Thread 76614180

You don’t need more than this, by the way.

>>76614180 (OP)
of course, u need sth completely different :D
>>76614111
>hey, what happened here bot?
>>>76612313
>thread inexplicably died :D why? :D u didn't like it ?D:
>>76604180
100% correct
but if one realizes that simple and patently obvious factoid - that it's one entity producing fake robotized traffic in sole interest to fuck up unsuspecting reader ... then one can infer awful lot out of it :D u are a fucking goldmine bot xD

but it requires a lil experimentation and knowledge and pure human intelligence and ingenuity to come up with sth that actually works and doesn't fuck yer up

ALL abs exercises are iliopsoas, yes crunch also, yes ditto for fancy machines, but your insistence on dragon flags (hanging leg raises, roman chair) made me try this retardation, surprised not - it's retarded, u are lifting ur legs up with iliopsoas
so what if i bend knees and hips and fold legs atop of pelvis, but then i can't lift my pelvis up without holding onto sth, but i don't want to roll on spine anyways so i just need to weigh upper body down somehow
so i grab 2 light dumbbells and move my extended arms with dumbbels past head
>cool
now i can lift my pelvis with legs folded on top of it up - i am not rolling backwards on spine curvature, i am lifting my pelvis off ground with just my upper back on the floor, not holding on to anything, just dumbbels in straight arms allow me to counterbalance weight of my lower body and i can lift it up
>so what?
WITH ABS I AM LIFTING PELVIS WITH ABS
>no it's still iliopsoas
it's not, legs are resting balanced over pelvis, there is no load pulling on legs, just pelvis wants to drop down which i prevent WITH ABS, there is no load on psoas and there is too much slack in it to act
>no it's still iliopsoas and rectus femoris
it's not bot i did it twice and my abs grew and demarcated from everything around them

>>76614180 (OP)
post body of scientists

>>76614193
and since we've got delts and abs exppounded there is no reason to not throw legs in:
>>76614211

>>76614180 (OP)
Post the paper? Genuinely curious about this

>>76614215
They're not (((scientists)))
>bro just lift as hard as you can that's all that matters
They're based.

>>76614180 (OP)
>do a single set with barely any rom of any weight till failure and you will be the same as someone that does multiple sets with perfect rom

>>76616256
Yeah, to failure means all the work you can handle. Whether it's 10 reps or 20 half reps it's still work.

>>76616256
>do a single set with barely any rom of any weight till failure and you will be the same as a clone of you that does multiple sets with perfect rom
fify

>>76614620
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/259390281_Evidence-Based_Resistance_Training_Recommendations_for_Muscular_Hypertrophy

I always feel so lazy when I just do one amrap set. What do I gain from doing multiple sets with slightly less intensity? Like density style shit?

>>76617077
>https://www.researchgate.net/publication/259390281_Evidence-Based_Resistance_Training_Recommendations_for_Muscular_Hypertrophy
they are assuming there is only one method - repetitions
and that is completely wrong:
>>76614216
>>76614193
u can also just hold :D

>>76617547
>I always feel so lazy when I just do one amrap set.
Well it might not be enough.
>What do I gain from doing multiple sets with slightly less intensity?
Assuming it's equivalent it's pretty much equal.
>Like density style shit?
Fewer sets would be more dense. People can go on and on about doing it one way vs the other but all you have to do is enough. Enough work (volume) that's hard enough (intensity).

>>76617547
>I always feel so lazy when I just do one amrap set.
It's fine if you're at least doing that for every head of the target muscle and doing it again before any significant amount of detaining can occur.
What do I gain from doing multiple sets with slightly less intensity?
More stimulus although with diminishing returns, slightly more shit you have to recover from, more spent glycogen and electrolytes. I'd say the biggest return on additional sets is work capacity. When I did HIT style stuff for cutting I had a horrible time getting back up to my growing volumes it felt like too much.

The big picture is if you can walk away from a session with any adaptations occuring and it staying long enough for you to get to your next session you've done about as good as you can. Once you're past the noob year you're adding less than 30g of lean mass a session for a fullbody. So it's absolutely paltry but if it can occur enough times on a long enough time line it adds up.

