are you building muscle or lifting weight?

[Sulo-Eno]

This is a double edged sword for me. My motivation for lifting comes from several places. In really thinking about it,...strength is probably my main motivator. Strength gains are much easier to measure then is added muscle. (especially at this point in my training).

That being said, I dont train like a power lifter. I dont do a bunch of supporting exercises to support my main lifts, like rack pulls or deficit pulls for deads. But I just cant help but get the enjoyment out of moving heavy things. It is addictive....especially when they start to feel light.

I am a big believer in if you lift 'heavy' the mass will come. You can try to trick your muscles all you want, (fatigue..etc), but nothing will grow them like real tension and stress which is generated from moving heavy weight.

For a natural guy, this is of primary importance. When on enhancing substances, protein synthesis is being driven artificially high, and you will gain muscle regardless. As a nattie, you have to force your body to do this.

I have come to notice that the many of top level natural guys are all crazy strong and base their workouts around moving the heaviest weight possible.

This is essentially how I too would respond to the original post.

[Nikonguy]

Thanks for sharing! What I want to know is if this Kai fellow has it all figured out why does he sound like he is about to have a heart attack trying to form sentences? Is that how stressed a human heart is with that much mass or did he just pound out a 2000 lb squat off screen?

LOL. He speaks very slowly and deliberately. He also has a soft speaking voice and outside of his videos and interviews I think he is pretty much an introvert.

[Sulo-Eno]

Olympic weightlifters, don't look like body builders. Powerlifters/weightlifters move more weight than bodybuilders. Bodybuilders care about how they look. Weightlifters care about how much # they move. Two different sports, different disciplines.

The question should be, are you trying to be a bodybuilder, weightlifter, or somewhere in between?





Arguably serious weightlifters have more functional strength

These pictures do a disservice though--many great powerlifters are not chubby...at least in Finland. If you look at heavyweights (like Hossein Rezazadeh) you always see some "radical lipid displacement".

[x-trainer ben]

Thanks for sharing! What I want to know is if this Kai fellow has it all figured out why does he sound like he is about to have a heart attack trying to form sentences? Is that how stressed a human heart is with that much mass or did he just pound out a 2000 lb squat off screen?

Because at 5ft 8 300 pounds the heart has to work a lil harder .

[Brackneyc]

I've never understood the rigid progression system, where you lift the weight for 6, 8, 10, or whatever reps, and then immediately rack the weight and move on to the next exercise, even if you have more reps in you.

A properly designed progressive routine has most guys hitting failure on those last few reps (that is the nature of that design). The guys you see who appear to have several reps left are doing it wrong. It is very mathematical if done right, and is very effective.

Problem is, if a person does not take the time to find the correct "starting weights," the program takes longer to be effective, but eventually it will be (if it is given time). "Most" (clearly not all) guys I see who train by the seat of their pants, end up just like the guys who don't track their food....looking average.

BB.com (by virtue of what it is...a training website) is packed with guys who claim no program and a pretty loose diet. My experience (and my eyes) tells me that in the real world, that approach does not work for most.

[Sulo-Eno]

Doesn't this sound a bit silly...
Weightlifters always think "more weight, more weight, more weight".
Kai Green doesn't ever want to become a weightlifter.
Kai Green wants to contract his muscles against "greater and greater amounts of resistance".

Am I to believe that more weight ≠ greater amounts of resistance?

[pharmamarketer]

Thanks for sharing! What I want to know is if this Kai fellow has it all figured out why does he sound like he is about to have a heart attack trying to form sentences? Is that how stressed a human heart is with that much mass or did he just pound out a 2000 lb squat off screen?

Kai fellow? Yeh he knows a liitle bit. Watch him train and you will find out why he is out of breath. He is a beast.

[IronCharles]

"Most" (clearly not all) guys I see who train by the seat of their pants, end up just like the guys who don't track their food....looking average.

So you're saying lifting to failure is "training by the seat of your pants"?


I've seen many posts where a guy says, "My program says to lift the weights for X reps, but I've got at least another rep in me. What should I do?" And the usual response is, "Rack the weight, stick with the program."

