all posts post new thread

Barbell Is a mass building phase necessary to keep building strength?

Status
Closed Thread. (Continue Discussion of This Topic by Starting a New Thread.)
Interesting. I think I am also seeing that the DL benefits just as much from increased body weight as the other lifts.

But I'm also seeing a gap in logic here, relative to each of us as individuals.

The relative weight that lifters can accomplish in various weight classes is not the same as if you took any ONE lifter and somehow put him sequentially at all the different body weights he reasonably occupy and see how strong he is at each weight.

Isn't that what we all really want to know? If I put on some weight, how much stronger can I get? Or coversely, if I steadfastly refuse to let my weight go up, is it seriously limiting how strong I can get?
 
So the headers are
(Weight class kgs) (Sq) (BP) (DL) correct?

Assuming that's correct, it's very clear just how much the DL improves as the weight classes go up right?

The slope calculation is pretty simple:
((Max of weight class X) - (Max of weight class Y))/((Weight class X) - (Weight class Y))

If you take weight classes 59 and 66 kilos, then:
Squat slope = (250-240)/(66-59) = 10/7 kilos added to the squat for an added kilogram of BW
Bench slope = (189-171)/(66-59) = 18/7 kilos added to the bench for an added kilogram of BW
DL slope = (285-271)/(66-59) = 14/7 kilos added to the DL for an added kilogram of BW

In this case, the BP benefited most, with DL second and squat third.

You can go a bit longer, like 83 vs 59 weight class:
Squat slope = (298-240)/(83-59) = 2.4 kilos added to the squat for an added kilogram of BW
Bench slope = (209-171)/(83-59) = 1.6 kilos added to the bench for an added kilogram of BW
DL slope = (326-271)/(83-59) = 2.3 kilos added to the DL for an added kilogram of BW

This case DL comes at a very close second, with bench far behind.


It occurs to me I might not be understanding at all what you're both saying, but from both data I provided and you provided, it's pretty clear that the DL benefits just as much (if not generally a bit more) from BW gain.

Perhaps I'm misunderstanding your point?



EDIT: On an added note, you can plot all of that data onto a regression program like wolframalpha. He will determine the best fit function for the data (which will most definitely be some higher exponential function, or perhaps some logarithmic function). The linearization is just useful for a rough estimate. Once you have that function, you can take its derivative. That will tell you exactly how much added BW will add to your max for every one of the lifts, at each weight class. I am very confident if you did that, the derivative for the DL would be generally the same value as the other two. Meaning, at any given weight class, additions of weight will manifest in max additions very similar to the bench and squat. We can make that rough prediction based on the slopes above we took but you might find other interesting things too.

We can talk more about this later if you want as I understand it might be a little bit complicated but something tells me you'd personally find it pretty interesting ^__^

Maybe our viewpoints are skewed differently.

When I compare the lightest lifter and the heaviest lifter in each category, in squat the heaviest squats 100% more than the lightest one. In the deadlift, 50% more. That's a massive difference.

If we take into account the individuals in question, the SHW with the 392,5 kg DL weighed 180kg. The man who lifted 390kg weighed 100kg.

Btw, both the -93kg and 105kg class lifts belong to the same person, with a difference of about 7,5kg and three years between the lifts.
 
Maybe our viewpoints are skewed differently.

When I compare the lightest lifter and the heaviest lifter in each category, in squat the heaviest squats 100% more than the lightest one. In the deadlift, 50% more. That's a massive difference.

If we take into account the individuals in question, the SHW with the 392,5 kg DL weighed 180kg. The man who lifted 390kg weighed 100kg.

Btw, both the -93kg and 105kg class lifts belong to the same person, with a difference of about 7,5kg and three years between the lifts.
1) For one thing, you shouldn't just compare the heaviest and the lightest lifter. There's no reason to believe this data is linear nor that those two points are representative enough. So if you want to compare how much max increases from BW gain, the closest the two weight classes, the more correct the answer will be. If the data isn't linear (which it almost certainly is not), taking the slope between both extremes gives misleading data.

You can generally approximate the slope when the weight classes are close together (the way I did) because any function is "linear" when you zoom in.

