Muscle Mass Directly Correlated to Strength

Hanley

>> HEY SKINNY, SCREW YOU!!

The new cool thing in powerlifting seems to be the demonization of muscle.

If you've the audacity to train like a bodybuilder and actually try to get more muscular in the pursuit of strength then you must be some sort of lunatic right?

Because all that matters is frequency and smolov right?

...maybe, if you're ALREADY jacked.

Buf if people ask you "do you even lift bro" when you're in a t-shirt, you're probably not there yet.

Do yourself a favour skinny, accept that putting on muscle will hurt, you'll have DOMS, and you can't gain the moral high ground over people doing 6 reps and above.

But you might just save yourself years of wasted progress if you do.

"Before going any further, I’d just like to point out that training with a focus on gaining mass to dominate at powerlifting is directly supported in the literature.
One study found that in elite level powerlifters, performance in all three lifts was strongly correlated (r=0.8-0.9 for some) to muscle thickness in the prime movers (although bizarrely, it was most strongly correlated to subscapularis thickness in all three lifts, just as an aside).

Another, hot off the presses, found again that one of the strongest predictors of performance in national-level lifters was muscle mass per unit height. Big is strong."

http://www.strengtheory.com/powerlifters-should-train-more-like-bodybuilders/

PS - being a fat-kinda-strong-dude doesn't count either. If you weren't fat, you'd just be weak. Look at the dudes in the pic above. They're all elite level guys. See much fat there? No, you don't, because they're not super heavy weights, and carrying fat that could be muscle into a weight class is just wasted weight.

Gummy Panda

So you're saying don't ignore assistance work?

power pants

who'd have people with muscles and in good shape are stronger than fatties and skinnys?

Gummy Panda

power pants wrote: »

who'd have people with muscles and in good shape are stronger than fatties and skinnys?

Have you ever seen Max chewning on YouTube. That's an example of a person who is strong buy is DYEL

Yer Aul One

I don't understand this point:
"and you can't gain the moral high ground over people doing 6 reps and above."

Alf Veedersane

Yer Aul One wrote: »

I don't understand this point:
"and you can't gain the moral high ground over people doing 6 reps and above."

As in you'll be doing more reps to build muscle so you can no longer claim the moral high ground over people doing more than 6 reps.

If I'm reading it right.

LuckyLloyd

Yer Aul One wrote: »

I don't understand this point:
"and you can't gain the moral high ground over people doing 6 reps and above."

There's an imagined battle somewhere in Hanley's head or a real battle somewhere outside this forum. If we've had people arguing for getting fat and only doing heavy low rep sets / singles as the Tao of strength training recently around here I've missed it anyway.

Yer Aul One

Alf Veedersane wrote: »

As in you'll be doing more reps to build muscle so you can no longer claim the moral high ground over people doing more than 6 reps.

If I'm reading it right.

Gotcha, thanks

LuckyLloyd

That is a great website though, every article I've read from there is very well written with a real clarity of thought. Idiots like me can understand it anyway.

Hanley

power pants wrote: »

who'd have people with muscles and in good shape are stronger than fatties and skinnys?

You'd be surprised.

Gummy Panda wrote: »

So you're saying don't ignore assistance work?

Exactly.

Yer Aul One wrote: »

I don't understand this point:
"and you can't gain the moral high ground over people doing 6 reps and above."

Alf Veedersane wrote: »

As in you'll be doing more reps to build muscle so you can no longer claim the moral high ground over people doing more than 6 reps.

If I'm reading it right.

Alf nailed it.

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

There's an imagined battle somewhere in Hanley's head or a real battle somewhere outside this forum. If we've had people arguing for getting fat and only doing heavy low rep sets / singles as the Tao of strength training recently around here I've missed it anyway.

There's still a lot of people out there on instagram, facebook and forums who have raging hard-ons for starting strength, strong lifts and the likes expecting it to be the answer to their physique and strength goals.

It's an over reaction to the bodybuilding era of the early to mid 00s.

You forget that the people who post here are in the minority, there's a far greater number reading and not contributing. It was addressed to those people.

Alf Veedersane

FWIW, I do think the mindset of "that's a bodybuilder workout...but I want to get strong" does exist among a lot of people that go to gyms and stick to <5 reps.

