Diário do gato de Schrödinger: LPO, powerlifting e umas paradinhas boribildi

[Lucas, o Schrödinger 11436]

O treino foi o seguinte:

 

Treino 3	A	Power Jerk	3	3	73;77;81
	B	Bench Press Pause Going Down	3	4	80
	C	Wide grip bench press	2	6	87
	D	Chest supported DB row	4	8	44

 

Último treino fofo do ano. 

 

É isso. Feliz ano novo a todos!

[Lucas, o Schrödinger 11436]

De hoje:

 

Treino 1	A	Box Sn	5	3	40;45;50;55;60
	B	Back Squat	4	6;4;4;1	110;126;126;137
	C	RDL	4	8	115
	D	Copenhagen Plank	3	20s	0

Os snatches eram com mais carga, mas fui subindo aos poucos pra ir testando o ombro, que incomodou desde as primeiras séries de aquecimento, e não deu pra fazer. Fui apenas até 60kg.

 

Vou novamente dar um passo atrás e e evitar snatches mais pesados, trabalhar com derivativos pra ir recuperando o ombro.

Paralelamente vou trabalhar a hipertrofia e força do ombro e da cintura escapular.

 

Por fim, estou avaliando fortemente começar a usar deca pra testar a resposta - não só no ombro, mas nas articulações em geral, que tem incomodado mais que o normal.

 

É isso.

[Vecchio 4785]

Por que as fichinhas visualmente curtas são as piores?

[Lucas, o Schrödinger 11436]

Em 03/01/2023 em 18:30, Vecchio disse:

Por que as fichinhas visualmente curtas são as piores?

As minhas são sempre assim, geralmente 14-16 sets totais. E eu fico bem cansado sempre kkkk

[Lucas, o Schrödinger 11436]

Post gigante do Lyle sobre hipertrofia e seleção de exercícios:

 

Spoiler

Ok, let's talk about exercise selection for HYPERTROPHY.

See that all caps word.  Keep it in mind as we go, it will prevent you from writing something dumbfucked like "But what if you're trying to get better at squatting?"

I am not talking about movements.  I am talking about muscle growth.

Now many of these comments will still apply in terms of making a MUSCLE stronger.  But in terms of making a MOVEMENT stronger, of course you have to do the movement.

See that bit above?  I'm talking solely about muscular hypertrophy.

What stimulates hypertrophy?

Well there are several mechanisms.  But the primary and absolutely important one is

Sufficient mechanical tension.  Simply, the muscle has to contract/be required to generate a certain force which exposes the fibers to mechanical tension.  

Even the volume dipshits in the fitness industry always list mechanical tension as the INITIATING factor in growth.  It has to do with the fibers literally pulling on what are called Focal Adhesion Proteins via Integrins which translates a mechanical stimulus into a biochemical one.

This is why cardio doesn't, except in beginners, cause muscle growth.    Tension requirements are too low and hence the fibers are not exposed to high mechanical tensions.

Now tension is required but not sufficient.  By that I mean this: if all that mattered was tension, you could do one maximal isometric contraction (maximum muscular tension) and go home and grow.  It doesn't work that way.

There is also a volume component.  Conceptualize this as metabolic work or mechanical work, whatever.  Basically a muscle has to undergo a number of high tension contractions to turn on protein synthesis.  How many?  Hard to say.  See below for some comments about effective reps.

Muscle Growth is Local

Contrary to what is occasionally still blathered about, the stimulus for muscle growth is almost exclusively local.  This bullshit about 'squat to get big overall' due to the hormonal response is just that: bullshit.   Any hormonal response is small, short-lived and, at most plays a microscopic role in growth.   One paper, if I recall correctly, estimated it at like 8% of the stimulus.

Rather, the growth stimulus is purely local.  A big factor in this is something called Mechano Growth Factor or MGF (note: they should have called this Massive Growth Factor or Motherfucking Huge Growth Factor IMO).  It's an IGF-1 related compound released locally within the muscle.

But basically a singular muscle generating some degree of high tension contractions turns on protein synthesis.

Note: there is a lot of thought that metabolites in terms of the growth stimulus and this is based on the low-load studies where light sets of 25-35 taken to failure generate growth along with lots of metabolites.  