[powernpain]

Being strong and looking good can be like comparing apples to oranges. personally I like to have a strong look but I will side towards power. Size comes with weight can get abit over generilized,( consider this outlook) meaning certain strength training and techniques can be used to build up strength but limit the growth factor, endurance quickly comes to mind and olympic style training. Often you can see 185lbs squating over 5oo, and C&J big numbers. Another example is, many can power squat big numbers, but one argument is, "lets see that go over your head. The strength training athlete has 15" arms, no chest, and tight frame but can power through 500lbs quite comfortably. Mix it up, add power by increasing lifts and add additional size and def by honing in on the specifc targeted muscle.

ROM in itself is arbitrary onto itself, factor body type, angles, length of limbs= distance of ROM, and many many more. A lifter with long arms may and probably will see better results shorting up his ROM at times/ not always, due to the fact that through complete ROM he begins to bring in other stabalizing muscles, and or supporting muscle groups which can take away from isolating and hitting the chest directly with the greatest impact.

Another important bit of info is, ROM does not compute to hitting more muscle, its allows you to hit the same muscle in a shorter ROM as with afull ROM only with more impact. Full Rom will provide the greatest result in regards to time, Full ROM=2 reps, Short ROM=1 rep per se.


Short explosive movement under heavy loads trigger white muscle tissue growth ( 18-20% larger than red tissue). Meaning stimulating this particular growth will lead you to better overall size gains. Full ROM targets more red tissue fibres, and are stimulated with higher reps and endurance type training. Size and definition come with this but awaking the white fibre will get some size on yoiu faster. One can continue to gain strength with this particular style of training without inducing large mass gain.

Example a corner back can aquire great power and strength but still needs the mobility and speed to be effective at his position, more strength and endurance training would be best protocol. The middle linebacker Will train for power and strength but will focus on adding size, short power movements heavy compounds. Both may infact have the same strength abilties but have different methods and purposes for their training. So often with top athletes, you can see the not so big guy out lift the big guy for these particular reason. ( I know some aren't going to be happy with this) and size really isnot the factor in this example.

Overall mixing it up and changing your routine by implementing power with design can present the best of both worlds for most lifters. You need to decide for yourself what you want and what makes you hit the iron and keep you going back, everyone else there is on their own journey.

[Brackneyc]

So you're saying lifting to failure is "training by the seat of your pants"?


I've seen many posts where a guy says, "My program says to lift the weights for X reps, but I've got at least another rep in me. What should I do?" And the usual response is, "Rack the weight, stick with the program."

For some guys, I would say training to failure is hit/miss. I say this because most undisciplined lifters seem (in my experience) unable to progress much without a schedule. As I said, not everyone.

The guys who say they have "more" in them (consistently, not one particular set on a random day) need to go heavier. We all have those sets where we seemingly are able to get an extra one here and there. If the routine calls for 3 sets of 8, and they can do 3 sets of 12, they are way off on their numbers. Most program writers detail the % of 1RM as a starting off point for programs which are progressive in nature. Most lifters (newbies especially) get all geeked up about "beginner", or "progressive" programs "feeling" too easy. By about week 3 they are either considering quitting, or crying about plateau, or injury.

This is not one size fits all, but I would be hesitant to recommend most guys just go in and train to failure.

[x-trainer ben]

So you're saying lifting to failure is "training by the seat of your pants"?


I've seen many posts where a guy says, "My program says to lift the weights for X reps, but I've got at least another rep in me. What should I do?" And the usual response is, "Rack the weight, stick with the program."

Yeah i don't understand that either!? If it says do 8 and i feel good enough to do 11, what just do 8?

[Brackneyc]

Yeah i don't understand that either!? If it says do 8 and i feel good enough to do 11, what just do 8?

Have you ever done (over a long period of time) a well written progressive routine? I don't care who you are, or your level of experience, "everyone" will hit the wall doing these if they do them long enough. The difference between the guy who follows it and the guy who doesn't is the guy who doesn't, hits failure faster, and blames the program.

[chodan9]

Doesn't this sound a bit silly...
Weightlifters always think "more weight, more weight, more weight".
Kai Green doesn't ever want to become a weightlifter.
Kai Green wants to contract his muscles against "greater and greater amounts of resistance".

Am I to believe that more weight ≠ greater amounts of resistance?

the difference he is pointing out is
more weight, more weight no matter how its done, form be damned.
as opposed to
proper form full range of motion, stretch/squeeze until failure, but only with the weight that can be accomplished with.

