Question about visual impact muscle building

[Ion26]

I've been wanting to do this this workout, and I was wondering if it is good and if it works

If you have time please check out the videos on the link posted (well i cant post links...)

visualimpactmusclebuilding DOT COM


So basically this program says

6-15 reps=sarcoplasmic hypertrophy=just get bigger, more mass
2-4 rep= myofibrillar hypertrophy= getting denser muscles, will make you cut
5 reps= will build mass and get you cut at the same time

Phase 1=2months of sarcoplasmic
Phase 2= 2 months Hybrid of both
Phase 3= 2 months myofibrillar

So what if you workout like this....

Mon= 6-15 rep range
tues= 2-4 rep range
weds= 6-15 rep range...and so on and so forth

With cardio everyday as well

P.S. same workouts everyday of the week (Back,chest, arms,shoulders)

[james0566]

So basically this program says

6-15 reps=sarcoplasmic hypertrophy=just get bigger, more mass
2-4 rep= myofibrillar hypertrophy= getting denser muscles, will make you cut
5 reps= will build mass and get you cut at the same time

if this is what it says, i'm not wasting my time watching it

[Ion26]

if this is what it says, i'm not wasting my time watching it

Well im just asking you all if this is true...?

[james0566]

Well im just asking you all if this is true...?

no it isn't

[Ion26]

no it isn't

okay...so do you have some insight to give about what is the best reps for getting cut and the best amount of reps to gain mass...

And what is false about visual impact muscle building program?

[Wildtim]

You get cut or gain mass by eating not by lifting.

Yes the type of groth does differ in different rep ranges but that has nothing to do with adding mass or losing fat.

[james0566]

okay...so do you have some insight to give about what is the best reps for getting cut and the best amount of reps to gain mass...

there is no rep range for getting cut. cut is about low body fat.

for the most part, food is as equally as important as routine with gaining mass. having said that, reps from 5 to 15 will tend to build a better physique than say a 1 to 3 rep range

[Ion26]

well diet wise...ive been on the atkins diet for a about 1 year

[Wildtim]

as if that ment anything....

You might want to read some of the stickies in the nutrition section.

[ExtraCalories]

I've been a personal trainer for 3 years now, on top of that I hold a masters in BKIN (essentially Kinetics) and a bachelors in sports nutrition. All in all, I have 6 years of human physiology education (including 2 years in the lab)

Take it from me - the guys that have replied to your post are severely misinformed.

based on principle, visual impact makes complete sense.

1 - 3 rep range builds your STRENGTH: why? by doing 3 rep ranges you are activating your body's fast flex muscle. In order to do this, you SHOULD be doing maximal and dynamic training. If you don't know what this is, then look up Dave Tate, one of most advanced strength coaches today.

Yes, you DO need to cut down your body fat to the 5% range if possible, but even doing that won't give you the look that visual impact is trying to sell. For that, you need a bit of "fluid" in your muscles - that is absolutely true.

It's even more true that guys that only do hypertrophic training are the weakest guys in the gym. Think about this: to build that nasty meathead muscle that a 6 - 15 rep workout produces, you need to have a CALORIE SURPLUS. So tell me how you are going to cut down to 5 - 6% body fat while on a CALORIE SURPLUS? It simply doesn't add up.

Here's how simple it is to get that lean cut look
1) you need lean, hard, dense muscle - in order for you to have that, you must focus on training that makes your muscle fibres more DENSE: Strength training (1-3) reps does that, HYPERTROPHIC TRAINING (8 - 15 actually) does not.

2) On top of getting lean hard muscle, you need to cut down your body fat percentage. YOU CANNOT DO THIS ON HYPERTROPHY. I don't care what people tell you about only eating the right stuff, it's not going to happen. Now people will tell you that you lose muscle mass on a low calorie diet - as long as you get your vitamins, sufficient amounts of protein and BCAA's, you will not. You will lose that fluid filled fake muscle, yes. But that muscle does not contribute to strength whatsoever, and it makes you look bulky.

3) Taylor lautner DID use a very similar program. His trainer, Jordan Luam, documented lautner's success, and he noted that he had the best results doing HYPERTROPHIC TRAINING right before filming. That last part was for purely physical looks, not performance.

To sum it all up, the concept behind visual impact is legit, but it has been known for a long time. 80% of the time do strength training (1-3) reps and FOR THE LAST PORTION OF YOUR TRAINING do hypertrophic (8 - 15) For ex, if I have a christmas party I want to go to, 3 weeks before the party i'll work out til my muscles fatigue.

