Lazy man's diet

[[TFU] Thegoon84]

I would totally agree with you if it wasn't for the fact he's a keen footballer and primarily wants to focus around stamina, presumably for playing

Yup pretty much, I play at a good standard and training is demanding... With regards to other Thankfully i blessed with boyish good looks + If i did get super fat it would take my wife 6 months to divorce me, in that time I could lose it all haha.

My Gym plan would consist of low weight more rep, I’m not keen on bulking as it will make me slow. I used be an amateur boxer so speed training is all I’ve ever really known.

I’m just so so bad dieting and planning. I took Stacks previously which I found really worked, even after I stopped I didn’t pile on the weight

 

[Diesel]

Every Summer I decide I'm going to shed a bit of weight and improve my fitness in readiness for the new football season. It never happens because I'm lazy sod and lack motivation to do anything that doesn't involve a football.

 

[[TFU] Thegoon84]

Every Summer I decide I'm going to shed a bit of weight and improve my fitness in readiness for the new football season. It never happens because I'm lazy sod and lack motivation to do anything that doesn't involve a football.

True dat!

Tho i find classes i.e boxercise, circuts, 5 aside have been great motivation to go as its much more fun than boring old gym.

 

[icecold]

My Gym plan would consist of low weight more rep, I’m not keen on bulking as it will make me slow. I used be an amateur boxer so speed training is all I’ve ever really known.

Excuse my phrasing, I assure you that I love you.

But that is BS. I've recently been approached by a boxer who was saying basically the same thing.

1) Low weight and more reps will not make you faster.

2) Low weight and more reps will not stop you adding mass.

3) Boxers and their coaches seem to have no idea what speed training is when is comes to proper strength and conditioning programming.


How much mass you put on is dictated by your diet. To get faster, you need to do strength training as part of a progression.

 

[Admiral Huddy]

I rarely step in but no no no to slim fast. Nothing but sugar calories for women just calorie counting without any regard to their long term fitness and health. If training then i'd go as far as seeing it's can be detrimental.

Grilled Chicken and mixed bean salad for example is far more leaner with good quality macros and you can pick at that during the day

 

[wedgie]

Bigger. Stronger. Faster.

Focus on fine tuning one somewhere down the line, until then they will more or less go hand in hand.

 

[[TFU] Thegoon84]

Excuse my phrasing, I assure you that I love you.

But that is BS. I've recently been approached by a boxer who was saying basically the same thing.

1) Low weight and more reps will not make you faster.

2) Low weight and more reps will not stop you adding mass.

3) Boxers and their coaches seem to have no idea what speed training is when is comes to proper strength and conditioning programming.


How much mass you put on is dictated by your diet. To get faster, you need to do strength training as part of a progression.

Disagree with you on this sorry. I fought someone who had clearly spent a huge amount of time in the gym, he hit hard but due to his size was just useless. By the end of the second he was swinging so slow i was able to dropped him from inside out.

Just remember a boxers relies on speed and agility, how does some who lifts heavy to bulk keep that??? Perhaps short term it works, but as soon as he loses that agility... its over!

 

[wedgie]

What a daft post.

Your example there is a boxer that had put on enough mass that it had a negative impact on his stamina, nobody has said this isn't possible. If your sport relies on endurance, and in particular is divided into weight classes, then there certainly is a limit to how much muscle you would want to put on.

The point being, it is very unlikely that you will ever reach this problem. Until you get there, bigger, stronger, faster should be treated as roughly the same goal.

 

[mrthingyx]

Excuse my phrasing, I assure you that I love you.

But that is BS. I've recently been approached by a boxer who was saying basically the same thing.

1) Low weight and more reps will not make you faster.

2) Low weight and more reps will not stop you adding mass.

3) Boxers and their coaches seem to have no idea what speed training is when is comes to proper strength and conditioning programming.


How much mass you put on is dictated by your diet. To get faster, you need to do strength training as part of a progression.

Disagree with you on this sorry. I fought someone who had clearly spent a huge amount of time in the gym, he hit hard but due to his size was just useless. By the end of the second he was swinging so slow i was able to dropped him from inside out.

Just remember a boxers relies on speed and agility, how does some who lifts heavy to bulk keep that??? Perhaps short term it works, but as soon as he loses that agility... its over!

Ooooh... Science vs. accepted wisdom!

Disgonbgud!

Where's my popcorn gif?

OP - you've missed the point of icecold's post which was that mass is irrelevant from a strength/power/speed perspective.

EDIT: look into muscle fibre types, too. Might be enlightening.

 

[[TFU] Thegoon84]

What a daft post.

Your example there is a boxer that had put on enough mass that it had a negative impact on his stamina, nobody has said this isn't possible. If your sport relies on endurance, and in particular is divided into weight classes, then there certainly is a limit to how much muscle you would want to put on.

The point being, it is very unlikely that you will ever reach this problem. Until you get there, bigger, stronger, faster should be treated as roughly the same goal.

Yeah fair enough. Perhaps i'm missing the point... I've just personally always felt sharper when doing lower weight and more reps.

 

[wedgie]

It's all irrelevant anyway, if you're looking to lose weight, you'll be adding very little muscle mass, let alone some ungodly amount that's way above what you want.

If you're in the calorie deficit that you need to lose weight, the entire purpose of adding weights is to effectively tell your body to keep hold of as much lean mass as it possibly can while you shift the fat. You will achieve this better lifting heavy weight.

 

[[TFU] Thegoon84]

It's all irrelevant anyway, if you're looking to lose weight, you'll be adding very little muscle mass, let alone some ungodly amount that's way above what you want.

If you're in the calorie deficit that you need to lose weight, the entire purpose of adding weights is to effectively tell your body to keep hold of as much lean mass as it possibly can while you shift the fat. You will achieve this better lifting heavy weight.

Actually yes i can now see where your coming from! Cheers.

 

[BennyC]

Yeah fair enough. Perhaps i'm missing the point... I've just personally always felt sharper when doing lower weight and more reps.

Probably because you're repetitions are faster and in a more dynamic/speed based manner, might be talking out my blow hole.

 

[icecold]

Disagree with you on this sorry. I fought someone who had clearly spent a huge amount of time in the gym, he hit hard but due to his size was just useless. By the end of the second he was swinging so slow i was able to dropped him from inside out.

Just remember a boxers relies on speed and agility, how does some who lifts heavy to bulk keep that??? Perhaps short term it works, but as soon as he loses that agility... its over!

That story isn't about a guy who got too strong that he got slow (because that doesn't exist), he lacked conditioning and endurance.

Use the best tools to get the job done. Don't train endurance with weights.

The problem is that boxing coaches have no knowledge of this, so these fallacies continue to filter down. If I showed a boxing coach how I'd programme for a boxer they probably wouldn't even know what they were looking at.

Edit: also, you absolutely do not train rate of force development with high reps.