I do that "useless curling" and can climb a rope. omg wtffff >:[[[
Just because you do something doesn't mean there was a cause and effect. Maybe you can still do something in spite of the way you trained, not because of it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fulmen
As far as jobs go and not hobbies that involve a form of climbing, I've always used curling movements for objects such as buckets, bags, bales, etc. and have never had to do a chin-up like movement ever.
I will have to disagree here. I'll go out on a limb and say you probably never once picked up a bucket, bag, bale, or whatever else it was while standing straight up or sitting with your back straight, moving your arms only at the elbows and keeping them tucked in. On the other hand, I would venture to guess that you probably did pick up those things using some other muscle also, say, your back?
* Every movement you do will involve multiple muscles so it's stupid to think "isolation" work alone is superior
* Every movement you do will also have weak links that can be improved by doing "isolation" work, so it's equally stupid to assume "movement based training" alone is superior
Turns out that there's a difference in general and specific training modalities and ignoring either one is short-sighted?
__________________
Articles | Blog | Pirate my book. "Yeah, but you did your post grad thesis on trolling, so you don't count."
-JP, endorsing how awesome I am
* Every movement you do will involve multiple muscles so it's stupid to think "isolation" work alone is superior
* Every movement you do will also have weak links that can be improved by doing "isolation" work, so it's equally stupid to assume "movement based training" alone is superior
Turns out that there's a difference in general and specific training modalities and ignoring either one is short-sighted?
Bit it is fun to watch the 'tards argue over this.
__________________
"A government big enough to give you everything you want is a government big enough to take from you everything you have."
Valid point. I still think that for most, isolation should be used to supplement the movement based ones, as you said PMDL, and not vice versa. But you make a good point.
Turns out that there's a difference in general and specific training modalities and ignoring either one is short-sighted?
I agree, hence me saying "...I do squats, deadlifts, pull-ups, et cetera. You can't beat the basics...", "...Just keep it simple; do the basics...", "...Bench, deads, squats, pull-ups, etc should be in a routine..." or "...I believe arms grow better from isolation movements while supplemented with the compound lifts..."
I know you read those lines, PMan; that's for everyone else who thinks I'm making it an either-or situation.
PS Thanks for directing me to UD a while back.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jean-Paul
Sooo, does that mean that you also prefer leg curls and extensions for leg mass over squats following your logic?
lawl
To use my logic, reread where I stated numerous times to just "do the basics". Since it's clearly hard to understand what a "basic" exercise is, I'll give you a freebie.
Since you're on the subject of legs, I would do the "basic" exercise for quads and do squats. I consider the basics for hamstrings as stiff-legged deadlifts, but sometimes I get lazy and do leg curls anway. (OMF kill me nao :<<).
The only problem arises is when I consider the basic exercise for biceps is curling; I mean, who the hell knew people curled to get bigger biceps?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Half Full
On the other hand, I would venture to guess that you probably did pick up those things using some other muscle also, say, your back?
Good point, but the main movement was the at the elbows-just like in curling. It'd be curling with imperfect form.
If you want to work on your ego, and maybe a little non-functional hypertrophy, go ahead and blast out those bicep curls.
If you want strength, functional hypertrophy, well rounded and proportional gains (strength and size) do chin ups.
When your body weight isn't enough to trigger adaptation you want, throw on that weight belt and start hanging plates from your waist.
Curl jockeys are always going to exist. That pumpe after cranking out a tough set of curls is very pleasurable to the ego, for that reason they idea of them being a superior exercise will exist.
If you insist on doing curls, I recommend doing straight (not EZ!) barbell curls and focusing on lifting with the outer part of your palms (pinky side). This elicits maximal bicep contraction.
You always hear people saying things like: "Yeah bro you gotta keep your body guessing," or "I always do that same routine, I just switch up the exercises to keep my muscles confused." I never understood that.
As with much Bro Logic, I think this is a case of a legitimate training principle that has been taken out of context, misunderstood, and misapplied.
As a couple of people have noted, you will hit plateaus and see stalled progress in any lift. Further, the longer you train, the slower your overall progress on a given lift, so a newbie will see poundages increase on a given lift from workout to workout, an intermediate lifter will see gains from week to week, and an advanced lifter will only see gains over a period of months. (Hence periodization, in all its many forms.)
