all posts post new thread

Barbell Barbell over 50: Easier to do more than less

Status
Closed Thread. (Continue Discussion of This Topic by Starting a New Thread.)
Boris Bachmann said:
I have zero science to back up my opinion
Click to expand...

As long as we're throwing stuff out there that has no science backing:

  • As an oldster trying to prioritize injury prevention, I do proportionally more pre-hab / "body balancing" work than I did when I was younger trying to maximize training specificity for performance reasons
  • What I'm losing in specificity seems to compensated for in both performance (eliminating weak links in the chain) *and* BRO SCIENCE ALERT hypertrophy, under the theory that your body will impede growth to some extent if it "thinks you're not ready" or "you will become imbalanced"
Which sounds like voodoo to me, but I have observed, for example, it's easier to induce deltoid growth when my upper back / rhomboids are progressing, too.
 
Boris Bachmann said:
Maybe I'm too slow to follow and this is all above my head.
I'm not assuming that you build, maintain, or lose at the same rate at all. I'm saying that where you are now matters as far as how you need to train. I'm saying if you are already trained and want to build, it's going to require more than once a week. If you want to maintain, once a week will probably do. If you are untrained or detrained, once a week will probably do.
Click to expand...
Ok I get what you mean and you may be right. I honestly don’t know where along the training experience curve gains will flatten and then, potentially, nullify or even if that will happen (assuming that the weekly single set changes increases in intensity/volume as strength and muscle increase). And, as I said, I’ve never tried HIT style weekly training for fear of eroding my gains
 
@Boris Bachmann good video, I never heard of the muscle strength deficit before. Is that related to like the neuromuscular training from powerlifting? That might not be the right name, I'm a few years removed from PL, but the idea that in addition to training your muscles you're always training your nervous system how to contract maximally.
 
John K said:
@Boris Bachmann good video, I never heard of the muscle strength deficit before. Is that related to like the neuromuscular training from powerlifting? That might not be the right name, I'm a few years removed from PL, but the idea that in addition to training your muscles you're always training your nervous system how to contract maximally.
Click to expand...
Yeah, it's been a long time since I've even looked at Siff, Zatsiorsky, etc (I can look things up later) but neuromuscular efficiency is absolutely part of it.
 
Boris Bachmann said:
I just made this video - it's related to the subject of aging, but it's more along the lines of why intermediate-advanced lifters can't "lift like they used to".
Click to expand...


Nice video.

I've explained it to others as saying once you get experienced, the neurological-driven gains are more tapped out, and you the adaptations have to be more physical.

Somewhat related, VBT is pretty humbling even on days you think are subjectively 'good days'. And conversely on 'bad' days.
 
watchnerd said:
I've explained it to others as saying once you get experienced, the neurological-driven gains are more tapped out, and you the adaptations have to be more physical.
Click to expand...

Pablo Casals was asked why he still practiced at age 90 and he answered, "Because I think I'm making progress." I'm with Pablo. Neurological gains are there for many people who think they aren't. "Experienced" does not necessarily equal "as good as possible."

-S-
 
Steve Freides said:
Pablo Casals was asked why he still practiced at age 90 and he answered, "Because I think I'm making progress." I'm with Pablo. Neurological gains are there for many people who think they aren't. "Experienced" does not necessarily equal "as good as possible."

-S-
Click to expand...

I try not to draw conclusions from my bass playing and relate them to resistance training.

The metabolic substrates are operating on different levels -- my bass playing doesn't stall if I don't get enough protein.

Unlike my music practice, my resistance training shows up in my blood work consistently -- if I get blood work a day after resistance training my creatinine levels will be elevated enough to set off a yellow flag and the docs will have me retest to make sure that it's related to protein turnover and not kidney disease.

Of course I continue to practice weightlifting for skill purposes, too, but it's a metabolically different animal than practicing bass.

Musicians, especially jazz and classical, have much longer careers than athletes for a reason.
 
Last edited:
watchnerd said:
I try not to draw conclusions from my bass playing and relate them to resistance training.
Click to expand...
In this way, we differ. I am not the first person to suggest this comparison at StrongFirst and I believe you'll find it in more than one book or article here. And if StrongFirst was like every other corner of the athletic world, I wouldn't be here, so I understand that it's not a common comparison to make.

watchnerd said:
The metabolic substrates are operating on different levels -- my bass playing doesn't stall if I don't get enough protein.
Click to expand...
I don't track what I eat but I'll guess I get the US RDA of protein, about .8 grams per kg of bodyweight. My lifting hasn't stalled yet.

watchnerd said:
Unlike my music practice, my resistance training shows up in my blood work consistently -- if I get blood work a day after resistance training my creatinine levels will be elevated enough to set off a yellow flag and the docs will have me retest to make sure that it's related to protein turnover and not kidney disease.
Click to expand...
I've never noticed a relationship between blood work and lifting for me but then again, I've never looked for one either. I get blood work once a year for my annual physical.

watchnerd said:
Of course I continue to practice weightlifting for skill purposes, too, but it's a metabolically different animal than practicing bass.
Click to expand...
That it's metabolically different doesn't mean that difference is significant in how one can approach lifting - it is an important difference for you, and it's not for me.

watchnerd said:
Musicians, especially jazz and classical, have much longer careers than athletes for a reason.
Click to expand...
I am hoping - who knows what the future may bring, of course, but God willing and the creeks don't rise - to start making requests to the powerlifting federations to add new 5-year age categories when I reach my 80's. Most top out at 85 or 90 years old.

watchnerd said:
I try not to draw conclusions from my bass playing and relate them to resistance training.
Click to expand...
I'm a musician for a living (perhaps a relevant thing here and perhaps not, I don't know) and I'm with the famous cello player in all areas of my life. Bob Dylan said, "He not busy being born is busy dying." Gaining muscle isn't "being born" to me but improving my skill at my lifts is.

