Mark Ripptoe is an idiot

[CognitiveShift]

That's not Mark Rippetoe it's Roger Estep...

o. it says mark rippetoe for the picture title for some reason lollll. but still.

[Jasonk282]

That's not Mark Rippetoe it's Roger Estep...

Maybe it's Rips evil twin?

[CognitiveShift]

it kinda looks like it could potentially be him with the hair and beard thing going on.

[Engineer_Guy]

o. it says mark rippetoe for the picture title for some reason lollll. but still.

Nope it's definitely Roger Estep.

Bottom left.

[CognitiveShift]

ahh okay, this is mark though right? or another false pic description?


kinda looks like it could be franco columbu? idk lol

[Engineer_Guy]

ahh okay, this is mark though right? or another false pic description?

I don't think that's him either though IDK who it actually is.

[nerd_power]

ahh okay, this is mark though right? or another false pic description?

Franco Columbo, I believe. I think that picture is just there to illustrate what a deadlift is.

-Andrew

[CognitiveShift]

Franco Columbo, I believe. I think that picture is just there to illustrate what a deadlift is.

-Andrew

ya i just edited my post guessin that and you guys responded lol.

[Toneyy]

Strong OP name to thread name

[all pro]

He didn't claim they don't exist. He said neural adaptations and hypertrophy will always occur together. Which is probably true. I don't see how you can lift weights in any way without creating SOME level of hypertrophy.

He's wrong.....and right. That's the problem. http://physiotherapy.curtin.edu.au/r.../01/neural.cfm

The same thing happened when I questioned him on the difference between Bill Starr's power cleans and His. They're very different but he wouldn't admit it.

[BrotherWolf]

You really need to read the whole argument instead of the last post where Ripp decided to change the rules in the middle of the game.

I already know his stance on this subject, you're an idiot for starting this thread and arguing with someone with a lot more knowledge than you'll ever have

you just don't get it lol

[gomez26]

How do you create neural adaptions without breaking down the muscle at all? That's pretty much what would need to happen in order to prevent hypertrophy.
Just because noticeable mass isn't gained doesn't mean hypertrophy did not occur. Your muscles can undergo myofibrillar hypertrophy without any noticeable mass increase.

of course u can gain strength via neural adaption without hypertrophy. weightlifters do it all the time so they dont end up in the next weightclass.
they tear down the muscle during training, then rebuild it - thats called compensation.
the term hypertrophy is only used for supercompensation (new muscle tissue) & needs a calorie surplus regardless if myofibrillar or otherwise. it will result in overall gain in muscle mass. not eating a surplus prevents hypertrophy.

I don't see how you can lift weights in any way without creating SOME level of hypertrophy.

only if we are talking about pure beginners can the statement can have some valid context. beginners will always have some hypertrophy even if they dont eat a surplus - they will lose some fat while gaining some muscle & keep the same weight. however once the noob gains dry up & if they keep eating maintenance they can gain more strength thru neural adaptions with no further hypertrophy because there is a limit to how lean they can get.

[SumDumGoi]

He's wrong.....and right. That's the problem. http://physiotherapy.curtin.edu.au/r.../01/neural.cfm

The same thing happened when I questioned him on the difference between Bill Starr's power cleans and His. They're very different but he wouldn't admit it.

I would say this sums it up quite nicely. As I said before (or at least in the other forum), muscle mass represents the ceiling for muscular strength. However to completely disregard neurological improvements in strength, especially in beginning lifters is ridiculous.

[gomez26]

just read more of the thread itself, yeah id agree beginners gain more in terms of strength then they would in terms of muscle mass in the first 3 months or so due to coordination & recruitment efficiency, compared to more advanced trainees.
but u would need to be a little more advanced to gain just strength with no muscle gains whatsoever.

[acrawlingchaos]

He didn't claim they don't exist. He said neural adaptations and hypertrophy will always occur together. Which is probably true. I don't see how you can lift weights in any way without creating SOME level of hypertrophy.

