Gym And Supplement Discussion

[markos]

Not sure many guys on here squat double bodyweight

[No Crust Racing]

What does BW have to do with anything a 120kg sqaut is a 120kg squat

I think you said it yourself. BW is not an excuse which in this case would also mean reason for being strong or weak.

http://www.skylinesaustralia.com/forums/topic/200767-gym-and-supplement-discussion/page-363#entry6906633

No doubt a solid effort either way.

Edited July 10, 2013 by ActionDan

[L33SH]

I still don't understand what you meant Markos when you said Its like when someone lifting a weight thinks hes building muscle, quite the opposite

[markos]

[No Crust Racing]

It's as Birds said Leesh, which is why Markos agreed with it.

Lift weights, damage muscle, force adaptation. Eat to repair/build muscle.

Birds is spot on

Edited July 10, 2013 by ActionDan

[No Crust Racing]

DP

Edited July 10, 2013 by ActionDan

[L33SH]

I didn't understand what Birds was saying so I wanted Markos to explain it in a way I could understand.

[No Crust Racing]

OK, I'm sure Markos will explain it another way using very specific words, but my take on it is this.

When you lift weights the muscle does not grow during that particular process, it is damaged and broken down. This forces the body to adapt, that is, repair the muscle which leads to growth/strength improvements of that muscle as it must adapt to sustain the repeated damage you subject it too. This part does not happen during lifting, rather during rest/eat/sleep.

Eating is critical because you provide the body with what it needs to repair and grow the muscle to withstand the damage sustained during lifting.

Essentially, if you eat well and lift heavy you will get stronger and in some cases grow larger (depending on your intake).

Saying lifting weights does not build muscle is just being very specific about which stage of the process is actually responsible for muscle gains, which is the eating phase.

Your average gym goer will say that lifting weights builds muscle because they are assuming you are eating with that goal in mind so it's taken for granted. Technically it is only a part of the process and not the specific part that actual does the growing.

Yes it is splitting hairs, but as Markos said, its part of the misinformation that gets around. Is it an issue? Not to someone with half a brain because most people will know that if you are lifting to get stronger or bigger, you must eat accordingly. Unfortunately, not everyone is that clued on so it does need to be specifically spelled out to some.

That is not a dig at you either.

Edited July 10, 2013 by ActionDan

[markos]

Firstly Dan. A 120kg squat is only impressive if your female and weigh under 60kg. Thats not me being a smart ass, its me being 100% honest. Hence my comment about bodyweight.

Now Leesh. All exercise is catabolic, no exception. Exercise damages muscles. Some exercise, like heavy weight training will produce an anabolic environment, as the body has to adapt to the stress or die. Light exercise doesnt produce as much stress, little adaption is required.

So once you have gone to the gym, lifted heavy weights, broken down lots of muscle tissue, your body will be screaming for calories.

If you dont provide them, the muscle gets smaller, because you broke it down, and you will get fatter as a result. Not heavier, fatter, generally lighter, which leads most into a false sense of security.

Now what happens if you do feed this new anabolic enviroment you created? Your muscle repairs, gets bigger, burns more calories, you get leaner over time.

This honestly is how simple it is

Where do we go wrong? Those that have no idea giving advice.

The term "fat". Its adipose tissue. I havent got a problem calling it fat, but its gets misused and misunderstood. You need to eat healthy fats, most girls are scared of them.

The word carbs is not scary, sugar is, its the same thing

All this, and lots more, creates all this confusion.

Society got soft, exercise became very non productive, now we have guys thinking a 120kg squat is impressive. Its not anyones fault, its society. I cant save everyone, but I can save you, or the next person

The reason I get frustrated and you guys think I'm a prick is because of the ignorance. No one that ever trains here gets offended by me or thinks I'm a prick, no arguments ever with clients on forums.

I have the proof what I'm saying is accurate, simple and the truth, around me all the time

If your a girl and walk in here and you see Nina benching 80kg, Heidi deadlifting 170kg, 4 girls squatting over 120kg, and they all weigh sub 60kg, your going to think the coach has a clue

If your a guy and walk in here, and 14yo boys are squatting 170kg and deadlifting 200kg, other juniors are squatting triple bodyweight or deadlifting 3.5 x bw, your going to think we may know what were doing.

But if your on a forum, you already know everything, and I'm just another contributor to the problem by telling you something different

Life is simple at PTC lol

Hope this helps Leesh

[L33SH]

alright.

[No Crust Racing]

I didn't say 120 is impressive, that was my point. You said BW wasn't an excuse ergo a reason for anything, so why would it make a 120kg squat impressive, that was my point.

BW either is or is not a factor, you can't have it both ways. Or I suppose you can, you can do whatever you want, just don't be surprised when people get confused.

I've said before, I fully subscribe to and agree with your views, approach, training methods, but that doesn't mean it doesn't shit me when you go above and beyond to split hairs on some of these things.

And yes I get why you do it, it's needed, people have their shit all mixed up - me included which you have helped with on a number of occasions.

I hate talking on forums sometimes, life is so much simpler in person.

Get of my lawn.

</grumpy>

Edited July 10, 2013 by ActionDan

[markos]

Pretty sure I said double bodyweight, never mentioned 60kg, you did

Double bodyweight, triple bodyweight, its a measure we use, Birds uses it quite a bit

Moronic internet argument deflecting from the real issue

[No Crust Racing]

What's the real issue then?

