Does strength always equal size?
- Thread starter 2horns
- Start date
hornedfrogs07
New member
pullinbig said:
To a large degree, size gains are dependent on genetics (considering all other factors equal), so one guy might eat out his ass and lift to get big but not be able to, while one might be able to blow up like a balloon with the same routine. If your body has it programmed in itself to say "I'm gonna weigh 165 and no more," then by God, you're gonna weigh 165 and no more, with the caveat being if you either eat enough to kill a horse with a tapeworm (i.e VERY high cal diet) or use AAS. While staying at that size, your body will continue to adapt to the weights you're throwing at it so that your strength will increase, you just won't have as large (or any) degree of hypertrophy.
As far as doing the higher volume work for fat burning properties, I don't see a correlation either. There's no way to spot reduce fat, so I don't see how doing super high reps of curls or something will help to trim fat, unless you're doing a circuit training type program, where your lifting is part of your cardio. In this setting (which I don't see the value in, b/c you're not pushing yourself to the max every time you lift), then yes, super high reps will aid in fat burning. I still don't see how this will be catabolic, however, until you overwork the CNS and enter a state of overtraining. At that point, or just short of it, your body will let you know it's time to slow down if you'll just listen, so you can nip the problem in the bud and reduce volume for a time until the body is ready to hit it again. Overtraining = catabolic, but I don't see how high volume work in general is catabolic (just look at some of these freak bodybuilders that do [blood] volume work day in and day out -- they may not be the strongest guys you'll ever see, but they DO grow).
Whether it's relavent or not, I'm gonna use myself as an example of my point on genetics. I can eat the exact same diet as my peers and gain weight/size like nobody's business, where most college kids as active as me would be losing weight like a sorority chick. In eating a college diet (I've tried to eat clean, but still wind up goin out for junk food at least 1-2 days per week) I've gained 40lbs, a full inch on the arms, >3" in my chest, etc. in the last 12 months, whereas my roommate eats as much or more than I do and struggles to maintain his bodyweight, much less grow (really doesn't try to either --- sissy machines and shit [high volume lifting])........and I outweigh him by over 45lbs already, meaning that, in theory, I should have to eat more to maintain my weight than someone who weighs 175-180.
However, I haven't increased any of my max lifts except for deads since around Xmas of last year. I'm working out with probably 40lbs more on all lifts now than I was then, but my maxes won't increase. Another friend of mine can't gain size, but his maxes won't STOP increasing. Genetics, pure and simple.
SpikeyLizard said:
This is the best thing I heard so far, its the truth, I have seen so many BBers in my day who lift like girls and have 23" arms and I have seen guys like Ruhl lift so much weight it made me sick.
Genetics make or break you when it comes to strength and size, we all have our limits, face it.
There is also this thing that no one talks about when it comes to powerlifters and their size that they have, and I do not mean dieting to make weight, but leverage points, these guys have by far the best leverage I have ever seen, sometimes just brute strength will not cut it.
Training for size or strenght can go both ways depending on the individual...
Mudge said:Watching him scream and turn all kinds of color while dumbell curling 25 pounds is just INSANITY!!!
I could tell you of a top pro from the the 80s who curls 30s and his bis were huge and the vein in his bicep was bigger than most kids biceps themselves...
Mudge
Community Veteran
Arnold always said 10-15 and that number was nowhere close for me 
I would agree that it would depend on what we are talking about though as a starting point and height. If I went from 215 pounds and 17 inch arms to 315 pounds I'd expect more than 21 inchers unless I was pretty loaded with bloat and fat.
I would agree that it would depend on what we are talking about though as a starting point and height. If I went from 215 pounds and 17 inch arms to 315 pounds I'd expect more than 21 inchers unless I was pretty loaded with bloat and fat.
Last edited:
hornedfrogs07
New member
Mudge said:
Not particularly. BF% went from 10-11% to 17ish% in that time. That's why I'm trying to cut now.
hornedfrogs07
New member
Mudge said:
Yeah, I've always carried quite a bit myself, so it was a shock for me to wake up one morning and see my abs.......................then I went out drinking that weekend and I haven't seen them since
When I get back down to 12ish%, then it's time to bulk again, IMO.
Nathan
New member
Spikeylizard could you please explain the benefits of lifing lighter weight with high rep, and also the benefits of lifting heavier weight with lower rep. Which will make you bigger faster and what will make you stronger faster.
In what way does the body burn fat if not from the area being worked the most. Is this simply determined through genetics as to wether the fat that I am burning will come from my waist or my legs, or my arms. I was under the assumption that fat was burned faster from the extremities used the most and to burn fat in the torso core movements were the key. But it also makes sense that you may simply burn the fat equally throughout the body and it just may be that the midsection is the area with the most therefore is the last area to lose it.
In what way does the body burn fat if not from the area being worked the most. Is this simply determined through genetics as to wether the fat that I am burning will come from my waist or my legs, or my arms. I was under the assumption that fat was burned faster from the extremities used the most and to burn fat in the torso core movements were the key. But it also makes sense that you may simply burn the fat equally throughout the body and it just may be that the midsection is the area with the most therefore is the last area to lose it.
hornedfrogs07
New member
Nathan said:
I'm not completely sure on the benefits of lighter weight/higher rep training vs. high weight/low rep training, other than the first will train you more for endurance and the latter works better for increasing brute strength. It really just depends on you as to what will work best for gaining size -- some people respond very well to a blood volume type workout, and some (like myself) respond better to lower reps and higher weight.
As far as the fat goes, there is no way to spot reduce fat in the body. Genetics will determine, to a large extent, the way and shape in which you store fat, as well as your ability to lose/burn it. When you're exercising, lipolysis in the adipose tissue will occur throughout the body, not just in the areas/limbs involved in a movement. You'll lose fat proportionally throughout the body, rather than being able to target a specific area.
Nathan
New member
I have ta disagree even though I do grasp the concept. I understand that genetics predetermines how you store fat, as to wether you will be apple or pear shaped, but I do not agree that genetics dictates the way you will burn fat. It is not that I have sound proof but listen....if a person with a high bodyfat percentage sits down and does preacher curls day in and day out you cannot tell me that if his genetics dictate that he will burn fat around the midsection first that he can get a six pack by doing preacher curls before he ends up with a set of ripped 23" arms. So this is why I think you can target weight loss, but you cannot focus its intensity in any one area totally without losing weight in other areas. Sound fair?
no, the guys arms arent going to be ripped just cause he does a lot of curls. he'll have the same amount of fat on them as before just more muscle under them. diet is the key for fat loss. if it wasnt bbers would never have to diet down. they could just do more reps to lean out.
hornedfrogs07
New member
Thanks PB. Took the words right out of my mouth, pretty much.
SpikeyLizard said:
Took what out of your mouth???
Oh, sorry Spikey, thought PB had gotten another one!!LOL
You know women are the worst about this but men are getting pretty bad about the whole spot-reduction thing. Madine is a PT and she has such a fit with people saying "What can I do to get rid of this fatty area (pointing aimlessly towards their tricep)?". Luckily I am the nice one who tells them. She always says " For $50 I'll build you a diet and then you'll know forever!!". Such a hard ass.
I was just talking about this in another thread. How I have just realized that my body doesn't like to bulk. Actually it does, what I mean is, it takes so much for me to burn off that extra junk that I gain when I bulk, that I have decided to just gain that lean mass slower and always be lean. May not get me to where I want as fast, but people have to do what works best for them, and based on THEIR genetics!!!
Great post everyone.
Similar threads
- Locked