If you look at the programs of competitive oly lifters and powerlifters, most do not simply hammer away at their competition lifts week after week. They rotate through various lifts to train the movement patterns of their competition lifts. They train the actual competition lifts less frequently when they are further out from a competition date, and more frequently as they approach a competition. For an oly lifter, this might mean rotating through lifts like pulls from the floor, hang cleans and snatches, cleans and snatches from blocks, rack jerks, etc, and for a powerlifter things like box squats, good mornings, board presses, floor presses, etc.
The idea is to continue making gains in physiological adaptations and neural efficiency, and avoid plateaus. Now, it's important to note that this is not the ONLY way. Some protocols call for lifters to train their competition lifts throughout the training cycle, with much less emphasis on assistance lifts; in these programs, volume and intensity are constantly manipulated to keep the adaptations coming.
So, do you need to change your exercises every three weeks to "confuse" your muscles? First of all, I wouldn't phrase it like that -- it's about keeping your CNS fresh, not confusing your muscles -- but more importantly, I think the answer is, "It depends." When progress stalls, you need to change something -- usually, set/rep combinations are the first thing manipulate. If you are an intermediate/advanced lifter, then it may be appropriate to rotate through a selection of different exercises in a planned way in order to keep progressing. But until you stop making progress from week to week on the big lifts, don't worry about it.
If you look at the programs of competitive oly lifters and powerlifters, most do not simply hammer away at their competition lifts week after week. They rotate through various lifts to train the movement patterns of their competition lifts. They train the actual competition lifts less frequently when they are further out from a competition date, and more frequently as they approach a competition. For an oly lifter, this might mean rotating through lifts like pulls from the floor, hang cleans and snatches, cleans and snatches from blocks, rack jerks, etc, and for a powerlifter things like box squats, good mornings, board presses, floor presses, etc.
This has become something of a brain-bug with the explosion of Westside's popularity, but it's really not true.
The majority of competitive OLers and PLers in the world don't actually do that.
__________________
Articles | Blog | Pirate my book. "Yeah, but you did your post grad thesis on trolling, so you don't count."
-JP, endorsing how awesome I am
all this makes me wonder why so many people care so much about what exercises other people do. do what you like, feels good, looks good or does what you want it do for your chosen sport and stfu!
Regarding the original question of muscle confusion, I think there is something to this. I know people who run the same 5-mile loop every day at the same speed. They push themselves very hard but don't get any faster, and can't understand why. It's because that's all their body knows how to do. But when they start mixing things up, doing intervals, hills, long distances, & tempos, they improve.
For me, as an avid triathlete and mountain bike racer I concentrated on the endurance workouts. I did strength training, which consisted of going through the machine circuit at the gym. I would work very hard, using the max weight that I could do 8-12 reps to failure, going through the circuit 3 times, and 4 times for certain body parts. However, even though I was working out so hard I wasn't getting stronger. I wasn't able to increase the weight over time. That's what got me into lifting free weights -- the realization that what I was doing wasn't providing the improvements I wanted, similar to the folks I knew who just ran that same 5-mile loop as hard as they could every day.
So, I do think that it is good to change workout routines periodically, either as part of a scheduled number of workouts (like NROL), or as part of a yearly periodization cycle, or whenever you hit a plateau.
Regarding the original question of muscle confusion, I think there is something to this. I know people who run the same 5-mile loop every day at the same speed. They push themselves very hard but don't get any faster, and can't understand why. It's because that's all their body knows how to do. But when they start mixing things up, doing intervals, hills, long distances, & tempos, they improve.
What you're referencing is the need for progression, not muscle confusion. And, in my opinion, progression trumps variety.
What you're referencing is the need for progression, not muscle confusion. And, in my opinion, progression trumps variety.
I'm not sure I understand the difference. I think of progression as doing "more". In the case of running, it is more distance or a faster pace. These people are already running the fastest pace they can for that distance. Pushing themselves to run a faster pace results in no improvement.