If you want to take into account the extremes, you need to plot the entire data, and then use a line of best fit. I went ahead and did that for you. The best-fit slope for the:
Sq is 2.3
BP is 1.2
DL is 2.1

So yes, the Squat does a little better with extra weight, with the DL a close second. And the BP well behind.

2) You have also cherry-picked your cases to fit your expectations. Something funky must've happened in that DL range you mentioned because it goes down, the goes up again. MOST of the time, added weight benefitted the DL and in that particular case, it didn't. So you can't base it off of that.

Cherry-picking would be like me going:
"The 93 kg benched more than the 105 kg! And the 74 kg benched more than the 83! Clearly increasing your BW hurts your bench"

Which is totally false. Most likely, something funky happened. You'd need more data to make better conclusions but overall, the data you provided shows the DL increasing almost as much as the SQ.
 
1) For one thing, you shouldn't just compare the heaviest and the lightest lifter. There's no reason to believe this data is linear nor that those two points are representative enough. So if you want to compare how much max increases from BW gain, the closest the two weight classes, the more correct the answer will be. If the data isn't linear (which it almost certainly is not), taking the slope between both extremes gives misleading data.

You can generally approximate the slope when the weight classes are close together (the way I did) because any function is "linear" when you zoom in.

If you want to take into account the extremes, you need to plot the entire data, and then use a line of best fit. I went ahead and did that for you. The best-fit slope for the:
Sq is 2.3
BP is 1.2
DL is 2.1

So yes, the Squat does a little better with extra weight, with the DL a close second. And the BP well behind.

2) You have also cherry-picked your cases to fit your expectations. Something funky must've happened in that DL range you mentioned because it goes down, the goes up again. MOST of the time, added weight benefitted the DL and in that particular case, it didn't. So you can't base it off of that.

Cherry-picking would be like me going:
"The 93 kg benched more than the 105 kg! And the 74 kg benched more than the 83! Clearly increasing your BW hurts your bench"

Which is totally false. Most likely, something funky happened. You'd need more data to make better conclusions but overall, the data you provided shows the DL increasing almost as much as the SQ.

I think the main problem with this discussion is the small sample size.

When I mentioned my viewpoint being skewed in the earlier post I did imply that I have the habit of concentrating on the heaviest weight classes. I find it interesting how close the deadlifts of lifters around 100kg are to those of the superheavyweights.
 
Interesting. I think I am also seeing that the DL benefits just as much from increased body weight as the other lifts.

Yes

Research shows there are three factors that optimize Hypertrophy. The primary factor is...

Metabolic Stress

It is elicited with "The Pump". Arterial blood is pumped to the working muscles.

Ventricle blood flow is trapped in the working muscle; the muscle contraction restricting blood flow from the muscle back to the heart.

What you end up with are bigger muscles swollen with blood, "Da Pump".

The Pump produces an anabolic hormonal cascade; increasing the size of the muscles.

Hypertrophy Training Prootocol

1) Moderate to Light Loads

2) Moderate to High Repetitins

3) Short Rest Periods between sets.

Take Home Message

A well written and executed Deadlift Training Program will increase muscle mass with a surplus of calories. Weight gain or loss is all about Diet.

The relative weight that lifters can accomplish in various weight classes is not the same as if you took any ONE lifter and somehow put him sequentially at all the different body weights he reasonably occupy and see how strong he is at each weight.

Yes

The majority of lifter have a Weight Class "Sweet Spot"; a body weight where their optimal performance occurs.

A Fundamental Issue of Weight Class Resistance

One of the prime issues for a lifter not moving up into a higher weight class is that it takes time to mature and grow into the new weight class. That meaning the lifter will not be initially as good and efficient in the new class as the lower one.

The only way to find out how well you will perform in a higher weight class is to move up, be patient and give yourself time to mature into the new weight class.

Isn't that what we all really want to know? If I put on some weight, how much stronger can I get?

Knowing

It's what I want to know. I have experimented with moving up and down the Weight Classes.

I began as a 148, dropped down to a 132, then went up to a 165, 181, 198, then down to 181, down to 165, then up to 198, up to a light 220 (208 lbs) and now a light 198 (190 lbs).