Please, find yourself better quality information than forums alone. You should read John Berardi's articles -> the foremost authority on sports nutrition, and you should read up on Dave Tate's articles -> the foremost authority on strength training. FYI, dave tate's pupils bench 800 pounds on average. He knows his stuff.

PM me if you have any questions.

[tha shredda]

look at a powerlifter and a bodybuilder offseason (me for example). if those lower reps were anything for "definition" then powerlifters would be quite more cut, but theyre not (though they only use that lowr rep range for theyre main lifts). I eat more than most powerlifters I know. simply put dont ever believe a rep range helps definiton. diet, with some cardio training is what you need. and I mean lets not mention that dave's pupils are on drugs, seriously. all I do is mostly hypertrophic training and Im one of the strongest lifters in my gym (granted I use the best form as well). point is, no rep range will help you cut.

[ExtraCalories]

look at a powerlifter and a bodybuilder offseason (me for example). if those lower reps were anything for "definition" then powerlifters would be quite more cut, but theyre not (though they only use that lowr rep range for theyre main lifts). I eat more than most powerlifters I know. simply put dont ever believe a rep range helps definiton. diet, with some cardio training is what you need. and I mean lets not mention that dave's pupils are on drugs, seriously. all I do is mostly hypertrophic training and Im one of the strongest lifters in my gym (granted I use the best form as well). point is, no rep range will help you cut.

I hate going through the basics again, but advice from people like shredda (no offense) are the reason there is so much misinformation when it comes to your body.

There are two things that you always need to keep in mind when you want to get shredded
1) you need to have a low body fat %
2) you need to have dense muscle fibre (which only a 1-3 rep range can give you)

Shredda pointed out that most powerlifters aren't cut - this is because of they're workouts are based on low volume training. Don't get me wrong, you need high volume - this is one of the reasons hypertrophic training will give you mass. But you need to be doing high volume at the 1-3 rep range. A solid exercise for hypertrophy would involve 3 sets 8 reps, but an equivalent strength routine 8 sets of 3 reps

In total, you do the same amount of reps. There is, however, a very big difference
1) hypertrophic training (3set 8 rep) - doesn't make your muscle fibres denser - all it does is build muscle tissue. Muscle tissue does not necessarily equate muscle strength
2) strength training (8set 3 rep) - makes your muscle fibre denser - activates type II fast twitch muscle.

Shredda also says he is one of the strongest guys at his gym. There is no possible way anyone who focuses on hypertrophy could be stronger than someone who focuses on strength training. Let's put it another way. There is no way someone who uses (6-15) rep range could be stronger than someone who uses a (1-3) rep range. It is scientifically impossible because the 6-15 rep range works your type I endurance muscle, where as 1-3 rep range trains your type II power muscle.

The human body is built to adapt. When you're doing 1 -3 reps, you're essentially telling your body that it needs to be stronger to life heavier weights. When your lifting 6-16, your telling your body you need to be able to last longer. Why do you think marathon runners are so skinny?

your rep range is everything, and visual impact is a solid program. That being said, I dont think you need to shell out the cash for it, just focus on strength training, cutting down your body fat, and use hypertrophic training 3 - 4 weeks before you need to show your body off

[tha shredda]

I hate going through the basics again, but advice from people like shredda (no offense) are the reason there is so much misinformation when it comes to your body.

There are two things that you always need to keep in mind when you want to get shredded
1) you need to have a low body fat %
2) you need to have dense muscle fibre (which only a 1-3 rep range can give you)

Shredda pointed out that most powerlifters aren't cut - this is because of they're workouts are based on low volume training. Don't get me wrong, you need high volume - this is one of the reasons hypertrophic training will give you mass. But you need to be doing high volume at the 1-3 rep range. A solid exercise for hypertrophy would involve 3 sets 8 reps, but an equivalent strength routine 8 sets of 3 reps

In total, you do the same amount of reps. There is, however, a very big difference
1) hypertrophic training (3set 8 rep) - doesn't make your muscle fibres denser - all it does is build muscle tissue. Muscle tissue does not necessarily equate muscle strength
2) strength training (8set 3 rep) - makes your muscle fibre denser - activates type II fast twitch muscle.

Shredda also says he is one of the strongest guys at his gym. There is no possible way anyone who focuses on hypertrophy could be stronger than someone who focuses on strength training. Let's put it another way. There is no way someone who uses (6-15) rep range could be stronger than someone who uses a (1-3) rep range. It is scientifically impossible because the 6-15 rep range works your type I endurance muscle, where as 1-3 rep range trains your type II power muscle.

