Size dictating knowledge: Yes and No

[Debaser]

I'll be the first to admit that there are a lot of huge guys who are utter morons when it comes to training, and got by with great genetics and/or gear.

However does it really work the other way? The guys I see that have intelligent training concepts and ideas are generally pretty big. It makes sense, I think. If their methods worked then why would they look like they barely worked out? I'll list a few...

Doggcrapp is a monster. I believe he's 300 lbs fairly lean. He has helped hundreds of people make astounding gains, including myself. I have put on over 40 lbs, in less than a year, naturally. I do not have elite genetics either. A lot of people are coming around on the training board, some of us are working pretty hard to get people on the right track (check out the sticky on the training board). I can't emphasize how many people this man has helped achieve their goals. Most of whom are clean and not genetic supermen.

IronAddict, unless you visit animal's board or the gotfina board, you probably do not know about him. But he too has helped countless people achieve their goals. He preaches low volume, higher intensity methods. He realized after 10 years of following bullshit volume split routines and reaching the height of 180 lbs at 6'1" that these methods will just not cut it for the average (or below) trainee. After discovering hardgainer/HIT methodology he reached 235 naturally I believe. He has been as heavy as 270 lbs at time, now he sits at 240 lbs 8% BF at 40 years old. Not too shabby.

Others that I know less of but that seem to follow the same grain; these guys know their shit and practice what they preach:

Realgains
Silverback (gotfina)
John Christy (hardgainer mag)

I'm sure I'm forgetting some guys and for that I apologize

 

[The Terminator]

Well it's sort of hard to listen to someone's advice when you see them post a pic and they are 25% bf and look like they have hardly ever been in a gym. But some people are really knowledgeable about every aspect of this yet still look poor. Perhaps it plays into the old adage of the mechanic who knows everything about cars yet drives the worst running vehicle on the road...

 

[Zoomster]

I am a firm believer in the been there done that equals credibility.
so many times I am in my gym watching some personal trainer that took a three course trying to give advice to people. I can't buy that.

 

[sustaMarc]

I sometimes work out at NYSC-that gym got the smallest pussies as trainers, its pretty sad

 

[jubei]

Always listen to the Huge Guys. First of all, these "huge guys" are huge for a reason. They train hard, eat properly, get enough rest and supplement to be where they are. Most of this knowledge has undoubtably come from trial and error and could potentially save you alot of trouble.

It makes me sick seeing goofy haired personal trainers with 13 inch guns telling me how to do dumbell curls. My arms are 18, his are barley 13, what could he possibly know that I don't. I don't read about curls in a book but I concentrate on every rep in every set. I would gladly go to a "big guy", tell tell him my goals and get him to figure out where your going wroing, because he's been there one time too. etc.

 

[cockdesiel]

Im in agreement with terminator. It is hard to follow the advice of someone that isnt in shape, but not impossible for me. I've learned that sometimes those indiv. are very knowlegable and were probably in shape at one point, now unmotivated for whatever reason. I'm not above listening to anyones advice, just as long as its logical and practical

 

[ironmaster]

In my opinion, a picture is worth a thousand words when it comes to bodybuilding credibilty.

 

[jubei]

exactly my point

 

[Zyglamail]

I am a firm believer in the been there done that equals credibility.
so many times I am in my gym watching some personal trainer that took a three course trying to give advice to people. I can't buy that.

I have seen this as well, but I have also seen the personal trainer who doesnt look like much take a hefty/weak individual and transform them into something anyone would be proud of.

I feel its impossible to judge a book by its cover. We all have different goals and ambitions, different working conditions and family commitments. We all have our ups and down, mental and health issues we have to deal with. I think we call all say we have seen a scrawny runt who really seemed to know his/her shit on any given aspect of training, we can also say we have seen human juggernauts and wonder how they can get dressed in the morning without help. My point is we all have different goals, some to compete and some get simple satisfaction out of helping others. Its easy to say "been there done that equals credibility." but what about the scrawny trainer with crappy genetics who works out but is nothing special whoc has spent many years helping hundreds of people? In all fairness I feel if he has directly, successfully trained hundreds of people then I would think that qualifies him as a "been there done". Maybe not personally but at the same time they have hundreds of cleints succeed under their tutalage and thus have much more exposure and a much broader base of what works and what does not based on direct contact and directing those he/she trains, than the average joe gym rat who only works on themself.

If any of you have been in a teaching environment you will know what I mean that teaching others is one of the best ways to learn yourself. Your continually asked questions form varying perspectives, things you may have never noticed or thought about, this further pushes you and in the end results in some of the best knowledge you will ever attain.

 

[JordanK25]

Most of the huge guys at my gym are idiots. They use poor form and a super shitty diet. They use huge amounts of gear to make up for their lack of knowledge/willpower. Everytime they tell me about their new stack I'm thinking to myself "Maybe you should learn how to eat and train and you won't need 1500 mgs a week of gear...". Of course I don't say that out loud because most of them have anger management problems

 

[chanmanfoo]

I have seen this as well, but I have also seen the personal trainer who doesnt look like much take a hefty/weak individual and transform them into something anyone would be proud of.

I feel its impossible to judge a book by its cover. We all have different goals and ambitions, different working conditions and family commitments. We all have our ups and down, mental and health issues we have to deal with. I think we call all say we have seen a scrawny runt who really seemed to know his/her shit on any given aspect of training, we can also say we have seen human juggernauts and wonder how they can get dressed in the morning without help. My point is we all have different goals, some to compete and some get simple satisfaction out of helping others. Its easy to say "been there done that equals credibility." but what about the scrawny trainer with crappy genetics who works out but is nothing special whoc has spent many years helping hundreds of people? In all fairness I feel if he has directly, successfully trained hundreds of people then I would think that qualifies him as a "been there done". Maybe not personally but at the same time they have hundreds of cleints succeed under their tutalage and thus have much more exposure and a much broader base of what works and what does not based on direct contact and directing those he/she trains, than the average joe gym rat who only works on themself.

If any of you have been in a teaching environment you will know what I mean that teaching others is one of the best ways to learn yourself. Your continually asked questions form varying perspectives, things you may have never noticed or thought about, this further pushes you and in the end results in some of the best knowledge you will ever attain.

well said Zyglamail, things are not always as they seem. in my teens people often thought i knew much about training and fitness when in reality i didnt know shit, and was lucky enough to have decent genetics and a home gym.
foo

 

[CB38AC]

I am a good example that size does not show what you know... Some of us just dont have the genetics...

With a solid diet and training I'm maxing out at about 205 at 5'10 close to 10% bf and this is with gear and t3 and slin...Some of us just have the genetics of a little guy and fight for everything...

 

[Nelson Montana]

It's a little of both.

One of the problems I've always had with Lyle McDOnald was that he so adamantly espoused his beliefs -- to the point that anyone who didn't beleve him was subject to verbal abuse. Meanwhile, his theories were concocted strictly from text book sources and not real life cases. (Most people who follow the ketogenic diet aren't really in ketosis -- but that's another story)

ANYWAY, my point is...

If you're going to be a diet expert -- and be arrogent about it -- I don't think it's asking too much that you aren't FAT.

On the other hand, following the advice of someone who has the most advantages (i.e. genetics/drugs) seems pretty stupid.

