[SpecialEd]

(02-07-2014 01:23 PM)dog24 Wrote:  

(02-07-2014 11:25 AM)SpecialEd Wrote:  

1.) Klokov is a genetic phenomenon, I believe he is natural.

I believe this falls under the category of dont give advice about something you know nothing about.

Unless you can prove klokov is on gear, you're making a fool out of yourself. The 'everyone juices' sentiment has infested the fitness world and is used as a cop-out by weak little men to make themselves feel better.

Klokov is pushing the limits of what is naturally attainable for a guy with good genetics but he's 6'0 with a huge frame and from champion pedigree. There are several guys from the pre-steroid era with comparable physiques.

[RexImperator]

(02-06-2014 09:18 PM)TripleG Wrote:  

Zydrunas Zavickas (possibly the strongest man who has ever lived, worldclass strongman and powerlifer)

^^^ "Baltic Power"

[rhodey]

(02-06-2014 09:56 AM)Nascimento Wrote:  

Many programs focus around strength training, such as starting strength and strong lifts, among many others.

I like the idea of having to build a 'base' of strength before you focus on other things, such as training for hypertrophy rather than strength itself.

I've been doing what's more similar to strength training for a little while now, after first starting with programs such as SS. I like that I developed I decent base of strength, and I am happy with my lifts when considering my body weight.

Is there a point of diminishing returns for strength training?

Sure, I can keep adding weight to my lifts, at this point more slowly, but I can still reach that #300 squat I've been so close to and try to eventually deadlift #400, which might take me another year or so if I really focused on it.

What is the point? If one does not have any intention of powerlifting that is.

My training in a sentence is focused around giving me a powerful body. A decent strength base, more focused around functional strength overall, aesthetic purposes, and overall body health.

I'm starting to think I might deload a bit on the heavy weights, and do singles only occasionally, and focus more on some other training factors rather than just low rep, heavy weight. Maybe more towards slower repetitions, less rest, a couple more sets, some 1 1/3 reps and such.

Also another concern I have towards the heavy weights - is this really sustainable long term? Sure you could argue that it's about building strong stabilizers overtime that would adapt your body, but squatting and deadlifting very heavy for years can take a toll on your body for the worst eventually, right? I'm coming to assumptions as of course I don't have many years experience with strength training.

I know there's many guys on here that do strength training and have insanely high lifts after spending years on the skill.

What are your experiences with this?

You basically need to better define what you are going for. What kind of "returns" are you expecting? If it's a certain type of physique, find role model based on your height and general bone structure and just shoot for that. For me back in the day it was Evander Holyfiled - til I realized he had skinny legs. Find out what it takes to get there and go for it.

If you want functional strength you need to define exactly what that means to you. I see that term tossed around alot. Does that mean you want be the guy your buddies call on Moving day or something else?


If you want health, define what that means to you too.

Are heavy weights sustainable? Depends, define heavy. 300 pound squatting and 400 pound Deadlifts should cause you zero issues if your form is good and your body type is not adverse to it and you don't have major muscular imbalances.

I said this before if your fear the weights , your should be lifting. Respect the weight but don't be fear them.

Some people are built to perform certain exercised and not others. The key is to stay away from those that cause unrecoverable joint damage or do them in a fashion that lessens the pain.

For example If you are not a competitive power lifter and flat barbell benching screws with your shoulders. Drop them for the myriad of substitutes out there. If you have a particular man crush for barbell benching then play with your grip or whatever. Basically YOU have to do the trial and error work to find out what works.

Often times the weights get blamed for injuries when it's the lifter who is to blame.

Are they ego lifters who load up more than they can really handle?

Are they dumb lifters who don't work opposing muscle groups

Are that dumb lifters that throw form out the window?


I can tell you a good majority of lifters I see are in one of the above categories. I was too for my first 2 years or so and I didn't know shit.

From my experience, It's the guys that don't learn or listen to their bodies or could give a shit who have long term issues.

And Honestly , it's not easy to get strong. Most people are not strong. The #'s you see here may impress you as a beginner, but you'd be surprised how that changes after a few years of smart consistent training under your belt.

I remember when I thought a 300 pound squat and 400 pound dead lift was impressive now I think... meh.


"What is the point?"

Again that's for you to define. Maybe being stronger than the average joe gives you extra confidence? Maybe it helps you compete in a sport. Maybe your saw "Pumping Iron" as a kid and wet your pants. Maybe you grew up in a tough neighborhood and just want to look intimidating ...