Most likely they are NOT directly involved but are only involved indirectly by increasing fiber recruitment.  For those wondering how a lighter weight can generate high mechanical tension well...it happens at the end of the set.  

As fatigue accumulates, more fibers have to fire and when you hit failure (defined operationally as an inability to complete another repetition regardless of how much effort you provide), the muscles generate high tension.  You just fuck around for 30 reps to get there.

Now we can go a bit deeper with this

Effective Rep Model

In recent years, the concept of effective or stimulating reps has been developed.  The idea here is that you get the best growth performing repetitions under conditions of full muscular recruitment.

Muscular Failure

When you perform any activity, the determinant of whether or not you can continue is if muscular force output is higher than force requirements.  So long as this is the case, you can continue.  As fatigue accumulates, muscular force capabilities start to decrease.  Eventually they match or fall below the requirements.  The set cannot be continued.

Note: I'm NOT talking about form failure in technical movements so shut it.  Think about someone on a leg extension.  The repetition cannot be completed when quad force output is below force requirements.  No technique involved.

Fiber Recruitment

Muscle fibers vary in their size and force output.   When force output is required, muscle fibers are recruited in a relatively orderly fashion from small/weak to large/strong.  Walking requires very little fiber recruitment.  Running more.  Sprinting even more.  You get the idea.

In the weight room, you will get essentially full fiber recruitment with loads of 80-85% of maximum force output.  About 5-8 reps or so.  IF you start at 85% (max set of 5) you will get full recruitment from repetition 1.  

If you start at 80% of maximum on the bar you'll get essentially full fiber recruitment from the first repetition.  Or certainly within one or two.  The last repetitions of the set will be performed under full fiber recruitment conditions.

What about submaximal loads?  Here you will not get full recruitment initially.  But as fatigue sets in, the body will recruit more fibers and you will eventually.  In a limit set of 15, you might get full recruitment for the last 3-5 reps.  You just had to do 10-12 to get there.  For a set of 30 to failure, you get full recruitment in the last 5 or so.  You just fucked around for 25 to get there.

Basically the last 5 reps of

a. A heavy set of 8

b. A lighter set of 15

c. A stupid set of 30

Are essentially the same neurologically, occurring under full recruitment conditions.  The difference is just in how many reps you did to get there.

I mentioned metabolic work up above and the 5-8 rep number is worth keeping in mind.  If you were to do a max set of 3 you'd still get full recruitment.  But you'd get NO more recruitment than the set of 5.  You'd also do less metabolic work per set.  

This is why over a decade ago I wrote a piece suggesting that sets of 5-8 were an optimal training range for growth as it maximizes fiber recruitment and metabolic work per set.  Yeah, you can do it with sets of 15 but it's a lot more work to get the same basic result.

Put differently you can get full recruitment with

Heavy sets NOT taken to failure (Doing 6 reps with an 8 rep max will still get you several reps under conditions of full recruitment).   Even with say a set of 10, if you stop at 8, you're getting several reps at full recruitment

Light sets taken to failure. Of some interest, studies on low-load training show that growth is worse if you don't go to failure.   But heavy sets NOT taken to failure do.  And this is why.

Tension + Metabolic Work FTW

Fundamentally growth comes down to the combination of high tension and sufficient metabolic work.  This is THE acute stimulus for growth.  High tension without sufficient metabolic work won't do it.  A ton of metabolic work without high tension won't do it.  You need both.

Put more simply, to stimulate a fiber to grow (OR get stronger) it has to be

1. Recruited

2. Fatigued/do sufficient metabolic work

Zatsiorsky was more or less correct.

And empirically a billion effective training plans are built around this.

Powerbuilding: Do some heavy sets of 5 and then some pump bullshit

My GBR: Heavy sets of 6-8 and then some higher rep bullshit

The old McCallum bulk protein: 5 sets of 5 (two tops sets) and 8 sets of 8 on a short rest

And old silly book I had suggested a heavy set of 6 straight into a set of 20.

Every successful system combines the two factors. 
EVERY SINGLE ONE (well that is not drug driven).

RIR/RPE

In recent years, the idea of using RPE (rating perceived exertion) or RIR (repetitions in reserve) to gauge weight training intensity has been developed. 

RPE has problems that are too boring to talk about so let's talk bout RIR.  RIR refers to the number of repetitions that could be performed before muscular failure occurs.

