Please Scroll Down to See Forums Below toitasatiger
New member
The Shadow said:
Thanks
.jpg "Research Chemical Sciences")
.png "Research Chemical Sciences")
Thanks
T
The Shadow
Guest
While Im at it......
C
curgeo
Guest
I feel TUT does play a role, not the only role, but another piece of the puzzle in training. Understand, I am coming from the powerlifter standpoint as it is what I am.
The reason that powerlifters train in low reps is not for maximum hypertrophy, but for maximum central nervous systemm recruitment. It is a different type of muscular growth. The density of the fibers get thicker where in bodybuilding, TUT is responsible for more sarcoplasmic (cell stuff) growth. The sarcoplasmic growth does make you bigger, but not neccessarily stronger, where the fibers getting thicker leads to more strength.
I have always felt, like yourself that TUT does play a role. This is why it would seem that madcows 5x5 training works so well. It allows enough time under tension to enocourage sarcoplasmic growth, but also allows a high enough weight to encourage myofibral growth and more strength.
When the object is to get stronger, there are actually 3 specific ways to do this. Check out Vladimir Zatsiorksky's "The Science and Practice of Strength Training" for more stuff on this:
1. Get faster. Increasing force production with a submaximal weight will get you stronger.
2. More CNS firing and an increase of muscle recruitment. Basically, it training your cns to fire all your fibers at one time.
3. Hypertrophy. You do a set, Like shadow was talking about earlier, take a short rest and do another set. This allows for more muscular recruitment of typeI and type II fibers..(I won't get into different subclasses of fibers).
On a side note, I have never seen a powerlifter without a lot of muscle mass. The only reason that they may not is they don't want to, so they can stay in their same weight class.
I guess I only wanted to show another side of the TUT debate. Strong does not mean mean big, but big does not equal strong. Basically, you have to decide what it is that you want to do. IF you are a sprinter, you have to look at different strengths like starting-strength, speed-strength, acceleration, strength-endurance and a host of other.....I don't necessarily feel that it is only TUT that contributes to their muscluar physique.
The energy systems also have to be looked at. If you are looking at the marathon runner/sprinter example again......a marathon runner uses the o2/lactic acid system of regenerating atp and also muscle mass is decreased due to the body needed to breakdown protein in the body for carbs (prot can be broken down into carbs btw) and also the body forming to the requirements that the body is put under. It is not optimal for a marathon runner to have a lot of muscle mass.
Weight training and sprinting utilize the gylcogen and creatine phosphate energy system predominantly (all energy systems are utilized in some way or another and to different degrees.)
Shadow, I agree that TUT does play an important role, but I would argue that it is just another part in the equation of strength and size.
The reason that powerlifters train in low reps is not for maximum hypertrophy, but for maximum central nervous systemm recruitment. It is a different type of muscular growth. The density of the fibers get thicker where in bodybuilding, TUT is responsible for more sarcoplasmic (cell stuff) growth. The sarcoplasmic growth does make you bigger, but not neccessarily stronger, where the fibers getting thicker leads to more strength.
I have always felt, like yourself that TUT does play a role. This is why it would seem that madcows 5x5 training works so well. It allows enough time under tension to enocourage sarcoplasmic growth, but also allows a high enough weight to encourage myofibral growth and more strength.
When the object is to get stronger, there are actually 3 specific ways to do this. Check out Vladimir Zatsiorksky's "The Science and Practice of Strength Training" for more stuff on this:
1. Get faster. Increasing force production with a submaximal weight will get you stronger.
2. More CNS firing and an increase of muscle recruitment. Basically, it training your cns to fire all your fibers at one time.
3. Hypertrophy. You do a set, Like shadow was talking about earlier, take a short rest and do another set. This allows for more muscular recruitment of typeI and type II fibers..(I won't get into different subclasses of fibers).
On a side note, I have never seen a powerlifter without a lot of muscle mass. The only reason that they may not is they don't want to, so they can stay in their same weight class.
I guess I only wanted to show another side of the TUT debate. Strong does not mean mean big, but big does not equal strong. Basically, you have to decide what it is that you want to do. IF you are a sprinter, you have to look at different strengths like starting-strength, speed-strength, acceleration, strength-endurance and a host of other.....I don't necessarily feel that it is only TUT that contributes to their muscluar physique.