If you want to learn how to become rich, don't ask the guy who inhereted a millon dollars. Ask the guy who started with nothing and made himself wealthy.


Now, I'm no mass monster, but I've made a ton of progresss, and that's the name of the game. I also think people have to realize that not everyone want's to be as huge as possible. Just because someone isn't big, doesn't mean they can't be.

I'd say the most brightest minds in the annals of bodybuilding would go to:

Dan Duchaine.

Rheo Blair

Vince Gironda

Mauro DePasquale

They knew what to do. They could tell you how to do it too.


None of them were over 200 pounds.

 

[satchboogie]

just for the record....

some of the best trainer/dieticians in the world are not muscle freaks but rather healthy fit guys who under a sweater don't look like they're packing mass.

you gotta remember that the knowledge that they posess may get you to gain 40 pounds of muscles within 2 years versus a giant whose knowledge will help you to gain those same 40 pounds but in 4 years!

myself, i train and eat properly and if i want i'm sure i can get to a pro proportion, but not interested!

much more satisfied with a lean, defined, low bodyfat physique all year long.

think about that!

 

[Nelson Montana]

Originally posted by Dial_tone


Vince Gironda had some real nutcake ideas. .................................

So did Blair and so did Dan. (And I don't agree with everyhting Mauro says). But I think whenever anybody goes out on a limb and chooses to see things differently, they're going to be off now and then. Then again, people who follow the crowd are also wrong -- a lot.

Actually, Vince was right abot most everything, except squatting. But I see his point. It really is a glute exercise as much as it's a thigh exercise. The Hack is better. But my old kness can't deal with it. My hackin' days are over.

 

[satchboogie]

NELSON........

you say your hacking days are over.

outta curiosity, what split do you follow? and, do you spend more than 45 minutes each session?

one last thing....

pre and post training meals.

what's in yours?>

 

[Nelson Montana]

Too many questions and too off topic.


Basically, I train a major bodypart and a corresponding muscle, per session, but do thighs alone. I occasionally do an entire body workout, circut style, 3 times a week, but I wouldn't recomend that to someone who wants to grow. It's more of a maintence thing, and you need a lot of muscle memory for it to be worthwhile. Everyone's needs are different.

 

[sermon_of_crockery]

An argument against the "big guys know what they're doing and little guys don't" philosophy would be this:

Big guys have the genetics to be huge. They don't have to try hard.

Little guys like myself and CB38AC have to work our asses off to get even the odd 5 lbs of muscle. We have tried lots and lots of different things and we know what works and what doesn't. The big guys probably got big off the first thing they tried so they think it's the best.

I think a little guy with shitty genetics who went from 155 to 170 works harder and knows more than a genetic freak who went from 220-270.

IMO.

 

[Debaser]

I think that some of you are missing my point: read the very first thing I said. To summarize:

In general, those that have developed intelligent training concepts look impressive. That doesn't mean the reverse is true--there are a lot of huge guys out there that don't know what theyre doing and got there because of genetics and/or gear.

And sermon of crockery, that's a total, um...crock of shit. You think every large guy has great genetics? The 2 I listed at the top didn't. They worked their asses off (probably harder in one training session than you ever will comprehend) to get to where they are.

155 to 170 knows more than someone who went from 220-270? There is no way to determine who knows more unless there are 2 specific people you have in mind. And works harder? Um I think it takes a little more work than you think to get to 270 (lean).

 

[sermon_of_crockery]

I think that some of you are missing my point: read the very first thing I said. To summarize:

In general, those that have developed intelligent training concepts look impressive. That doesn't mean the reverse is true--there are a lot of huge guys out there that don't know what theyre doing and got there because of genetics and/or gear.

And sermon of crockery, that's a total, um...crock of shit. You think every large guy has great genetics? The 2 I listed at the top didn't. They worked their asses off (probably harder in one training session than you ever will comprehend) to get to where they are.

155 to 170 knows more than someone who went from 220-270? There is no way to determine who knows more unless there are 2 specific people you have in mind. And works harder? Um I think it takes a little more work than you think to get to 270 (lean).

To even hold 270 pounds on a body, even at just 20% or lower bf, even with huge amounts of gear, takes genetics that are better than 95% of the population.

I don't deny that it also probably takes a lot of work.

I don't care how much gear I take, 10 grams of test a week won't get me to 270#. I have about average genetics. Below average compared to people who regularly work out and stuff.

Guys like Paul Chek and Vince Gironda are amazing minds. Maybe they have developed their knowledge because they could develop their bodies only so much.

Guys with genetics can continue to develop their bodies and get recognition for that.

I'll tell you one thing, if I was huge from what I learned already I would be much less thirsty for knowledge. Because I would already be huge. Shit if I was 225 at 10% bf I would probably quit right there. But as it is my inadequacies drive me to find new ways of developing my body.

I'm not trying to say you're wrong. Just playihng devil's advocate.

Maybe if you have the structure and want to be huge, you should seek out huge guys for advice. If you have a smaller frame you should seek people with similar structure who have successfully put on muscle.

Different people are going to have different expertises.

 

[Debaser]

Doggcrapp was a 135 lb ectomorph. He is now 300 lbs pretty lean. You should adopt his training methods, I don't know a single person (including myself) who hasn't made incredible gains after using his methods correctly (including diet).

 

[Triple J]

sometimes yes, sometimes no

 

[Nelson Montana]

Everybody's 135 pounds once.

 

[slobberknocker]

Everybody's 135 pounds once.

Yeah, that was me in 7th grade.

 

[Baoh]

No.

 

[sk*]

Yeah, that was me in 7th grade.

HAHA, yea seriously, I remember I was 120lbs in the 6th grade and went all the way up to 200lbs or a little less by 8th grade. I know I was exactly 200 by 9th grade.

Fucking fatass haha lol.

-sk

 

[slobberknocker]

lol, you beat me, I was 195 in 9th grade. But then I started lifting.

 

[CB38AC]

Yeah I started at 140 sophmore year in highschool, Genetics suck....

And on the dog crap thing... The guys very well respected and knows his shit but he responds to juice well obviously and beeing an ecto he can bulk and not get fat...

Personaly my body puts on fat before muscle and I gainedonly 10 pounds off of a gram of test and 300 deca for 10 weeks on my second cycle...

Some of us just got the shit end of the stick but people think I'm big at 5'10 205-208 around 10% or so...

How hard you work and how much you know are only proven in words and actions not size

 

[Debaser]

No the guy doesn't "respond to juice well obviously" it is BECAUSE he knows his shit when it comes to training. And how to eat. You think some random yahoo here is going to hit 300 muscular pounds just because he responds to juice well? Even mesomorphs take a LOT of work to get to the superheavyweight category. Mind you DC hit I believe 235 or 240 before he touched super supplements.

Everybody is 135 lbs once that's correct Nelson. However I have put on about as much weight in my first year of training as you did with 20 years of training PLUS JUICE. I may have better genetics than you but I'm no freak, and 25 lbs of muscle gain w/o gear is not all that impressive unless you were already 200 lbs or so at your height. But you were what, 135?

 

[CB38AC]

I'm not sure who all of that was aimed at but on the part to me about DC...