My stance is, it is probably true that you can not have one without the other (though I am unaware of any studies pertaining to this). I do believe that you can probably find specific training that would make the the gains from one or the other statistically irrelevant... and for the most part a moot point to argue.

[MikeKK]

I will go ahead and agree with this, I felt my time on SS was a waste compared to other workouts

Getting +40kg in a squat over 2months must be a waste of time, surely. Lol funny how SS works for many people but didn't work for you. Maybe you didn't eat or train hard enough.

[bravo96]

Getting +40kg in a squat over 2months must be a waste of time, surely. Lol funny how SS works for many people but didn't work for you. Maybe you didn't eat or train hard enough.

Or mabey he responds better to other training methods.

[MikeKK]

Or mabey he responds better to other training methods.

I wasn't getting much gains either.. till i started eating properly, above maintenance. My bet would be that he wasnt eating or sleeping right. You hit a plateau fast on this program as its very intensive.

[all pro]

An analogy of what neural adaptation is does not support your claim that you can obtain neural adaptions without any muscular hypertrophy occurring...

Simple question here: How do you create neural adaptions without breaking down the muscle at all? That's pretty much what would need to happen in order to prevent hypertrophy.

As much as I hate SDG and I do because he's a pompous, obnoxious arse, he's right. One way to gain strength without ANY hypertrophy is through dynamic effort work. That's 100% neural adaption and it's done all the time.Obviously the gains will be limited but there will be gains none the less. In fact every single time you change a parameter the first adaption is neural. With most programs size will follow shortly there after unless you're under eating.

[l2evolution]

Op.


. . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . ,.-‘”. . . . . . . . . .``~.,
. . . . . . . .. . . . . .,.-”. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .“-.,
. . . . .. . . . . . ..,/. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ”:,
. . . . . . . .. .,?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .\,
. . . . . . . . . /. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ,}
. . . . . . . . ./. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ,:`^`.}
. . . . . . . ./. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ,:”. . . ./
. . . . . . .?. . . __. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . :`. . . ./
. . . . . . . /__.(. . .“~-,_. . . . . . . . . . . . . . ,:`. . . .. ./
. . . . . . /(_. . ”~,_. . . ..“~,_. . . . . . . . . .,:`. . . . _/
. . . .. .{.._$;_. . .”=,_. . . .“-,_. . . ,.-~-,}, .~”; /. .. .}
. . .. . .((. . .*~_. . . .”=-._. . .“;,,./`. . /” . . . ./. .. ../
. . . .. . .\`~,. . ..“~.,. . . . . . . . . ..`. . .}. . . . . . ../
. . . . . .(. ..`=-,,. . . .`. . . . . . . . . . . ..(. . . ;_,,-”
. . . . . ../.`~,. . ..`-.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..\. . /\
. . . . . . \`~.*-,. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..|,./.....\,__
,,_. . . . . }.>-._\. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .|. . . . . . ..`=~-,
. .. `=~-,_\_. . . `\,. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .\
. . . . . . . . . .`=~-,,.\,. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .\
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . `:,, . . . . . . . . . . . . . `\. . . . . . ..__
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .`=-,. . . . . . . . . .,%`>--==``
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . _\. . . . . ._,-%. . . ..`

[SumDumGoi]

As much as I hate SDG and I do because he's a pompous, obnoxious arse, he's right. One way to gain strength without ANY hypertrophy is through dynamic effort work. That's 100% neural adaption and it's done all the time.Obviously the gains will be limited but there will be gains none the less. In fact every single time you change a parameter the first adaption is neural. With most programs size will follow shortly there after unless you're under eating.

[Kirra]

Strong mental masterbation ITT.

[bassing68]

P90x works for getting overweight people to lose weight and get in shape.

Just like SS works for getting weak people stronger.

Both have their pros and cons...