0RIR = no more reps could be performed (i.e. the NEXT repetition would be failure).

.5 RIR = no more reps could be performed but you could us a littte more weight

1 RIR = 1 more rep could be performed

2 RIR = 2 more reps

&c

It has been generally shown that one needs to train at 4RIR or less to stimulate growth.  Think about this.  If you do a set of 10 and stop at 5 reps that's a warm-up set.  This is where most people in most gyms train.

Now if you did sets at 5RIR with a short rest, as you accumulated fatigue, RIR would drop and it would eventually become a training stimulus.  

But this is just an inefficient way to get to high tension.  Just like low load training.  You fuck around for a lot of sets to get to what the old bros used to called 'the growth reps'.  Just stimulating/effective reps before we scienced the fuck out of it.

Let me add that as I harped on about last year, as you approach 3-4RIR and less, bar speed slows due ot the force velocity curve.  And Mike Israetel can eat a dick for his hour of character defamation about me since he wouldn't admit I was right.

Mid-summary

Ok, let's sum up so far

1.    Muscle growth is almost exclusively a local phenomenon.

2.    To trigger growth acutely you have to:
expose a muscle to high mechanical tension
perform a sufficient amount of metabolic work

3.    Put differently: you need to recruit the fiber and then make it work/fatigue/something.  If you don't recruit a fiber it can't receive a training stimulus.  IF you recruit it and don't subject it to enough work, it won't receive a stimulus either

4.    Full recruitment of a muscle can occur with
Heavy loads not taken to failure
Light loads taken to failure

Progressive Tension Overload

The above just described acutely, within a workout, what turns on protein synthesis.    But in the longer term, there is more involved.  

Specifically there is progressive tension overload.  Simply, as  muscle becomes stronger and bigger you need to force it to generate higher tension outputs to subject it to sufficient mechanical tension.

In practice this means adding weight to the bar, which is the only proxy we really have for tension at this point.

Note: there are a bunch of caveats here that I wrote up on my website in the muscular tension series.  Spare me the fucking pedantry.

Let me note that the above does NOT mean adding weight at every workout or every week.  It's progression over time.  Put differently: go find someone in you gym benching 185X8.  Come back in a year.  If he's still benching 185X8 he's not bigger.  If he's not up to 245X8 he's bigger.

But this happens over a more extended period.

Yes, beginners usually can add weight rapidly.  But this is more to learning and neural effects.

Even intermediates, for short periods (i.e. 6-8 weeks) who are eating well may add weight weekly (i.e. my GBR).

Under most situations, what is now a sufficient load might remain such for 3-4 weeks.  So long as it remains in the 1-4 RIR range it's fine.  IF that weight for reps is now a 5-6RIR, it's a warm-up set.

In practice, you can simply take a final set to limits on a given exercise.  If you get 4 or more reps than target (i.e. you do 12 reps when the goal is 8), stop sandbagging and add some weight to the bar.  

If you're skilled you can use bar speed.  If you know that at 2RIR the bar slows and suddenly you crank out the reps without a bar speed drop, it's time to add weight.

Note: there are a shit ton of other factors that go into this.  This isn't a training book...yet

Summing Up:

Ok, to stimulate growth in a muscle/individual muscles fibers you need to combine

1.    High mechanical tension

2.    Sufficient metabolic work

3.    To within about 3-4 reps of failure (to failure on light loads)

4.    Progressing the load on the bar over some time frame as you adapt

As Dante Trudell put it:

Growth is stimulated by becoming stronger in a moderate repetition range.

ALL successful non-drug based hypertrophy systems are based around these principles.  Any training NOT built around these principles is either stupid or only works if you're on a shit ton of gear.  
|
Then you can do whatever the fuck you want. Train, don't train, go fuck around with pansy weights and performatively throw up for your Intstagram cretins.  Doesn't fucking matter.  The drugs are doing the work.

But all big naturals used some system including the above over their career.  Period.

Exercise Selection

Ok, with the above in mind, let's talk about exercise selection FOR FUCKING HYPERTROPHY (not a joke, anybody goes "But what about getting better at squats, I will kick you out so you can go learn basic reading comprehension")

1. First, the exercise must involve the target muscle for that individual.  This seems like a real duh but in this industry, the stupidity is perpetual and infinite so I have to mention it.  If an exercise doesn't involve a muscle for that individual it is a bad exercise FOR THEM.