[Max10]

what I liked about the video personally was the focus on the curl.

how many of you know guys (or are the guy/girl) who put a lot of weight on the bar but then rock their arms at the shoulder joint in an effort to get the bar up.
the guys I work out with on occasion are bad for that, and they would bust balls at the light weight I had to use to perform them correctly, stretching the bicep, and squeezing the contraction on top.
the thing is, they are still swinging the bar with the same weight, and I am now (a couple years later) using the same weight as them only my form is still correct.
my arms have changed radically in those 2 years, but their arms have not changed at all.

Rocking the body is an easy trap to fall into, and then ego can get in the way of the reverse gear to bring the weight back down to allow for a good ROM.

I'm on AP's Intermediate program #1. One of those programs where you're lifting below your 10RM baseline weight, so it takes a bit of ego door checking.

For example, since you mentioned curls. The curl is considered, in this program, as an accessory exercise (only squat, BOR, and Bench are staples), so in workout 1 you run 8 reps of your 10RM and then 20 reps at 50% of that weight. Workout 2 is 12 reps of your 10RM, followed by 20 reps at 50% of your workout weight.

I get some funny ass looks when I'm struggling on rep 18 and 19 with only 20 pounds on the EZ curl bar! I don't care, though. I love that about this program - the programming itself back down the weight and helps you to concentrate on form. I have to freely admit that I wouldn't be running that light of weight, and thus getting my form reinforcement, if it wasn't programmed in.

[Sulo-Eno]

the difference he is pointing out is
more weight, more weight no matter how its done, form be damned.
as opposed to
proper form full range of motion, stretch/squeeze until failure, but only with the weight that can be accomplished with.

That isn't what he said.

I understand your point, but I don't think he said anything about "form be damned". I got the impression that he is just opposed to training like a powerlifter. That's why I found it particularly amusing that while he castigated the "more weight" philosophy, he espouses a "greater amount of resistance" training philosophy (he doesn't acknowledge that these are essentially and practically the same thing.)

[bigtallox]

What bodybuilders do advocate is that the ROM and form is of more importance than just hoisting the weight up.

Personally, when people say things like that, it makes me think they don't know very much about training for strength. Form is very important when training for strength, good form allows somebody to lift MORE weight. Successful strongmen and powerlifters are ALWAYS working on technique. Granted that technique may look different than how a bodybuilder lifts, but calling it "just hoisting the weight up" represents a lack of understanding. I'm not talking about somebody with truly bad technique, I just get the feeling from your comment, you don't understand the difference.

[Jtbny]

That isn't what he said.

Hmm that's what I got out of the video. Sounds like its exactly what he said.

You ninja edited

To me it sounds like weight should follow form.

[bigtallox]

the difference he is pointing out is
more weight, more weight no matter how its done, form be damned.

But, no successful powerlifter/strongman does that.

[Sulo-Eno]

Hmm that's what I got out of the video. Sounds like its exactly what he said.

Your "getting something out of the video" is different than him saying these things.
Yes, weight should "follow form"...powerlifters are every bit as interested in this as bodybuilders.

[Big_Sky_Guy]

One also needs to realize that there is a big difference between natty guys and the pros. They don't NEED to lift heavy to get big. Natty guys do.

Not true.

If it were true, then the top-level Pros would not put themselves at risk by going heavy.

They may be able to lay off the heavy stuff at the end of their career, but most will have to implement it along the way.

[Jtbny]

Your "getting something out of the video" is different than him saying these things.

Srs? So because he didn't spell it out word for word then it wasn't implied?

[Sulo-Eno]

Srs? So because he didn't spell it out word for word then it wasn't implied?

I don't mean to split hairs: I just remarked that he claims "more weight" is bad, but "greater resistance" is good. Yes, it is clear that he is against bad form. However, this shouldn't be a reason not to be a weightlifter, since weightlifters are equally concerned about form. Do you follow my reasoning?

[yakabebe]

Absolutely agree. Some of my lifts are pretty light, compared to some of the guys who are stronger, yet smaller than me. I've found that I can make the same, or better, gains by lifting lighter weights with strict form.... as long as I take each set to failure, than I can by lifting heavy, for a few reps, and never exceeding the number of reps called for by a program.

I've never understood the rigid progression system, where you lift the weight for 6, 8, 10, or whatever reps, and then immediately rack the weight and move on to the next exercise, even if you have more reps in you. The microtears in the muscle tissue occur in the last few reps, when your mind is signalling the muscle to move beyond what it's comfortable with. Pushing beyond what you can normally do is what triggers growth, whether it be light weights to failure, or heavy weights to failure. The lighter weights encourage building with sarcoplasmic fluid, which creates volume. Heavier weights encourage building with myofibrillar cells, which promote strength, but build less size than sarcoplasmic hypertrophy.

