# All round more fuller muscles



## dingosteve (Apr 26, 2009)

Been training for a year now roughly and even though i feel i made good progress, i feel that i dont have that full smooth full muscle look. Im kinda trying to keep carbs to minimum which i know will effect gylogen stores and that will effect the look of muscles but i see plenty of other guys wo run keto diet and seem to have developed full looking muscles.

Maybe im expecting a bit much for 1 year of training but this year im hoping to make some gains. I am training naturally so im not sure jus how long it will take , but i have a plan and idea that i will have gainned significant muscle in 3 years of training.


----------



## sizar (Nov 13, 2008)

def carbs makes a difference . but it takes years mate.. one year you be lucky to build a good base .. it's not easy but it's doable so just train and eat well .. the problem is these days everybody wants to look huge but be cut 365 days a Year thats all i hear these days.. as you know this will limit the amount of muscle you gain.


----------



## dingosteve (Apr 26, 2009)

cheers Sizar i think i know this inside but is alwasy good to have someone inform you as well to reinforce what you feel inside not jus what you percieve of yourself on outside. DO you think 3 years is prolly the minimum to expect a decent body?. I definitely feel now i've trained for a year i can feel im doing exercises properly since i have better control over my body.

Is nice when people you aint seen for years comment on how much you changed.


----------



## LunaticSamurai (May 19, 2009)

chilisi said:


> I wish it was easy to gain  But to me, thats what makes it satisfying when you get results. You have earn't them.
> 
> Even on gear though, you sweat blood to achieve your results.


x2


----------



## dingosteve (Apr 26, 2009)

yea i hear people at work say you should go on the gear you would be twice the size with half as much training , i used to educate them that actually you gotta work very hard when on gear but thanks to ignorance no one believes it. ooh my personal favorite, ya jus full of water! well i say, isnt everyone??


----------



## sizar (Nov 13, 2008)

honestly when your on gear .. because you push your self far beyond the limit even tho you recover faster train harder it's stil way tougher than training naturally . in the past 3 - 4 weeks my coach been pushing me to the limit i'm stil aching from leg session which was done monday evening . painful . i'm training chest and tris tonight i know is going to be another hell session but i fooking love the pain  .. just TRAIN hard man and result will be on the way


----------



## dingosteve (Apr 26, 2009)

i can imagine ya coach screamin at ya "lift it up you fu(kin pussy, if you dont someone else will, do you want ? DO YOU!!"


----------



## sizar (Nov 13, 2008)

he goes go on 20 reps i get to 20 i'm thinking thank **** he goes 5 more .. i get there he goes there is 2 more there buddy .. get them lol


----------



## dingosteve (Apr 26, 2009)

jus what ya need mate someone to help you find your potential!


----------



## weeman (Sep 6, 2007)

sizar said:


> he goes go on 20 reps i get to 20 i'm thinking thank **** he goes 5 more .. i get there he goes there is 2 more there buddy .. get them lol


 :confused1: :confused1: :confused1:

how many fkn reps in a set is he making you do!? :lol:


----------



## vlb (Oct 20, 2008)

sizar said:


> def carbs makes a difference . but it takes years mate.. one year you be lucky to build a good base .. it's not easy but it's doable so just train and eat well .. the problem is these days everybody wants to look huge but be cut 365 days a Year thats all i hear these days.. as you know this will limit the amount of muscle you gain.


x2

**** being cut, i just wanna be massive


----------



## sizar (Nov 13, 2008)

weeman said:


> :confused1: :confused1: :confused1:
> 
> how many fkn reps in a set is he making you do!? :lol:


we go for high reps .. heavy weight best form possible. minimum 12 reps .. he doesn't count 8 or anything if i can't get 10 or 12 he changes the set to drop set and let me carry on with another 12 .. even worse but it's good workout


----------



## SK-XO (Aug 6, 2009)

I'll enter my 2 cents for you mate.

Basically I've been training like say 2 ish years now. Now I had the ilusion from when I was fat (17.5 stone fat at 17) that I could get down and have abs and biceps showing etc, however not the case I shredded down to say 10ish stone and was just skinny fat looking, awful. Now that im built up, I got to about 16.8 stone but was quite bulky looking, so cut down to 15.2 stone which I am roughly at now. Im a lot fuller, leaner, harder etc. Because I've built a base. It takes time, but tbh the bulking to fk worked, all I did was constantly eat eat and eat everything and train hard. I admit it looks and makes you feel like sh1t when your soft looking but once you cut you learn it's all worth it. Don't give up.