Really if you have to ask that question then you have already answered that question...you feel me?

[rhodey]

(02-07-2014 02:04 PM)SpecialEd Wrote:  

(02-07-2014 01:23 PM)dog24 Wrote:  

(02-07-2014 11:25 AM)SpecialEd Wrote:  

1.) Klokov is a genetic phenomenon, I believe he is natural.

I believe this falls under the category of dont give advice about something you know nothing about.

Unless you can prove klokov is on gear, you're making a fool out of yourself. The 'everyone juices' sentiment has infested the fitness world and is used as a cop-out by weak little men to make themselves feel better.

Klokov is pushing the limits of what is naturally attainable for a guy with good genetics but he's 6'0 with a huge frame and from champion pedigree. There are several guys from the pre-steroid era with comparable physiques.

No one here is in the position to prove that. Most people could give 2 shits because it really doesn't take away from his achievements. But at that level, they are ALL on gear.

[SpecialEd]

The burden of proof lies with the accuser. I am not anti-gear by any means but it's against the rules in oly lifting and so it does take away from the accomplishment.

Quote:

But at that level, they are ALL on gear.

That's a ridiculous statement.

[Rotisserie]

Yes there is a point of diminishing returns. But it's very, extremely, absurdly unlikely you will ever reach that point while 'clean.'

[_DC_]

I think people are misconstruing the term "diminishing returns". With its correct meaning, actual strength gains, etc. its absolutely diminishing returns. For attracting women (probably the OPs intent), it at least correlates with the diminishing returns of the actual muscle, ignoring a possible preference for dudes who arent jacked anyway.

Some well respected people have put the following as gains with good diet and lifting mechanics, starting from a beginner: 1st year: 12-24lbs of muscle, 2nd year: 6-12lbs of muscle, 3rd year: 3-6lbs. The pattern for following years should be easily deduced from this.

Any dude who hasnt lifted ever is absolutely going to benefit from a year or two of serious lifting. After that, many people may be perfectly fine with working just enough to keep their gains and not pushing with more routines and more workouts per week.

[mikeymike]

(02-07-2014 08:20 PM)SpecialEd Wrote:  

The burden of proof lies with the accuser. I am not anti-gear by any means but it's against the rules in oly lifting and so it does take away from the accomplishment.

Quote:

But at that level, they are ALL on gear.

That's a ridiculous statement.

someones man crushing and wanting to believe in fairy tales.

[StrikeBack]

TL;DR: nothing to worry about, as a recreational lifter, there is no diminishing return for you.

If you have someone coaching you on proper techniques, and you're of average size, you should be squatting 300 and deadlifting 400 within about 6-12 months. Those are pretty easy to achieve. I've seen hundreds of newbies manage this at many lifting clubs, and it's not like our sport (powerlifting) attracts heaps of talented athletes (those go to real ones that pay money). Most are unco average joes who usually can't play any other sport well.

It's harder if you train at a typical commercial gym with no inspiration around and do a program generated from a spreadsheet or downloaded from the Internet, including the ever popular Slowing Strength and Weak Lifts.

As for diminishing returns, the question is: what do you train for?

If it is to get stronger, there is no diminishing return. You can never get strong enough! I train stupidly hard for every 5lb gain on my lifts. Don't worry, you won't get too strong accidentally.

If it is to help you with another sport, the diminishing return line is drawn where your strength training eats into the training time of your main sport, and/or develops side effects that make you less suitable for the main sport.

If it is to help you pick up chicks / for health / better quality of life etc., the line is drawn when you sink too much time into training that you lose valuable time elsewhere.

If you're strength training to pick up girls, it might help somewhat, but the line is quickly reached. In my lifting club, we have a joke about it. After a very hard session or set, we'd ask each other:

"Why do we do this shit to ourselves?"
"For fame, money and women!"

Nobody lifts super heavy all year round, least of all strength athletes. We all do periodisation (look it up) i.e we have various phases of training, not always super heavy, that's often reserved to competition blocks during the training cycle. The body is also amazingly adaptable, don't underestimate that.

Weightlifting is cool but it's a young athlete's game. It's an explosive sport, and you cannot do it slowly (thanks, gravity). Powerlifting can be done well into old age (have a 83 y.o man at our club, he's still very strong & fit, can pull about 450lb) because it's a slow sport. The two are like jumping vs running. You can't jump slowly, but you can run at whatever speed you want.