Being and ecto is a blessing if you are willing to eat, I am a fucking endo who buts on only fat haha... and an appetite of 10 people its horrible...

I wish I had normal genetics... Just did 150mg fina a day with 700mg test and 50 winnyED and lost 10 pounds fat and added little to no strength on a strict CKD with 2500 cals a day or so and times 6-7 meals with connstant ketpo testing and strict carb ups...

This game is 80% genetics

 

[vegeta#1]

chad nicholls

chad nichols looks like crap but ronnie coleman and every other pro comes running to him for diet advice. also look at chris aceto jay cutlers dietician and trainer he does not look good either. the point is a dr doesnt have to have cancer to cure cancer it is knowledge that matters not size.

 

[vegeta#1]

chad nicholls

chad nichols looks like crap but ronnie coleman and every other pro comes running to him for diet advice. also look at chris aceto jay cutlers dietician and trainer he does not look good either. the point is a dr doesnt have to have cancer to cure cancer it is knowledge that matters not size.

 

[vegeta#1]

chad nicholls

chad nichols looks like crap but ronnie coleman and every other pro comes running to him for diet advice. also look at chris aceto jay cutlers dietician and trainer he does not look good either. the point is a dr doesnt have to have cancer to cure cancer it is knowledge that matters not size.

 

[jacshelb]

I've really got no excuse for posting this, I just wanted to tell my story that relates to this.

I just got back from hanging out with some friends. One of them is an obvious mesomorph. He weighs 225 at 5'10" without anymore fat than the regular out of shape guy (let's say 18-20%?). He has a physical job and doesn't workout, but looks very much like he does. He flexed his calf and I asked if he would measure it. He did, as well as most everything else: calves- 18inches and defined, arms 17.5", thighs 27.5"

Crap, I thought, I've been working my ass of for two years straight and am nowhere near these measurements at this point! (I've never used any juice, so don't laugh too much) I've gone from 145-175 (or 180 depending on morning or night) over the last two years. Can be frustrating!


Jacob

 

[DOGGCRAPP]

The members of this message board get so pathetic sometimes it makes me sick. Here Ill clear up things for you ok. I graduated high school at 128lbs at 17. Two and a half years later I was 6 foot one and 137lbs. A WHOPPING 9LB GAIN from 17 to 19-20 YEARS OLD. I am supposed to be a 150lb 6 foot tall man! That is my genetics. At 25 years old I probaly would of weighed 148-152lbs or so. So much for your "everyone weighs 135lbs once bullcrap"--I was a 20 year old! Not some Junior high kid. I was a grown man! Do you want to know why I am up at the 300lb mark. Ill tell you why and this is the absolute truth. I KNOW NOONE AND I MEAN NOONE WHO HAS EATEN MORE FOOD THAN I HAVE, TRAINED AS HARD AS I HAVE, STUDIED AS MUCH AS I HAVE, OR HAS AS MUCH FORTITUDE/DRIVE AND NEVER SAY DIE ATTITUDE AS I HAVE IN THE LAST 14 YEARS TO BECOME AN ELITE BODYBUILDER. Christ it took me two years of lifting just to look normal at roughly 190lbs at 6 foot one. I went three and a half years once without missing a meal (6 meals a day). I cant stand seeing some of you guys making excuses for your lack of progress or lack of UNSTOPPABLE drive to become something. If you dont have the damn balls to knock down walls then dont make excuses up for someone who has the balls to do it! So far Ive heard --"well obviously he must have great genetics" --I have crap genetics! I just will not take NO for an answer!
Ive heard "anabolics". I went roughly 6 years and to 242LBS clean! I gained 105LBS clean from busting my ass in the gym and busting my ass with a fork in my mouth every 3 hours of every single day. Ive used supersupplements since but out of the 160 or so odd LBS Ive gained, over 100LBS OF IT was done clean! When you spend 14 years and eat like I do 6 times a day like clockwork and use backbreaking weights in the gym then call me on it ok? Till then dont make excuses for a lack of passion, willpower and resolve! Will I be getting a pro card? Unlike almost every bodybuilder out there that thinks they are going to make it to pro status--Im a realist. No I started to low on the totem pole, I cant make up for the lack of genetics that I was originally handed compared to genetically gifted people. Im a realist on that front and know that you have to be looking like your a bodybuilder before you even touch a weight to make it to pro level nowadays. Thats the genetic playing field now. If I was given normal genetics and was in the 185lb range when i started lifting--you would be seeing a 6 foot 1 350lb offseason bodybuilder typing this post. At one time I had people chuckling at me trying to be a bodybuilder with the shopping bag of food I used to take to work--when I weighed 150lbs with 13 inch arms.
Im at 300lbs now with 21 plus inch arms and noone chuckles anymore but I cannot stand hearing the typical--"genetics, drugs" BULLSHIT coming out of peoples mouths when they have no idea how much harder Ive had to try and the limits and boundaries of food Ive had to shove down the hatch to get here.
And thats what you see me do repeatedly online when Im training guys--I take guys who think they have crap genetics and will only make it to 215lbs and make them into 275LB monsters! Whose next?

 

[CB38AC]

No one meant to insult you bro. Just for some of us no matter the work me do what you've achieved cab never happen!!

I do believe most people can get nice and big with a good body but for some of us thats NEVER going to happen...

Just cause you where able to with hard work you act like everyone can. WRONG thats bullshit... Most people can get big but you try to say everyone can or that it was all work??? You weren't genetically gifted granted, you worked very hard and had a perfect routine but still THE SIZE CAME...

I dont know what else to say eccept everything you said is true for 90-95% of people. I hate the bullshit excuses people make but after years tryoing sometimes some of us needa be realistic.

The amount of gear that it would take to get me to 250 would kill me in a matter of weeks I promise you...

Genetics matters when it becomes a cripling factor and despite the respect you've earn from everyone on the board I can't really agree there. In no way do I try to say I know more than you or take away from what you've done but it's a situation where until you've been there you can't understand and I mean that to most guys here. This isn't to give your average guy an excuse. We both know most guys here think they work harder than they do before they see the daily routine of a truely dedicated trainie. I only mean to say that for some of us like me saying that its not genetics is a slap in the face. Saying genetics played a role isnt an insult to you at all. I Only mean that with very very hard work and perfecting your craft of training and eating you had the genetics that it was POSSIBLE. Not great genetica maybee not even good but decent enough where with work you COULD grow. No matter what you or anyone else says for some of use liek myself that idea is a fairytale that can never happen.

 

[CB38AC]

And on your training guys...

I might like to be a challenege for you haha... If you can make me grow then you've got something specialin your techniques. I have been on gear and periodizing and a good diet for months and only am at 207...

I'd like to talk to you about this more in e-mail or private messages. Don't want to eat up your time so whatever works better...

I'm a college student with nothing but time and love for this game so whatever you said would go basically...

Always up for new challenges and workouts, when you can;t grow for years at a time even on sauce or insulin desperation makes you a very receptive student of the game.

 

[Nelson Montana]

DC: No one is doubting your expertise. (Although some comments are a little presumptuous). I also understand it's difficult to accept other peoples limitations when you've worked hard at overcoming yours, but that doesn't discount the genetic factor. That would be like me saying, "I can't believe someone can't sing as long as they practice and learn how." Well, guess what? Some people just can't sing.