2. The exercise must not injure the person. This seems self-evident but again, this industry is filled with perpetual and infinite stupidity.  Some exercises are hard on some people's joints but not others.   If it bothers their joints, it is a bad exercise FOR THEM.

3. The individual must be able to progressively load the exercise over time.  This is often forgotten as some movements, frequently bodyweight can't be loaded progressively past a certain point.  
|
Once you can do 50 pushups, what do you do next?  Yes, you can change body position and shit like that.  It's trivial to add a 2.5 lb plate to the bar.  There are practical issues here that aren't involved to the physiology I want to look at.

Ok, so what does an exercise have to allow

1.    The trainee to expose the TARGET MUSCLE to high mechanical tension

2.    Perform a sufficient amount of work

3.    Achieve full recruitment

4.    Work to within 0-4 RIR FOR THE TARGET MUSCLE.

Ok, I put that last bit in all caps because that is what gets left out of this discussion.  People tend to think about taking an exercise to 0-4RIR rather than taking the muscle to 0-4RIR.

Remember, I'm talking about muscular hypertrophy NOT training a specific fucking movement (see above: get Hooked on Phonics if you can't see the difference).

What happens during the exercise in terms of proximity to failure, reaching  0-4 RIR is not necessarily the right criteria.  Especially in compound movements.

So let's start in reverse.

I have you doing a leg extension.  It is, for all practical purposes isolating your quadriceps muscle group (VMO, VL, VI, RF) for say 8-10 reps or whatever.  If I take you to the point of 2 RIR, I can say with some degree of certainty that it was the quadriceps that reached 2RIR.  I mean true 2 RIR, you didn't just stop.  Assume I have a magical wand that lets me know this is the case.  Or I gauge your bar speed.

Or let's just say I take you to muscular failure, the inability to complete a full repetition.  Ok fine, maybe you quit because you have no training drive and going to failure has to be learned and practiced.  But assume that is not the case.  

If you fail on leg extensions, I know that your quads failed.  On a set of 10 I know that you exposed them to high mechanical tension, sufficient metabolic work (for that set) with at least 4 and maybe 5 effective reps.

Now let's look at a squat.  Where you have a huge technical component.  Where not only the quads but the glutes, hamstrings, low back, upper back and god knows what else are all involved.  Deadlifts are even worse.  Ok, let's assume you have technical competency.    

Let's assume you have the training drive to actually get anywhere close to 4RIR, an assumption that is, in 99% of cases not true.  I've put videos of people taking squats to failure up to show you what it looks like.  I can say with some certainty that essentially NONE of you have ever gotten anywhere fucking close to it.

But let's assume you are the mythical Internet trainee who trains harder than any 10 trainees...

Ok, I take someone through a set of squats to 2 RIR. Again, magic wand.  I see bar speed get a bit slower and then very slow and stop them. They'd have ground out one more for sure and maybe two.  I know this from experience in the gym.  Someone asked me once what tool I used to gauge bar speed.  They are called eyes.

Here's the question: 
What failed?  Or rather what muscle in the movement was taken to 2 RIR when the set was stopped.

Just think about it for a second before you read on.  Think hard about it.

Or think about deadlifts where quads, hamstrings, low back, glutes, upper back, grip and god knows what else are involved.  

Again assume you have the technical competency to do reps anywhere near failure.  And the training drive (where I can assure you that 100% of you couldn't/haven't done it). I take you to 2 RIR.

What failed?  Or what muscle involved was the one that caused bar speed to slow and me to stop the set?

Keep thinking before you read on.

You can't answer that, can you?  Neither can I.

In the case of the deadlifts, I daresay it will almost always be low back causing the set to end.  Especially conventional.   Which isn't to say that other muscles didn't also get taken to 2-4 RIR. But how can we know if they did or not?

What about squats.  Presume you're using squats to train the quads.  If the lifter hits 2 RIR on the squat, can we say that it was his quads that gave out?  Or hit 2 RIR?

No, we can't.

Bench Press
Think about the bench press where pecs, delts, triceps, a little serratus, maybe some lats and shit are involved.  You hit 2 RIR?  What was the limiting muscle group?  