Strongman is also cool, but not accessible to most people, and only really appeals to huge dudes.

Quote:

I criticized powerlifters for being fat and justifying their lack of all-around fitness because they can squat a ton. Bite me. Jim Wendler, a former elite level powerlifter, has said exactly the same things.

This is only true for super heavyweights and there are precious few of them. Funnily enough they attract most of the attention because they move the biggest weights and look like freaks. Powerlifters in lower weight classes have to optimise their lean mass to fit in the weight class and usually are very lean and athletic.

As for lifting weights and joint health at older age, powerlifting and weightlifting have the lowest injury rate of any sport. If you play any sport, injuries are part & parcel, gotta accept some risk. The injuries in those sports are not that terrible though. I've had some injuries, but even in my injured state, I was fitter and stronger than most people.

If you want to avoid injury risks completely and be like most avg inactive people, those folks suffer from various hip, back, knee problems even before they reach old age. You're screwed there too.

It's a myth that lifting weights at old age causes problems. It's the opposite. At my club there's a retired couple in their mid-70s. They have zero of those problems, no osteoporosis either (their bone density is better than avg 30-sth males). My parents both lift (I coach them) and are in their 60s, they're often mistaken for 40-sth as they're very fit, in great shape and look young. They used to both suffer from back and knee pains, which are now long gone. When it's flex time at my dad's local gym and he takes his top off, most of the young blokes put theirs back on out of shame. Yet 10 years ago, he used to look like a typical fat weak 50-sth who might die soon from a heart attack and limp everywhere.

If you're a recreational lifter, I have an advice for you: never train to failure, train to success instead. You should leave every training session satisfied with your hard work while feeling like you're ready to conquer the world. And by that I mean you should have enough in the tank to go out, pick up a girl, bang her good, or do whatever you want to do for the rest of the night. Train hard but leave 1-2 reps/sets in the tank. You should be able to enjoy training for the rest of your life that way. Don't train to failure to the point you're crawling on the ground in a pool of sweat, barely able to breathe. That's not hardcore, that's dumb training, and you will not get better that way. People who do that will require lots of motivational videos, posters, pre-workouts etc. before they hit the gym every time, and that's not sustainable, they will burn out soon enough. Before you ask, pro bodybuilders who train to failures always maintain their form and have done so for decades, and are on a full warehouse of best drugs money can buy. Amateur lifters should not imitate the training of elites.

[augen sehen]

(02-07-2014 08:20 PM)SpecialEd Wrote:  

The burden of proof lies with the accuser. I am not anti-gear by any means but it's against the rules in oly lifting and so it does take away from the accomplishment.

Quote:

But at that level, they are ALL on gear.

That's a ridiculous statement.

Does this shit even matter, really? If he's not on gear and has 0.001% genetics, that doesn't really help the average playboy who's looking to get a girl as hot as his. This argument is taking away from the thread.

As for the topic, I stopped training for strength once I got past a 315 lb squat and 365 deadlift. It was about the same time at which I injured my back twice in a row in other sports, and decided that I would take it easy on the heavy lifts and focus on aesthetics some more.

Once you have a decent base of strength, it's all gravy. I would never recommend a beginner to start out on a 5-day split, but I would also not recommend someone advanced to stay on 5x5 forever to keep building strength - unless you plan to compete.

[SpecialEd]

(02-08-2014 01:52 AM)mikeymike Wrote:  

(02-07-2014 08:20 PM)SpecialEd Wrote:  

The burden of proof lies with the accuser. I am not anti-gear by any means but it's against the rules in oly lifting and so it does take away from the accomplishment.

Quote:

But at that level, they are ALL on gear.

That's a ridiculous statement.

someones man crushing and wanting to believe in fairy tales.

“I don’t believe in bodybuilders using steroids. If a man doesn’t have enough male hormones in his system to create, a nice hard, muscular body, he should take up ping pong.”~Steve Reeves

Again, I'm not saying I'm against gear but surprise surprise there are men who have walked the planet and accomplished great feats of strength/muscularity without it. No one wants to admit to themselves that they are genetically inferior and so they lash out by accusing everyone of being on gear.