140 pounds at 20 years old isn't that abnormal. Lots of people are thin at that age and fill out later. The fact that you reached 242 "drug free", as you say, proves that you had the genetics for growth. I guarantee there are thousands of guys who work as hard, and as smart, and could never achieve that -- not without getting too fat at least.

And that brings up another point.

Size is easy. ANYBODY can get big if they eat enough and lift. That ain't rocket science. But you must realize that weighing 300 pounds isn't everyone's goal. And insane obsession to a single goal which offers no opportunity for financial gain is not a practical or even a viable option for most people with a life.

It's always best to learn lots of different ideas. What DC and myself offer are completely different. My work is designed to dispell myths, expose the frauds, question the the common thinking and help the "genetically challenged" bodybuilder to avoid pitfalls and make the most progress in the shortest possible time. DC's methods are for the guy who wants to be as huge as possible and is willing to do whatever it takes to get there. If that's what you're looking for, DC's your man.

There's room for everybody, as long as they know what they're doing -- which is actually quite rare.

 

[Citruscide]

DC: No one is doubting your expertise. (Although some comments are a little presumptuous). I also understand it's difficult to accept other peoples limitations when you've worked hard at overcoming yours, but that doesn't discount the genetic factor. That would be like me saying, "I can't believe someone can't sing as long as they practice and learn how." Well, guess what? Some people just can't sing.

140 pounds at 20 years old isn't that abnormal. Lots of people are thin at that age and fill out later. The fact that you reached 242 "drug free", as you say, proves that you had the genetics for growth. I guarantee there are thousands of guys who work as hard, and as smart, and could never achieve that -- not without getting too fat at least.

And that brings up another point.

Size is easy. ANYBODY can get big if they eat enough and lift. That ain't rocket science. But you must realize that getting bigger isn't everyone's goal. And insane obsession to a single goal which offers no opportunity for financial gain is not a practical or even a viable option for most people with a life.

It's always best to learn lots of different ideas. What DC and myself offer are completely different. My work is designed to dispell myths, expose the frauds, question the the common thinking and help the "genetically challenged" bodybuilder to avoid pitfalls and make the most progress in the shortest possible time. DC's methods are for the guy who wants to be as huge as possible and is willing to do whatever it takes to get there. If that's what you're looking for, DC's your man.

There's room for everybody.

presumptuous -- LOL

I agree with you on this point, learning many areas is a good idea.

Everytime I have heard DC discuss his plan, he never slammed anyone's plan where people GAINED from it... say, like the 5x5... I think his main contention is that he HATES people who turn their noses up at new ideas, when they are stuck in a groove where they have been using THIER plan for years with no gains....

But then again... I think spinning wheels is useless too.

But I understand and agree with your points.

C-ditty

 

[Zyglamail]

My biggest gripe about the DC training method is that I have not seen it presented in anice, organized, readable fashion. DC, take this as constructive criticism please. I think if you were to clearly and legibly convey your method you may have more supporters. As it sits I find that in order to really put your method together you need to do a lot of reading between the lines etc. If you have already done this, then I appologize, I must have missed it.

 

[Nelson Montana]

presumptuous -- LOL

I agree with you on this point, learning many areas is a good idea.

Everytime I have heard DC discuss his plan, he never slammed anyone's plan where people GAINED from it... say, like the 5x5... I think his main contention is that he HATES people who turn their noses up at new ideas, when they are stuck in a groove where they have been using THIER plan for years with no gains....
........................................

BINGO! I'd say that 90% of most peoples failures is their refusal to accept a more effective method. They get very defensive. They demand research studies. They'd rather debate than actually DO something.

 

[Nelson Montana]

I don't think it's any mystery, or great revelation, that people who don't apply themselves, are unlikely to make great progress. That's a given.

But you can work real hard at something and still fail if what you're doing isn't effective.

In other words, if you're traveling east to find a sunset, it doesn't matter how hard or how long you travel. You won't find what you're looking for.

 

[sk*]

Funny, I don't ever recall seeing any Doggcrapp posts until today. From now I'll be reading all of them.

He mostly posts on animal's board (www.animalkits.be), the cycles on pennies thread is probably the best thread I have ever read.

-sk

 

[DOGGCRAPP]

Nelson Montana::But you must realize that weighing 300 pounds isn't everyone's goal. And insane obsession to a single goal which offers no opportunity for financial gain is not a practical or even a viable option for most people with a life.

Doggcrapp:: I couldnt agree more with that statement. To each his own whether thats a 185lb model physique or 350lbs of monstrosity--its still all hard work in my book. I just found myself irritated knowing what Ive had to go through to get here-and then hearing people just sway it aside with "genetics, drugs etc"
At least 10 strangers a day say something about "my being a bodybuilder" nowadays but I vividly remember the people smirking and laughing when I told them "IM trying to put on muscle and get bigger" when I was constantly eating every 2.5-3 hours. Things like one girl saying "Muscle? <laughing> Who you kidding? Your a stick!"......I didn't forget that stuff. I ran with a pack of 5 friends from 20-25, all of us lifting, some with great genetics..some of them quit, some of them made it from 180 to 225 or so but I took it all the way to 302LBS. I went at this full bore, they went at this at 50% and thats the difference.

Zygamail theres a huge reason why my concepts arent outlined in a precise manner. About a year and a half ago I found a small board with about 47 members to it and I said what the hell--------I'll leave a post on my methods and opinions since it was such a small crowd of people. Ive been very successful locally putting dramatic size on people and I thought a couple posts to about 50 guys and end of story. Anomynous name of Doggcrapp and done. The thing took off like absolute wildfire and I was in no way prepared for it.

 

[Stillgoing]

My biggest gripe about the DC training method is that I have not seen it presented in anice, organized, readable fashion. DC, take this as constructive criticism please. I think if you were to clearly and legibly convey your method you may have more supporters. As it sits I find that in order to really put your method together you need to do a lot of reading between the lines etc. If you have already done this, then I appologize, I must have missed it.

I summarized & organized the DC info in a pdf document. It helped me make sense of it & implement it in my training routine. If you want it I would be happy to email it to you.

 

[Stillgoing]

TO DOGGCRAPP:

Thank you so much for sharing your thoughts & methods. I have been on "your program" for a couple months now, and it has really been a welcome change. I've been training 18yrs, so, I can't say I've been transformed overnight, but, the weights are going up a little most every workout and I hope to keep it going. I have found the best aspect of your program to be the absolute & constant focus on major exercises and increased poundages. That alone is worth giving this program a try.

Thanks again.....

 

[CB38AC]

Still going I'm very interested... I'll get ahold of you if not please get me at [email protected] if you see this before I e-mail you...

I need something new.

 

[needsize]

I think its kinda funny that this thread started out asking about size vs knowlege, but ended up an ad for the DC training....

 

[Stillgoing]

I think its kinda funny that this thread started out asking about size vs knowlege, but ended up an ad for the DC training....

At least it didn't degrade into a flamefest like so many now....

 

[HUCKLEBERRY FINNaplex]

I normally don't do this,but I have to say I just spent the last hour checking out DC's methodologies on Diet and training,and I will tell you guys,HE KNOW HIS SHIT,and then some...I agree with his philosophies wholeheartedly,particulary in regards to protein intake/diet...The points he touches in on those areas is the NUMBER 1 reason people fail to grow,on or off anabolics.Mad props big man.