It sound like you'd like to know.

...if I steadfastly refuse to let my weight go up, is it seriously limiting how strong I can get?

Weight Classes

Gaining weight increases strength. That is why their are Weight Classes.

The question for Competitive Lifters is, "Which Weight Class am I the most efficient?"

One method that will provide you some feed back on that is to employ one of the Powerlifting Formulas that is used for determining who is "The Best Lifter" of the lifters in the various Weight Classes.

Use the Co-Efficient to determine you present number at a specific body weight. Then as you gain weight, use that body weight Co-Efficient to see how your are progressing.

Most importantly, be patient training at you new body weight. Allow yourself time to mature into it. "Rome wasn't built in a day", trite but true.

Kenny Croxdale
 
Last edited:
When I started the thread I wasn't asking if a larger person will be stronger than a smaller person as much as will the ES principles naturally build the mass that is necessary to sustain an increase in strength.

This might be a departure from the original question so maybe I should start another thread, but the other thing I wonder is: ES seems to be designed for people that are also committing a lot of energy to the practice of a sport. If I have a desk job and don't practice a sport that requires a lot of energy, does that mean I could also add a few higher rep sets as if that was my sport?
 
The relative weight that lifters can accomplish in various weight classes is not the same as if you took any ONE lifter and somehow put him sequentially at all the different body weights he reasonably occupy and see how strong he is at each weight.

Isn't that what we all really want to know? If I put on some weight, how much stronger can I get? Or coversely, if I steadfastly refuse to let my weight go up, is it seriously limiting how strong I can get?

It is certainly not what I want to know. My strength training is part of my idea of a life well-lived.

-S-
 
I think Anna meant in the context of this discussion, which is dead on. This discussion is about the effect of adding muscle to ones own frame, rather than comparing records across weight classes.
 
Interesting. I think I am also seeing that the DL benefits just as much from increased body weight as the other lifts.

But I'm also seeing a gap in logic here, relative to each of us as individuals.

The relative weight that lifters can accomplish in various weight classes is not the same as if you took any ONE lifter and somehow put him sequentially at all the different body weights he reasonably occupy and see how strong he is at each weight.

Isn't that what we all really want to know? If I put on some weight, how much stronger can I get? Or coversely, if I steadfastly refuse to let my weight go up, is it seriously limiting how strong I can get?

If the low hanging fruit has been picked and your linear progression is all but stalled, gaining weight will increase strength. Even if you begin waving/periodizing etc, once you have hit a plateau for your bodyweight, adding pounds will increase strength output.

Yes, you can apply waving etc and still get strength gains at the same weight, but if you do nothing but increase lean mass you will see increases in output. And this irrespective of protocol (PowerLifting vs BBing vs ?). Pound for pound IDK, but for sure it will either go up, or your ability to push X number of reps at a given %RM will go up.

I'm equally certain that at some point increases in BW will no longer increase your loads, but that is going to be at a pretty high ratio of weight to height.

Conversely if you intentionally lose weight your strength will go down in one of the aforementioned ways - either top end will step back, or ability to perform X number of reps at a submaximal %RM will go down.

This assumes your body comp staying pretty much the same with only a change in lean muscle or a proportionally equal gain in muscle/fat/water etc.

Edit to add: this is a good reason to keep records of the weight you moved with given routines and BW.

Maybe a better question is whether adding weight improves unprogrammed expressions of strength and to what extent. But that would be part of a bigger conversation about "functional" movements etc.
 
When I started the thread I wasn't asking if a larger person will be stronger than a smaller person as much as will the ES principles naturally build the mass that is necessary to sustain an increase in strength.
@Jeff to come back to your original question I think you will build mass if you need it.
I don't have any science to back up the following statements, but I believe the human body is a tremendeous piece of nature.
If you train up to the point where at your current weight you milked all the strength gains that come through neural adaption and the only way to further increase strength is to add mass, your body will "know" it.
It will naturally increase your appetite and in return you'll naturally eat more. This leads to an increase in mass and the cycle starts again.
Of course like a linear progression this has limits otherwise your mass and your lifts would grow into infinity.
I believe this is what happened to the old strongman. I don't think they forcefully increased their food intake or used dedicated hypertrophy cycles. They just lifted heavy weights on a daily basis and over time naturally ate more to keep adding weight to their lifts and as a side-effect build more muscle.
Again I have absolutely no science to back this up, but I honestly believe in it.
 