The energy systems also have to be looked at. If you are looking at the marathon runner/sprinter example again......a marathon runner uses the o2/lactic acid system of regenerating atp and also muscle mass is decreased due to the body needed to breakdown protein in the body for carbs (prot can be broken down into carbs btw) and also the body forming to the requirements that the body is put under. It is not optimal for a marathon runner to have a lot of muscle mass.
Weight training and sprinting utilize the gylcogen and creatine phosphate energy system predominantly (all energy systems are utilized in some way or another and to different degrees.)
Shadow, I agree that TUT does play an important role, but I would argue that it is just another part in the equation of strength and size.
T
The Shadow
Guest
Hmmm......curgeo said:
Well.....why do prlfers get stronger and stronger atthe elite level without gaining an appreciable amount of muscle??
B/c they train primarily for strength.
Why do bbers gain insane amounts of LBM, but do not gain the strength that "should" come hand in hand?
B/c they train for size.
Its more important than anyone realizes imo
que_66
New member
Those of us residing in the "not fully tarded" section of EF, I'm confused. (shocker huh?)
Exactly how does this figure into the beginners workout?
I try to hold TUT for at least a 4 count on certain exercises using the one one-thousand, two one-thousand method of counting....... but is this for any and every exercise?
I'm sure that TUT is part of the reason my muscles fatigue so quickly during a workout.
If it's abs I try to hold it as long as I can on each rep cuz I don't care if they hurt.
Exactly how does this figure into the beginners workout?
I try to hold TUT for at least a 4 count on certain exercises using the one one-thousand, two one-thousand method of counting....... but is this for any and every exercise?
I'm sure that TUT is part of the reason my muscles fatigue so quickly during a workout.
If it's abs I try to hold it as long as I can on each rep cuz I don't care if they hurt.
C
curgeo
Guest
Which is basically what I said.....that is why I stressed the 3 principles of strength by Zatsiorsky.
What I am saying is that it is only one part of the hypertrophy equation. My outlook, and again this is my opinion, is you have to have proper time under tension, but you also have to have sufficient weight for strength gain. Charles Poliquin popularized the German Volume Training and also rep cadence 10 years ago. Like I said, it is important, but not the only thing.
If I take a weight that is 50 percent of my 1rm and keep doing reps for 40 sec, does that mean I am going to get more size? My opinion is that it will only increase hypertrophy if you are using an untrained athlete. If however you use a person that has been training for a while, it will not work because there will be no forced adaptation.
Tom Platz and fred Hatfield talk about in their ISSA training manual (which I am not certified under) that you have to train in the 65 to 85 percent range in order to train for hypertrophy....if you train with less, you get no forced adaptation and if you train over that, you don't allow enough TUT for hypertrophy....only strength.
Like I said Shadow, I am not debating that TUT is not important for hypertrophy, but you also have to take in account weight as well as what particular strength you are training for, if not just hypertrophy.
What I am saying is that it is only one part of the hypertrophy equation. My outlook, and again this is my opinion, is you have to have proper time under tension, but you also have to have sufficient weight for strength gain. Charles Poliquin popularized the German Volume Training and also rep cadence 10 years ago. Like I said, it is important, but not the only thing.
If I take a weight that is 50 percent of my 1rm and keep doing reps for 40 sec, does that mean I am going to get more size? My opinion is that it will only increase hypertrophy if you are using an untrained athlete. If however you use a person that has been training for a while, it will not work because there will be no forced adaptation.
Tom Platz and fred Hatfield talk about in their ISSA training manual (which I am not certified under) that you have to train in the 65 to 85 percent range in order to train for hypertrophy....if you train with less, you get no forced adaptation and if you train over that, you don't allow enough TUT for hypertrophy....only strength.
Like I said Shadow, I am not debating that TUT is not important for hypertrophy, but you also have to take in account weight as well as what particular strength you are training for, if not just hypertrophy.
C
curgeo
Guest
Que, I think TUT is great for you right now. Keep doing what you are doing as long as you are making progress. When progress stales, then we can see what is the problem in your log and make adjustments.
T
The Shadow
Guest
up
Similar threads
