how do i build and define instead of lookin overly juiced?

thelookout

Hi guys,

Im looking at doing a 5 day workout routine working different parts of the body on different days. I want to put on muscle but also have good definition so i dont look overly "ballooned" or juiced like a body builder.
Can you give me advice please? Should i be lifting heavier weights with less reps?

Transform

current program? Height/weight? Diet?

drdeadlift

The juiced look wont just happen on its own.

Mellor

You aren't going to end up looking like a body builder by accident.

Brian?

I'd worry about it when it happens.

Eat big and lift big for now, see where that gets you.

Thud

I'm going to take up tennis, but i don't want to be too good at it, maybe just win Wimbeldon or something like that but not a Grand Slam......anyone know any good tennis programmes i can do?

arse..biscuits

Thud wrote: »

I'm going to take up tennis, but i don't want to be too good at it, maybe just win Wimbeldon or something like that but not a Grand Slam......anyone know any good tennis programmes i can do?

What is your current weight, height, diet?

cabla

If you take 50grams of protein a day you're guaranteed to be Mr.Olympia 2014. It's not for me....

But on a serious note it is extremely hard to get into the "bodybuilder" look. Post you weight, height and diet up for the best advice. Also put up what you're currently doing in the gym.

Bruce7

thelookout wrote: »

Hi guys,

Im looking at doing a 5 day workout routine working different parts of the body on different days. I want to put on muscle but also have good definition so i dont look overly "ballooned" or juiced like a body builder.
Can you give me advice please? Should i be lifting heavier weights with less reps?

Find some sportsmen that have the type of physique you are looking for. There's likely to be a wide variety of sports that fit the bill - from surfing to triathlon to the pole vault. Choose one that you are likely to enjoy and be reasonably good at, that you can afford to do and that you can get to regularly, then take it up. Keep doing it until you look the way you want.

J-Fit

Thud wrote: »

maybe just win Wimbeldon or something like that but not a Grand Slam

Not to be pedantic but if you won Wimbledon, you would have won a Grand Slam.

Thud

J-Fit wrote: »

Not to be pedantic but if you won Wimbledon, you would have won a Grand Slam.

you sure? i don't know much about tennis but was under the impression it was this:

"The tennis Grand Slam is a cumulative achievement, winning all four major championships in a single year "

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grand_Slam_(tennis)

J-Fit

Thud wrote: »

you sure? i don't know much about tennis but was under the impression it was this:

"The tennis Grand Slam is a cumulative achievement, winning all four major championships in a single year "

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grand_Slam_(tennis)

Ah maybe I'm wrong, I don't know. It seems to me that they always talked about the individual "majors" as grand slams which weren't to be confused with doing a 6 Nations Grand Slam, i.e. beat Eng, Sco, Wal, Fra, Ita. Possibly I'm confused.

rubadub

Bruce7 wrote: »

Find some sportsmen that have the type of physique you are looking for..... Keep doing it until you look the way you want.

In many cases these athletes will get their physique in the weights room, rather than on the pitch or on a bike or whatever. Like a built sprinter did not get like that from running for 10 seconds.

e.g.
http://www.zone5endurance.com/?p=469

In No Limits, The Will To Succeed, Michael Phelps credits weight training with improving his performance between 2004 and 2008:

The work I was putting in jumped to a new level. Everything I accomplished in the pool leading up to and through [the 2004 Olympics in] Athens had been done without my doing any serious weightlifting…After 2005, both of us understood the time had come…[M]y legs needed to get much stronger…I went from having never lifted so much as a barbell in my life to grueling workouts in the weight room three days a week…Eight Olympic medals, six gold, and, when I started doing the box squat at Michigan, one of the most basic of strength building exercises for the legs, I was lucky to be able to max out one rep at 300 pounds. I worked up to twenty.

I can't find a before & after pic, he is not huge or anything but some people like that look. I have seen videos of Lance Armstrong doing weights too.

By all means take up a sport if it helps you continue training, but if an actor wanted to play an athlete they might just hit the weights an not do much of the actual sport skill training, unless needed for a scene.

I mess about on gymnastic rings which I like, there are of course some sports where the activity is good resistance training.

Mellor wrote: »

You aren't going to end up looking like a body builder by accident.

And if they ever did get too big they can just stop training and the muscle goes away. I think some people are under the impression that once its built it stays there.

J-Fit

rubadub wrote: »

In many cases these athletes will get their physique in the weights room, rather than on the pitch or on a bike or whatever. Like a built sprinter did not get like that from running for 10 seconds.

e.g.
http://www.zone5endurance.com/?p=469


By all means take up a sport if it helps you continue training, but if an actor wanted to play an athlete they might just hit the weights an not do much of the actual sport skill training, unless needed for a scene.

I mess about on gymnastic rings which I like.

EDIT: I should add that in practice it probably wouldn't come close to that but I still don't buy it.