What is P90x in case my research fails like usual

[PeterGibbons316]

If you want proof, i present to you this:

http://startingstrength.com/resource...ad.php?t=30751

Go ahead and read that nugget. I make my appearance about half way through the thread. We are now currently locked in a debate regarding his belief that all increases in muscular strength are caused through an increase in muscular hypertrophy and that neurological adaptations do not exist, or at least can't be separated from hypertrophy.

He then blindly disregards any evidence that is presented to disprove this fact and states that all increases in muscular strength, even in beginners, is caused by an increase in hypertrophy.

I have basically taken to calling him an F'ing idiot in every post and hope to be banned soon. This man may know how to teach someone how to squat, but it is astonishingly how little knowledge of basic physiology he has.

absolutely incredible!

Yes you can have strength increases due to neural adaptations rather than muscle hypertrophy, but not for an extended period of time - those adaptations begin to plateau very quickly (I'm pretty sure this is discussed in Practical Programming, so Rip isn't a complete idiot on the subject.) In order to continue to see strength gains over an extended period of time there MUST be muscle growth. Just because something CAN happen doesn't mean that is the only thing that DOES happen.

Also, you seem to care more about what Rip says than any of his nuthuggers that I have seen. You are a very angry little man.

[Kirra]

I actually agree with Rip's reply in the context of novice lifters. His statement is of course incorrect in it's absoluteness, but I can't imagine a novice not getting at least SOME hypertrophy out of anything that would cause neural adaptations.

[Kirra]

Also, you seem to care more about what Rip says than any of his nuthuggers that I have seen. You are a very angry little man.

The hilarious thing here is that both of us represent a much more moderate stance when it comes to SS compared to what SDG seems to think. He's like the dudes arguing against IIFYM saying that "you can't let all of your carbs come from ice cream and expect the same results as with brown rice" when in fact no one who actually follows IIFYM would advocate that.

Just like neither you nor I have claimed that SS is a be all end all strength/hypertrophy program.

[Rickyscivic]

Agreed it got me nowhere my lifts werent increasing as fast as i did on my regular program

[rdferguson]

That's not neutral adaptions either...that's holding each man accountable for their job/position and if they can't preform up to task then you fix the problem by replacing them. Just like you fix your form to me more efficient. You body didn't adapt, you were just using improper technique.

I've tossed many a Marine out of my Squat/fireteam simply because they could not perform to USMC standards and in my line of work...people return home in coffins with American flags on them.

Just like your football example...he didn't adapt, he was using improper technique.

I got the impression that SDG wasn't referring to changes in technique here, but to improved motor recruitment patterns. Each muscle fibre is activated by a specific motor neuron, and each motor neuron is part of a greater motor unit. Consider each motor neuron to be one athlete. When the movement occurs, the team plays, but early on the team don't play well together. This doesn't necessarily represent a faulty/inefficient movement pattern. In this context, it represents the movement occurring as it's supposed to, but the team making the movement being poorly attuned to one-another. As the team becomes more alert to one-another and become more adept in their roles, they win more games, which is analogous to the individual motor neurons becoming more coordinated with each other and winning more battles against the bar. The movement hasn't changed, but the team making the movement have gotten better at their job.

[mrbighead]

If you want proof, i present to you this:

http://startingstrength.com/resource...ad.php?t=30751

Go ahead and read that nugget. I make my appearance about half way through the thread. We are now currently locked in a debate regarding his belief that all increases in muscular strength are caused through an increase in muscular hypertrophy and that neurological adaptations do not exist, or at least can't be separated from hypertrophy.

He then blindly disregards any evidence that is presented to disprove this fact and states that all increases in muscular strength, even in beginners, is caused by an increase in hypertrophy.

I have basically taken to calling him an F'ing idiot in every post and hope to be banned soon. This man may know how to teach someone how to squat, but it is astonishingly how little knowledge of basic physiology he has.

absolutely incredible!

Just love yourself for who you are and don't worry about the rest. Enjoy life and be happy.

[qoohhlt]

This is bbding site ,not a court room