As if bodybuilders aren't strong.

You hear it in changing rooms and on the floor of commercial gyms - strength and high reps are mutually exclusive.

LuckyLloyd

That's fair enough, I get ya.

I do think advice is generally cycling back to a more balanced perspective from five year's ago where GOMAD + SS was prescribed to all comers irrespective of background or goals.

Tbh, the only general flaw I'd see now on here in terms of advice is forgetting about intensity. Yes diet; yes balance; yes do things you prefer but at some point you have to focus and try as hard as you can during some of your exercising.

whupdedo

[QUOTE=Hanley;94704245

PS - being a fat-kinda-strong-dude doesn't count either. If you weren't fat, you'd just be weak. Look at the dudes in the pic above. They're all elite level guys. See much fat there? No, you don't, because they're not super heavy weights, and carrying fat that could be muscle into a weight class is just wasted weight.[/QUOTE]

So your also saying fat is the same as muscle??? If you're implying fat people are stronger than skinny people, that's kinda what you are saying, or would you like to clarify ?

Hanley

whupdedo wrote: »

So your also saying fat is the same as muscle??? If you're implying fat people are stronger than skinny people, that's kinda what you are saying, or would you like to clarify ?

What?

Fatter people ARE generally stronger in absolute terms than skinny people. Mass moves mass.

whupdedo

Hanley wrote: »

What?

Fatter people ARE generally stronger in absolute terms than skinny people. Mass moves mass.

Exactly my point entirely

Zillah

Hanley wrote: »

What?

Fatter people ARE generally stronger in absolute terms than skinny people. Mass moves mass.

Depends on the fat person. Some fat people that avoid doing exercise suffer serious muscular degeneration as a result.

Hanley

whupdedo wrote: »

Exactly my point entirely

So then how is your point relevant to this thread?

Alf Veedersane

whupdedo wrote: »

Exactly my point entirely

It's not saying fat is the same as muscle though.

Hence the line "carrying fat that could be muscle into a weight class is just wasted weight"

Vet Thrower

So 3 x 10 is in again?

First program I was ever given was Cleans, Squats, and Bench for 3 x 10, 3 times a week, increasing the weight by a small amount once a week.

You were free to do abs and curls and whatever in addition, but it was clear that these were vanity exercises.

I think I was in the best shape of my life doing it. Just a coincidence of course that this was largely in my mid 20s.

power pants

everyone arguing yet agreeing that the op is correct

a new low :pac::pac:

Nervous Wreck

power pants wrote: »

everyone arguing yet agreeing that the op is correct

a new low :pac::pac:

Hanley starts a provocative thread and calls people fat weaklings.

People argue cos fuck Hanley.

Alf Veedersane posts in every thread ever started.

There's nothing new about this low.

Alf Veedersane

Nervous Wreck wrote: »

Alf Veedersane posts in every thread ever started.

Unlike the Irish rugby team, I keep a run going

whupdedo

Hanley wrote: »

So then how is your point relevant to this thread?

Well your obvious omission of including in your post, the fact that fat people have more muscle than skinny people, by reading your post I came to the conclusion that whether skinny or fat, people have the same muscle mass whatever their size.

A study in the states refers to obese kids excelling in weight intensive exercises due to a build up of muscle needed to carry the extra mass around, by saying fat people wouldn't be strong if they were skinny is a non argument

Mellor

Hanley wrote: »

Another, hot off the presses, found again that one of the strongest predictors of performance in national-level lifters was muscle mass per unit height. Big is strong."[/I]

"Short is the new Strong"

TracyWills

Gummy Panda wrote: »

Have you ever seen Max chewning on YouTube. That's an example of a person who is strong buy is DYEL

wow that's so cool.

LuckyLloyd

Vet Thrower wrote: »

So 3 x 10 is in again?

First program I was ever given was Cleans, Squats, and Bench for 3 x 10, 3 times a week, increasing the weight by a small amount once a week.

You were free to do abs and curls and whatever in addition, but it was clear that these were vanity exercises.

I think I was in the best shape of my life doing it. Just a coincidence of course that this was largely in my mid 20s.