Last edited:
@North Coast Miller, improving skill can be worked on for a lifetime. I started lifting in my mid-40’s and set a new lifetime best at 62 that I’m hoping to improve upon for years to come.

-S-

No argument there, but whatever the gains are at the same BW, an increase in lean BW would almost certainly push up the #s even more.

And another thing I feel pretty strongly is that when the weights climb in the context of competitive lifting, is not necessarily the same as getting stronger across the board. Demonstration of strength as a 1RM skill on a specific movement vs application of strength to unrelated/unprogrammed movements.
 
No argument there, but whatever the gains are at the same BW, an increase in lean BW would almost certainly push up the #s even more.
And no argument from me there.

And another thing I feel pretty strongly is that when the weights climb in the context of competitive lifting, is not necessarily the same as getting stronger across the board. Demonstration of strength as a 1RM skill on a specific movement vs application of strength to unrelated/unprogrammed movements.
That's far too broad a generalization, IMO. Carryover from one thing to another is going to vary widely based on the activities on both sides of the equation, and also on gear.

I will advance the argument that perhaps the completely raw DL - NB, this is my lift - may be the best predictor of carryover. By "completely raw," I mean DL slippers, socks, underwear, a t-shirt and a singlet - no belt, no wraps, no straps. Using PL gear is a specific skill, and lifting with an eccentric phase also allows sport-specific skill.

I can tell you this - if I felt there was a lift that had more carryover to the "application of strength to unrelated/un-programmed movements," I'd practice it.

-S-
 
I have a related question: let's say you increase your weight to increase your strength, and then diet back to your original weight. How much of the gained strength is it possible to keep when losing weight?
 
I have a related question: let's say you increase your weight to increase your strength, and then diet back to your original weight. How much of the gained strength is it possible to keep when losing weight?

I'd say if you were super lean to begin with, added lean weight, and then dropped back down you'd retain very little of the increased strength. Some probably, as a bit of the increase will be due to changes in the connective tissue, but overall it wouldn't be much.
 
And no argument from me there.


That's far too broad a generalization, IMO. Carryover from one thing to another is going to vary widely based on the activities on both sides of the equation, and also on gear.

I will advance the argument that perhaps the completely raw DL - NB, this is my lift - may be the best predictor of carryover. By "completely raw," I mean DL slippers, socks, underwear, a t-shirt and a singlet - no belt, no wraps, no straps. Using PL gear is a specific skill, and lifting with an eccentric phase also allows sport-specific skill.

I can tell you this - if I felt there was a lift that had more carryover to the "application of strength to unrelated/un-programmed movements," I'd practice it.

-S-
I don't believe there are that many if any single movements that have massive carry-over on a scale that is universally helpful. As you say, if I knew of one I'd be doing it.

And that leads me back to my observation that as strength gains on a given lift are no longer linear and begin topping out to what the average competitive lifter can move, you are more and more governed by specificity.

It is extremely unlikely you can increase across a variety of movements in a similar fashion. Restating my earlier, a person doing a variety of lifts and increasing on all of them by increasing bodyweight, will have a much better likelihood of showing improvement in unprogrammed activities.
 
I think... that our bodies have a natural, healthy maximum strength that is sitting there waiting for us to fill in when we want to. That seems to me to be about manipulating about 1/3 bodyweight in one hand, and deadlifting 1.5 bodyweight for a few reps in each case. After this, it would seem the average person is going to need to increase mass significantly. If we do NOT exercise enough to attain this "healthy level of strength" then we leave ourselves rather weak. Breaking past this healthy level of strength can be very challenging and involves putting on weight and consuming more and more calories. It's like filling up a water bottle - you can easily get it full of water, but to change/widen the shape of the bottle to allow it to fit in more water takes some special skills and technology!