I'm just pointing out how things get convoluted so easily.

In one breath in the post I linked, you say BW is no excuse. The next, it's the measure of choice, but only when convenient?

Jesse, your lightest lifer, went 180kg at 67kg you said, and because BW is no excuse, we should all be treating that as no different to 120kg guy going 180? Of course not, it makes no sense does it. BW has to be a factor.

That 60kg girl went 120, which in my head IS actually pretty damn good because it's 2x BW, but then "Firstly Dan. A 120kg squat is only impressive if your female and weigh under 60kg". So at 65kg, it's now crap and BW is no excuse? Or 65 is ok but 70isn't?

What's your actual view then? BW is either a factor or it's not. Either 180kg squat is good or it's not pure and simple (BW means nothing) OR it's good depending on your BW, which then goes against what you said earlier about BW not being an excuse.

I get that you want to clear up confusion, but I'm pointing out that in some instances you are helping create it. Which is why some people might feel like the goal posts move around a bit too much.

I think I get you and I'm very confident that if I was in there training with you, it would be crystal clear and I would be a beast, my point is how easy it is for people to get confused when you yourself, a clear expert in the field, can quit easily, at least on a forum, come off as contradicting your own views.

You can have the last say though, I've ranted far too much about not much. Sorry dudes and dudettes.

[Birds]

Saying lifting weights does not build muscle is just being very specific about which stage of the process is actually responsible for muscle gains, which is the eating phase.

Your average gym goer will say that lifting weights builds muscle because they are assuming you are eating with that goal in mind so it's taken for granted. Technically it is only a part of the process and not the specific part that actual does the growing.

Yes it is splitting hairs, but as Markos said, its part of the misinformation that gets around. Is it an issue? Not to someone with half a brain because most people will know that if you are lifting to get stronger or bigger, you must eat accordingly. Unfortunately, not everyone is that clued on so it does need to be specifically spelled out to some.

That is not a dig at you either.

Your average gym goer who wants to get bigger and stronger doesn't even understand this IMO. That is why you see so many complaining about size despite going to the gym for years...or coming on the forums complaining about a lack of progress while filling out "My Fitness Enemy" or "If It Fits Your OCD".

I attribute it to mimicry and ignorance. Small guy sees huge guy lifting big weights at the gym, but then they both go home to different places, where huge guy eats 1kg of rump steak for dinner and 3 glasses of milk, meanwhile small guy eats only until he's full. This goes on for years and small guy assumes that big guy has been training much longer / hitting the roids or is genetically superior. You can also blame poor PTs, who don't give their clients a proper (or any) meal plan to suit their weight training.

The problem with people not understanding the specifics of muscle building / where it happens, is that you get skinny guys saying "that was a hard session bro, we lifted for over an hour...got a good pump too...we're gonna be huge in no time". Then he goes out clubbing/dancing for 4 hours and says "no time for dinner tonight" or eats his version of a lot of food, which is basically enough to drive his hunger away and that's it. A year later he's on a forum saying I train so hard and do everything right, why can't I get bigger or gain weight? Then people like Markos and I say you need to eat some food and increase some weights, the body will come later. Then the guy says "but I do eat and I have a 120kg squat, that's pretty heavy for my gym". Then we say bullshit!

[No Crust Racing]

I hear you man.

And shit, 120kg is still heavy for me.

FOREVER SQUAT DODGER

Sidebar: Just ate a snickers, back to normal now. Alf Stewart has gone home.

Time for Gym.

Edited July 10, 2013 by ActionDan

[L33SH]

Wow birds have a dig at me why don't you

[GHOSTrun]

Wow birds have a dig at me why don't you

Post some selfies to shut him down*

(you are female right?)

*only if you're female

Edited July 10, 2013 by GHOSTrun

[Birds]

Good and funny video on the topic of eating food to support strength gains and muscle building:

[No Crust Racing]

Honestly don't think that was a dig at you Leesh.

You're a beginner (me too!) doing most things right I'd say, maybe just impatient

[Birds]

Birds, Eric Marocher owns that gym, met him in 2010 in Idaho, lovely guy, his wife is Dawn, the strong bencher

They are both teachers and run the gym in the evening, funded by the lifters. They cant run it as a business because of an assortment of shit like medical cover. If they had to pay there own, it would cost them $40,000pa (kids)

I thought you might have met the owner along the ways; the environments seemed too similar for you to not have run into each other. You can tell their gym breeds a strong lifting environment.

Speaking of...

A while back I was talking about how important your training environment and exposure to other people stronger than you is. There seems to me a major reason why, besides good training methods, that people at PTC are strong...I believe it's because they bounce off each other's success. If i recall correctly, a few years ago at PTC, a 200kg pull would have ranked amongst the highest for your lifters...but now you have teenagers doing it because your juniors have since surpassed 260kg+.

This mentality is difficult to achieve in a commercial gym, where you are amongst the strongest there. You have to look elsewhere for the upper limits. I said that I wouldn't be lifting what I am, had I not seen videos of people lifting significantly more than me - exposure; it sets the standard high. The bar is only as high as you set it and sometimes you need others to set it higher for you. I always recommend people train with people who have what they want - even if you don't get there, there's a good chance you'll get further than you would have when training by yourself or with those weaker than yourself. This guy sums it up pretty well:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K7l47rXqRo0