I think it boils down to stressing your muscles and cardiovascular system. Once your body adapts to a particular stress the improvements plateau. To continue improving you need to cause additional stress, and this can be done by either progression (more weight, more speed, more reps, longer distance, etc.) or by variety (new exercises or types of workouts).
Well, I'm not all that versed in the cardio aspects. But, in terms of weight lifting progression means adding more weight, more sets, less rest time, etc. with the intent of creating overload. Variety is simply changing something....anything. I can change lots of variables, but not actually overload my system. Variety doesn't mean that you're creating additional stress.
A novel thought: Train to improve performance in a sport or hobby.
If your hobby happens to be trying to impress other dudes with your gunz while wearing your sister's t-shirt then who am I to say it's ghey?
__________________
Working "hard," or the perception of working hard, doesn't really mean anything. Sweating, vomiting, and breathing hard could be a good workout or a tropical disease kicking in.-Dan John
Regarding the original question of muscle confusion, I think there is something to this. I know people who run the same 5-mile loop every day at the same speed. They push themselves very hard but don't get any faster, and can't understand why. It's because that's all their body knows how to do. But when they start mixing things up, doing intervals, hills, long distances, & tempos, they improve.
For me, as an avid triathlete and mountain bike racer I concentrated on the endurance workouts. I did strength training, which consisted of going through the machine circuit at the gym. I would work very hard, using the max weight that I could do 8-12 reps to failure, going through the circuit 3 times, and 4 times for certain body parts. However, even though I was working out so hard I wasn't getting stronger. I wasn't able to increase the weight over time. That's what got me into lifting free weights -- the realization that what I was doing wasn't providing the improvements I wanted, similar to the folks I knew who just ran that same 5-mile loop as hard as they could every day.
So, I do think that it is good to change workout routines periodically, either as part of a scheduled number of workouts (like NROL), or as part of a yearly periodization cycle, or whenever you hit a plateau.
This is because intensity will always be a greater stimulus than volume.
Has nothing to do with the need for variety. It's the need for constant overload.
But overload != variety.
Here's a fun point I like to make, with regard to all the people that want to "improve endurance" and "do Crossfit".
Endurance trains up very quickly. Within say 4-6 weeks, you can build your endurance up to a fairly impressive degree, both locally and systemically.
Compare that to muscle and strength. That takes months, and realistically years, to build.
Strength* trumps every other quality, even endurance.
This isn't to say that there isn't a need for specificity, but the net outcome here is that the greater your total output (maximum intensity) becomes, the lower any given activity will be as a percentage of that.
It will be much easier for someone with a high 1RM, or a well-trained VO2 max, or a high power output (for cycling, running, etc) to perform at any given level than a person with lower "max" values.
That's why intervals help endurance training and why strength training helps just about everything. The less relative effort a task represents, the easier it will be.
* This doesn't necessarily mean maximum bench/squat/etc strength, but rather strength of the relevant muscle groups for the relevant function. A subtle distinction, since there's a big overlap.
__________________
Articles | Blog | Pirate my book. "Yeah, but you did your post grad thesis on trolling, so you don't count."
-JP, endorsing how awesome I am
I've been training in the exact same way, with very minor changes, periodising the load and volume for 2 years now. Pretty much the exact same training cycle with minor changes repeated over and over again with a higher load. It's working a treat.
Endurance trains up very quickly. Within say 4-6 weeks, you can build your endurance up to a fairly impressive degree, both locally and systemically.
if you believe this, you have a very low standard for endurance. i suspect the statement has more to do with the 10k or marathon time it takes to impress you vs the weight it takes to impress you in the gym.
i'm one of the guys on the running boards who argues that good athletes with long athletic histories can run marathons with very little training. this may be an impressive accomplishment to some, but in reality it's no more impressive than the number of pull-ups good athletes with long athletic histories can do or the weight some big guys can move with very little training.
I was actually thinking about this the other day. I couldn't really understand why it's considered a bad thing for your body to get used to an impressive athletic accomplishment in such a way that you can do it over and over (even without rest days). It seems to me that this would be just another training philosophy.