The human body is built to adapt. When you're doing 1 -3 reps, you're essentially telling your body that it needs to be stronger to life heavier weights. When your lifting 6-16, your telling your body you need to be able to last longer. Why do you think marathon runners are so skinny?

your rep range is everything, and visual impact is a solid program. That being said, I dont think you need to shell out the cash for it, just focus on strength training, cutting down your body fat, and use hypertrophic training 3 - 4 weeks before you need to show your body off

bodybuilding itself proves your theory wrong. Again, NO rep range will help you define, cut , however you want to put it. There are almost no bodybuilders who utilize this "style" you are presenting, and I would say they must be doing something right. Bodybuilders are getting bigger and more defined than ever. Density DOES not help definition. Anymore than fiber size. I understnad what your trying to say, but its wrong. Diet/cardio. There it is. Your nieve to compare a marathon runner to a 6-15 rep range lifter. <--- this is anaerobic. Your body responds to this rep range with what? more strength to handle the more stress. You know nothing about science, look at the amount of videos on youtube of bodybuilders who are lifting way more than a LOT of people lifting for strength (a lot of which are natural).

I must say I really LOL'd at this statement:

"There are two things that you always need to keep in mind when you want to get shredded
1) you need to have a low body fat %.."

forget the 2nd thing, but is it not common knowledge that "shredded" and low bf% are the same thing??? You dont need to keep that in mind, you just need to diet right and move more. You have practically mentioned nothing about diet or cardio, please do more reading (from a diff source than where your getting anything now) and come back later

[L0WER1T]

bodybuilding itself proves your theory wrong. Again, NO rep range will help you define, cut , however you want to put it. There are almost no bodybuilders who utilize this "style" you are presenting, and I would say they must be doing something right. Bodybuilders are getting bigger and more defined than ever. Density DOES not help definition. Anymore than fiber size. I understnad what your trying to say, but its wrong. Diet/cardio. There it is. Your nieve to compare a marathon runner to a 6-15 rep range lifter. <--- this is anaerobic. Your body responds to this rep range with what? more strength to handle the more stress. You know nothing about science, look at the amount of videos on youtube of bodybuilders who are lifting way more than a LOT of people lifting for strength (a lot of which are natural).

I must say I really LOL'd at this statement:

"There are two things that you always need to keep in mind when you want to get shredded
1) you need to have a low body fat %.."

forget the 2nd thing, but is it not common knowledge that "shredded" and low bf% are the same thing??? You dont need to keep that in mind, you just need to diet right and move more. You have practically mentioned nothing about diet or cardio, please do more reading (from a diff source than where your getting anything now) and come back later

sorry bro ... but your resources are not in the least credible ... "youtoube" "bodybuilding.com" .. like honestly im by no means a expert or professional, however i am a LONG time athlete and that includes power lifting .. i must say the aforementioned information regarding the specific workout is in fact correct .. i just think you may be misunderstanding what you are reading .. or you judgment is clouded by big biceps and monsterous quads although very appealing its still biased .

all im really trying to say is have an open mind here .. and also remember that different body types react to different types of training .. a very close friend of mine has made some serious gains and looks fantastic ( not bodybuilder awesome) but still AMAZING compared to when he started , and id like to mention he is TOTALY against bodybuilding ( he is a silly goose)
in conclusion i would say stick with what works awesome for you , but also keep a open mind that there is better science than " cardio and eat clean" because i assure you thoes two factors arent as important as a lot of folks make them out to be

[RockCrab]

I smell a multi account trying to pump some crap.

[tha shredda]

I smell a multi account trying to pump some crap.

yea just look at theyre number of posts. lol.

and youtube wasnt a "source", but a fact. will they deny what they see? plenty of bbers on there not "lifting for strength" outlifting people that do lift for strength.

[ExtraCalories]

yea just look at theyre number of posts. lol.

and youtube wasnt a "source", but a fact. will they deny what they see? plenty of bbers on there not "lifting for strength" outlifting people that do lift for strength.

There is no need to make multiple fake accounts or w/e, I have nothing to prove and I certainly don't have time to pursue an online flame war.

I am a personal trainer however, and I do have a responsibility to correct people when they are wrong or to help people when they want it. I also know that you guys haven't referred to any scientific facts during your objections.

Im going to assume that shredda has no idea of what the diffrerence is between the various different muscle fibres. I'm also going to assume that shredda has absolutely no idea how various exercises manipulate the various muscle fibres.