Assuming you're using it for pecs, can you say that the pecs were taken to 2 RIR?   If your pecs are significantly stronger than your triceps, they may only be at 5RIR when your triceps hit 2RIR?  The triceps are stimulated. The PECS ARE NOT

Louie Simmons once said "A lift doesn't fail. A muscle fails"  And he's right.   It's the old 'weakest link of the chain thing'.  Failure occurs when force requirements exceed force output.  

It doesn't matter if your pecs can move 225 if your triceps can't.  If your triceps can only move 185, you can only bench 185.  And your pecs are understimulated.  It's why powerlifters do assistance work.

Which takes us out of hypothetical physiology and gets into the biomechanics and the endlessly stupid fucking squat threads that pissed me off enough to write this.

People who find big compound movements to be effective for growth are ALWAYS built biomechanically well for them.  Chinese Ol'ers have short femurs and their back squats are almost perfectly upright.  

Guys who get a lot out of flat bench for pecs tend to have shorter arms, barrel chests along with fairly even strength in all muscles.    &c

Let me try to explain this more complexly.

The Bench

This can also occur due to biomechanics.  People with lanky arms will have, for boring length,are, volume reasons triceps that are relatively weaker.  Unless their triceps are FUCKING HUGE, I can say with some certainty that triceps will fatigue long before pecs are optimally stimulated.  IT'S A SHITTY MOVEMENT FOR THEM.  Add to that that long arms mean elbows go far behind the torso means more stress to the anterior joint capsule of the shoulder means eventual injury.   

Note: This can be addressed if desired.  You could, for example, pre-exhaust the pecs either as a separate exercise or as part of a pre-exhaust set.  So you do a set of 8 flyes or pec deck to near failure, fatiguing the pecs so that they only can do 80X10 or 90X10 in the bench.  With the relative pec/triceps strength so much closer now, the pecs are likely to be far closer to 0-4RIR when the triceps invariably give out.  Even if you just do 2 heavy sets of pec dec FIRST in the chest workout, the same will occur to some degree.  See, it's not always best to start with the compounds.

However bench also has the technical and balance component.  Remember the goal is to expose the target muscle to high tension and work to the point of 0-4RIR.  If your technique stops you at 5RIR, you didn't get shit out of it.  It amazes me that fitpros will say

1.    studies of exercise on unstable surfaces are shit for strength and growth (stabilizers fail)

2.    yet still adhere to movement that have an inherent instability issue as well without recognizing the potential for this to limit the movement

Without recognizing that they semi-contradict each other.  

Yes, instability to stability is a continuum from one legged bullshint on a Bosu to a leg extension.  They just draw THEIR line at the movements they like to do/think are mas macho/think everybody should do/that everybody has done for reasons.

If you're training the bench with the goal of growing pecs and your rotator cuff gives out, you're doing it wrong.  DB's are worse unless your technique is meticulous like mine.  And it's probably not because you didn't spend the time I did making sure I never break form.

But I put you on a Hammer chest press and take that out and we've eliminate a potentially early source of fatigue that prevents THE TARGET MUSCLE from being stimulated.  We still might have the triceps issue.  But I have removed the stability issue.

The Squat

Onto squats, assuming we are using squats to train quads (there is no 'legs' muscle group to train).  First we have the muscular balance issue.  Say your quads are strong but your low back is simply weak.  

If low back hits 2 RIR when quads are at 5RIR, your quads didn't get a stimulus.  The WRONG muscle was the one that got recruited and fatigued.  Yes, you can and should strengthen it to potentially eliminate this weak point.  I'm just talking concepts here.  

This is a problem that many women run into due to how muscles are distributed in the body.  Women carry proportionally more muscle in the legs than upper body.  Their upper bodies may not be able to shoulder what their legs can move. If the upper back fatigues first and that stops the set, before the quads have been stimulated well it's a shitty quad movement for them....is this sinking in yet?

Fun fact: Chinese female Ol'ers do a ton of upper body work for this reason.  Both OL's are limited by what you can hold overhead so they train (and drug) the shit out of it so it's not limiting.  When I watched the 2008 summer games, most of the other countries female lifters were wobbly as fuck overhead due to inadequate upper body development.  The Chinese women were rock solid because they had delts bigger than most dudez.