----------



## Rambo55 (Jun 14, 2009)

What your speaking about is called muscle maturity.

This take years to "fully" develop mate.. Some athletes are the same weight year after year yet they look fuller/leaner. this is down to muscle maturity.

Only advice would be AVOID HIT and general low volume training.

Strength density is the best way to fully dvelop muscle and this can only be done by volume....


----------



## sizar (Nov 13, 2008)

Rambo55 said:


> What your speaking about is called muscle maturity.
> 
> This take years to "fully" develop mate.. Some athletes are the same weight year after year yet they look fuller/leaner. this is down to muscle maturity.
> 
> ...


thanks for the info mate.. what you mean by avoid HIT ?


----------



## Rambo55 (Jun 14, 2009)

IMO- Low volume / HIT style training is NOT the best way to go about getting that mature "look".

It may be great for strength.

It may be great for size

But getting that mature look I believe volume is king..


----------



## sizar (Nov 13, 2008)

SK-XO said:


> I'll enter my 2 cents for you mate.
> 
> Basically I've been training like say 2 ish years now. Now I had the ilusion from when I was fat (17.5 stone fat at 17) that I could get down and have abs and biceps showing etc, however not the case I shredded down to say 10ish stone and was just skinny fat looking, awful. Now that im built up, I got to about 16.8 stone but was quite bulky looking, so cut down to 15.2 stone which I am roughly at now. Im a lot fuller, leaner, harder etc. Because I've built a base. It takes time, but tbh the bulking to fk worked, all I did was constantly eat eat and eat everything and train hard. I admit it looks and makes you feel like sh1t when your soft looking but once you cut you learn it's all worth it. Don't give up.


mate my story is similar to yours i was 16.5 fat like around year ago i cut down i was happy around 12 and 11.5 as i was ripped fully but then i want to get bigger but i was scared to eat so i just ended losing more weight til at some point i got under 11 stone now i'm just going for bulk .. eat clean train hard ..


----------



## sizar (Nov 13, 2008)

Rambo55 said:


> IMO- Low volume / HIT style training is NOT the best way to go about getting that mature "look".
> 
> It may be great for strength.
> 
> ...


that's what my coach said .. he said heavy weight to stress the muscle and high reps will def stimulate more growth than going for heaviest you can and do6-8 reps. i understand what his talking about the burn you get out of 20 reps you never get if you do 8 reps


----------



## Rambo55 (Jun 14, 2009)

Muscle hypertrophy dosen't happen due to how much weight is on the bar..

It happens based on how much stress the muscle is under.

So "weight" is irelivant really...

I see time and time again... Guys "wanting" a bigger/more deveolped chest and they think there route there is getting a bigger PR on BB bench press.

This is NOT the case at all.

Also people should "surve the strength curve" in there program.(s)


----------



## sizar (Nov 13, 2008)

Rambo55 said:


> Muscle hypertrophy dosen't happen due to how much weight is on the bar..
> 
> It happens based on how much stress the muscle is under.
> 
> ...


this is so true .. everytime you say you train or go to the gym.. the 1st question is .. what you benching .. . . or when you say to someone your progressing getting stronger .. again what you benching .. i just say more than you do :tongue:


----------



## rs007 (May 28, 2007)

Rambo55 said:


> Muscle hypertrophy dosen't happen due to how much weight is on the bar..
> 
> It happens based on how much stress the muscle is under.
> 
> ...


Mate you are zooming in and isolating things too much.

I'm not saying you are wrong (although there are so many factors to muscle hypertrophy and how to cause it I find your statements a bit final), a muscle experiences stress, but that hardly makes wieght irrelevant - you use the weight to cause the stress.

In any given movement - more weight = more instantaneous stress - physical fact.


----------



## Rambo55 (Jun 14, 2009)

Yep,

My lifts on the big three( bench,deads,squats) are pi$$ poor yet my deveolpment is better than guys that can out bench,squat and deadlift me.

I also can't understand how guys consider low volume stuff to be 'high intensity'

Come back after 25 sets of chest work hitting on ranges and planes of motion and tell me it wern't intense.