I don't think 3 x 10 is cool again. I think it's more a case of people realising their training should be varied and encompass a variety of rep ranges and exercises overtime while keeping in mind that if pulling heavy singles is an end goal you'll need to specifically practice pulling heavy singles in the same way that if looking like you lift is an end goal you'll have to do some training and dieting to that end.

Myopia is the real enemy on this stuff imo.

Redmen Rafalution

This thread has me a little confused. I am two weeks into Starting Strength. Is it not a good programme?

Should I add extra stuff into the programme? I have been inactive for about three years now but prior to that I was pretty fit and active. I am doing Starting Strength as a way of getting back up to speed.

What are the weaknesses in the programme that I should look to address? Thanks for any advice and apologies if this is the wrong thread.

LuckyLloyd

Redmen Rafalution wrote: »

This thread has me a little confused. I am two weeks into Starting Strength. Is it not a good programme?

Should I add extra stuff into the programme? I have been inactive for about three years now but prior to that I was pretty fit and active. I am doing Starting Strength as a way of getting back up to speed.

What are the weaknesses in the programme that I should look to address? Thanks for any advice and apologies if this is the wrong thread.

It is a good programme imo. It will engrain a discipline in following a training cycle through to a conclusion and you'll maximise linear strength gains on the compound lifts if you stick at it and establish a good base for future weight training endeavours.

Where the program falls down and is criticised is:

- dietary advice
- lack of conditioning / assistance

Basically, stick to Starting Strength until you have reset all of the lifts a couple of times but don't be afraid of throwing in some curls / conditioning if you want and think about not using the programme as an excuse to eat all in sight.

When you get to that point, don't be afraid of moving onto an intermediate program that has higher rep assistance work and AMRAP compound sets.

But it is a great place to start because it's simple and effective and provides a crucial purpose for each trip to the gym.

Redmen Rafalution

Thanks for the help there LuckyLloyd. Good to get the clarification!

Probably a stupid question but what do you mean by ''reset all the lifts''?

LuckyLloyd

Redmen Rafalution wrote: »

Thanks for the help there LuckyLloyd. Good to get the clarification!

Probably a stupid question but what do you mean by ''reset all the lifts''?

So, one your first workout on Starting Strength you will establish a starting weight - something you can get a set of five on a lift for with perfect or very good form (or you could just start with the bar). From there, every trip to the gym you'll add weight to the bar for each lift. So session two for each lift might look like:

Squat 3 x 5 @40kgs
Press 3 x 5 @22.5kgs
Deadlift 3 x 5 @60kgs
Bench 3 x 5 @35kgs

And session three:

Squat 3 x 5 @45kgs
Press 3 x 5 @25kgs
Deadlift 3 x 5 @65kgs
Bench 3 x 5 @37.5kgs

Well you'll do this session to session until eventually you reach a point where you can't do three sets of five at the planned weight on one of the lifts. No panic, maybe you were tired / underfed / overstressed on the day that was in it. And you go down and try it again next session but fail to make it again. Well, that's when you reset. Take 15% off the weight and go down next time and get your 3 x 5 done and continue incrementing and you'll find that you blast past the weight you previously failed.

You'll hit a wall on the press first, and probably the Deadlift last. And so long as you're making progress on one or two of the lifts you should keep at SS. Eventually you'll reach a point where you've had to reset all lifts a couple of times and need to change to an intermediate program. How long will it take to get there? It could take 6 months, it could take a year depending on you and your consistency and how you manage recovery outside the gym. But if you ride out the program to that endpoint you'll have established a decent base of strength to work from.

Zombienosh

I think the buzz word these days is Powerbuilding.

EmcD123

Zombienosh wrote: »

I think the buzz word these days is Powerbuilding.

whats powerbuilding?ive never actually heard that word before

Lago

Tell this to 90% of GAA managers and they'd spit in your face, tell you "I did boxing in my youth etc....." and then bring their team on an extreme weight loss exercise program for the preseason.

Mellor

EmcD123 wrote: »

whats powerbuilding?ive never actually heard that word before

POWERlifting + bodyBUILDING


They originally wanted to call it BodyLifting, but it was giving people the wrong impression.

Hanley

Where are we at in this thread now?

We're agreeing stronglifts is ok with some smart assistance work albeit not perfect, 3x10 is great, and fat people are stronger than skinny people?

...sounds like all is well wit the world!