[theking]

Steve Reeves used steroids as well man. Sorry to burst your bubble. If u look up pictures of him u can clearly differentiate between when he was natty and started using. While nothing is ever definitive, if u talk and associate/use gear yourself u start to get a pretty clear picture regarding this stuff.

In regards to diminishing returns, Id say after 2/3 years of disciplined lifting one will be near his natural potential. Of course u can keep lifting and receive marginal increases in strength/size but in comparison to to your first couple years it will not be much. So after a couple years u can build a pretty decent physique and then probably maintain it with less effort than it took u to get there or put in a ton of work to get marginal returns on your effort. Or u can use gear. One can definitely look very good tho after a couple years natty lifting

[mikeymike]

(02-08-2014 11:25 AM)SpecialEd Wrote:  

(02-08-2014 01:52 AM)mikeymike Wrote:  

(02-07-2014 08:20 PM)SpecialEd Wrote:  

The burden of proof lies with the accuser. I am not anti-gear by any means but it's against the rules in oly lifting and so it does take away from the accomplishment.

Quote:

But at that level, they are ALL on gear.

That's a ridiculous statement.

someones man crushing and wanting to believe in fairy tales.

“I don’t believe in bodybuilders using steroids. If a man doesn’t have enough male hormones in his system to create, a nice hard, muscular body, he should take up ping pong.”~Steve Reeves

Again, I'm not saying I'm against gear but surprise surprise there are men who have walked the planet and accomplished great feats of strength/muscularity without it. No one wants to admit to themselves that they are genetically inferior and so they lash out by accusing everyone of being on gear.

Oh great quote that changes everything lmao. Of course you can build a decent body without gear can you build an elite world class body without them, very unlikely, but more so can you compete in a sport that is flowing in peds, when your competitors are overwhelmingly using and the tests are so easy to beat, is it possible anything is possible, is it likely, really doubtful. If you want the smoking gun to convince you, a pic of Kloko with a syringe in his ass you wont get it but then you wont find it with most pro bbers either but youre pretty quick to assume theyre using. Whats the difference besides your want to believe. Hes a genetic freak, hes a beast, and without gear hed still be those things but with them hes a top tier olympic athlete without them a borderline one, its the nature of his chosen field, to compete you play the same game your competitors do or you fall behind. Ive personally first hand helped pro athletes use hgh and aas, as well as actors so this notion that its against their rules is naive, of course its against the rules but that doesnt mean much of anything. People do throw around the so and so is a user far too often to excuse their own lack of results but when youve been a high level athlete as I have you know what the body is capable of and you know at which point someone is likely playing the game ( you cant speak in absolutes unless you see it), I cant put the needle in his ass but in his sport if he isnt using well over 95% are and likely way higher than that, so if hes not using hes the exception not the rule, if he is, it doesnt take 1 iota from what he has accomplished. Youre sounding much like those who didnt want to believe Armstrong used cause he didnt look exactly like what an aas user was supposed to look like, like only 300 pounders use, when youre in a sport where everyone uses, and you need the edge few people resist its not the in the make up of athletes to not do whatever it takes. I could show you pics of mid heavies in the offseason who all look like this guy who arent chasing size at all cost using huge amounts of gear and guys who use huge amounts who look like shit, you cant trust the look alone. When I played tennis I used and I hardly looked bigger than a tour de france guy and I wasnt the only one. This isnt the golden era of bbing that Reeves belonged to, even still there were plenty of golden era guys who said that Reeves used and they saw it, Sergio, Larry Scott both in particular mentioned his use so while he likely barely dabbled he likely did, gear is a lot more mainstream these days but few people like to go on the record, its still against the law in most of the world, and its the dirty little secret and there is no money in saying supps dont work use gear, they need to say it was cell tech that made them huge so be weary of the quotes and what comes out of these guys mouth they are their own marketing machine and they make money off their bodies, it only hurts them to be honest.

[Doctor]

How naive some people are is adorable. In case no one has told you yet, the world is not all unicorns and rainbows. Santa Clause isn't real (and no I can't prove he's not real). That girl that says she's only been with two guys is lying. People want to win and will do anything to get there.

There was a time when I thought Ronnie Coleman was drug free. And if I did like the Hulkster said and said my prayers and ate my vitamins I would get big and strong like him. And just like when I found out the WWF was fake, my world came crashing down on high level athletes. I think it was MikeCF that said something along these lines somewhere, "if someone is making a living on their body or performance, you can assume they're on something" (sorry if I butchered it).