 

[Debaser]

I think its kinda funny that this thread started out asking about size vs knowlege, but ended up an ad for the DC training....

Excellent contribution. I'm not sure why you would even say that to be honest.

 

[sk*]

I've been doing something similar to what dc said and love it so far, I think I am gonna keep doing this till end of summer then i'll give WSB a try for a while.

Overall, love what DC says. So far I grow on less protein than what you suggest though, second I hit a plateau i'll immidietely bump up my protein.

-sk

 

[Baoh]

I think its kinda funny that this thread started out asking about size vs knowlege, but ended up an ad for the DC training....

Agreed.

 

[Baoh]

Excellent contribution. I'm not sure why you would even say that to be honest.

The reasons are likely two-fold. One is sheer irony. You likely cannot see the other because myopia brings you happiness.

 

[Stillgoing]

The reasons are likely two-fold. One is sheer irony. You likely cannot see the other because myopia brings you happiness.

Cute response.

In fact, DC is an excellent example of the whole size vs. knowledge debate. On the "cycling for pennies thread", DC posted a pic of himself, and, while big, some bros questioned his knowledge because he was not as big as they expected him to be. Then I believe some size vs. knowledge debate resulted after that. Therefore, very appropriate to bring the topic up here.

On my taking the opportunity to thank DC on this thread, I did it because it was convenient and I wanted to.

 

[Debaser]

Considering DC was one of the examples I listed in my original post Baoh, and it concerned their expertise, obviously their expertise would probably end up being discussed. Saying its "an ad for DC training" is a comment stemming from pure ignorance.

 

[needsize]

Excellent contribution. I'm not sure why you would even say that to be honest.

I said it because it was true, the thread morphed from your original post to another one of your info-mercials. You seem to have a real attitude problem when anyone has anything to say that you dont agree with. I've never once had anything negative to say about the DC training as it makes sense, but you on the other hand have trashed just about every other training philosophy or approach. You need to relax a bit

 

[Nelson Montana]

Alright, everybody simmer down and get back on track. I'd like to add something else to the original point.

All too often, people gravitate more toward the image than the message. That's why supplement companies use pros to endorse their products. People don't want to hear than that someone gained 10 pounds of muscle and went from 160 to 170. They want to see massively, ripped freakazoids! But one thing has nothing to do with the other.

On the other end, I get people who want to learn my methods because they like that "fitness model" body look -- which is more what I possess. Well...suprise! I didn't make the progress I did by doing "fitness model" exercises! I got it though hardcore bodybuilding techniques. That's the fastest, most efficient way to put on muscle whether you're 150 pounds or 250 pounds. And it doesn't matter whether your goal is to be 190 or 390. Many of the same principles apply. I think DC will agree with this.

Personally, I didn't want to be any bigger, but I can show someone how to be as big as they want, just as I'm sure DC can get someone into shape who's only desire is to look good on the beach. What works, works.

Over the years I've conducted a lot of interviews with top pros and do you know who I thought was the most knowledgabe of all? Jack LaLanne. That's right -- the guy who geared his careeer toward getting fat housewives in shape. That guy knows more than most of the people on this board, COLLECTIVELY, will ever know. And that's a a man who practices what he preaches.
But hey, some moron can take a gram and a half of gear a week and be bigger than LaLanne ever was, so why should he listen to him? That's the thinking. And that's the problem.

So the bottom line is, it's the information that counts , and the knowledge and the ablity to convey it -- as well as practicing what you preach and having the results to show for it. In that regard, the experts in the field are far and few-between.

 

[Debaser]

Great points Nelson. Along the line of some women thinking that they want to look "toned." They don't realize that they need to add muscle, and then lose fat, and that this isn't really different from the guy wanting to get huge (until you get to extreme levels of course).

And Needsize, I'd like you to point out where in this thread *I* turned it into a DC infomercial. I believe that those were OTHERS posting about their results and experiences. And yes, I HAVE trashed volume routines. And I always will. I'm sorry if this upsets you. But I'm not going to change my mind.

 

[Zoomster]

I'm not buying what you are selling, Nelson.

I have trained several people, to include women and had terific results.

All of them made dramatic gains on my " cut for size" program.

 

[needsize]

And Needsize, I'd like you to point out where in this thread *I* turned it into a DC infomercial. I believe that those were OTHERS posting about their results and experiences. And yes, I HAVE trashed volume routines. And I always will. I'm sorry if this upsets you. But I'm not going to change my mind.

I never said that you turned it into an info-mercial, just that it turned into one. You can trash other routines all you want, but that doesnt mean that they arent effective and dont work great for MANY trainees. The reason why you bring so much heat on yourself is that you shove your/DC's ideas down peoples throats, while others in these forums just state their ideas, and let people decide for themselves. I have not had one person who followed my routine to the letter, that didnt achieve awesome results, but my approach to telling people about it is radically different to yours.
Like I said, just relax...

 

[DOGGCRAPP]

Stillgoing::In fact, DC is an excellent example of the whole size vs. knowledge debate. On the "cycling for pennies thread", DC posted a pic of himself, and, while big, some bros questioned his knowledge because he was not as big as they expected him to be.

Doggcrapp:: actually stillgoing I put many pics up there twice when requested and only one guy ever posted derogatory comments--the exact same guy who told everyone my methods suck on two other message boards and gave me crap on Animals board previously. His ego is unsurpassed in all of bodybuilding as any post that has the words DC or doggcrapp in it he always without fail chimes in with something derogatory. He also puts down Jason Meullar, Trevor Smith and a slew of other people including Animal which got him banned from that board. Considering the source I expected no less from him--in fact if i put pics up weighing a lean 400lbs he would of said I didnt look that big--because its an ego thing with him toward me.

As far as this turning into an infomercial with my methods--I just wanted to set the record straight concerning me personally and yes I agree lets go back to the original topic......

 

[BigManStan]

Size does help you take what they are saying but there are many people that are not huge that know alot.

People who have known me for a long time tend to listen because they have seen me huge and small. (had a problem where i couldn't work out and lost alot of gains then put them back on in about 3-4 months after I was able to get back into the gym).

A guy with size might not know much besides personal exp. that he has in the gym while lifting and a small guy might not know much more then theory on the subject. It is always nice to run into someone that knows his theory and knows the practicality part also.

I guess I am saying that the best advice comes from someone who reads and goes to the gym because they know the theory and they know what works in practicality and what doesn't.

 

[Stillgoing]

Doggcrapp:: actually stillgoing I put many pics up there twice when requested and only one guy ever posted derogatory comments--the exact same guy who told everyone my methods suck on two other message boards and gave me crap on Animals board previously. His ego is unsurpassed in all of bodybuilding as any post that has the words DC or doggcrapp in it he always without fail chimes in with something derogatory. He also puts down Jason Meullar, Trevor Smith and a slew of other people including Animal which got him banned from that board. Considering the source I expected no less from him--in fact if i put pics up weighing a lean 400lbs he would of said I didnt look that big--because its an ego thing with him toward me.

Absolutely agree. I thought this point would be completely obvious given its absolutely riduculous for someone to say a lean 300lb man, regardless of height, is "not that big".