It's also why front squats are often problematic for hypertrophy.  Unless your upper body is beast strong, your rack/shoulder girdle/upper back is likely to fatigue long before your quads do.    

The Zercher squat is even stupider although that's really a support movement for squatting anyhow to help people stay more upright.

Even the cretins who recommend HEAVY goblet squats seem to be unaware that it's likely your wrists/grip that give out.  How is this good to train the QUADS?

Biomechanical Factors

Now this interacts with biomechanics.  Someone with short femurs (and good ankle mobility and yes this can be offset some with shows) can maintain a very upright torso in a back squat.  This has several consequences.

One, their low back isn't stressed nearly as much.  So it's less likely to be the cause of early fatigue.

Two, their upper back doesn't have to work nearly as hard to keep the bar in place, especially when it's high bar.  So the upper back is less likely to be the cause of early fatigue.

Three, due to the mechanics of the short-femured squatter, they can often go deeper which means more knee flexion which means more quad involvement.

If I take that squatter to 2RIR on squats, they are far more likely to be at 2RIR for the quads.

Now someone with long femurs.  For any squat style, their hips will be much further back.  To keep the bar over the center of support, that means that their torso must be tipped more forwards.

One, this means that low back is far more likely to be the cause of early fatigue.

Two, the upper back has to work much harder to keep from caving.

Third, tall femured squatters generally have more trouble getting deep meaning less knee flexion which means less quad involvement.  

They might get a decent butt out of it.  I did when I power squatted and sat more back than down because that emphasized hip flexion rather than knee flexion.

And yes, this can be influenced by shoes to a degree.  And by ankle mobility to a degree.  But they are unlikely to ever reach the upright position of the short femurred squatter.  It's simply biomechanics.  And those can't be changed without power tools.

Which means that, so far as exposing the quads to a proper training stimulus (again high tension + work to the point of 0-4RIR), the squat won't be a good movement for them in general. 

They are far more likely to have a limiting muscle that is not the quads along with not being able to technically perform the movement in such a way to emphasize quad involvement.

I put them on a hack squat, or smith machine where the torso is upright and we can adjust foot position without them going ass over teapot and I can train their quads.  Or I put them on a leg extension and take all this bullshit out of the equation.  I can take them to 2RIR and KNOW that it was their quads fatiguing.

It doesn't matter IF THEY ENOJOY SQUATS (HERP DE DERP)
It doesn't matter if you think someone is a pansy if they don't squat
There is no such thing as 'all over development' so drop that idiocy.  There is no 'all over' muscle group FFS

The exercise will be shit FOR THEM in terms of training their quads due to their inherent unmodifiable biomechanics.  And usually the people who can't grasp this are

a. Built to back squat to begin with with no capacity to understand that not all people are built like them

b. Young macho dipshits who have bought into the bullshit of the perpetually infinitely stupid fitness industry on this topic

We have at least two in this group.  And probably more than that.

The Deadlift

The deadlift, well I addressed that above.  What does the deadlift even train to begin with.  don't say everything.  There is no everything muscle group.  

I daresay in involving everything it doesn't train anything (except the deadlift and your fucking ego) effectively.  Maybe if someone has perfect mechanics and balanced muscular strength it trains something well.  But that's fairly rare.  Who among you have done sets of 8 in the DL to 2RIR or failure?  A fair few.  

I've done it but I'm awesome.  And built for it.  And somehow had fairly balanced strength where my upper back never caved compared to what my legs could move. 

The Bent Over Row

Exercise number 4 of THE BIG 3.  A big ego movement where your low back will alwaysfatigue first.  How does this train the upper back effectively unless it just happens to hit 0-4RIR when your low back gives out?  

A proper chest supported row eliminates a perpetual limiting factor.  Now you can actually train your back.  Unless your arms are lanky and biceps are weak and they are limiting in which case I make you do a shrug back to actually TRAIN YOUR BACK which is the goal of the exercise.

The OHP

Fuck the overhead press too.  You spend more energy dicking it around your head and most likely serratus or triceps will limit delt stimulus.  Is this making sense.

Yes, some people get a lot of it.  Look at how they are always built.  Like benchers with relatively short arms with big triceps.  So it's a more balanced movement FOR THEM.  

When they fatigue, it's a more even fatigue so that their delts are likely to get more effective reps without triceps being too limiting.