Klokov, as an athlete, does not have a parallel in the US. He is a state sponsored strength athlete in a sport that Russia has been heavily associated with for the better part of the last century. He has the resources of an entire country to support him basically. US Olympians are, for the most part and especially outside of Subway commercials and minor endorsements, treated insignificantly compared to Olympians in other countries. HGH when it was first available had no test for it. There are drugs out there that currently have no test available for them. As a state sponsored athlete, what's to say there isn't some Boris in a lab coat in Siberia cooking up drugs outside of explicitly stated testing regiments. My evidence for this? They've been doing it for 50 years or so.

In a sport where a gold medalist can be defined by a few kgs, amongst a field of all genetically superior athletes with top level training and state sponsorship, a natural athlete won't stand a chance.

As far as genetic potential and "diminishing returns", 2-3 years is nothing. You can make drastic improvements in a few years, but there is a difference between someone who has trained hard for a few years and someone who has trained hard for 5 years or more. I'm not talking just about size either. You won't just magically get huge. Training is just like any other skill. You might make 70-80% of your progress in a few years, but that last 20% is what will take the longest and what makes the biggest difference. That's the difference between a good physique and a phenomenal physique. True muscle balance and density don't come in the short term. And contrary to what people think, you don't need to devote huge segments of time to get there. Consistency and training smart is the key. If you're going to spend 5-10hrs a week training, why not train hard and make progress rather than settling for stagnating.

[Doctor]

(02-08-2014 01:55 AM)StrikeBack Wrote:  

TL;DR: nothing to worry about, as a recreational lifter, there is no diminishing return for you.

Weightlifting is cool but it's a young athlete's game. It's an explosive sport, and you cannot do it slowly (thanks, gravity). Powerlifting can be done well into old age (have a 83 y.o man at our club, he's still very strong & fit, can pull about 450lb) because it's a slow sport. The two are like jumping vs running. You can't jump slowly, but you can run at whatever speed you want.

I like your answer, but I disagree with you to a certain extent on this. Saying powerlifting is a "slow" sport I feel is incorrect. Yes the overall bar speed may be slower, but bar speed is relevant in that Oly weightlifting the weight moved is less. If you deadlift 700lbs, you can deadlift 500lbs very fast. A deadlift is not a clean, I know that. If you took a successful powerlifter and asked them to lift even close to their max slowly they would not be able to do it. The movement of maximal weight, regardless of lift, is about force production. Watch videos of Naim Suleymanogly. Especially some of his later, heavier lifts, I would hardly qualify that bar speed as "fast". The lifter moving relative to the weight is definitely fast, but in terms of purely bar speed not so much. If you watch Benedikt Magnusson or Orlando Green deadlifting, I would hardly classify their lift or bar speed as "slow".

[SpecialEd]

Mikeymike, can you space a little man? Feel like I just injected something in my eyes...

I am not in denial about the widespread use of gear today. However, there's a large crowd that claims that anyone with a physique larger than a tennis player is using. It's laughable imo. There were plenty of bodybuilders/strongmen in the pre-steroid era with klokov-esque physiques. We can debate Steve Reeves but how about Reg Park or Eugen Sandow? Park was 6'1 and 250lbs lean in his prime, he was Mr. Britain is 1948, WELL BEFORE steroid usage was common.

I dont want to go into a lengthy history of AAS but it didn't really catch on in the West until the late 1950s. Then nazis were the pioneers, he soviets were giving it to their athletes and we started doing the same thing in order to be competitive. The U.S Olympic weight lifting team doctor, John Ziegler, created Dianobol and the FDA approved it in 1958. Im sure you know that unlike today it was perfectly legal and not done in the shadows.

[rhodey]

(02-08-2014 03:50 PM)SpecialEd Wrote:  

Mikeymike, can you space a little man? Feel like I just injected something in my eyes...

I am not in denial about the widespread use of gear today. However, there's a large crowd that claims that anyone with a physique larger than a tennis player is using. It's laughable imo.

What's laughable is that you think Klokov is %100 natural. Everything else you said doesn't apply to anything that was said or inferred in this thread.
But I'll stop because the OP thread is derailing....

[mikeymike]

(02-08-2014 03:50 PM)SpecialEd Wrote:  

Mikeymike, can you space a little man? Feel like I just injected something in my eyes...