 

[Baoh]

Cute response.

In fact, DC is an excellent example of the whole size vs. knowledge debate. On the "cycling for pennies thread", DC posted a pic of himself, and, while big, some bros questioned his knowledge because he was not as big as they expected him to be. Then I believe some size vs. knowledge debate resulted after that. Therefore, very appropriate to bring the topic up here.

On my taking the opportunity to thank DC on this thread, I did it because it was convenient and I wanted to.

I found your post legitimate, Stillgoing. I was responding to Debaser, which is why I put his statements in quotes, though. No worries.

 

[Baoh]

Considering DC was one of the examples I listed in my original post Baoh, and it concerned their expertise, obviously their expertise would probably end up being discussed. Saying its "an ad for DC training" is a comment stemming from pure ignorance.

I've observed your manner of posting often enough to know what you were doing, and what you were doing is orienting the flow of discussion to support your hero. If you want ignorance, you should opt for a mirror.

You are a "religious" zealot in essence.

Addendum:

If you think this is a flame, you're wrong. You'll find I haven't bashed DC (the man), and while I don't care for his program as it relates to MY body, I don't slight users of it, as it seems to generally work well. Take a look at your posts. Do a search. Go ahead. Nobody will make fun. Just search through your posts and observe what seems like a Radical Jehovah's Witness obsession with the routine and all the resultant attempts to shove it down the throats of others. Sometimes, you're just a proponent, and there's surely nothing wrong with that at all, but other times....

Your belief system as it relates to training is flawed by emotion. It shouldn't even be about beliefs, but results. You made good gains. Good job. Leave it at that, give instruction to those who ask for direction, and make more gains. No fanatacism is needed if it's as good a system as you think it is.

 

[Debaser]

You're way off base, and you're exaggerating my fervor a little too much. As a matter of fact, I'm a big proponent of Hardgainer training methods, and H.I.T.

1. The main reason I tell someone to look into DC training when their training isn't working so well is twofold. One, because it works, and works better than any other routine I've tried. Two, because there is a pretty comprehensive sticky about it detailing everything. It seems to get people interested in it easier than hardgainer/HIT. Maybe if YOU searched through all my posts, you'll notice that I've recommended several routines (and described them), by, oh let's see:
John Christy
Gavin Laird
Stuart McRobert
Iron Addict
Silverback
Myself
and probably a few others.

2. Do not consider my rejection of volume training to be blind devotion to DC training. Volume training is ineffective or inefficient for the vast majority of the population. If anyone here thinks it's the way to go, I'll go out of my way to show them they are badly misinformed.

3. About shoving it down the throats of others, you can accept the fact that I'm blunt and don't pull punches or you won't. I'll tell someone their training sucks--I don't give a fuck. DC is not this way but even his patience (far more than mine) gets tried by some of the sheer ignorance that abounds on this board. I'm tired of everyone thinking that because it's an internet message board, we should somehow all like each other. That's not how it works in real life, and that's not how it works here. God forbid some of you guys visited animal's board. There's insults and flames everywhere, but DC would agree with me in saying there's no better place for info anywhere.

 

[Baoh]

You're way off base, and you're exaggerating my fervor a little too much. As a matter of fact, I'm a big proponent of Hardgainer training methods, and H.I.T.

1. The main reason I tell someone to look into DC training when their training isn't working so well is twofold. One, because it works, and works better than any other routine I've tried. Two, because there is a pretty comprehensive sticky about it detailing everything. It seems to get people interested in it easier than hardgainer/HIT. Maybe if YOU searched through all my posts, you'll notice that I've recommended several routines (and described them), by, oh let's see:
John Christy
Gavin Laird
Stuart McRobert
Iron Addict
Silverback
Myself
and probably a few others.

2. Do not consider my rejection of volume training to be blind devotion to DC training. Volume training is ineffective or inefficient for the vast majority of the population. If anyone here thinks it's the way to go, I'll go out of my way to show them they are badly misinformed.

3. About shoving it down the throats of others, you can accept the fact that I'm blunt and don't pull punches or you won't. I'll tell someone their training sucks--I don't give a fuck. DC is not this way but even his patience (far more than mine) gets tried by some of the sheer ignorance that abounds on this board. I'm tired of everyone thinking that because it's an internet message board, we should somehow all like each other. That's not how it works in real life, and that's not how it works here. God forbid some of you guys visited animal's board. There's insults and flames everywhere, but DC would agree with me in saying there's no better place for info anywhere.

Point 1 - Where did I say you did not endorse the other training authors and their routines/styles?

Point 2 - "Volume training is ineffective or inefficient for the vast majority of the population." The vast majority of people who get results use volume training. That, in and of itself, proves nothing, but neither does your biased assertion. And what's volume? 3x8-12? GVT? WSB? Intensity-Insanity ala Michalik? Hmmm?

Point 3 - Your internet wannabe tough guy act does not interest me, and your theatrics are better spent on some Cell-tech loving teen. Saying "I don't give a fuck" is an act. If you didn't actually care, you'd not even have the need to mention it. If anyone is tired of dealing with people on a board, I don't see the barrier that prevents them from leaving. It's our choice to stay. I was on Animal's board for years, as well as others. Unfortunately, it CAN be a good place for info, but it's often trumped up as being better than it is. I've seen more than you've seen, especially before "creative editting" by certain powers that be because of personal bias and sheer frustration. This third point of yours is merely an exercise in mental masturbation, so keep on tugging away....

Your response has only served to reinforce what I said earlier.

 

[Debaser]

Point 1 - Where did I say you did not endorse the other training authors and their routines/styles?

Point 2 - "Volume training is ineffective or inefficient for the vast majority of the population." The vast majority of people who get results use volume training. That, in and of itself, proves nothing, but neither does your biased assertion. And what's volume? 3x8-12? GVT? WSB? Intensity-Insanity ala Michalik? Hmmm?

Point 3 - Your internet wannabe tough guy act does not interest me, and your theatrics are better spent on some Cell-tech loving teen. Saying "I don't give a fuck" is an act. If you didn't actually care, you'd not even have the need to mention it. If anyone is tired of dealing with people on a board, I don't see the barrier that prevents them from leaving. It's our choice to stay. I was on Animal's board for years, as well as others. Unfortunately, it CAN be a good place for info, but it's often trumped up as being better than it is. I've seen more than you've seen, especially before "creative editting" by certain powers that be because of personal bias and sheer frustration. This third point of yours is merely an exercise in mental masturbation, so keep on tugging away....

Your response has only served to reinforce what I said earlier.

1. You said I was like a religious zealot. How many Christian/Muslim/Hindu/Buddist "zealots" do you know?

2. Obviously you can't really base that on numbers, so let's base it on assertion, as you have done. If the vast majority who get results do volume training, then why does almost everybody in my gym who does it, look the same all the time? And are using nearly the same weight? Obviously this is not a study, it's just based on what I've seen with my own eyes. But it's no less scientific method than what you have said. Also, I can't believe someone that seems as intelligent as you would look at volume training as "productive." Yes, many people have gotten results with it. A huge number of trainees have also made little or no progress with volume training. The ones that do make somewhat fast progress, that are natural (generally those with good genetics) could be training more productively anyway.