Take my S&S journey for example. I can do the routine with the 32, even if I got injured and missed over a month. But, to do it with the 40... I can work up to it, find it hard to maintain the workouts, and tend to lose it and drop back to 32. Same with deadlifts - I can pick up 1.5 bodyweight even without training up to it, but getting past that takes dedication! Evidently, my body had certain natural capacities for weight bearing that I learned to activate through the SF programmes, and once learnt cannot lose.
 
Hello,

Restating my earlier, a person doing a variety of lifts and increasing on all of them by increasing bodyweight, will have a much better likelihood of showing improvement in unprogrammed activities
I think this is a good observation.

Indeed, for a while, I tried to "free-style" my workout. Everyday, I used different moves, using plenty of tools: kettlebells, rubber bands, bodyweight, rings, etc... I did not follow any program for any move. I did ring complexes, bent press, pull ups, pistols, etc... My bodyweight increased a little (let's say about 2kg in 2 months). Then I tested a "max" GU, and was very [positively] surprised to do 5 GUs @40. I was not able to do it before, far from it (it was barely one "wobbling" rep).

Maybe a wide variety of moves permits to get both plenty of rest (you do not "exhaust" only certain muscle groups), while gaining strength. Plus, I think the body can be some kind of "sponge": the more you move and the more you lift (just a little everyday), the more it increases you ability to move even more. To a certain extent, this is a virtuous circle.

I never progressed that much. Maybe it was more natural to my body to work this way. Now, I reached some kind of "natural healthy strength". It requires effort, both mental and physical, if I want to lift heavier. So from here, I had two options: specialization in some lifts, or keep varying a lot by progressively increase difficulty (harder variations, etc...)

Kind regards,

Pet'
 
Maybe a wide variety of moves permits to get both plenty of rest (you do not "exhaust" only certain muscle groups), while gaining strength.

Varying Exercises

One of the fundamental key for increasing strength and for hypertrophy is varying your exercises.

While varying them every workout was effective for you, a more effective method it to use them in a...

Periodization Training Program

That means performing the same exercises over a number of week before rotating them out with a new exercise.

How long you employ the exercise has to do with you...

Training Age

This is defined as the length of how long you have been training not your chronological age.

That because Novice Lifter adapt more slowly. This allows them to continue to make progress for a longer time period with the same program. About 8 - 12 weeks.

Advanced Lifter adapt more quickly to a training program. They need to change out their program more often. about every 2 -4 weeks.

Changes in exercises are more effective than in loading schemes to improve muscle strength. Changes in exercises are more effective than in loading schemes to improve muscle strength. - PubMed - NCBI

This research demonstrated that the key for optimizing Strength Training is Varied Exercise.

The two most effective of the four method tested were...

1) Constant Intensity-Varied Exercise

2) Varied Intensity-Varied Exercise

The empirical data that has demonstrated for around 36 years is...

The Westside Training Program

One of the covenants of this program it Auxiliary Exercise Rotation; employing Auxiliary Exercises that are mimic or similar in nature to the Powerlifts for increasing strength.

Once an Auxiliary Exercise is exhausted, a new training cycle is implemented with a new Auxiliary Exercise.

This adheres to the foundation on Periodization Training...

The General Adaptation Synerome

When the body is introduced to a new stimulus (an exercise in this case) it goes through an adaptation process; you become stronger.

However, at some point the body adapts and progress stops.

Summary

1) Varying Exercise in your training elicits a greater training response.

2) The guidelines for the length of your training program is dictated by your Training Age.

3) Periodization Training Cycles need change once adaptation to a training program occurs.

4) Changing exercise can be as simple as going from a High Bar Squat to a Low Bar Squat or a Wide Grip Bench Press to a Narrow Grip Bench Press.

The same muscle are involved but there is a shift of the loading and muscle firing sequence.

The Ice Cream Example

Vanilla, chocolate and strawberry ice cream are still ice cream but they have a different flavor.

Kenny Croxdale
 
Last edited:
Status
Closed Thread. (Continue Discussion of This Topic by Starting a New Thread.)
Back
Top Bottom