Hey, do what works for you, of course, but the skill comparison being playing a musical and lifting is certainly worthy of everyone's consideration.

-S-
 
Steve Freides said:
In this way, we differ. I am not the first person to suggest this comparison at StrongFirst and I believe you'll find it in more than one book or article here. And if StrongFirst was like every other corner of the athletic world, I wouldn't be here, so I understand that it's not a common comparison to make.


I don't track what I eat but I'll guess I get the US RDA of protein, about .8 grams per kg of bodyweight. My lifting hasn't stalled yet.


I've never noticed a relationship between blood work and lifting for me but then again, I've never looked for one either. I get blood work once a year for my annual physical.


That it's metabolically different doesn't mean that difference is significant in how one can approach lifting - it is an important difference for you, and it's not for me.


I am hoping - who knows what the future may bring, of course, but God willing and the creeks don't rise - to start making requests to the powerlifting federations to add new 5-year age categories when I reach my 80's. Most top out at 85 or 90 years old.


I'm a musician for a living (perhaps a relevant thing here and perhaps not, I don't know) and I'm with the famous cello player in all areas of my life. Bob Dylan said, "He not busy being born is busy dying." Gaining muscle isn't "being born" to me but improving my skill at my lifts is.

Hey, do what works for you, of course, but the skill comparison being playing a musical and lifting is certainly worthy of everyone's consideration.

-S-
Click to expand...

No offense, but I don't understand how this relates to the video @Boris Bachmann made, and my follow-up to it, about how training is different when you're an intermediate / advanced lifter due to systemic stress.
 
Last edited:
I get it - Steve's talking about "the skill of strength" broadly. Like I said (or tried to communicate) in the video, I'm drawing a distinction here between skill/technique and muscular motor function.
I've explained it to others as saying once you get experienced, the neurological-driven gains are more tapped out, and you the adaptations have to be more physical.
Click to expand...
I guess I don't know at what point neuromuscular efficiency stops improving or stops being the primary driver of progress but I agree - even when we can't see those physical changes, there's a lot going on under the hood.
Somewhat related, VBT is pretty humbling even on days you think are subjectively 'good days'. And conversely on 'bad' days.
Click to expand...
Honestly, I know very little about velocity based training. Like nothing.
 
Boris Bachmann said:
I guess I don't know at what point neuromuscular efficiency stops improving or stops being the primary driver of progress but I agree - even when we can't see those physical changes, there's a lot going on under the hood.
Click to expand...

I read a study that delved into this and it's a spectrum -- I'll see if I can find it.

Boris Bachmann said:
Honestly, I know very little about velocity based training. Like nothing.
Click to expand...

It doesn't apply equally well to all exercises, and it's totally useless on others.

I use it for measuring bar velocity on mid-skill lifts with simpler bar paths, like squats and pulls.

It's an attempt to solve the "external stressors" problem for %-based training that relies on 1RM, i.e. if I'm under a lot of stress (lack of sleep, job/school, under-recovered / over-trained), my theoretical 70% lift might actually be more like an 85% effort on a "bad day".

It's a data-driven attempt at auto-regulation.

Therefore instead of training with a proscribed weight on the bar, you're trying to train towards hitting a proscribed velocity target, and adjusting the weight up or down accordingly.

There are charts that attempt to normalize this vs % 1 RM using 'typical' velocities, but really you have to gather data for each athlete individually over time.

image-asset.jpeg
 
Last edited:
As a formerly sedentary 49 year old, I find spreading out work outs are better for my joints than focused fewer days of higher intensity exercises. I tend to benefit more from programs designed to be run more frequently than less. And this I believe goes well w SF approach in which there are plenty of high frequency programs suitable for beginners, and it may be for a good reason… Take S&S and compare it w Q&D for example.
 
Last edited:
watchnerd said:
I've explained it to others as saying once you get experienced, the neurological-driven gains are more tapped out, and you the adaptations have to be more physical.
Click to expand...
watchnerd said:
training is different when you're an intermediate / advanced lifter due to systemic stress.
Click to expand...
I think this is where the confusion has started. Experience relates to just the time and effort put into something, while "advanced" seems to be more related to the actual achievement in a given area. Someone may be experienced, but not advanced and vice versa; level of advancement may recede, while experience goes just one way. A talented young weight- or powerlifter may tap out his neurological-driven gains in several years, while a typical casual gym-goer might never approach this limit.
 
Indeed, every organism reacts differently. One person may respond better to 9-10 RPE but with very low volume, and another with much more volume but with 7-8 RPE training. In an interview, Dorian Yates said that there was a time when he tried Arnold-style volume training, but after only a week he felt like a rag and made no progress, despite other factors being 100%. Despite the medication, apparently his body responds better to another kind of stimulus. I believe that in terms of increasing strength, not just muscle, different methods will work differently for certain people. For some, certain methods work better than others, even if at first glance they are less scientifically sound.
 
Dydo said:
Indeed, every organism reacts differently. One person may respond better to 9-10 RPE but with very low volume, and another with much more volume but with 7-8 RPE training. In an interview, Dorian Yates said that there was a time when he tried Arnold-style volume training, but after only a week he felt like a rag and made no progress, despite other factors being 100%. Despite the medication, apparently his body responds better to another kind of stimulus. I believe that in terms of increasing strength, not just muscle, different methods will work differently for certain people. For some, certain methods work better than others, even if at first glance they are less scientifically sound.
Click to expand...
Mmm, yes and no. I mean, yes everyone's different but human physiology doesn't differ THAT much. I'll try to type more later.
 
Status
Closed Thread. (Continue Discussion of This Topic by Starting a New Thread.)
Back
Top Bottom