Well said.....and such big words!!

This is the age old argument, isnt it? In the end what works for one may not work quite as well fo another.

And looking at 100's of guys over time and comparing them to moi...a vast vast majority simply do the thing wrong. Flat out wrong. The philosophy of "just get the f@#ker up" is the ONLY concern. And theyll be doing that regardelss is they are actually doing an isolation type move!

For mine, regardless of the weight used unless perhaps in the case of Oly moves where the plyometrics and explosive aspect is inherent...strict adherence to form and reaching fatigue will get the job done. And in the end doing that you'll end up being stronger than the guy that has done it his way.

But you'll have to be satisfied KNOWING that curling X lbs X # of times with proper form IS stronger than a guy who pushes 1.5X but recruits lats, pecs, delts, gravity and momentum. Hes got a team approach...you're doing it solo!

[Jtbny]

I don't mean to split hairs: I just remarked that he claims "more weight" is bad, but "greater resistance" is good. Yes, it is clear that he is against bad form. However, this shouldn't be a reason not to be a weightlifter, since weightlifters are equally concerned about form. Do you follow my reasoning?

No I hear you. I think his point was made for those who really don't comprehend what you said. I know I see it each and every time I go to the gym, the people who swing their curls or something else goofy to lift heavy weight. If their goal is to have "bigger numbers" then great, but If their goal is to build the muscle in the most effect way then they would be better served lowering the weight, and concentrate on the form.

[yakabebe]

Have you ever done (over a long period of time) a well written progressive routine? I don't care who you are, or your level of experience, "everyone" will hit the wall doing these if they do them long enough. The difference between the guy who follows it and the guy who doesn't is the guy who doesn't, hits failure faster, and blames the program.

I'd add to this and from my own experience where I have adhered to a programme written by a coach...I've often made the comment and the discussion (at times had the argement ) that stregnth, power, feeling good in the gym and ones capacity to lift a weight can often be far from a linear progression. As such if you hit the gym and all the planets are lined up and you feel like you could lift a car...but the programme calls for a far less sort of effort....I've advocated training intuitively but within the constraints of an overarching and well thought out programme.

[OutOfStep]

Personally, when people say things like that, it makes me think they don't know very much about training for strength. Form is very important when training for strength, good form allows somebody to lift MORE weight. Successful strongmen and powerlifters are ALWAYS working on technique. Granted that technique may look different than how a bodybuilder lifts, but calling it "just hoisting the weight up" represents a lack of understanding. I'm not talking about somebody with truly bad technique, I just get the feeling from your comment, you don't understand the difference.

Did you bother to watch the video? Because if you did, you'd notice that the guy who's form is being critiqued by Kai was indeed "just hoisting the weight up". I get the feeling from your comments that you don't have a ****ing clue about how to build a bodybuilder's physique, yet you take every opportunity to chime in with your 2 cents in every bodybuilding thread anyway.

[chodan9]

But, no successful powerlifter/strongman does that.

thats why I said this in the OP:

By the way, this will not apply to those whose focus is lifting more weight or whose goals may be outside the focus of this post or video.

I was trying to be as specific to bodybuilding as possible, but apparently I was not specific enough.

[BackwoodsGa]

For me its both.

[chodan9]

I don't mean to split hairs: I just remarked that he claims "more weight" is bad, but "greater resistance" is good. Yes, it is clear that he is against bad form. However, this shouldn't be a reason not to be a weightlifter, since weightlifters are equally concerned about form. Do you follow my reasoning?

the guy he was training with has the goal of being a bodybuilder, so the points he made were with the intention of getting the most muscle development out of his training sessions, that's why the focus was as it was.

getting more weight up anyway you can is very different from applying greater resistance to the specific muscle group that you're training.

[JOHN GARGANI]

But in the last year I have grown a bit, physically and emotionally and have discovered its not about how much weight you move, its how the weight you move affects you.
So I have reset my personal goals, I want to build a good looking, symmetrical well proportioned body with good size. I am trying to no longer be concerned with how much weight I move in terms of some arbitrary strength goal.

I'm a little late getting on this thread, buddy, but the above quote by you, to me, shows that you have had a REVELATION!

you get it now!!