I am not in denial about the widespread use of gear today. However, there's a large crowd that claims that anyone with a physique larger than a tennis player is using. It's laughable imo. There were plenty of bodybuilders/strongmen in the pre-steroid era with klokov-esque physiques. We can debate Steve Reeves but how about Reg Park or Eugen Sandow? Park was 6'1 and 250lbs lean in his prime, he was Mr. Britain is 1948, WELL BEFORE steroid usage was common.

I dont want to go into a lengthy history of AAS but it didn't really catch on in the West until the late 1950s. Then nazis were the pioneers, he soviets were giving it to their athletes and we started doing the same thing in order to be competitive. The U.S Olympic weight lifting team doctor, John Ziegler, created Dianobol and the FDA approved it in 1958. Im sure you know that unlike today it was perfectly legal and not done in the shadows.

Yeah I'll work on it for ya lol

You're just flat out lying that there were plenty of guys who were Klokov esque range in the pre steroid era, put up the pics of guys sitting 6ft 230 sub 10% bf before steroids. Reg park was not in the pre steroid era, they were around in his era. Sandow was but was just in incredible shape not a particularly big guy, with dedication and incredible attention to detail you can get in tremendously lean shape but Sandow was at most 180 pounds. If he'd be genetically elite, given 20 years later without much difference in training and food how do you explain a near 60 pound heavier Park?

You're speaking solely of dbol but test came on in the 30s. Methyltest and a few other compounds came out just shortly thereafter, the german and russian olympic programs were dabbling in steroids before pharma giants went and got these patented, they were at the forefront of steroid usage. The chemical warfare game continues today, they're years ahead of what the average guy can get so going off patents doesn't account for olympic athletes. Even then while it was freer flowing, few of those old school guys admit to using it, they'll talk about seeing others do it but they all want to keep their name clear.

I don't have a problem with you saying that way too many guys are too quick to jump to the thinking that anybody who looks half decent is using, I agree with you... it's naive however to see some of the guys today and need to see a needle before you'll believe somebody is using unless they look like Ronnie. Some of it is just painfully obvious and olympic lifters and any sort of lifter is usually not the guy you want to bank on being natty. Im sure the odd one exists but they're not at the top of the sport you just can't compare to someone who has similar genetics and is using drugs.

[rhodey]

(02-08-2014 09:30 PM)mikeymike Wrote:  

I don't have a problem with you saying that way too many guys are too quick to jump to the thinking that anybody who looks half decent is using, I agree with you... it's naive however to see some of the guys today and need to see a needle before you'll believe somebody is using unless they look like Ronnie. Some of it is just painfully obvious and olympic lifters and any sort of lifter is usually not the guy you want to bank on being natty. Im sure the odd one exists but they're not at the top of the sport you just can't compare to someone who has similar genetics and is using drugs.

Spot on. What's funny is that Klokov had to abruptly bow out of the 2012 Olympics due to some phantom "injury". The rumor is that he tested positive and they allowed him to save face.

[Checkmat]

(02-06-2014 09:56 AM)Nascimento Wrote:  

Many programs focus around strength training, such as starting strength and strong lifts, among many others.

I like the idea of having to build a 'base' of strength before you focus on other things, such as training for hypertrophy rather than strength itself.

I've been doing what's more similar to strength training for a little while now, after first starting with programs such as SS. I like that I developed I decent base of strength, and I am happy with my lifts when considering my body weight.

Is there a point of diminishing returns for strength training?

Sure, I can keep adding weight to my lifts, at this point more slowly, but I can still reach that #300 squat I've been so close to and try to eventually deadlift #400, which might take me another year or so if I really focused on it.

What is the point? If one does not have any intention of powerlifting that is.

My training in a sentence is focused around giving me a powerful body. A decent strength base, more focused around functional strength overall, aesthetic purposes, and overall body health.

I'm starting to think I might deload a bit on the heavy weights, and do singles only occasionally, and focus more on some other training factors rather than just low rep, heavy weight. Maybe more towards slower repetitions, less rest, a couple more sets, some 1 1/3 reps and such.

Also another concern I have towards the heavy weights - is this really sustainable long term? Sure you could argue that it's about building strong stabilizers overtime that would adapt your body, but squatting and deadlifting very heavy for years can take a toll on your body for the worst eventually, right? I'm coming to assumptions as of course I don't have many years experience with strength training.