And for the lanky armed lifter with relatively weaker triceps, it won't do shit for their delts.

I put them on a good lateral raise machine and take them to 2RIR, I KNOW I trained their medial delts.  An OHP to 2RIR well who the fuck knows for that long armed trainee.

So let's sum up exercise selection for hypertrophy

1. It must work the target muscle effectively

2. It must allow the target muscle to be exposed to high mechanical tension and sufficient metabolic work to the point of 0-4reps from failure (or failure for low load stuff). This means it cannot have some OTHER component that causes the set to end prior to reaching that point.  That could be balance/coordination/technique, relative muscular strengths or biomechanical factors.

3. It must be safe for the trainee because injuries are not good for hypertrophy in my experience

4. It must be able to be progressed over time.  There are practical issues here. Another post or something.

Summary

That's it.  Those are the requirements for hypertrophy.  There are no best movements or required movements or any of that bullshit.  A good exercise meets all 4 of the above criteria for the individual in question.  A bad exercise does not.  There will be no exercises that are good and bad for all trainees.

With certain biomechanics (usually tall, lanky arms or legs), a squat, bench, DL, OHP and BOR are likely to be pointless exercises.  

You can fix some muscular imbalances (i.e. so triceps don't limit bench) but you can't change biomechanics.  If someone is built poorly for a given movement it will be a shitty movement FOR THEM FOR HYPERTROPHY.

Everybody please read this until it sinks in.

Colou sem formatação e eu não vou ter o trabalho de formatar do zero kkk

[Lucas, o Schrödinger 11436]

Treino 2:

 

A	Power Jerk	3	3	73	120	Pausa 3seg na recepção
B	Wide grip bench press	4	6;6;6;2	90;90;90;107	120
C	Barbell Prone Row	3	8	70	10	Pausa 3seg no final da puxada - RPE 7
	DB Seated Press	3	8	44	90
D	Elevação Lateral	3	12	9	60	RPE 6

 

Hoje eu tava bem cansado, ainda reflexo da ressaca do réveillon, mas o treino até que fluiu bem.

 

O ombro não incomodou hoje. O maior problema são os snatches mesmo.

É isso.

[Lucas, o Schrödinger 11436]

Hoje foi descanso de treino com pesos. Fiz 50min de remo. Tenho remado 2-3x por semana, geralmente nos dias sem treino (inclusive, segunda fiz meia hora).

[Lucas, o Schrödinger 11436]

Treino 3:

 

A	Pause Back Squat	4	4	108	120	3seg bottom
B	B Stance GM	3	10;10;8	43	90
C	Dual DB Elbowing Row	4	10	44	90	2 halteres 22kg
D	upright row	3	10	30	90

Tá impressionante como essas cargas fofas estão me deixando cansado. O corpo ainda se recupera, a passos lentos, do final do ano.

 

Sorte que o @Coach.Wagner é mto bom nesse dimensionamento de cargas. Se fosse eu que estivesse programando estaria colocando umas cargas mto mais altas e estaria quebrado em 2 semanas.

 

É isso.

[Lucas, o Schrödinger 11436]

 

Treino 4:

 

A	CL Pull + CL From Hip	4	3(1+1)	75
B	Snatch Deadlift	4	4	80
C	Wide grip bench press	3	5	96
D	DB Seated Press	3	8	44

Essa semana foi puxada demais, mas consegui fazer todo o treino. Acho que semana que vem vai ser menos difícil treinar.

 

É isso.

[Lucas, o Schrödinger 11436]

Atualização Dieta

 

Eu to fazendo um dia de PSMF (protein sparing modified fast) toda semana (segunda), há 3 semanas. É basicamente uma ingestão alta de proteína e mínima do resto. Pra mim dá uma boa folga pro intestino, tira a retenção e eu até curto pq me sinto bem mais leve nos dias subsequentes. De quebra gera um buffer de calorias pro restante da semana, quando eu tenho feito leves superávits.

 

Nesse dia eu ainda tento incluir um cardio leve. Hoje fiz 40min de remo e só. Amanhã tem um treino técnico de LPO leve.

 

A ideia é ficar em manutenção (saldo semanal zero) nesse esquema 6/1 até o final do mês e depois aumentar o superávit nos outros dias.

 

É isso.