Actually, i'm just going to assume that shredda has absolutely no background in human physiology. He may know how to perform certain exercises, but he certainly doesn't know how the human body works.

I'm going stop talking about shredda completely now - if you have any common sense, or if you want ACTUAL results, you would be best to dismiss his/her opinion. Take it from someone who has years of experience as a personal trainer and various educational degrees in human kinetics.

Defenition comes from skin wrapped tightly around dense hard muscle. This is what most people are after when they say 'shredded' or 'ripped'. Your muscles only become lean, hard, and dense when you do a workout that focuses on a low rep range. This is because lifting weights so heavy you can only do 3 reps maximum sends a message to your brain and central nervous system that it needs more strength to survive. Internally, your brain and CNS are sending chemicals and enzymes that compact your muscle fibres.

When you are lifting for higher reps, your body isn't focused on lifting MORE weight - it's focused on lifting weights that it can already lift MORE OFTEN. Researchers in Tokyo first proved this in 1976, by observing that athletes who used high rep ranges had a massive build up of FLUID in their muscles.

Common sense point: Which one of these is harder, a fluffly snowball or a snowball that is so packed together it's practically ice?

Ok, so I've laid down some facts. You might be wondering why the strongest men in the world aren't defined, and why body builders have defined muscles.

Here's something you need to understand - It's all about getting rid of fat. Body builders often lift until they cant lift anymore - that means, they are lifting so many times that the body is forced to use fat as an energy source. At the same time, the brain is telling those worked out muscles to conserve a lot of fluid in the muscle, and glycogen (fat the muscle uses as it's primary energy source). Don't be fooled - the muscle isn't getting harder, or more defined. It IS going to get bigger, but that size is going to look fluffy and undefined - think roid and meatheads at the gym.

At the same time, the men that compete in strongman competitions are only concerned with strength. They coudln't possibly care how ripped they are, and so when they train they NEVER DO HIGH VOLUME SETS. no high volume sets = no fat as a fuel source, and that is why they do not look ripped.

if you want to get 'ripped' or 'shredded' you need to have harder muscles and a low body fat % - think taylor lautner, dwight howard. If you just have skin wrapped tight around fluid filled muscles, you'll look like the michelin man. Which one do you want to be?

to get that hard muscle, you need to do strength trainine 1 - 3 reps
to use fat as a fuel source, you need to do lots of repetitions.

Solution? Do numerous sets of strength training. Oh, and shredda is right in that cardio will help you along the way, of course it will. For that, tabada training is by far the most effective cardio method.

And seriously, stop taking advice from people who have no background in human kinetics nor a basic understanding of human physiology. I'd say 60 - 70% of people in the gym get results by pure luck more than anything. Of course if you pick up a pair of dumbells and start doing curls you'll start to see some results. But if you have specific results in mind, you need to understand how the human body develops muscle, and for what purposes.

PS if you live in the Vancouver Canada region, fire me a PM and i'll be more than happy to give you a free 1 hour session where I can talk to you about proper nutrition and exercise technique. I happen to be a level 4 CPT and a fitness manager for GoodLife fitness.

Oh, and one more tip before i stop viewing this thread completely - eat fat to lose fat.

[longshankman]

how would the density of a muscles contribute to what it looks like with skin wrapped around it? too much skin (fat) not cut, less skin - cut. the muscles is bigger or smaller, the fat is either more or less, hell, some people pump there muscle with synthol and you can only tell if the shape is out of place, not by determining denseness.

[pumplikecuming]

I've been wanting to do this this workout, and I was wondering if it is good and if it works

If you have time please check out the videos on the link posted (well i cant post links...)

visualimpactmusclebuilding DOT COM


So basically this program says

6-15 reps=sarcoplasmic hypertrophy=just get bigger, more mass
2-4 rep= myofibrillar hypertrophy= getting denser muscles, will make you cut
5 reps= will build mass and get you cut at the same time

Phase 1=2months of sarcoplasmic
Phase 2= 2 months Hybrid of both
Phase 3= 2 months myofibrillar

So what if you workout like this....

Mon= 6-15 rep range
tues= 2-4 rep range
weds= 6-15 rep range...and so on and so forth

With cardio everyday as well

P.S. same workouts everyday of the week (Back,chest, arms,shoulders)

IGNORE THAT BS. Please, do yourself a favor and completely ignore the whole myofibrillar hypertrophy and sarcoplasmic hypertrophy thing. It will lead you to much headaches, much more questions, and unnecessary things to keep you up at night. You can train for mass or strength. Mass being muscle, strength being neural...thats it. You can train for increased glycogen storage but thats a different beast.