----------



## sizar (Nov 13, 2008)

rs007 said:


> Mate you are zooming in and isolating things too much.
> 
> I'm not saying you are wrong (although there are so many factors to muscle hypertrophy and how to cause it I find your statements a bit final), a muscle experiences stress, but that hardly makes wieght irrelevant - you use the weight to cause the stress.
> 
> In any given movement - more weight = more instantaneous stress - physical fact.


yeah but not when your doing couple of reps .. thats not stress thats waste of time. or some people suppose to be squating .. but all they really doing is dipping .. why put on so much weight that you can't even movee.. obviously go heavy enough to stress the muscle .. but all we are saying heaviest way is not the only way to stimulate muscle growth. is combination of heavy weight amount of reps and the form you use. thanks everyone for sharing different opinion is good to pick up bits and bobs from different people :thumb:


----------



## rs007 (May 28, 2007)

Rambo55 said:


> Yep,
> 
> My lifts on the big three( bench,deads,squats) are pi$$ poor yet my deveolpment is better than guys that can out bench,squat and deadlift me.
> 
> ...


May be

But if you do it with a given wieght, and I do the same, with your wieghts x1.5, who has experienced the bigger stress?

Generally

Stronger guys tend to be bigger. You get outliers - you may well be one of them.

But I've never seen a small powerlifter, and they stick to even lower ranges. Similarly, I've never seen a truly weak bodybuilder...

Genetics, bigger picture.


----------



## Rambo55 (Jun 14, 2009)

rs007 said:


> Mate you are zooming in and isolating things too much.
> 
> I'm not saying you are wrong (although there are so many factors to muscle hypertrophy and how to cause it I find your statements a bit final), a muscle experiences stress, but that hardly makes wieght irrelevant - you use the weight to cause the stress.
> 
> In any given movement - more weight = more instantaneous stress - physical fact.


Sorry i don't mean use "light weights" still enough to take to you to failure i the given rep range.

But trying to beat PR on squats won't always = deveolped quads.

Full butt to heels squatting with NO pausing at the top or bottom of the movement- constant tension will = deveolped quads.

" train the MUSCLE not the movement "

My point being still go to failure ( where needed) but when form is correct and your using correct methods of intensity weight( poundages) will go down.


----------



## sizar (Nov 13, 2008)

Rambo55 said:


> Yep,
> 
> My lifts on the big three( bench,deads,squats) are pi$$ poor yet my deveolpment is better than guys that can out bench,squat and deadlift me.
> 
> ...


since i'm being coached .. i look back on how i used to train .. i used to think that was intense .. now days i'm finishing my work within 40 mins .. hiting any where 20 sets 25 sets per muscle 4 to 5 excerices high reps it's unreal the amount of reps we do .. i'm on cycle at the mo .. and my chest took 5 days to stop hurting from workout .. legs stil aching from monday. stiff as hell.


----------



## Rambo55 (Jun 14, 2009)

I've also seen "large" power lifters but where talking purely about "deveolping" muscle maturiry here.

When those powerlifters diet down there often shocked how little muscle there carrying..

Please everyone don't post of pics of powerlifters because i have seen tons.... I'm speaking in general

By the way the guy whos my Coach and also cites the same methods as me is this guy... Drugs or no drugs you cannot say he's not "developed" yet he will even say he's strength re: weight on the bar was poor


----------



## rs007 (May 28, 2007)

sizar said:


> yeah but not when your doing couple of reps .. thats not stress thats waste of time. *or some people suppose to be squating .. but all they really doing is dipping ..* why put on so much weight that you can't even movee.. obviously go heavy enough to stress the muscle .. but all we are saying heaviest way is not the only way to stimulate muscle growth. is combination of heavy weight amount of reps and the form you use. thanks everyone for sharing different opinion is good to pick up bits and bobs from different people :thumb:


Who mentioned anything about bad form?

2 guys doing bench press, identical form, identical structure, 1 pressing 180kg for 4, the other pressing 190kg for 4 - the latter has placed more stress into their muscles, simple irrefutable fact.

Prove to me why doing a couple of reps is a waste of time - our very own jw007 goes for really low reps and singles - one of the better physiques on here and thats even with all the injuries :lol:

Powerlifters generally stick to lower rep ranges, most of them outsize most of the people on here.

This forum is getting slowly saturated with bullsh1t notions and rules of thumb, I have only 1 myself - aim for 1.8g of complete protein per lb - and even I concede that this isn't universal, its what works for me, some guys get bigger on less, some guys don't grow even on more.


----------



## rs007 (May 28, 2007)

Rambo55 said:


> Sorry i don't mean use "light weights" still enough to take to you to failure i the given rep range.
> 
> But trying to beat PR on squats won't always = deveolped quads.
> 
> ...


