I want to ask here and not on fit because fit lacks scientific rigour and is childish advice.
According to actual doctors and proffesionals,and not just the lifters,which method is optimal for getting power and size?
high reps or low reps?
Furthermore,is there any medical info regarding rest days,number of sets so on?
Any journal or such?
I believe if you torrent Practical Programming by Ripp, he has citations in their for where he gets his reasoning. The opinion tends to be that lower reps but high intensity (sets of 1-3 reps but at a high weight) with sufficient rests produces the best results for strength training while higher reps and lower intensity (sets of 10+ at low weight) is best for endurance and conditioning. Size is a by-product of muscle mass, which comes with strength, and weight gain from diet. A more temporary solution to size is hypertrophy from doing sets of 7-9 reps at a medium-low weight for several sets.
does hypertrophy makes you weak or can you be big AND strong?
I mean normal strong,my main concern is having a buff appearance for work related reasons.
Since we're Veeky Forums, this guy is a retired engineer, and he maintains a free page for anybody to use to calculate exactly what they should be lifting and doing: scoobysworkshop.com
There are also professional lifters around with tons of advice like Dorian Yates but remember he lifted for aesthetics/size, and you want 'power' which is different. A power lifter is a fat guy with a barrel chest and gigantic arms because they have to intake so much food when lifting insane levels of weight. Aesthetics guys are all about targeting specific muscles, Dorian Yates will go all through this if you look any of his youtube videos up he was a big fan of holding weights, and negative reps to build size (so is scooby). For example the way I progressed in pullups is I would do them until I got stuck half way through the 3rd or 4th pullup, then just held that position for as long as I could, and slowly let myself down. By the next week I could do 5 or 6 before getting stuck. It works.
i always thought scooby was a meme and not a real person TBQH
Same here actually, I only watched his vids and never looked at his actual site but he wrote an awesome web app for free, with zero advertising or shilled products to calculate nutrition and measure gains it's pretty awesome.
Something else I do is I follow a little of the Rock's nutrition advice, such as taking delayed protein at night (Casein). While you sleep your muscles want protein and I found once I started taking this before sleeping I woke up never feeling sore, even after maxing out reps.
Anyway Scooby is who you want to listen to when you begin, then you need advice from professional competitor bodybuilders since this is what they do all day like Dorian Yates, who also has a gym you can go to so your next vacation, go to his gym for 2 weeks and hire somebody there to train you and give advice to take home for the rest of the year.
Hypertrophy gives you the so-called "pump". You can be strong and get the pump but the converse may not be true. However, it's strength-training that makes you strong, not just lifting weights here and there. You can get strong which will make you big if you have a routine to follow (with a decent diet too).
Scooby once came to Veeky Forums to try to help them out but you can imagine how that went. He was legitimately a good fellow who only wanted to share his tips with the world and has a heart of gold.
This is a decent treatment of neuromuscular development, complete with citations from peer-reviewed articles.
bayesianbodybuilding.com
Also check the book Practice Programming for Strength Training.
Also pretty sure the Veeky Forums sticky cites peer-reviewed articles as well or at least it did a couple years ago.
These are all variations on an old technique:
en.wikipedia.org
To be quite honest, Veeky Forums's advice is correct.
The body contains many systems that adapt in response to stimulus. The stronger the stimulus, the stronger the adaptation. The type of training changes the type of adaptation. Lifting about 90% as heavy as you can manage improves your strength.
So the reason we do low reps is simple. Low reps is simply the side effect of choosing to lift heavy.
>For example the way I progressed in pullups is I would do them until I got stuck half way through the 3rd or 4th pullup, then just held that position for as long as I could, and slowly let myself down. By the next week I could do 5 or 6 before getting stuck. It works.
Seconding this, negatives worked for me also.
The thing to realize OP is that you can try these methods practically for free, and when you do, you will find that they actually do work. When I first started, 135 pounds on my shoulders felt like an incredible crushing weight. Now 225 pounds is a warmup weight and feels like next to nothing. I don't need a high impact journal to tell me that I got stronger.
There's also StrongMan organizations, every city has them. That's how Alister Overeem became Ubereem by working out with those guys throwing gigantic tires around and dead lifting 300kg. He also used TRT/juice of course youtu.be
Thanks for the advice guys
>getting power and size?
what exactly do you mean? do you want to be powerlifter? or a strongman? or maybe even a gymnast? each of them has power and size
A rockclimber actually
General strength training is always good to default to. I'd probably suspect that a strength routine with a focus on shoulder, backs, and arms would benefit you most. Don't forget though, the heavier you become from gaining muscle, the harder it is to climb so definitely lower the volume on squats.
Also;can ANYone ever have so much natural Testosterone it duplicates the effects of test-boosting supplements,or even anabolic steroids?
Steroids.
no and it's not close
Sorry didn't read your post fully, should have answered it like this
>duplicates the effects of test-boosting supplements
Legal test boosting supplements are just a way of wasting your money. Anything effective is banned, because here in the free world using things that can improve your fitness, quality of life, etc. are socially reprehensible, only things like painkillers and alcohol are OK. You can spend a bunch of money on supplements that do nothing while pretending to be effective, nothing wrong with that.