[Mlynch74d3]

Quick question "Extra Calories." You say that "it has been known for a long time. 80% of the time do strength training (1-3) reps and FOR THE LAST PORTION OF YOUR TRAINING do hypertrophic (8 - 15)"

However, the visual impact course says the exact opposite according to the original poster:

Phase 1=2months of sarcoplasmic (hypertrophic)
Phase 2= 2 months Hybrid of both
Phase 3= 2 months myofibrillar (strengh, 1-3 reps)

Your post is contradictory because you say that the visual impact program is based on solid evidence, and then go on to recommend a strategy that is the complete reverse as the visual impact.

Am I missing something?

[ironwill2008]

Am I missing something?

Yes. All the red bull**** ITT.

[RockCrab]

AND it's 2+ years old. OP ain't comin' back to defend his crap.

[Quicktim6]

hmm..

[Determinednoob]

This is my first new year on this site. Are there always to many necroed threads at the beginning of the year?

[xsajun]

Hey

I bought the visual impact muscle building before few weeks and overall I can say that I'm pleased with my purchase.

The program is much more extensive and practical in comparison to other similar programs online which I have tried before and the customer support from Rusty Moore is very good.

I personally really like the mixture between exercises and diet regime that Rusty Moore teaches inside the visual impact muscle building and I believe that the two months guarantee from Rusty Moore is a very fair offer and it can easily allow anyone to start using this program with no risks.

I do not really feel that the visual impact muscle building is a "magic pill" like some reviews on the web declare, but so far I�m very pleased with the results and I believe that with the right attitude it's possible for most people to see noticeable results in just a few weeks. In any case, with the full money back guarantee I don't believe that there's something to lose...

If you want to know more about the benefits and drawbacks of the visual impact muscle building system and to decide if it is actually for you check out this one page that may help


All the best

[lacrosseman415]

I've been wanting to do this this workout, and I was wondering if it is good and if it works

If you have time please check out the videos on the link posted (well i cant post links...)

visualimpactmusclebuilding DOT COM


So basically this program says

6-15 reps=sarcoplasmic hypertrophy=just get bigger, more mass
2-4 rep= myofibrillar hypertrophy= getting denser muscles, will make you cut
5 reps= will build mass and get you cut at the same time

Phase 1=2months of sarcoplasmic
Phase 2= 2 months Hybrid of both
Phase 3= 2 months myofibrillar

So what if you workout like this....

Mon= 6-15 rep range
tues= 2-4 rep range
weds= 6-15 rep range...and so on and so forth

With cardio everyday as well

P.S. same workouts everyday of the week (Back,chest, arms,shoulders)

I just bought this course, but am a little confused. I am not sure what weight to start at for most of these exercises.

Is there a starting weight i should shoot for?

My Gf also purchased the VI for Women, is there a starting weight she should use? She is not looking to build much muscle but rather stat lean and compact. VI mentions to stay a few reps below failure, but no where does it mention what weight is a good weight to start at....

Any thoughts?

[scullin]

2-4 rep= myofibrillar hypertrophy= will make you cut
5 reps= will build mass and get you cut at the same time

NO losing fat makes you cut.

[scullin]

Any thoughts?

Troll ...scam.....blatent advertising... all come to mind

[RockCrab]

I just bought this course, but am a little confused.
Any thoughts?

PM the OP. I doubt he's around to help. In lieu of this craptastic program and the fantabulous support provided by the OP, read the stickies.

[7M33R]

Quick question "Extra Calories." You say that "it has been known for a long time. 80% of the time do strength training (1-3) reps and FOR THE LAST PORTION OF YOUR TRAINING do hypertrophic (8 - 15)"

However, the visual impact course says the exact opposite according to the original poster:

Phase 1=2months of sarcoplasmic (hypertrophic)
Phase 2= 2 months Hybrid of both
Phase 3= 2 months myofibrillar (strengh, 1-3 reps)

Your post is contradictory because you say that the visual impact program is based on solid evidence, and then go on to recommend a strategy that is the complete reverse as the visual impact.

Am I missing something?

You're missing the bonus phase, which is effectively phase 4. This is essentially the same workout as phase 1 but with the diet of phase 3, and supplementing with creatine.

The idea is that your skin will not have adapted to your newly small but dense muscles and then you follow a pump up routine supplementing with creatine to add size and fluid to your muscles, making them pop out.

Its similar to carb loading but more long term.