I agree more with that - the way I would put it is, it is not what you do, but how you do it.

Disagree on the squats tho, I never go beyond parallel, you couldn't pay me enough to do it, in fact if I am honest I barely reach parallel as my aim is to get the knee joint to 90 degrees - no further - and that means my femur is above parallel because of the natural tilt forward from the heel.

My legs are probably my best bodypart, which just goes to prove what i am saying - blanket statements don't cut it - genetics and the bigger picture is where its at.

Whatever you do, do it well


----------



## rs007 (May 28, 2007)

Rambo55 said:


> By the way the guy whos my Coach and also cites the same methods as me is this guy... Drugs or no drugs you cannot say he's not "developed" yet he will even say he's strength re: weight on the bar was poor


Mate your coach was going to get big no matter what.

Absolutely no point whatsoever in you posting that pic, I just need to post a pic of Mike Mentzer, or Dorian Yates, both of who blow your coach out the water, but trained with polar opposite systems.


----------



## Rambo55 (Jun 14, 2009)

Yes my point being that SO many guys add more and more weight to an exercise; Take BB bech press for example.

The more weight they use 9 times out of ten there form suffers....

So they end up training the movement and not the muscle.

Stretching and contracting goes out the window...


----------



## rs007 (May 28, 2007)

Rambo55 said:


> When those powerlifters diet down there often shocked how little muscle there carrying..


Mate that happens all the time with actual bodybuilders too :lol: :lol: :lol:


----------



## rs007 (May 28, 2007)

Rambo55 said:


> Yes my point being that SO many guys add more and more weight to an exercise; Take BB bech press for example.
> 
> The more weight they use 9 times out of ten there form suffers....
> 
> ...


I totally get you there, no point throwing form to the wind in order to add wieght - but, more wieght with same form, = more stress - whether you do 2 reps or 20.

So to say weight is irrelevant is not true.


----------



## MillionG (Nov 17, 2009)

rs007 said:


> I totally get you there, no point throwing form to the wind in order to add wieght - but, more wieght with same form, = more stress - whether you do 2 reps or 20.
> 
> So to say weight is irrelevant is not true.


Jeeeez Rams, stop whining about form, everyone knows that this is how you workout:






:whistling: :laugh::laugh::laugh:


----------



## sizar (Nov 13, 2008)

rs007 said:


> Who mentioned anything about bad form?
> 
> 2 guys doing bench press, identical form, identical structure, 1 pressing 180kg for 4, the other pressing 190kg for 4 - the latter has placed more stress into their muscles, simple irrefutable fact.
> 
> ...


no comment mate.. i aint even going to bother .. have it your way .. what ever works for you. :thumb:


----------



## dtlv (Jul 24, 2009)

Continued stimulation of the adaptation process is what it's all about - sets, reps, load, rest times between sets etc are all just variables involved in stimulating the required protein kinases and hormones to add new muscle.

However you train it has to be progressive and this is what matters the most, that you place a higher level of stimulation on the muscle than previously. You can do this by changing several variables - increasing the weight, increasing reps or sets, reducing rest between sets... all of these when used progressively, either individually or in combo will stimulate some form of hypertrophic response.

I think that there's place for both high and low rep training - high rep developing more sarcoplasmic hypertrophy and volumising the cells and low rep training leading to more myofibrillar hypertrophy and an increase in numbers of cells. Both increase strength although myofibrillar by far the most, and both increase size although sarcoplasmic does this the most. In general sarcoplasmic hypertrophy is a lot easier to develop but because it's also less permanent it's the first thing you lose when training stops for a while.


----------



## Guest (Feb 11, 2010)

Guys can we agree to disagree? :lol:


----------



## rs007 (May 28, 2007)

sizar said:


> no comment mate.. i aint even going to bother .. have it your way .. what ever works for you. :thumb:


 :confused1:

Why the huff mate - all I am saying when you boil the bones of it is, you can't make blanket statements like that, and not expect to be challenged.

I can't have it my way, because I am not touting any one way - I know bodybuilding just doesnt work like that - hence why I always intimate as much in my posts.

You said doing 2 reps is a waste of time - it may be for you, but very clearly, from the amount of big dudes walking the earth that train this way, it isn't universal...