I admire the people who can constantly shock their bodies with new exercises. I, unfortunately, have to be very careful about introducing new exercises because experience teaches me that an injury could be waiting around the corner. For me, new exercises are introduced carefully and one at a time, all the while being monitored as to the effects it is having on my body (pain, fatigue, early failure on other exercises, etc). But congratulations to those of you who are constantly adding variety to your workouts,
if you believe this, you have a very low standard for endurance. i suspect the statement has more to do with the 10k or marathon time it takes to impress you vs the weight it takes to impress you in the gym.
I'm not necessarily talking ultra-endurance events; I should have been more specific.
Think the "metabolic conditioning" type of stuff that's popular these days.
I wasn't trying to suggest that someone could run for a few weeks and be ready for a marathon. That does require a high degree of specificity.
I'm speaking purely in terms of anaerobic endurance and "general fitness".
Quote:
i'm one of the guys on the running boards who argues that good athletes with long athletic histories can run marathons with very little training. this may be an impressive accomplishment to some, but in reality it's no more impressive than the number of pull-ups good athletes with long athletic histories can do or the weight some big guys can move with very little training.
That is similar to the point I'm making. Endurance is probably the lowest quality on the scale of difficulty to achieve. Which is to say, it benefits much more from other things than it does from training it directly (barring the need for specificity)
__________________
Articles | Blog | Pirate my book. "Yeah, but you did your post grad thesis on trolling, so you don't count."
-JP, endorsing how awesome I am
A novel thought: Train to improve performance in a sport or hobby.
If your hobby happens to be trying to impress other dudes with your gunz while wearing your sister's t-shirt then who am I to say it's ghey?
Yea! Also, if your hobby happens to be trying to look like an average, lean teenage male (if you're male) and repeatedly telling yourself and friends that you're more "functional" to make up for your lack of developement then who am I to say that, too, is ghey or retarded?
That is similar to the point I'm making. Endurance is probably the lowest quality on the scale of difficulty to achieve. Which is to say, it benefits much more from other things than it does from training it directly (barring the need for specificity)
Marathoners/runners have always been a pet peeve to me. I don't know why.
I just get pissed off hearing about how great they are, yet most look like they came outta Auschwitz (omg he judging otehrs wtf).
This also reminds me of how all the T-Gurus these days are pimping "metabolic workouts" and crap of that nature.
They always have this testimonial from some client going "wow I thought I was strong but < X > kicked my ass!" or "wow I thought I was in shape but after < X > I was beat to hell and sweating up a storm!"
No kidding, because you're out of shape. Or because your routine wasn't addressing certain weak points.
The point remains: I can take a strong person and put them on "conditioning" workouts for 4-6 weeks, and they will beat the pants off the person that isn't already strong but working the hell out of conditioning.
Try to do the opposite - take someone who relies on metabolic workouts and spend 4-6 weeks working on strength - and you will not get the same transfer of ability.
That's exactly why you never see me suggesting "metabolic workouts" to people on diets or to beginners. It waters down the effects of both strength training and conditioning work.
Strength begets everything else.
__________________
Articles | Blog | Pirate my book. "Yeah, but you did your post grad thesis on trolling, so you don't count."
-JP, endorsing how awesome I am
I've noticed the same thing, e.g. squats, going from doing doubles, to say 8 rep sets, conditioning improves rapidly even after the first week of higher reps, so that the second week is easier on the conditioning, despite being 20lbs heavier.
I also noticed this when doing smolov, the first week was hard conditioning wise, but weeks 2 and 3(same rep ranges, higher weight) were much better.
Yea! Also, if your hobby happens to be trying to look like an average, lean teenage male (if you're male) and repeatedly telling yourself and friends that you're more "functional" to make up for your lack of developement then who am I to say that, too, is ghey or retarded?
You are my new T guru Flumen!
The first thing I have most new clients do is a basic strength program. They'll see good body comp changes and create a foundation for any work to follow.
__________________
Working "hard," or the perception of working hard, doesn't really mean anything. Sweating, vomiting, and breathing hard could be a good workout or a tropical disease kicking in.-Dan John
The first thing I have most new clients do is a basic strength program. They'll see good body comp changes and create a foundation for any work to follow.
Linear Mode
