Good? How?What the fitness industry would not dare to admit and you may not like what I have to say….
This is a good blog post by Ori Hofmekler discussing hypertrophy and the biological liability.
My problem with the specifically cited article is not about details, but major flaws.Kettlebelephant said:***It's just the specific case with Read where you shouldn't focus on every little detail. Not to give him a free-card, but my experience with his statements shows me that the big message behind them is valuable 99% of the time, even though he has problems conveying it because of his attitude.
Back in the day, some of the same people would win lifting and BB competitions. The ideas of improving what you look like and looking like you're strong don't have to be unhealthy.Good? How?
Everyone in their right mind knows that bodybuilding is not healthy. The bodybuilders think the same.
On the first page of this thread, in my first post in this thread, I mentioned Tommy Kono as an example of well-done training of both athletics and hypertrophy which supported each other.Back in the day, some of the same people would win lifting and BB competitions. The ideas of improving what you look like and looking like you're strong don't have to be unhealthy.
I am not doing a good job of following your posts in this thread in their intended context.On the first page of this thread, in my first post in this thread, I mentioned Tommy Kono as an example of well-done training of both athletics and hypertrophy which supported each other.
When I last referred to bodybuilding like mentioned in the linked articles, I meant the modern kind, which is why I used Coleman as an example. I believe the authors of these articles were also thinking about bodybuilding as it has come to be.
IDK about pound for pound, but Coleman has moved some serious weight for reps. 800lb squat, 800lb DL, IIRC 600lb front squat.modern bodybuilding to me is one of there worst persuits you can do for your health and apperiance. you have extreme amount of mass that isn't remotely useful, and there is no skill involved. old school BBers had function, Tommy Kono was a great American Olympic lifter and athlete and going back further Eugen Sandow was very muscular and could do amazing feats of strength. I would love to see Ronnie Coleman (or other modern BBer) do anything close to those two.
My opinion of course, but if you only look like you can perform but can't actually do anything but pose whats the point?
I with you most of the way. Even when I was into BB type training I was always looking to move up my weights and stay loose enough to kickbox. If I'd stayed with it who knows?@North Coast Miller i didn't know that about ronnie Coleman. I see your point but still seems backwards to me. The training to look a certain way rather then training to do something. Like elite gymnasts who specialize in rings are jacked, but every ounce of muscle is for a purpose. Bodybuilders training to be bigger and that's it. Yeah guess there strong but it's more of a side effect.
This needn't be an either/or proposition. At age 62, I do not training to "actively ... add muscle," I train a few, low-rep sets of a few lifts most days. (My training log is online at We Ride Chickens for anyone wanting to see what I do.)... by that point [your late 40s], if you are not actively training to add muscle to your frame, you are losing it at a rate of about 5% a year, getting worse every year.
In my country at this writing in late 2017, 20% of children and 40% of adults are obese - I'll go with "skinny = healthy," thank you, and wish that more people did what's necessary to be healthy. I've got enough muscle to perform the lifts I train at the weights I want - why would I want to add muscle?How anybody that knows that who also understands the importance of muscle for health and function yet still pats himself on the back for being skinny is beyond me, but it points to the pervasiveness of the "skinny = healthy" meme.