And if they ever did get too big they can just stop training and the muscle goes away. I think some people are under the impression that once its built it stays there.

That is hilarious about Phelps! 300 x 20 on a box squat equates to a 1RM of around 290kg! What a horsesh1tter.

cc87

J-Fit wrote: »

That is hilarious about Phelps! 300 x 20 on a box squat equates to a 1RM of around 290kg! What a horsesh1tter.

Pounds not kilograms

J-Fit

cc87 wrote: »

Pounds not kilograms

Yeah I know that.

J-Fit

Bloody editing tool is shot.

I should add that it probably wouldn't actually come to 290 in practice but I still don't buy it.

cc87

J-Fit wrote: »

Bloody editing tool is shot.

I should add that it probably wouldn't actually come to 290 in practice but I still don't buy it.

Its about 130 kg whats so hard to believe about that?

One of the top olympic athletes training hard

I doubt his training would include much reps at or near max weight anyway

Da Za

J-Fit wrote: »

That is hilarious about Phelps! 300 x 20 on a box squat equates to a 1RM of around 290kg! What a horsesh1tter.

When would 300lbs x 20 ever equate to a 290kg max?

Max reps at a weight will never correlate to a certain max, too many variables

J-Fit

cc87 wrote: »

Its about 130 kg whats so hard to believe about that?

One of the top olympic athletes training hard

My God man, I know that! Find a 1RM calculator and do the maths again!

J-Fit

Da Za wrote: »

When would 300lbs x 20 ever equate to a 290kg max?

Max reps at a weight will never correlate to a certain max, too many variables

They absolutely do correlate. The further they get from 1, the lower the correlation. Like I added, 300lbs for 20 punched into a max calculator comes out at 290kg when in practice that would probably not come anywhere near. It's still more than I believe Phelps would ever squat. Just my opinion and I am absolutely sticking to it!

EDIT: See below

Reps CoEfficient
1 1.00
2 .943
3 .906
4 .881
5 .856
6 .831
7 .807
8 .786
9 .765
10 .744
11 .723
12 .703
13 .688
14 .675
15 .662
16 .650
17 .638
18 .627
19 .616
20 .606

cc87

J-Fit wrote: »

My God man, I know that! Find a 1RM calculator and do the maths again!

Im saying 130kg x 20 reps.

I dont see the difficulty.

Also, 290 is way too high an estimate i think

J-Fit

cc87 wrote: »

Im saying 130kg x 20 reps.

I dont see the difficulty.

Also, 290 is way too high an estimate i think

It's not too high an estimate based on the tools we have to do the estimating.

WeeBushy

1. He's the greatest olympian of all time, I wouldn't put anything past him tbh.

2. Why would he lie about his squat? He's a swimmer, gym numbers mean nothing to him.

Bruce7

rubadub wrote: »

In many cases these athletes will get their physique in the weights room, rather than on the pitch or on a bike or whatever. Like a built sprinter did not get like that from running for 10 seconds.

By all means take up a sport if it helps you continue training, but if an actor wanted to play an athlete they might just hit the weights an not do much of the actual sport skill training, unless needed for a scene. /QUOTE]

I was aiming for simplicity. If you take up a sport and are reasonably good at it, and keep it up, you'll naturally start to want to get better, and improve your diet, and find out about the training that people are doing who are a level above you, and so on. In a lot of cases, but not all, this will involve lifting weights, but with a completely different mindset to the OP's.

The key thing is finding something you like and will keep doing and trying to get better at, not the OP's approach of looking at a sport they don't like and deciding that they want to achieve some of the results from it.

Just my opinion.

rubadub

J-Fit wrote: »

Like I added, 300lbs for 20 punched into a max calculator

Many of these calculators do not go beyond 15 reps, and can throw out odd figures once past 12 or so.

Put in 300lb for 20 reps and it throws out 2 figures for estimated 1RM, based on different formulas 636 & 499, 288kg vs 226kg

http://www.naturalphysiques.com/18/one-rep-max-calculator

He could also be taking time between them, like this '20 reps of your 10RM' business.

J-Fit

Yes that's what I'm saying but someone correctly pointed out that the more reps performed, the more variables involved so the prediction is less accurate.

http://www.timinvermont.com/fitness/orm.htm

J-Fit

rubadub wrote: »

Many of these calculators do not go beyond 15 reps, and can throw out odd figures once past 12 or so.

Put in 300lb for 20 reps and it throws out 2 figures for estimated 1RM, based on different formulas 636 & 499, 288kg vs 226kg

http://www.naturalphysiques.com/18/one-rep-max-calculator

Yeah I accept that higher reps means less accuracy. What about this study though?

http://www.mirallas.org/Esport/Mayhew1RM.pdf

Shows high correlations between high reps and 1rm if I'm reading correctly, which admittedly I didn't think would be the case.

