.com/showth...hp?t=125200301

http://forum.bodybuilding.com/showth...hp?t=125197801

http://forum.bodybuilding.com/showth...hp?t=125201301

http://forum.bodybuilding.com/showth...hp?t=125195251

How much you wanna bet none of the anti SS parrots attempted to help any of these guys?


Too many people woudl rather complain time and again about noobs being pointed to SS, yet are never there to help

[Koaia]

Why is his head always down or face obscured in every picture where he is ripped up? I went through 5-6 pages of google images and couldn't find a single image of this man with his face nonobscured in some way.

Funny, I found this on the very first page of Google images.

[SumDumGoi]

You can start with these threads, all currently on the top page

http://forum.bodybuilding.com/showth...hp?t=125200301

http://forum.bodybuilding.com/showth...hp?t=125197801

http://forum.bodybuilding.com/showth...hp?t=125201301

http://forum.bodybuilding.com/showth...hp?t=125195251

How much you wanna bet none of the anti SS parrots attempted to help any of these guys?


Too many people woudl rather complain time and again about noobs being pointed to SS, yet are never there to help

This is subject to sampling bias as only 9 out of 25 threads on the first thread contain more than 10 posts within them.

[Farley1324]

This is subject to sampling bias as only 9 out of 25 threads on the first thread contain more than 10 posts within them.

Exactly the problem! Nobody wants to help the noobs, they just want to complain about the help they do receive.

Like I said, put up or shut up.

[SumDumGoi]

Funny, I found this on the very first page of Google images.

Something looks off in that picture to me. He looks like he is about 5' 2" or something.

[SumDumGoi]

Exactly the problem! Nobody wants to help the noobs, they just want to complain about the help they do receive.

Like I said, put up or shut up.

By your own assessment you and the other SS gurus are not helping the "noobs" out equally as much. Your argument is flawed.