>anabolic steroids?
no and it's not close
>Don't forget though, the heavier you become from gaining muscle, the harder it is to climb so definitely lower the volume on squats.
>Don't get too heavy
Stop. Stop telling people this. You can do that math. You can calculate your % increase in strength, and your % increase in weight. If your % increase in strength ≥ your % increase in weight, then climbing will not be harder. Also, climbing requires leg strength as well as upper-body.
IF strength gains > weight gains, you will use a lower % of you overall strength to move your body weight every time you apply force.
You CAN get "too heavy" but you have to define that. Functionally, "too heavy" means your weight gain as a % of you starting weight is proportionately larger than your strength gain as a % of your starting strength. This pretty much only happens if you get too fat. Strength gained by muscle tends to out-pace weight gained by muscle proportionate to you starting stats.
The body adapts for survival. If you lift heavy for one rep, your body will learn that it must adapt to heavy weight.
If you run for 24 miles, your body will learn to adapt to run 24 miles. Look at marathon runner bodies, do their muscles look powerful with large size?
“Power” is based on a definition. Power in physics is amount of energy transferred per unit time. Considering long distance runners burn more calories than a powerlifter does in the same amount of time, according to physics the long distance runner is more powerful.
“Size” is a different definition. After running a long time, the muscles still get sore. The muscles are adapting but they do not gain much size that the human eye can see. However, the muscle is more dense, probably. The size question answer from me is I dont know
Strength Training is not for faggots though
Strength is defined as the ability to produce force against an external resistance. "Power" is the speed of neuromuscular recruitment.
The former can be increased with training. The latter cannot as it has a genetically determined neurological component that cannot be improved.
>does hypertrophy makes you weak or can you be big AND strong?
>le big but weak bodybuilder
This meme has to die.
First let's look at the fucking scientific facts, then move to anecdotal evidence:
1. The structural stability of any body is parametrised by cross-sectional area, Young modulus and for other stresses such as bending, moment of inertia (so geometry of cross sectional area plays a role)
2. Young modulus of muscle mass is almost suredly only affected by CNS, that is, how strong the electrical impusle ordering it to contract is, and how well or efficiently it is transmitted.
3. geometry in this case is irrelevant as you cannot change it through training, also most muscles work with strictly axially aligned loads
4. Cross sectional area is increased by hypertrophy
5. Some muscle fibers are best stimulated by fast, explosive contractions
So, what's the anecdotal evidence?
1. Some scrawny people can have good strength (basically they increased young modulus trough strength training)
2. Many powerlifters despite not training for hypertrophy are pretty buff
3. Strength guys are usually fucking massive (and tall, i'd say 6'1'' is the average height at WSM championships)
4. Many bodybuilders despite training for mass gains move nevertheless heavy loads
5. There's a good overlap between bodybuilding and powerlifting/strongman and ther's always been (Magnusson, Lou Ferrigno et al).
The truth: you can maximize only one of the 2 parameters and you will get some mass and some strength (CNS training will yield more strength compared to weight gain, while hypertrophy training will yield more muscle mass), but you cannot get one without the other. Moreover, for optimal gains you should be aiming to maximize both since this is not a Pareto optimality problem.
TL;DR: if we use continuum mechanics, we can see that for optimal strength gain, hypertrophy is important. Also, strength training will give you some hypertrophy. Train both for maximum strength gain.
yes it is, faggots are humans just like you
can I naturally have the same T that a banned effective boosters would give another man?
There has never and probably never will be any reliable study about the part of excersise that involves aesthetics. And here's why:
1)Serious doctors are really not concerned by aesthetics at all, you could be in perfect health to a physician but look like shit.
2)Things aimed at the general public will always be full of shit because most people are very insecure about this so that means that it's a fucking goldmine for con artists so you will never know which one is right.
3)That only leaves one other group that could share their knowledge: doctors related to the world of professional athletism. This in theory would be a good place to learn how your body works, if it wasnt for the simple fact that every single professional athlete uses steroids and other secret advantages that they cant confess, so their experience will always be useless to the general public.
This refers of course only to in depth specific questions about how the body work. Everyone agrees on the general idea (lift heavy lose weight and youll look nice).
but because of the reasons i said it is almost impossible to have concrete legit 100% reliable scientifical knowledge about lifting
READ THE FUCKING STICKY
>5x5 is optimal for power and size
That is pretty much all you need to know. Also work out 3 to 4 times a week.
Most rock climbers aren’t big guys, they’re usually just pretty lean. Excess muscle mass just means more weight to haul up a wall.
The problem for the whole fitness stuff is that there is no exact scientific proof what's the best lifting method is. But in general: higher reps are better for general muscle growth, which doesn't mean that you don't grow no muscles if you train with low reps and high weight, just less muscle.
According to a long time study (I post the source later, don't worry, we are on Veeky Forums, the thread will be here until tomorrow at least) the optimal muscle grow is achieved through hitting the same muscle group 2 times a week.
Or using steroids and do absolutely nothing and get two time the size from an natural with perfect nutrition and training regime (here I have the study because that discussion always starts):
nejm.org
>you have to define that
In terms of rock climbing, "too heavy" means you can't obtain secure support on a rock face.