I know there's many guys on here that do strength training and have insanely high lifts after spending years on the skill.

What are your experiences with this?

I'll tell you what. I compete in Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu and have competed in pankration. Within my weight class, every variable you can influence your athleticism in a positive direction makes a difference.

I know the very familiar feeling of slapping hands with a guy, getting my hands on him and knowing right away that I am stronger than him. I have mini-flashbacks to all the heavy deadlifts, squats and weighted chin-ups I've done over the years, several days a week. My hands are hard with calluses on the pads like a gorilla.

As I wreck my game over my strength-challenged foe, midst the hundreds of micro-thoughts running through my head every second we are locked in struggle, one or two of them include the thought, "damn I'm so glad I do strength training."

All other things being equal, the stronger guy will win.

Even if you don't compete in sports, everything physical in life becomes easier. Moving water jugs out of the basement at work. Changing a flat tire. Etc.

It's in my opinion that every man can and should train himself to be at least "advanced" in most lifts by the time he's in his mid-20's. All it takes is a few consistent years and average genetics.

http://www.exrx.net/Testing/WeightLiftin...dards.html

Any average guy can get to an advanced level of strength by lifting consistently 3-4x/week for a few years. Barring injury or fuckarounditis (the awful phenomonon of changing your entire training paradigm/program every few weeks and spinning your wheels as you never get stronger), it's a pretty linear path to success. One that has been well-traveled by men with shit genetics like myself.

Personal best lifts to-date: 320x5 squat, 275x1 bench, 395x5 deadlift, weighted chin-ups +100lbsx4 @ 165lbs


* "Fuckarounditis is a behavioral disorder characterized by a mediocre physique and complete lack of progress, despite significant amounts of time spent in the gym."
- Berkhan, M. (2011) "Targeting The Fuckarounditis Epidemic: Preventative Measures and Intervention Strategies."

[Peregrine]

"Fuckarounditis" priceless.

[Hades]

If you don't value pursuing big numbers or getting strong at the potential expense of joint health or training longevity then that's your prerogative.

There might come a time when you've been training for several years only to run into a guy who's been training for three months and yet has the same or better numbers than you do. Wouldn't you feel shame at having wasted all that time in the gym? Does anybody go into an endeavor wondering how they can spend years doing the same shit and yet make no progress beyond that which is attainable for any newb within a few months?

My numbers are not the greatest either but the only reason I'm considered "the strong guy" at work is because everybody else sucks much worse than I do.

That being said, there are opportunity costs to everything. If your time is better spent doing other things then it doesn't make much sense to spend several hours a week in the gym. I wouldn't tell some hotshot investment banker to get his lazy ass in the gym if he's working 80 hour weeks and making more money in a month than I do in a year. What do you consider important?

[Remington]

Train the right way. Perfect your form as well as your discipline. Develop a workout for your goals and bust your ass to achieve them.

[Nascimento]

Just reached a new max for 1 rep on the squat today. The one I've been aiming for for so long. The squat has been important to me because when I knew about the squat and how great of an exercise it was when I first started weight training in the newbie days, and it took me over a year to build up good form and flexibility for it. Back then I struggled to even squat my body weight for a few reps and now I pretty much squatted 2x that weight. Made sure to hold a stable core during the down movement and went deep enough so I knew it was legit, and then extended up using every fibre in my core to keep me stable during the movement.

Felt fantastic.

I worry about the diminishing returns of strength training one day, and then I reach a long awaited goal that gives me a new one up ahead. I'm not sure I can back out of this now, hah.

Although I have to say I'm usually humble with weight training and approach new maxes patiently because I want to build up my body so that it can actually handle it and is adapted to that stress already.

I feel as long as I don't rush into new maxes, I build up stabilizers with other exercises, I'm always properly warmed up before big lifts, and occasionally foam roll/stretch to relieve tightness in my muscles, I'm doing this whole thing right. I don't want to have to deal with spine/joint issues as I age more than I have to and I hope this is the ideal mindset. What do you guys think?

[bodmon]

I think the reason to get as strong as possible when you're young and natty is that when natty, 1) size = strength, and 2) you're not gonna gain a lot of size anyway, so you'd better be fucking strong to get what you can. also it feelsgoodman.

if however as time goes on you find that that's too much for too little, and you want a magazine physique off of hammer strength machines then you gotta get on the juice.