3. I'm not trying to be a "tough guy." I just tell it like it is (a horrible cliche but nonetheless applicable). I didn't say that I have the general "I don't give a fuck about anything" attitude that oh so many guys profess, I was saying that I don't give a fuck about telling someone that they could be training much smarter than they are. If they don't believe me, fine, it's their stubborness that will hold them back when they plateau.

 

[Zoomster]

If you are not big, or at least as big as you want to be, then you have not figured it out.

Don't tell me how to train when you look like Don Knotts.

 

[needsize]

Debaser, you keep saying that anyone making great gains on what you would consider a volume routine must have great genetics. That simply isnt true. For example, I have aweful genetics for gaining mass, for the first 5 years of serious training I busted my ass trying every routine out there and was lucky to gain a few lbs a year. When I tried this version of the 5x5, I blew up just like you say people do on the DC training. And I continue to do so every time I cycle it into my training. Not only that, any one that I train makes similar gains. So the gross generalizations that make make simply arent true.
I'm not saying that DC training isnt effective, but it is not the only routine out there that is that effective, there are others that work just as well

 

[V10 MOJO]

size and knowledge are not always concomitant. just cause your built doesnt mean you know what youre doing and just cause you have a pencil protector in your top pocket doesnt mean you dont.

hell, many times the professional in a perspective field is the last one to follow his/her advice. ever see a hairdresser with good hair, LOL

 

[Debaser]

Are you training naturally needsize? Most of the people doing DC training are. It's not a slam if you're not, I just want to put things into perspective.

 

[needsize]

Are you training naturally needsize? Most of the people doing DC training are. It's not a slam if you're not, I just want to put things into perspective.

I'm not natural anymore as I hit my genetic limit a while ago, but I did gain somewhere between 60-70lbs naturally using that routine before I started using gear

 

[Debaser]

That's cool. What I like about your program is that it focuses on strength progression. My only beef is that you could probably gain more strength if you dropped the additional exercises, I don't really think they're necessary...

 

[needsize]

That's cool. What I like about your program is that it focuses on strength progression. My only beef is that you could probably gain more strength if you dropped the additional exercises, I don't really think they're necessary...

The additional exercises focus on hypertrophy, so without them there are huge strength increases, but the size gains arent as much.
For what its worth, I do plan on trying the DC training at some point, I just wanted to make the point that there are other systems that are also very effective

 

[Stillgoing]

The additional exercises focus on hypertrophy, so without them there are huge strength increases, but the size gains arent as much.
For what its worth, I do plan on trying the DC training at some point, I just wanted to make the point that there are other systems that are also very effective

Needsize, I'm curious, what does your training routine look like? Is it posted somewhere, or, can you give me a brief description? I always like to hear about different methods.

 

[powerforward]

stillgoing, look up needsize 5 x5 program in the search engine.

 

[needsize]

stillgoing, check out the sticky in the training forum. Since my routine is pretty much the opposite of the DC, cycling back and forth between the two would probably be a good way to keep your body from adapting

 

[Stillgoing]

stillgoing, look up needsize 5 x5 program in the search engine.

Will do, thanks....

 

[Baoh]

1. You said I was like a religious zealot. How many Christian/Muslim/Hindu/Buddist "zealots" do you know?

2. Obviously you can't really base that on numbers, so let's base it on assertion, as you have done. If the vast majority who get results do volume training, then why does almost everybody in my gym who does it, look the same all the time? And are using nearly the same weight? Obviously this is not a study, it's just based on what I've seen with my own eyes. But it's no less scientific method than what you have said. Also, I can't believe someone that seems as intelligent as you would look at volume training as "productive." Yes, many people have gotten results with it. A huge number of trainees have also made little or no progress with volume training. The ones that do make somewhat fast progress, that are natural (generally those with good genetics) could be training more productively anyway.

3. I'm not trying to be a "tough guy." I just tell it like it is (a horrible cliche but nonetheless applicable). I didn't say that I have the general "I don't give a fuck about anything" attitude that oh so many guys profess, I was saying that I don't give a fuck about telling someone that they could be training much smarter than they are. If they don't believe me, fine, it's their stubborness that will hold them back when they plateau.

1. You didn't answer me.

2. I don't base my use or endorsement of systems by arbitrary assertion. That is WHY, in case you were unable to garner it, I countered your baseless assertion with one of my own. Irony. An obviously failed attempt to show you the logical fallacy in your reasoning. Oh, well. As for your gym, why do you automatically assume that the training is to blame (although I am not saying it isn't partially to blame)? Do you think they have their diet set up properly, too? I doubt it. Also, have you ever considered leaving the microcosm of your gym. It's a big world, and I'm betting you've seen a rather small portion of it. Go to PLing gym or ten. Go to gyms overseas. Not just the Golds or Ballys in your hometown. You are committing an error of sampling, and likely also one of selective observation. I know more tiny HITers than large ones. That doesn't necessarily prove anything, though, so I keep my mind open and say it can work for people, as I have seen it work for some (not the majority of, as I am not into blind faith in training) weight trainers. "Also, I can't believe someone that seems as intelligent as you would look at volume training as 'productive.'" Yeah, sure. Nevermind the fact that most people who achieve results in the competitive sports of Powerlifting, Olympic Lifting, Strongman, and Bodybuilding train via "volume", which you blatantly avoided defining. "The ones that do make somewhat fast progress, that are natural (generally those with good genetics) could be training more productively anyway." I'd interject here with the converse notion to be true. You have no way of backing up your statement, though, and it's obvious you lack the education necessary to determine much at all about genetics, whether in relation to Bodybuilding or any other aspect. For you, it's a blanket excuse. You couldn't possibly handle having your blessed system lose credibility, so you choose to ignore any evidence to contrary, writing it off as "good genetics" or "super supplements". Cop-out of a low order, too.

3. A) No. B) You, too, will plateau, and you'll regress, as thinking outside of one realm is not something you have demonstrated any capability of.


----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In case there's any confusion, I am not anti-DC. I think his diet is excellent, I think his ideas regarding choosing simple compounds, like Testosterone and Trenbolone for AAS usage is spot-on, and I think his stretching & frequency ideas have a good deal of merit. However, it's not the only thing, nor do I believe it's the best thing for all people, or even necessarily for most people.

 

[Debaser]

1. You didn't answer me.

2. I don't base my use or endorsement of systems by arbitrary assertion. That is WHY, in case you were unable to garner it, I countered your baseless assertion with one of my own. Irony. An obviously failed attempt to show you the logical fallacy in your reasoning. Oh, well. As for your gym, why do you automatically assume that the training is to blame (although I am not saying it isn't partially to blame)? Do you think they have their diet set up properly, too? I doubt it. Also, have you ever considered leaving the microcosm of your gym. It's a big world, and I'm betting you've seen a rather small portion of it. Go to PLing gym or ten. Go to gyms overseas. Not just the Golds or Ballys in your hometown. You are committing an error of sampling, and likely also one of selective observation. I know more tiny HITers than large ones. That doesn't necessarily prove anything, though, so I keep my mind open and say it can work for people, as I have seen it work for some (not the majority of, as I am not into blind faith in training) weight trainers. "Also, I can't believe someone that seems as intelligent as you would look at volume training as 'productive.'" Yeah, sure. Nevermind the fact that most people who achieve results in the competitive sports of Powerlifting, Olympic Lifting, Strongman, and Bodybuilding train via "volume", which you blatantly avoided defining. "The ones that do make somewhat fast progress, that are natural (generally those with good genetics) could be training more productively anyway." I'd interject here with the converse notion to be true. You have no way of backing up your statement, though, and it's obvious you lack the education necessary to determine much at all about genetics, whether in relation to Bodybuilding or any other aspect. For you, it's a blanket excuse. You couldn't possibly handle having your blessed system lose credibility, so you choose to ignore any evidence to contrary, writing it off as "good genetics" or "super supplements". Cop-out of a low order, too.

