Please Scroll Down to See Forums Below
napsgear
genezapharmateuticals
domestic-supply
puritysourcelabs
UGL OZ
UGFREAK
napsgeargenezapharmateuticals domestic-supplypuritysourcelabsUGL OZUGFREAK

Drop sets..

macrophage69alpha said:
pump stretches the muscle fascia which is one of the primary limiting factors of growth. it places a different kind of strain on the muscle that heavy load bearing does not. Heavy load bearing in many cases PRIMARILY trains the CNS, muscular work is secondary-- especially with explosive movements and near maximal lifts. Now negative work on the other hand places tremendous strain on both the CNS and the muscle fibers
I never knew it streched the fascia...

Now Macro... would "too much" pump be a bad thing... or training hard for a significant period of time beyond once one achieves a pump... I like your in depth posts :)
 
Well, I have to admit that I have a tough time believing that fascia stretching accounts for growth. If the stimulus and response for growth is there, the membrane that covers the muscle fiber is not going to curtail that growth. There's no way in hell that a pump could make it stretch while growth at the molecular level could not.

And even when not specifically setting out to get a 'pump', every workout I do results in a pump to one degree or another, so I don't see how training specifically to get a more pronounced pump is going to omprove response by an appreciable amount. If that were the case, then why don't you see guys with disproportionately large lower back areas? Extreme lower back pumps are commonplace among AAS users, yet I've neither read about nor experienced any pronounced grwoth in this area, which would indicate to me that there isn't much benefit that results specifically from the pump.

True, heavy singles involve the nueral system heavily. A good way to sidestep that factor would be to do multiple sets of, say, triples and get the desired muscular effect as well as going heavy. You get the best of both worlds - heavy weights and muscles that ge lots of work. BTW when I say 'work' I mean weight on bar x number of times lifted.

And explosive movements are fantastic for growth - the amount of force/power they demand will stress the muscles AND the nervous system. Yes, exposive lifts heavily involve the nervous system, but it's not as though the nervous system can perform actual mechanical work. That task still falls squarely and solely on the muscles. Ever seen the traps on an Oly lifter?

Still no sale on pumps being relevant. There are lots of people (myself included) who give pumps no heed and are none the worse off for it. Increasing poundages on the big lifts matters. Eating appropriatley for your goals matters. Drugs matter. The metabolic side effects of lifting, trace mineral intake, meal timing, etc. do not. Powerlifter, bodybuilder, Oly lifter, it doesn't matter. Muscle is muscle. It gets stimulated by doing work. It grows by being fed and allowing for recovery. THe further one gets away from that, the more their wheels will spin.
 
Facial stretching could potentiate more growth, as there's more room for the muscle to swell into.. but I don't think it could directly cause it. DC's stretching techniques made a difference to my chest but that could also have been the higher rep range I was using.

the 'pump' causes non contractile tissue to swell temporarily, training for strength causes muscle fibers to grow. Drop sets are not something I'd ever do as moving heavy weight for medium reps is plenty stimulation enough without burning me out for 'da pump'
 
Tweakle said:
Facial stretching could potentiate more growth, as there's more room for the muscle to swell into.. but I don't think it could directly cause it. DC's stretching techniques made a difference to my chest but that could also have been the higher rep range I was using.
I certainly wouldn't discount stretching as a good thing, and I am vaguely familiar with the notion of myofascial release and the role the fascia pays in our anatomy. I agree that stretching is good for recovery and would likely assist in growth.

Like I said, I just can't imagine a muscle not growing or even being limited by the fascia. I could be wrong, but that notion seems absurd to me (the fascial argument, not me being wrong :P). People would be walking around the gym in pain from the tension of their muscles against the fascia if that was the case, wouldn't they?

If it's possible to manipulate the fascia with massage, I gotta believe that muscular growth is not going to be affected by them whatsoever - that growth is gonna happen whether the fascia like it or not :)
 
Guinness5.0 said:
Like I said, I just can't imagine a muscle not growing or even being limited by the fascia. I could be wrong, but that notion seems absurd to me (the fascial argument, not me being wrong :P).


calves is a prime example of fascial limitation on growth.

as a note- most sprinters actually tear the fascia of the calves through training
 
macrophage69alpha said:
calves is a prime example of fascial limitation on growth.

as a note- most sprinters actually tear the fascia of the calves through training
Do you have a link handy that discusses this (or myofascia in general)? I am forming my opinion based on logic, which doesn't necessarily follow science.

EDIT: Actually, what you wrote supports my point - the fascia didn't restrict growth; growth overcame the fascia. Hence, the fascia wasn't the limiting factor at all.
 
I change my weekly routine about every 5 weeks, and daily, e.g. tomorrow I do abs and arms, I will do something different every week,




But I always go for the max pump, and the maximum weight.





Since my elbows are shot, can’t do skull crushers, but will think of 5 other triceps exercises and pump them to the max, before I am done.
 
Top Bottom