What does literature suggest for someone making good strength gains but little muscle hypertrophy? I have to specify that I do sets with rep ranges going from 8 to 15

>>76614180 (OP)
>self-select a weight and perform repetitions to failure
>perform contractions at a repetition duration that maintains muscular tension
>self-select rest intervals based on available time
>self-selected frequency of training
>range of concentric, eccentric and isometric muscle actions
>select resistance type (free-weights, machines, cable, etc) based on personal choice
>perform a variety of exercises/body positions/hand-grips to activate different areas of a muscle in attempt to stimulate hypertrophy
>trained persons performing regular resistance training are encouraged to allow adequate rest between training sessions without fear of atrophy. Brief (~3 weeks) absences from training appear not to cause significant atrophy and potentially promote greater hypertrophy upon return to training
all based and true.

>self-select the ROM of the exercise
no. in most cases largest ROM is best.

>>76619166
did he ever say what the band on his knee was for?

>>76619184
patellar tendonitis

>>76618587
I believe your body's response to strength training is mostly genetic. I've been doing high-intensity, low-volume work, and experienced noticeable hypertrophy regardless despite not wanting it.

>>76618587
It suggests that you're able to do 12-20 reps with it and you need to raise the weight and try harder and then it says stop being a 65kg lanklet pussy who doesn't 1-5 rep max bench press.

>>76619224
So what's wrong with me? What is my body doing? When one says "it's genetics", what does it mean exactly? Do I have trash tier genetics?

>>76619239
>When one says "it's genetics", what does it mean exactly? Do I have trash tier genetics?
It depends on your goal. Do you want to be a bodybuilder? Then yes, your genetics are awful.
Do you want to become strong as fuck while staying twinkmode (like me)? Then your genetics are great.

>>76619244
Yes, my initial goal was to reach a good-looking body, but apparently my body doesn't want to build muscle for some reason

>>76614180 (OP)
so just 1 set until failure?
so I can just do my daily workout in 15-20 minutes and be done?

>>76619257
if you are fat, try cutting
if you are lean, try bulking

>>76614180 (OP)
>optimal training is just doing what feels right for you
I guess this makes sense

>>76619290
I've done a 10-kg cut this summer, but it doesn't make a difference, I either look DYEL and skinny or DYEL with fat to lose, I don't look athletic at all although my numbers at gym are intermediate/advanced

>>76619351
if you look DYEL then time to bulk up
your maintenance calories + 800 and godspeed

>>76619286
I think so?

>>76614180 (OP)
>Persons can self-select the ROM they exercise through. There appears no evidence to suggest that decreased ROM negatively affects muscular hypertrophy.
i just can't wrap my mind around the ROM one. you're telling me for squats, i could load up the bar and just barely bend my knees an inch a few times until failure, and that would be equally as effective as going full ROM? Or in that example, would it be effective hypertrophy just for the muscle fibers stimulated by a 1/10th ROM squat, and then you would have to do 9 other exercises to stimulate the other muscle fibers that would have been stimulated had you just done a full ROM squat in the first place?

>>76619427
You did wrap your mind around it. You thought it through and answered your own question. And not only would it hit fewer muscles it would take a lot more weight and reps.

>>76619239
There's nothing wrong with you. You're just scared to push hella weight and allergic to the last few reps in the tank. There's no secret. It's just hard.

>>76619560
>You're just scared to push hella weight and allergic to the last few reps in the tank
NTA
I'm retarded and can't gauge RIR, it's either I leave too much in the tank or I just go till I can't.

>>76619427
APOLOGIZE

>>76619551
>You did wrap your mind around it. You thought it through and answered your own question. And not only would it hit fewer muscles it would take a lot more weight and reps.
situation reverses when u stop repping and start holding :D
>>76614264
>>76615170
>>76617745
>>76617869
in this case without actually gripping anything
thread u've abandoned bot, why did u abandon ur thread bot? was I too much to handle? :D