3. A) No. B) You, too, will plateau, and you'll regress, as thinking outside of one realm is not something you have demonstrated any capability of.

1. I believe I did. My point was that a religious zealot, likened to a bodybuilder, would be one that refuses all other ideologies but his own. I said that I endorse many kinds of training, thus refuting that statement.

2. I've talked to a lot of trainers who have been in the game for longer than I've been born. Many of them say that a lot of trainees fail because they are doing too much volume to recover, even IF their diet (and other factors) are spot on. Stuart McRobert's series of books and magazines have helped THOUSANDS of trainees where they simply spinned their wheels with volume training. He wrote for the people with average genetics or less. Obviously this pool of trainees would make up the majority.

Most people who achieve in the competetive sports of powerlifting, bodybuilding etc. use volume? You don't think any other factors might have to do with it? Genetics and/or gear maybe? These people succeed for a reason. This has no bearing on the genetically average, NATURAL trainee. How many of these average, natural trainees do you think will go far in pro bodybuilding, or the world's strongest man competition, or the olympics, or powerlifting competitions?

3. Until I hit my genetic ceiling (which I believe is much higher than everyone thinks of themselves) what makes you think I would plateau on DC training? The entire system is set up to avoid plateaus. I haven't heard of anyone, since the Cycles on Pennies thread was started, that truly plateaued with no way out on his program.

 

[Nelson Montana]

I just think it's funny that every proponent of low volume training also insists on doing hours of cardio each week.

Why not just work out a little more and drop the cardio? Oh yeah, cardio magically makes fat disappear while other forms of training training doesn't. Whatever.

 

[slobberknocker]

More important than size, is experience. My mentor is a man who's been doing this for 35 years. I hang on his every word. I just think you should show respect to those who have battled with the iron for a really long time. Chances are, they know a thing or two, no matter how big they are. JMO.

 

[Baoh]

1. I believe I did. My point was that a religious zealot, likened to a bodybuilder, would be one that refuses all other ideologies but his own. I said that I endorse many kinds of training, thus refuting that statement.

2. I've talked to a lot of trainers who have been in the game for longer than I've been born. Many of them say that a lot of trainees fail because they are doing too much volume to recover, even IF their diet (and other factors) are spot on. Stuart McRobert's series of books and magazines have helped THOUSANDS of trainees where they simply spinned their wheels with volume training. He wrote for the people with average genetics or less. Obviously this pool of trainees would make up the majority.

Most people who achieve in the competetive sports of powerlifting, bodybuilding etc. use volume? You don't think any other factors might have to do with it? Genetics and/or gear maybe? These people succeed for a reason. This has no bearing on the genetically average, NATURAL trainee. How many of these average, natural trainees do you think will go far in pro bodybuilding, or the world's strongest man competition, or the olympics, or powerlifting competitions?

3. Until I hit my genetic ceiling (which I believe is much higher than everyone thinks of themselves) what makes you think I would plateau on DC training? The entire system is set up to avoid plateaus. I haven't heard of anyone, since the Cycles on Pennies thread was started, that truly plateaued with no way out on his program.

1. No. Additonally, I find it funny how you put similar routines in a collection as if they are so different. Hardgainer and Iron Addict's work are -for the most part- quite similar, as are the others you mentioned. DC incorporates R-P and a greater frequency (which I believe is a large improvement over other HIT systems). Also, his incorporation of stretching is a different aspect from that normally seen in other HIT routines. Regardless, you're speaking in terms of Fudge Ripple, Chocolate, and Moca Fudge ice cream. All variants of the same theme, and closer together than they are different. Not entirely the same, but not nearly so different as you imply by listing them.

2. Show me the results Stuart McRobert has achieved in his own body by following his own methods. I used to subscribe to Hardgainer magazine. With a few notable exceptions, the athletes depicted as proponents of Hardgainer tend to have paltry development. Even the exceptions are not true McRobert-type enthusiasts, so don't even try to pull a Kevin Tolbert example. His adoptive father was a Nautilus man, and often still advocates higher frequency than the average HITer.

3. Read between the lines on why that reason exists, since you often use it as a justification for "volume" trainers.

 

[jubei]

It seems everybody knows something about every possible subject imaginable. People in general "hear" alot of things. This could be while flipping through channels, browsing through a magazine at the doctors office, or scanning through the paper at the breakfast table. Once armed with the knowledge gleaned from a single article by a single author this person will not be swayed by any argument you can come up with regadless of its validity.

True, while not every big guy is a genius, I can bet he knows a good if not great dig on the subject of gaining muslce. The same applies to "retired veterans" who are now older and are no longer involved in the sport.

If thats a picture of Nelson Montana on the front of his book, it would be a good indication that what he's saying at least has the potential to be right. There is no substitute for experience.

 

[Debaser]

1. No. Additonally, I find it funny how you put similar routines in a collection as if they are so different. Hardgainer and Iron Addict's work are -for the most part- quite similar, as are the others you mentioned. DC incorporates R-P and a greater frequency (which I believe is a large improvement over other HIT systems). Also, his incorporation of stretching is a different aspect from that normally seen in other HIT routines. Regardless, you're speaking in terms of Fudge Ripple, Chocolate, and Moca Fudge ice cream. All variants of the same theme, and closer together than they are different. Not entirely the same, but not nearly so different as you imply by listing them.

2. Show me the results Stuart McRobert has achieved in his own body by following his own methods. I used to subscribe to Hardgainer magazine. With a few notable exceptions, the athletes depicted as proponents of Hardgainer tend to have paltry development. Even the exceptions are not true McRobert-type enthusiasts, so don't even try to pull a Kevin Tolbert example. His adoptive father was a Nautilus man, and often still advocates higher frequency than the average HITer.

3. Read between the lines on why that reason exists, since you often use it as a justification for "volume" trainers.

1. Point taken. I agree that I am definitely a proponent of low volume, higher intensity routines. I was essentially just reiterating that I'm not saying "DC or hit the bricks."

2. Stuart McRobert had horrible genetics (read Beyond Brawn) and managed a 400 x 20 deadlift. I'd say that's pretty impressive. Not all have paltry development, I'd say John Christy is pretty sizeable. And Dr. Ken is a higher frequency guy? Every routine of his looked pretty much like the standard hardgainer route. Kevin Tolbert had incredible genetics and would have thus benefited from any type of training. However I believe even his strength gains would have plateaued much earlier from volume training as opposed to lower volume methods. He was natural too.

3. To be honest I'm not sure what you're saying here. Of course it's 4:15 in the morning and my deductive reasoning at the moment is sub-par.