J-Fit

Apologies to the OP, totally derailed the thread.

COH

140x20 in no way equates to a 290kg 1RM... Those calculators are meaningless for high reps

J-Fit

Yes but the point is that you could still conservatively estimate a 1RM based on an amount of weight lifted and it is still above what I think Phelps would be capable of. That was my original point.

nice_guy80

one of the greatest non-threads ever

just hope the OP doesn't get too much of a 'juiced' look

COH

nice_guy80 wrote: »

one of the greatest non-threads ever

just hope the OP doesn't get too much of a 'juiced' look

My fingers got totally f*cking JACKED just from posting in it

J-Fit

nice_guy80 wrote: »

one of the greatest non-threads ever

just hope the OP doesn't get too much of a 'juiced' look

Jaysus, will you go back to the GAA forum and help the poor souls there with their wrist strength! At least try to be constructive!

Liam90

thelookout wrote: »

Hi guys,

Im looking at doing a 5 day workout routine working different parts of the body on different days. I want to put on muscle but also have good definition so i dont look overly "ballooned" or juiced like a body builder.
Can you give me advice please? Should i be lifting heavier weights with less reps?

lol, is this real life?

rubadub

J-Fit wrote: »

Like I added, 300lbs for 20 punched into a max calculator comes out at 290kg

You can test out which formula suits you best, that's what I did for higher reps. If you use your own figures for your own squats I imagine this formula will predict and overly high 1RM for you. It is predicting the 1RM to be ~2.1 times the 20rep max.

In my log I see I did x20 96kg deadlifts once, 2.13times that is 204kg, no way I could have lifted that.

In the linked study it went to 16 reps on the graphs. Once you get higher it gets into endurance and I would expect people who train for endurance would be better, i.e. have a lower actual 1RM than the predicted one at high reps, than say a powerlifter who might rarely train at 20+reps. I did 32 dips once & 20 chins, I bet that would give a ridiculous prediction in the calculator of added weight to dip with. If you argue "dips & chins are different' then it would also show the formula might need to change depending on exercise.

thelookout

thanks for ruining my post losers

Hanley

Liam90 wrote: »

lol, is this real life?

This is worse than the dude complaining about the company giving their employees time off work to exercise, still paying them, and giving them free gym membership.

And FTR, I've done 140kg x20 beltless, not a hope was I ever getting close to 290kg under the same conditions.

You can say there's correlation for 20 reps, there is, but it's SO f*cking loose it doesn't matter. It's like saying the number of sunny days in a row correlates to the chance of rain. It kinda does, but it doesn't effect it to any meaningful extent.

COH

Hanley wrote: »

It's like saying the number of sunny days in a row correlates to the chance of rain. It kinda does, but it doesn't effect it to any meaningful extent.

Beautiful use of imagery and/or feelings..

OP are you trying to train to look Brad-Pitt by any chance?

Brian?

Right so, can we get back on topic and leave the 1RM discussion for another thread?

Darkest Horse

Hanley wrote: »

Liam90 wrote: »

lol, is this real life?

This is worse than the dude complaining about the company giving their employees time off work to exercise, still paying them, and giving them free gym membership.

And FTR, I've done 140kg x20 beltless, not a hope was I ever getting close to 290kg under the same conditions.

You can say there's correlation for 20 reps, there is, but it's SO f*cking loose it doesn't matter. It's like saying the number of sunny days in a row correlates to the chance of rain. It kinda does, but it doesn't effect it to any meaningful extent.

I think all of this was established before you arrived to save the day.

Hanley

Darkest Horse wrote: »

I think all of this was established before you arrived to save the day.

I think this is a discussion forum. Could be wrong tho.

It is the internet after all.

Hanley

briankeating wrote: »

Right so, can we get back on topic and leave the 1RM discussion for another thread?

What's the topic? Not wanting to get too big?

OP, don't worry about it. Never gonna happen. If you don't want to look like you're on drugs, don't take drugs.

Thud

thelookout wrote: »

thanks for ruining my post losers

Apologies, give us a little more background info on you and we will be more helpful.

Weight, height, age and what you are currently doing in gym is usually a good start.

Getting big usually takes years of hard work and dedication (much as getting good at any sport does) so suggesting it might happen by accident set the thread off in the wrong direction

Hanley

Thud wrote: »

Apologies, give us a little more background info on you and we will be more helpful.

Weight, height, age and what you are currently doing in gym is usually a good start.

Getting big usually takes years of hard work and dedication (much as getting good at any sport does) so suggesting it might happen by accident set the thread off in the wrong direction

I bet this dude's name starts with "C" and ends with "larence" and is a totally legitimate concern!

Michael 09

I for one have found this thread to be very entertaining. As soon as I read "I don't want to get too big" I just waited for peoples heads to explode as they type replies - brilliant.