Don't be mad with me, lets hug :thumb:


----------



## rs007 (May 28, 2007)

Dtlv74 said:


> Continued stimulation of the adaptation process is what it's all about - sets, reps, load, rest times between sets etc are all just variables involved in stimulating the required protein kinases and hormones to add new muscle.
> 
> However you train it has to be progressive and this is what matters the most, that you place a higher level of stimulation on the muscle than previously. You can do this by changing several variables - increasing the weight, increasing reps or sets, reducing rest between sets... all of these when used progressively, either individually or in combo will stimulate some form of hypertrophic response.
> 
> I think that there's place for both high and low rep training - high rep developing more sarcoplasmic hypertrophy and volumising the cells and low rep training leading to more myofibrillar hypertrophy and an increase in numbers of cells. Both increase strength although myofibrillar by far the most, and both increase size although sarcoplasmic does this the most. In general sarcoplasmic hypertrophy is a lot easier to develop but because it's also less permanent it's the first thing you lose when training stops for a while.


I personally agree with most of that, there is a place for all types of training depending on the individual, and I suppose liek a lot of things, it doesn't pay to put your eggs in any one basket...


----------



## Guest (Feb 11, 2010)

rs007 said:


> :confused1:
> 
> Why the huff mate - all I am saying when you boil the bones of it is, you can't make blanket statements like that, and not expect to be challenged.


Because his coach said so.. lol


----------



## rs007 (May 28, 2007)

Dan said:


> Guys can we agree to disagree? :lol:


I'm still not speaking to you after pulling that stunt on me last night, you knew fine well I was dieting, don't make out you didn't

:lol:


----------



## Wee G1436114539 (Oct 6, 2007)

Dtlv74 said:


> Continued stimulation of the adaptation process is what it's all about - sets, reps, load, rest times between sets etc are all just variables involved in stimulating the required protein kinases and hormones to add new muscle.
> 
> However you train it has to be progressive and this is what matters the most, that you place a higher level of stimulation on the muscle than previously. You can do this by changing several variables - increasing the weight, increasing reps or sets, reducing rest between sets... all of these when used progressively, either individually or in combo will stimulate some form of hypertrophic response.
> 
> I think that there's place for both high and low rep training - high rep developing more sarcoplasmic hypertrophy and volumising the cells and low rep training leading to more myofibrillar hypertrophy and an increase in numbers of cells. Both increase strength although myofibrillar by far the most, and both increase size although sarcoplasmic does this the most.


**** me mate it took me a whole book to say that. Well done, nice and concise.


----------



## MillionG (Nov 17, 2009)

Wee G said:


> **** me mate it took me a whole book to say that. Well done, nice and concise.


Lol, gotta love the ability of Bioscience people to write as little as possible to get the point across..

Lazy fcukers we are


----------



## dtlv (Jul 24, 2009)

Cheers guys - only wish I knew wtf I was on about :lol: :lol:

As far as I see it you need to train both ways at some point if your end goal is a decent bodybuilding physique. You may settle on one way as being most suitable for you, but that just tells you you've found the way to train to your genetics and have found the training style that improves the type of fibre you personally have most abundantly.

There's still a case if looking to develop an all round physique for peroids of training the other way too as each method of training brings something useful (be it increased strength adaptation from low rep training or increased capiliarization and nutrient delivery from high rep).


----------



## Mark W H (Jan 25, 2010)

Dont forget that a change is as good as a rest. You have to train both heavy for low reps and moderately heavy for higher reps to hit all the different muscle fibres. Different exercises will require different rep ranges. So long as you are working your butt off and getting enough rest and goosd diet and making gains what does it matter whether you do singles or sets of 50? Do what feels right, change it round to prevent getting stale of to get past sticking points. Boost your ego with some singles every now and then, it doesn't hurt.

I tend to think that body building is about using the minimum weight with the maximum effort to stimulate the growth,as opposed to weight/power lifting being minimum effort to move maximum weight to stimulate the max lift.


----------



## jw007 (Apr 12, 2007)

sizar said:


> yeah but not when your doing couple of reps .. thats not stress thats waste of time. or some people suppose to be squating .. but all they really doing is dipping .. why put on so much weight that you can't even movee.. obviously go heavy enough to stress the muscle .. but all we are saying heaviest way is not the only way to stimulate muscle growth. is combination of heavy weight amount of reps and the form you use. thanks everyone for sharing different opinion is good to pick up bits and bobs from different people :thumb:


Hmmm so what your saying is only a full range of muscular contraction will cause muscular hypertrophy?

So rack pulls are a waste of time then???

By your theory, 10 super strict press ups will fire more fibres amd create more stress on the pecs, in turn causing far more growth than lets say 1 rep at 200kg on bench??


----------

